Sachar economist back with some bang

Zia brother

From your photo you look about 5-6 year older than me. In case you really need to get the phobia out of Islamophobia then ask all Muslims to assimilate rather than keep talking about how we stand disadvantaged.

most government jobs are on competitive exams with hidden roll numbers. If you talk about discrimination through a secret software program, it would just be a conspiracy theory!

Look let us face it. We need to get our girls into school. We need to toss of outdated mentality of trying to stick to laws which have no bearing in today’s world.

Sachar can only be a stop gap arrangement. The real story would be to be mentally equal and have the mindset to mingle with the best of the world and be equal. Unfortunately all these stories of victimhood of Hindus, christians and Buddhists being against us … are just BULL SHIT

[Reply]

Zia;
You reiterated some reports or studies. these are US based people but you are India based journo, you tell us, what is lacking amongst muslim communities, which is making them going down and down. please eloborate on those factors. let us hear from you specifics and not some foreign reports. Come on, ready to listento you.

[Reply]

Lack of muslim leadership in india most of the todays leaders r corrupt and selfish these leaders r distroying the lives of the muslims in india.

[Reply]

Anonymous Reply:
October 1st, 2012 at 7:49 am

@ Raja

Sir, let me continue the debate we were having in the last blog.

My first grouse against Islamic belief and practice is that the Quran is just addressed to men. When my sister read it the first time, she commented that the entire discourse is addressed to a man.
“You can marry two, three or four times… you can cultivate your women… you should do etc etc….”

In the context, it gives a deep disadvantage to women. That they can only be viewed as a sub text of men.

This mindset places most Muslims a step behind other religions and atheists who have broken the bonds with scriptures.

I am not comfortable that my sister’s husband tomorrow view her in this light or for that matter my daughter (if I ever have one) is viewed as a appendage of her man.

In your reply on the status of women you were trying to point out that though polygamy is allowed in Islam, in practice it does not happen. Well, a wrong is a wrong. There is no point in saying that the law is bad… but since the crime rate is not so high, why change it. And frankly in my experience in Moradabad and in Saudia, I have seen that multiple wives are not rare. That women are perpetually under threat and feel insecure.

Anyway I am typing between college assignments. Will continue the discussion later.

[Reply]

Anonymous Reply:
October 3rd, 2012 at 5:07 am

Parvez,

I have read your posts on this blog and earlier blog of Mr. Zia Haq.
I am extremely happy to read your views and am surprised and pleased at your wisdom . Though you being much younger than
me, the respect for you in my heart has grown manifold. May your tribe increase. With your permission may I copy and post your above views on another blog. I will only do it if you allow me.

[Reply]

Anonymous Reply:
October 3rd, 2012 at 7:03 am

@ Mohan

Well, I comment on my religion only for the purpose to make the world a better place. I am Muslim by birth , but I claim the right to question. You have full right and permission to copy my views– if they are worth anything!

Abid Reply:
October 4th, 2012 at 11:02 am

Mr. parvez, pls read the Quran carefuly u will find at many places Allah addressed to both men/women. you pls read the Quran translation in urdu maulana Abulalamaududi with muqtasar hawashi which is so simple in understanding. Regarding the polygamy which is allowed in Islam but subject to the condition that u will be justifide o/w better to have one wife. Tks n Rgds. Abid

[Reply]

ssraja Reply:
October 4th, 2012 at 11:29 am

sumitji what u r talking about backwardness of muslim community is because of the government policiesand the bureacrates mostly from the rss background.specially not educating them .lets go to the facts what u r india is today because of muslim community .u r top industrialists of this country have made their fortune by serving the muslim countries . today’s reliance industries which has made its fortune by exporting groceries to middle east muslim countries.and hindujas has made their fortune by entertaining the iran shah(the king then).in the 80’s when india was going through foriegn exchange crisis
the indian muslim who worked in middle east send their hard earned money which helped india’s foreign exchange defict.u r corrupt leaders and industralists what they did for the country they stashed money in swiss banks and other taxheaven countries.what other communities educated brahmins ,gujratis and other communities have done for this country they got educated here by using the infrastructure and sbubsidies. instead of serving the indians they settled in developed countries for their selfish motives.where as the partition is concerned muslim community is not the culprit gandhiji has opposed the division, but the hindu leaders rejected him and he has to leave the congress .jinnah is not a muslim nor he practicesed namaz in his life .he was a secular indian.he worked as sectary for then a hindu party congress.latter some muslimleague members has requested mr jinnah to lead the party with some conditions jinnah accepted.
both the community leaders want to rule the country because of their selfishness the country is divided not because of the muslims nor hindus .with this division the most loosers r the muslims more than a million lost their lives and other community which suffered is the sikhs who were displaced and lost many lives by this division.and the muslims have lost every thing after partition in india they were treated as second class citizens and in pakistan as mohajirs.where as world is concerned the west has unleashed the terror for oil on muslim countries and blaming the innocent muslims.

Anonymous Reply:
October 5th, 2012 at 4:47 am

I think you are suffering from a victimhood mindset. If Indians worked in the gulf and got paid for it… then those countries also got excellent workers. Please get out of this slave and master mindset.

Gulf Shiekhs never employed Indians for charity. Neither did Indias do charity by runing their establishment and making them rich. It is a two way street.

ssraja Reply:
October 5th, 2012 at 6:42 pm

i said mr rss that the foreign exchange came to india by muslims working in middle east which helped india when there were no reforms no IT industry there were no exports
then india was in need of foreign exchange.

Anonymous Reply:
October 9th, 2012 at 6:55 pm

I know everyone in the world is wrong, while the Taliban, the LeT , the IM the harkat are lollipop chewing infants.

Anonymous Reply:
October 4th, 2012 at 1:22 pm

let us not try to dodge the issue. Can you quote the exact verse literally rather than an intrepretation.

Abid Reply:
October 4th, 2012 at 11:35 am

mr.Raja, polygamy is allowed in Islam but subject to the condition that u will be justifide with them o/w better to have one wife. whether it is in practise or not it is nun of yr bsns. pls be careful next time when u reply to others follow the authenticity. tks. Abit.

[Reply]

vijay ! Reply:
October 6th, 2012 at 8:26 am

Can you advise me whether ply gamy by Hafeez Saeed (marrying wives of dead suicide bombers ) and of Osama as well as Multiple (50 or more) wives of Saudi Sheikhs is justified as all of them happen to be religious people?

[Reply]

Show me one place in the world where muslims statistically stand out as model citizens. In pre-independence India, there were the labourers and watch-men. In UK, where so many Pakistanis and Bangladeshis have settled, there are, as a group, worse off than the immigrants from the Caribbean.All across Europe North America and even in Australia and New Zealand, it is the same leit-motiff repeating over and over. There are certainly individual exceptions, but how can you ignore such large numbers all across the globe? The mullahs brainwash the muslims to view this as a conspiracy against muslims, not their own short coming.
Muslims demand respect, but will give no respect to minorities within their own lands. They are constant source of terror and criminality even in places as Thailand and Philippines, were the normal citizens are so calm and peace-loving. Malaysia is the only country in the world where muslims are doing somewhat better, but it also is the only country in the world to “reserve” jobs for the majority community, and they they are doing it without any guilt or shame.
Thanks to the minority appeasement policies of the ruling party in India, muslims have developed a sense of entitlement to the wealth being generated in India. But, they dont want to educate themselves, they dont want to live crime-free, Muslims from all over the country supported the Muslim League in breaking up the country, being 24.6% of the country’s population then, they were able to wrangle 30% of India’s land mass, and then over 70% of the Muslims did not leave for Pakistan, their promised land of choice. And now this Muslim wants the hard working Indians to fund the community that stabbed India, with freebies that equates them with all the others who have struggled to educate themselves and work hard day in and out for that.

[Reply]

ssraja Reply:
October 3rd, 2012 at 10:08 pm

mr sumit first remove u r RSS goggles sir.see muslim community with u r human eyes.

[Reply]

Sumit Bose Reply:
October 3rd, 2012 at 11:45 pm

@ssraja, please answer the points factually and second them with statistical data. Please, I am no RSS chaddi-walla, I cherish the freedom that Hinduism offers, to be critcial of anything that my rationale and (limited) intellect permits, and when i say anything…it really means everything. I am so relieved and blessed that I am not a blinkered and shackled nuthead, ready to invert logic and truth and accept wild unsubstanciated conspiracies, be blind to the beastiality and brutality chronicled in my scriptures, get into rampages when in a mob.
tarnish any recounting of recorded facts as “hate”. What is the worth an value of the secular education that has been sqaundered on you, that you are unable to reflect recorded and accepted facts as “hate”. Go and burn out the Bukhari’s collection if you feel so outraged, try your best to put a decent mask for the pedophle, caravan-bandit, mass-murderer, torturer, slave-merchant “rangila ras00l”.

[Reply]

ssraja Reply:
October 4th, 2012 at 10:59 am

sumitji what u r talking about backwardness of muslim community is because of the government policiesand the bureacrates mostly from the rss background.specially not educating them .lets go to the facts what u r india is today because of muslim community .u r top industrialists of this country have made their fortune by serving the muslim countries . today’s reliance industries which has made its fortune by exporting groceries to middle east muslim countries.and hindujas has made their fortune by entertaining the iran shah(the king then).in the 80’s when india was going through foriegn exchange crisis
the indian muslim who worked in middle east send their hard earned money which helped india’s foreign exchange defict.u r corrupt leaders and industralists what they did for the country they stashed money in swiss banks and other taxheaven countries.what other communities educated brahmins ,gujratis and other communities have done for this country they got educated here by using the infrastructure and sbubsidies. instead of serving the indians they settled in developed countries for their selfish motives.where as the partition is concerned muslim community is not the culprit gandhiji has opposed the division, but the hindu leaders rejected him and he has to leave the congress .jinnah is not a muslim nor he practicesed namaz in his life .he was a secular indian.he worked as sectary for then a hindu party congress.latter some muslimleague members has requested mr jinnah to lead the party with some conditions jinnah accepted.
both the community leaders want to rule the country because of their selfishness the country is divided not because of the muslims nor hindus .with this division the most loosers r the muslims more than a million lost their lives and other community which suffered is the sikhs who were displaced and lost many lives by this division.and the muslims have lost every thing after partition in india they were treated as second class citizens and in pakistan as mohajirs.where as world is concerned the west has unleashed the terror for oil on muslim countries and blaming the innocent muslims.

Sumit Bose Reply:
October 5th, 2012 at 12:36 am

@ssraja, I am so bemused at reading this pathethic inversion of simple facts. It is so abundantly clear that you wear that skull-cap forced upon your ancestor by some maurading foreigner, not over your skull, but over the past centuries the skull-cap is now covering your brain. It is pointless engaging in any worth-while debate with you as you feel every successful person in india owes it all to the glorious world of Islam. Every wrong and every ill of this country is to be stuck only on RSS’s face. Please stop fooling yourself you are making a total fool of yourself.

ssraja Reply:
October 5th, 2012 at 6:37 pm

I know u r the chaddy wala because of that u r speaking in their language.first know the facts then speak just don’t abuse others sir.

Sumit Bose Reply:
October 5th, 2012 at 11:16 pm

@ssraja, you have lost the plot totally. I am alluding to wine you are blabbering vinegar, I am talking of cheese you are screaming of chalk. I leave you free to rant into the emptiness for a very good reason: you can ventilate the toxins that have built up within yourself.Have a great life!

ssraja Reply:
October 7th, 2012 at 8:10 pm

mr sumit u r showing muslim in poor light,so i am showing facts i did’nt lost the plot there was peace in middle east out of 57 muslim countries marely 1,2 countries were had some conflicts the remaining were peaceful and prospering until the devil america intervened and distroyed the peace of the region .in india it is the rss which is blaming the community to meet the ends and for political purposes it want to garner the support of the bc’s and other non brahmin communities by targeting the muslim community.its a stratigy .if muslims or any other community gets the privileages as the upper caste getting then naturally they can produce APJ ABDUL KALAMS.

Sumit Bose Reply:
October 8th, 2012 at 12:57 am

@ssraja, I just dont know where to start to counter your ignorant diatribe…the quintessense of which is to blame USA and the RSS. In the inverted order created by the pseudo-secularists in the Congress and VPSingh (who is also from that cess-pool), in India, it is the so-called under-pivileged who have the aces stacked on their side; the net result: SC/STs and OBCs get ino highly competitive courses by just getting less than 50% marks, while the so-called privileged classes have to grind on even after getting 93% marks. These students end up failing for years in the Medical colleges and in the Professional courses.
Dr Kalams are not products of hand-outs,but are the direct consequence of determined and focussed hard work nurtured by loving and supportive parents. What do you say of the prodigial son who takes his share and stays back to extract more and more, creating turmoil and disturbance? You have no answers to that. that sums up the mid-set and attitude of the (general) Muslims in India.

I am rather surprised that my comments have been deleted. I have only tried to get at the bottom of the problem of crying victim hood by Muslim leaders. The community should look inside and see what practices makes them go to the bottom of the ladders in performance indices as compared to say Christians, Sikhs and Hindus and Jews world over.

There is no point in believing that Muslims are deliberately denied jobs because of religion. Most exams for government jobs have a roll no which does not identify the religion. Bad performance to qualify is due to bad education and beliefs. period.

Victimhood mentality will only create more crutches. Instead free the women from bad personal law and see the difference.

[Reply]

rao Reply:
October 4th, 2012 at 1:15 am

i dont know when u will realize that u are an absolute idiot.

[Reply]

Anonymous Reply:
October 5th, 2012 at 4:42 am

Mr Rao, all I can say is you must be a fake who wants to drive the Muslims in the arms of conspiracy theorists, women right haters, anti-progress mindsetters.

[Reply]

rao Reply:
October 8th, 2012 at 3:33 pm

this is neither ur age nor u have knowledge to understand these difficult social issues.by writing more and more u only show how stupid u are.

Anonymous Reply:
October 9th, 2012 at 6:22 pm

I think you will call anybody who tries to get us Muslims out of this evil personal law, our backward mindset, our intention to fight all as stupid.

You, must be a moron.

rao Reply:
October 15th, 2012 at 6:41 am

parvaiz u re an idiot.muslim personal laws are the best.our backwardness is due to our poverty not muslim personal laws.now amendments in hindu personal laws are bringing them close to muslim personal laws..

Why are all Indian govts pro Hindu when the politician only cares about his/her wealth and power, being the worshipper only of the god of wealth? Because without the Hindu vote, no politician worth his P can ever hope to take part in an election, let alone win one. Indian Muslims too have made the same point but it took them so many years after Independance – now several political parties realise that Muslims of India are as much important to them as the Hindus are – for without the Muslim vote no party can hope to get a clear majority. This is what Mamata banerjee have realised; the same gyan have dawned onto the SP, TDP, BSP, DMK – remaining regional / national parties have to realise the same too. Even the BJP is getting closer to it but is shying away from embracing the same gyan whole-heartedly. Unless all political parties fully realise that without the Indian Muslims contribution to the political beggar’s bowl and so this community can no longer be ignored, no Sachar recommendations are ever going to be accepted or implemented.

[Reply]

ssraja Reply:
October 3rd, 2012 at 9:59 pm

Ahmed wake up u r getting fooled by these politician’s .no one is appeasing u.u r leaders r selfish and greedy u r falling into their trap in the name of religion.u r own leaders r dragging u into poverty don’t blame others.and so called educated and welloff community of muslims is so selfish they forget their duty what islam preaches. they treat the poor muslims as untouchable’s.

[Reply]

Let us go to the period before Oxford, cambridge and Harvard, which, those who do not know, started as Madrassas for theology, when the Islamic golden age was inaugurated by the middle of 8th century.
The Abbasids rulers of Baghdad were influenced by the Quraanic injunctions and Hadith such as , the ink of a scholar is more holy than the blood of a martyr.
During the period the muslim world became an intellectual centre for science, philosophy, medicine, and general education, the Abbasids championed the cause of knowledge and established the so called house of wisdom in Baghdad, where the muslims and non-muslims scholars sought to translate and gather all the world’s knowledge into arabic, many classic works of antiquity that would otherwise have been lost , were translated into arabic and persian and later in turn translated into turkish, hebrew and latin. During this period the muslim world was a cauldron of cultureswhich collected, synthesized and significantly advanced the knowledge gained from the ancient Roman, chinese, Indian, Persian, Egyptian, Greek and Byzantine civilisations. So records the wikepedia.
And those who are not familiar with the history of Baghdaad, should note that found a resting place in the land known as the cradle of human civilisation, with the inscription on his gave,” He fought well and kept his faith. History shall also record that those who raided Baghdad in the 21st century were the graduates from the Pseudo elite universities of the USA, whose eduational programs fail to make a fully developed human after graduation

[Reply]

Islam and Polygamy:

There seems to be some sort of idiotic defence hat Polygamy is all right for Muslims and Polyandry is bad.

I think the Koranic injunctions made sense in the 7th century Now they have to be revised for today’s times.

Why do we see our leaders rush to defend this anti-women Muslim personal law? Is it love for Islam?

NO!

it is a broom for suppressing women by giving men an unequal right in marriages.

In case all these leaders loved islam so much, they would have fought for implementation of the Sharia as much as they do for this Muslim personal law. Why don’t we see the Muslim leaders begging that all Muslim criminals in India should get their hands chopped ?

If Sharia law is no longer required today neither is this Muslim personal law which discrimantes against women.

[Reply]

rao Reply:
October 15th, 2012 at 6:44 am

There seems to be some sort of idiotic defence hat Polygamy is all right for Muslims and Polyandry is bad……………………………………………….
marriage is allowed in certain circumtance,it is better to marry than running to brothels and keeping cuncubines.

[Reply]

article written by M N ROY on islam and india.
Islam and India
ALTHOUGH Islam came to India after it had played out its progressive role, and its leadership had been wrested from the learned and cultured Arabs, the revolutionary principles of the days of its origin and ascendancy were still inscribed on its flag; and a critical study of history might reveal that the Muslim conquest of India was facilitated by similar native factors as In the case of Persia and the Christian countries. No great people, with a long history and old cIv1lIsatIon, can ever succumb easily to a foreign invasion, unless the invaders command the sympathy and acquiescence, If not active support, of the masses of the conquered people. Brahmanical orthodoxy having overwhelmed the Buddhist revolution, India of the eleventh and twelfth centuries must have been infested with multitudes of persecuted heretics who would eagerly welcome the message of Islam.
Mohammad Ibn Kassim conquered Sindh with the active assistance of the Jats and other agricultural communities oppressed by the Brahman rulers. Having conquered the country, he followed the policy of the early Arab conquerors. “He employed the Brahmans in pacifying the country by taking them into confidence. He allowed them to repair their temples and to follow their own religion as before, placed the collection of revenue in their hands, and employed them in continuing the traditional system of local administration.” (Elliot, “History of India) when even the Brahmans, some of them at any rate, were prepared to go over to the side of the mlechha conquerors, the social conditions of the country could not be very normal. Evidently, society was in such a disintegrated and chaotic state as to make the position even of the most privileged class insecure. That is usually the result of counter-revolution. A revolution may be defeated by a combination of forces; but that does not enable the triumphant forces of reaction to remove the causes of social disintegration which brought about the revolution. In India, the Buddhist revolution was not defeated; it was miscarried owing to its internal weakness. Social forces were not sufficiently mature to carry the revolution to victory. Consequently, after the downfall of Buddhism, the country found itself in a worse state of economic ruin, political oppression, intellectual anarchy and spiritual chaos. Practically, the entire society was involved in that tragic process of decay and decomposition. That is why not only the oppressed masses readily rallied under the banner of Islam which offered them social equality if not political liberty; even the upper classes offered their services to the foreign aggressor out of selfish motives. That shows that, while the masses were in a state of despair, the upper classes were thoroughly demoralized.
As regards the spread of Islam in India, an ardent admirer of ancient Hindu culture like Havell, who cannot be suspected of any sympathy or even fairness to the Muslims, gives the following highly interesting testimony: “Those who did so (embraced Islam) acquired all the rights of a Musalman citizen in the law courts, where the Quran and not Aryan law and custom decided dispute in all cases. This method of proselytism was very effective among the lower castes of Hindus, specifically among those who suffered from the severity of Brahmanical Jaw with regard to the ‘impure’ classes,” (“Aryan Rule in India.”)
This is certainly not a very complimentary remark wrung from a firm believer in the perfection of Brahmanical law. In any ease, it is clear that In the time of Mohammedan conquest, there lived In India multitudes of people who had little reason to be faithful to Hindu laws and the traditions of Brahman orthodoxy, and were ready to forsake that heritage for the more equitable laws of Islam which offered them protection against the tyranny of triumphant Hindu reaction.
In another place, Havell chooses to deco precate the spiritual values of the teaching of the Arabian Prophet. But at the same time makes a very significant statement regarding the spread of those teachings in India. “It was not the philosophy of Islam but its sociological program, which won so many converts for It in India.” Of course, for the masses philosophy has no appeal. They are always attracted by a “sociological program” which offers them something better than the given conditions of their life. And a bad philosophy, that to say, a reactionary outlook of life, cannot be associated with a sociological program which secures the support of the downtrodden masses. If the sociological program of Islam found support of the Indian masses, it was because the philosophy behind that program was better than the Hindu philosophy which had been responsible for the social chaos from which Islam showed a way out for the masses of the Indian people. By the above statement, Havell admits that even in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, when Islam was winning adherence in India, it had not altogether played out its social-revolutionary role, and that it was by virtue of its social revolutionary character that it struck So deep a root in India. That is to say even in its days of degeneration and decay, Islam represented spiritual, ideological and social progress in relation to Hindu conservatism.
Havell is a famous eulogist of Indo-European culture which he considers to be the noblest product of the creative genius of man. On the other hand, he has bitter antipathy for the Muslims. His opinion cannot be dismissed as biased against the Hindus. As a matter of fact, his bias is entirely on the Bide of the Hindus. So, if even a historian like him found distasteful things happening in India in the past, conditions were very deplorable indeed. He writes: “But the victorious progress of Islam in India Is not to be accounted for by external reasons. It was mainly due to the political degeneration of Aryavarta which set in after the death of Harsha… The social program of the Prophet… Gave every true believer an equal spiritual status made Islam a political and social synthesis and gave it an imperial mission… Islam was a rule of life sufficient for the happiness of average humanity content to take the world as it is. Islam reached the zenith of its political strength at the critical period when the conflict between Buddhist philosophy and that of orthodox Brahaminism was a potent cause of political dissension in northern India.” (Ibid).
King Harshavardhan died in the middle f the seventh century. Thus, the political disintegration of India was a process parallel o the rise of Islam. The death of a king, however great, does not mark the turning point of history. The process had been going on for many centuries. The Buddhist revolution arrested it for a time, only to be aggravated, accentuated and accelerated on its defeat. Indeed, the monastic degeneration of Buddhism and its disintegrating influence on the entire Indian society greatly helped the Muslim conquest just as Chr1stia~ monasticism had done elsewhere.
Commenting on Mahmud of Guzni’s invasions, Havell further writes: “The almost invariable success of his arms added immensely to his prestige and brought Islam many adherents among the uncultured warrior classes of the North-Western Provinces to whom fighting was a religion and victory in the field the highest proof of inspiration.” (Ibid). Mahmud’s exploit could not but deal a staggering blow to the faith in the divinity of the shrines where the Indians had brought their offerings from times immemorial. Consequently, the religious feeling which found expression in the worship at the shrines, and the faith in their presiding deities were rudely shocked and inevitably shaken. In such circumstances, “religious feelings’ and spiritual instincts” induced the masses to transfer their devotion 1rom the gods of demonstrated impotence to the more mighty one, the belief in, and worship for whom, incidentally, was rewarded so magnificently. For ages, millions had believed in the supernatural power of the gods worshipped at the famous temples of Thaneswar, Muttra, Somnath etc. The priests of those temples had amassed fabulous riches at the expense of the believing multitude by virtue of their pretensions to the ability of invoking the protection of the powerful divinities. Suddenly, the whole venerable structure of belief and tradition collapsed like a house of cards under the cruel blow of the invading Infidel. When Mahmud’s hosts approached, the priests told the people that the invaders would be devoured by the fiery wrath of the gods. The people confidently expected a miracle which failed to happen. Indeed, it was performed by the God of the Invader. Being based upon miracle, faith necessarily is transferred to the most miraculous. Judged by all the traditional standards of religion. Those who embraced Islam at that crisis were the most religious.
A critical Investigation of the Internal as well as the external causes of the Muslim conquest of India is of practical value today. It will remove the prejudice that makes the orthodox Hindu look upon his Muslim neighbor as an Inferior being. Freed from preconceived ideas, the Hindus will be in a position to appreciate the constructive consequences of the Muslim conquest of India. That will enable them to live down the hatred of the conquered for the conquerors. Unless a radical change of attitude 18 brought about by a sober sense of history, the communal question w1ll never be solved. The Hindus w1ll never be able to look upon the Muslims as integral parts of the Indian nation until they come to appreciate the contribution they made towards the emergence of Indian society out of the chaos caused by the breakdown of the antique civ1l1sation. Besides, a proper understanding of history derived from a correct understanding of the successful advent of the Muslims in India will enable us to ascertain and stamp out the deeper causes of our present misfortune.
On the other hand, few Muslims of our days may be conscious of the glorious role played on the stage of history by the faith they profess. Many may disown and repudiate the rationalism and skepticism of the Arabs as deviations from the teachings of the Koran. But Islam occupies a memorable place in history thanks rather to its original-unorthodoxy and irreligiosity made evident by the Arab philosophers, than to the later growth of a reactionary priesthood or to the barbarous fanaticism of the Tartar converts. Islam had played out its progressive role before it penetrated India. Its nag was planted on the banks of the Indus and the Ganges not by revolutionary Saracen heroes, but by Persians demoralized by luxury and the barbarians of Central Asia who had embraced Islam, both had subverted the Arab Empire—that magnificent monument to the memory of Mohammad. Still, it was welcomed as a message of hope and freedom by the multitudinous victims of the Brahmanical reaction which had overthrown the Buddhist revolution and had consequently thrown the Indian society in a state of chaos. Neither the Persians nor the Mogul conquerors of India were entirely devoid of the traditional nobility, toleration and liberalism of the Saracen heroes. The very fact that comparatively small bands or predatory invaders from distant lands could make themselves the rulers of a vast country for such a long time, and their alien faith found millions of converts, proves that they did satisfy certain objective requirements of the Indian society. Even when much of its original revolutionary fervor had been overwhelmed by reaction. Islam still exercised certain revolutionary influence on the Hindu society. The Mohammedan power was consolidated in India not so much by the valour of the invaders’ arms as owing to the propagation of the Islamic faith and the progressive significance of Islamic laws.
Even the fiercely fanatical anti-Muslim Havell grudgingly admits…The e1fect of the Mussalman political creed upon Hindu social life was twofold: It increased the rigor of the caste system and aroused a revolt against it. The alluring prospect which it held out to the lower strata of Hindu society was as tempting as it was to the Beduins of the desert “(It) made the Sudra a free man and potentially a lord of the Brahmans. Like the Renaissance of Europe, it stirred up the intellectual waters, produced many strong men, and some men of striking originality of genius. Like the Renaissance also, it was essentially a city cult; it made the nomads leave his tent and the Sudra abandon his village. It developed a type of humanity full of joie de vivre. …” (“Aryan Rule in India”).
To the above highly illuminating statement, it may only be added that the rise of reformers like Kabir, Nanak, Tukaram, Chaitanya, etc. who evidenced a popular revolt against Brahmanical orthodoxy, was to a great extent promoted by the social ecects of Mohammedan conquest.
In view of this realistic reading of history, Hindu superciliousness towards the religion and culture of the Muslims is absurd. It insults history and injures the political future of our country. Learning from the Muslims, Europe became the leader of modem civilization. Even to-day, her best sons are not ashamed of the past indebtedness. Unfortunately, India could not be fully benefited by the heritage of Islamic culture, because she did not deserve the distinction. Now, in the throes of a belated Renaissance, Indians, both Hindus and Muslims, could profitably draw inspiration from that memorable chapter of human history. Knowledge of Islam’s contribution to human cultured and proper appreciation of the historical value of that contribution would shock the Hindus out of their arrogant self-satisfaction, and cure the narrow-mindedness of the Muslims of our day by bringing them face to face with the true spirit of the faith they profess

[Reply]

Sumit Bose Reply:
October 9th, 2012 at 5:46 am

@Saad, M.N Roy was no historian of any repute, he at the best would be as bad in History as was our Chacha Nehru. Will and Ariel Durant were eminent historians who have earned the resounding approval of Historians all over the world. They have termed the Islamic conquest of India as the most brutal and most reprehensible conquest in the annals of World History. Please don’t pass this entire bunch of marxists and pseudo-marxists apologetic drivel as authentic.You want the real dope, read M.A.Khan’s Islamic Jihad and there you will find the translations of the gory details from the chroniclers of each of those slave scoundrels till our great “freedom fighter” Tipu Sultan. And that will open a real pathway for you to understand how some direct ancestor of yours had to lick the boots of some barbarian and had to “honour” himself by accepting Islam, to prevent his head being separated from his torso and to prevent his wife and children being sold into slavery. I am so bemused to read inversions of truth of the direct descendants of those who had to be traumatized; as if the gory details in the K0ran and the bestiality in the H@diths were not reason enough to debunk this terrible baggage of history, when India was down on its knees under the constant flow of bandits from Central Asia.

[Reply]

SAAD Reply:
October 9th, 2012 at 3:27 pm

THE apparently sudden rise and the dramatic expansion of Mohammedanism constitutes a most fascinating chapter in the history of mankind. A dispassionate study of this chapter is of great importance in the present fateful period of the history of India. The scientific value of the study by itself is great, and the meritorious quest for knowledge is sure to be handsomely rewarded. But with us, to-day in India, particularly with the Hindu, a proper understanding of the historical role of Islam and the contribution it has made to human culture has acquired a supreme political importance.
This country has become the home of a very considerable number of the followers of the Arabian Prophet. One seldom realizes that many more Mohammedans live in India than in any single purely Islamic country. Still, after the lapse of many centuries, this numerous section of the Indian population is generally considered to be an extraneous element. This curious but extremely regrettable cleft in the loose national structure of India has its historical cause. The Mohammedans originally came to India as invaders. They conquered the country and became its rulers for several hundred years. That relation of the conqueror and the subjugated has left its mark on the history of our nation which to-day embraces the both. But the unpleasant memory of the past relation has been progressively eclipsed by the present companionship in slavery. The effect of British Imperialism is no less painful and ruinous for the bulk of the Muslim population than for the masses professing Hinduism. So completely have the Mohammedans become an integral part of the Indian nation that the annals of the Muslim rule are justly recorded as chapters of the history of India. Indeed, Nationalism has gone farther in effacing the painful memory of the past.
The practice of seeking consolation for the shame of the present in the real or legendary glory of the past has dressed the Muslim rulers of India in brilliant national colors.
Yet, a Hindu, who prides in the prosperity of the reign of an Akbar, or boasts of the architectural accomplishments of a Shahjehan, is even to-day separated most curiously by an unbridgeable gulf from his next door neighbor belonging to the race, or professing the faith, of those illustrious monarchs who are believed to have glorified the history of India. For the orthodox Hindus who constitute the great majority of the Indian population, the Mussulman, even of a noble birth or high education or admirable cultural attainments, is a ‘mlechha’-impure barbarian-who does not deserve a social treatment any better than accorded to the lowest of the Hindus.
The cause of this singular situation is to be traced in the prejudice born, in the past, of the hatred a conquered and oppressed people naturally entertained for the foreign invader. The political relation out of which it sprang is a thing of the past. But the prejudice still persists not only as an effective obstacle to national cohesion, but also as a hindrance for a dispassionate view of history. Indeed, there is no other example of two communities living together in the same country for so many hundred years, and yet having 50 little appreciation of each other’s culture. No civilized people in the world is so ignorant of Islamic history and contemptuous of the Mohammedan religion as the Hindus. Spiritual imperialism is the outstanding feature of our nationalist ideology. But this nasty spirit is the most pronounced in relation to Mohammedanism. The current notion of the teachings of the Arabian Prophet is extremely ill-informed. The average educated Hindu has little knowledge of, and no appreciation for, the immense revolutionary significance of Islam, and the great cultural consequences of that revolution. The prevailing n0tions could be laughed at as ridiculous, were they not so pregnant with harmful consequences. These notions should be combated for the sake of the national cohesion of the Indian people as well as in the interest of science and historical truth. A proper appreciation of the cultural significance of Islam is of supreme importance in this crucial period of the history of India.
The great historian Gibbon describes the rise and expansion of Islam as “one of the most memorable revolutions which has impressed a new and lasting character on the nations of the globe.” One is simply amazed to contemplate the incredible rapidity with which the two mightiest empires of the ancient time were subverted by the comparatively small bands of nomads issuing from the Arabian Desert, fired with the zeal of a new faith. Hardly fifty years had passed since Mohammad assumed the role of the singular Prophet spreading his Message of Peace at the point of the sword, his followers victoriously planted the banner of Islam on the confines of India, on the one side, and on the shore of the Atlantic, on the other. The first Khalifs of Damascus reigned over an Empire which could not be crossed in less than five months on the fleetest camel. At the end of the first century of the Hegira, the “‘Commanders of the Faithful” were the most powerful rulers of the world.
Every prophet establishes his pretension by the performance of miracles. On that token, Mohammad must be recognized as by far the greatest of all prophets, before or after him. The expansion of Islam is the most miraculous of all miracles. The Roman Empire of Augustus, as later enlarged by the valiant Trajan, was the result of great and glorious victories, won over a period of seven hundred years. Still, it had not attained the proportions of the Arabian Empire established in less than a century. The Empire of Alexander represented but a fraction of the vast domain of the Khalifs. For nearly a thousand years, the Persian Empire resisted the arms of Rome, only to be subdued by the “Sword of God” in less than a decade. Let a modern historian describe the miracle of the rise of Islam.
�Nowhere was there a vestige of an Arabian state, of a regular army, or of a common political ambition. The Arabs were poets, dreamers, fighters, traders; they were not politicians. Nor had they found in religion a stabilizing or unifying power. They practiced a low form of polytheism. A hundred years later, these obscure savages had achieved for themselves a great world power. They had conquered Syria and Egypt, they had overwhelmed and converted Persia, mastered Western Turkestan and part of the Punjab. They had wrested Africa from the Byzantines and the Berbers, Spain from the Visigoths. In the West they threatened France, in the East Constantinople. Their fleets, built in Alexandria or the Syrian ports, rode the waters of the Mediterranean, pillaged the Greek islands and challenged the naval power of the Byzantine Empire. Their success had been won so easily, the Persians and Berbers of the Atlas Mountains alone offering a serious resistance, that at the beginning of the eighth century it must have seemed an open question whether any final obstacle could be opposed to their victorious course. The Mediterranean had ceased to be a Roman lake. From one end of Europe to the other, the Christian states found themselves confronted with the challenge of a new Oriental civilization founded on a new Oriental faith.” (H. A. L. Fisher, “A History of Europe”, pp. 137/8.)
How did that stupendous miracle happen? That has been one of the baffling questions for historians. To-day the educated world has rejected the vulgar theory that the rise of Islam was a triumph of fanaticism over sober and tolerant peoples. The phenomenal success of Islam was primarily due to its revolutionary significance and its ability to lead the masses out of the hopeless situation created by the decay of antique civilizations not only of Greece and Rome but of Persia and China-and of India

[Reply]

Sumit Bose Reply:
October 10th, 2012 at 9:04 am

@Saad, this reply of yours is a copy paste from 3 separate sources. I also am amazed how the Arabs were able to conquer the Persians; of course the Abbassids turned the tables on the Arabs, but without rejecting that pedophile, necrophile, caravan-bandit, mass-murderer, torturer, slave-merchant (among a few of his qualities).You have not answered a single point that I have responded to, but are gloating about the rise of the Caliphate; what does that do for you, as an Indian? As a pseudo-arab, you cannot even reflect on it as your own. Saad, go and spend a few years in Arabia and you will know how terribly the common Arabs treat Indian muslims, and there are millions as you ever so willing to lick Arab feet.
Please read M.A. Khan’s book Islamic Jihad, he has painstakingly translated documents yet preserved in the London museum right from Mohammad of Ghori onwards till Tipu Sultan.I bet, if you have any sense of fairness you will be astonished with gory details recorded by the gloating chroniclers , on how they brought more power to Islam and enjoyed bringing suffering and pain upon us Indians, who happened to be on the loosing side at that time. You are a typical product of those terrible times, education has not brought you to a frame of mind to understand your roots. The law of nature is very clear, if you do not understand your roots and are not comfortable with it, you will never be able to spread your branches.

@ Saad

life is all about today.

If you talk about past glories and apply the rules of yesterday… I am afraid you will be like Geoffery Boycott playing 20-20

No group of people are let down by a few leaders. Its is a collective mindset which needs to change. If yo cling on to a fallacy that everything as per the book and new knowledge be damned, well the state of the Muslims would be as it is today world over. Just lagging behind the world except in places where oil is found.

[Reply]

rao Reply:
October 10th, 2012 at 2:19 pm

islam is for knowledge and change.even in india great changes are coming.there is silent revolution in field of education.islam brought light of education.before that knowledge was prohibited for 90%of indians.in pakistan also education is spreading very fast.turkey to jakarta muslims are more educated and far more civilized than india.in 5 gulf countries they are moving very very fast in field of education.iran is technically far ahead of india.specially their women.

[Reply]

vijay ! Reply:
October 10th, 2012 at 4:37 pm

So why dont you go there and serve them

[Reply]

rao Reply:
October 10th, 2012 at 5:39 pm

millions are already there.

Deep Bhaduri Reply:
October 11th, 2012 at 1:14 am

a few more ar#*-lickers of the Arabs would certainly be tolerated.

saad Reply:
October 15th, 2012 at 7:05 am

hindus are licking the ase of arabs more than muslims.hindu according to their religion has to i lick the ases of money and power.arab or non arab same for them.

ISLAMIC PHILOSOPHY
THE age of Arabian learning lasted about five hundred years, and coincided with the darkest period of European history. During the same period, India also was lying prostrate, under the triumphant Brahmanical reaction which had subverted or corrupted Buddhism. Eventually, it was, thanks to the inglorious success of having overcome the Buddhist revolution, that India fell such an easy prey to’ Muslim invaders.
Under the enlightened reign of the Abbassides, the Fatemites and the Ommiades rulers, learning and culture prospered respectively In Asia, North-Africa and Spain. From Samarqand and Bokhara to Fez and Cordova, numerous scholars studied and taught astronomy, mathematics, physics, chemistry, medicine and music. The invaluable treasure of Greek philosophy and learning had been burled under the intolerance and superstition of the Christian Church. Had it not been for the Arabs, It would have been irretrievably lost, and the dire consequence of such a mishap can be easily imagined.
Vain piety and hypocritical holiness induced the Christians to spurn the science of antiquity as profane. In consequence of that vanity of Ignorance, the peoples of Europe were plunged into the medieval darkness which threatened to be bottomless and interminable. The happy resurrection of the divine light of knowledge, lit by the sages of ancient Greece, at long last dissipated the depressing darkness of Ignorance and superstition prejudice and intolerance, and snowed the European peoples the way to material prosperity, intellectual progress and ,spiritual liberation. It was through the Arabian philosophers and scientists that the rich patrimony of Greek learning reached the fathers of modem rationalism and the pioneer of scientific research, Roger Bacon, was a disciple of the Arabs. In the opinion of Humboldt, the Arabians are to be considered “the proper founders of the physical sciences, in the signification of the term which we are now accustomed to give it.” {“Kosmos”, Vol. II.)
Experiment and measurement are the great instruments with the aid of which they made a path for progress, and raised themselves to a position of the connecting link between the scientific achievements of the Greek and those of the modern time.
AI Kandi, AI Hassan, AI Farabi, Avicena, Al Gazali, Abubakr, Avempace, Al Phetragius. (The Arabian names are so contracted in historical works written in European languages) -these are names memorable in the annals of human culture; and the fame of the great Averroes has been 1mmortalised as that of the man who made the forerunners of modern civilization acquainted with the genius of Aristotle, thereby giving an inestimable impetus to the struggle of the European humanity to liberate itself from the paralyzing influence of theological bigotry and sterile scholasticism. The epoch-making role of the great Arab rationalist, who flourished in the first half of the twelfth century under the enlightened patronage of the Sultan 0! Andalusia, is eloquently depicted by the well-known saying of Roger Bacon: “Nature was interpreted by Aristotle, and Aristotle interpreted by Averroes.”
The standard of spiritual revolt against the authority of the Christian Church, and the domination of theology, was hoisted in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. The rationalist rebels drew their inspiration from the scientific teachings of the great philosophers of ancient Greece, and these they learned from the Arabian scholars, particularly Averroes.
The bigotry of the pious Justinian, in the beginning of the sixth century, finally purged the holy world of Christian superstition of the remaining vestiges of pagan learning. The last Greek scholars were forced to leave the ancient seats of learning. They emigrated from the Roman Empire, and sought refuge in Persia; but there also sacerdotal intolerance proved equally hostile to profane learning. Eventually, the derelict science of Athenian culture found a hospitable home in the court of the Abbassides Khalifs of Baghdad who were so impressed by the wisdom of those foreign infidels that neither Koran, nor sword was offered to them. On the contrary, all the remaining votaries of ancient learning, whose knowledge ridiculed faith, and indulgently smiled at all religion, were invited to accept the liberal hospitality of the Commander of the faithful.
The Khalifs not only took the exiled Greek scholars under their protection. They dispatched competent men to different parts of the Roman Empire with the instruction and the means to collect all the available works of the sages of ancient Greece. The precious works of Aristotle, Hipparchus, Hyppocrates, Galen and other scientists were translated into the Arabian language, and the Khalifs gave every encouragement to the propagation of those irreligious teachings throughout the Muslim world. Schools established at State expense disseminated scientific knowledge to thousands of students belonging to all classes of society,-”from the son of the noble to that of the mechanic”. Poor students received education free, and teachers were handsomely remunerated for their services which were held at the highest esteem. The Arab historian, Abul Faragius, records the following views of Khalif Al Mamon regarding the men of leaning: “They are the elect of God, his best and most useful servants, whose lives are devoted to the improvement of their rational faculties. The teachers of wisdom are the true luminaries and legislators of a world which without their aid would again sink into ignorance an barbarism.
The current notion of the bigotry and fanaticism of Islam loses all historical authenticity when it is known that the men of learning so highly appreciated by the successors of the Prophet, were mostly devoid of any religious fervour, not a few of them holding views frankly heretical; and the general burden of their teachings was the assertion of the reason of man as the only standard of truth. History does not provide the critical student with many instances of the head of a religious order encouraging the “improvement of rational faculties”, as Khalif Al Mamon did. For, the cultivation of rational faculties is entirely incompatible with faith. Yet, Al Manon was but one of the illustrious lines of Abbassides Khalifs who not only encouraged the propagation of scientific knowledge, but themselves participated in it. Nor were the enlightened Abbassides an exception.
The Fatemites of Africa and the Omminades of Spain rivaled them in political power, material prosperity as well as in the patronage and propagation of knowledge. The library of Cairo contained over one hundred thousand volumes; whereas Cordova boasted of six times as many. This fact gives lie to another calumny which depicts the rise of Islam as an eruption of savage fanaticism, namely, the tale of the destruction of the famous library of Alexandria. One must have a pious mind or credulous disposition to believe that those who took delight in founding and supporting such noble seats of learning, would have callously set fire to the library of Alexandria; that, those who command the gratitude of mankind for having saved its most precious patrimony, could have possibly begun by contributing to the destruction of that treasure. When dispassionate and scientific study of history dissipates legends and discredits malicious tales, the rise of Islam stands out not as a scourge but a blessing for the mankind.
While books written in the eleventh and twelfth century indignantly detail the shocking tale of the burning of the library of Alexandria, the historians Eustichius and Elmacin, both Egyptian Christians, who wrote soon after the Saracen conquest of their country, are significantly silent about the savage act. The former, a patriarch of Alexandria, could be hardly suspected of partiality to the enemies of Christianity. An order of Khalif Omar has been usually cited as evidence of the barbarous act ascribed to his general. It would have been much easier not to record that order than to suppress any historical work composed by Christian prelates who had endless possibilities of concealing their composition. A diligent examination of all relevant evidence enabled Gibbon to arrive at the following opinion on the matter: “The rigid sentence of Omar is repugnant to the sound and orthodox precept of the Mohammedan Casuits; they expressly declare that the religious books of the Jews and Christians, which are acquired by the right of war, should never be committed to the flames, and that the works of profane scientists, historians or poets, physicians or philosophers, may be lawfully applied to the use of the faithful.” (“Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire”).
Since history began to be written with impartial criticism, the tale of the destruction of the Alexandrian library has either been discredited or subjected to grave doubt. In any case, at the time of the Saracen conquest, the library of Alexandria had ceased to be the repository of the valuable records of Greek learning. Long before that time, Alexandria had enshrined Christian bigotry in the place of scientific knowledge and philosophical wisdom. The character of the contents of the library must have changed accordingly. The pagan scholars, driven by Christian intolerance away from the seat of ancient learning, must have carried away the treasures they valued more than all other things. If the flame was actually lit by the order of Omar, it consumed ponderous tomes of theological controversy which had done immensely more harm than good to mankind. The fire of Islam might have consumed the none too precious records of vain and futile theological disputations; but the admirable ardour the free-thinking Khalifs collected, preserved and improved the valuable records of ancient learning which had left the Alexandrian library before its useless and pernicious contents were put to the flames.
Byzantine barbarism had undone the meritorious work of the Ptolymies. The real destruction of the Alexandrian seat of learning had been the work of St. Cyril who defiled the Goddess of learning in the famous fair of Hyparia. That was already in the beginning of the fifth century. The Christian Saint would not tolerate that philosophical lectures and mathematical discourses held by a young pagan woman should be patronized by the elite of Alexandrian society, while the pious but incomprehensible sermons of the Archbishop were attended only by the rebels. If he was no match intellectually, he possessed the power to eliminate competition once for all Under his instigation, the rebels, led by a regiment of monks burning with religious frenzy, attacked the seat of Alexandrian learning and, in the name of religion, perpetrated crimes too painful to be recorded and too shameful to be remembered.
“Thus, in the four hundred and fourteenth year of our era, the position of philosophy in the intellectual metropolis of the world was determined; henceforth, science must sink into obscurity and subordination. Its public existence will no longer be tolerated. Indeed, it may be said that from this period for some centuries it altogether disappeared. The leaden mace of bigotry had struck and shivered the exquisitely tempered steel of Greek philosophy. Cyril’s act passed unquestioned. It was now ascertained that throughout the Roman world, there must be no more liberty of thought…..Such assertions might answer their purposes very well so long as the victors maintained their power in Alexandria, but they manifestly are of inconvenient application after the Saracens had captured the city. For the next two dreary and weary centuries, things remained, until oppression and force were ended by foreign invaders. It was well for the world that the Arabian conquerors avowed their true argument, the scimitar, and made no pretensions to superhuman wisdom. They were thus left free to pursue knowledge without involving themselves in theological contradictions, and were able to make Egypt once more illustrious among the nations the earth,-to snatch it from the hideous fanaticism, ignorance and barbarism into which it had been plunged.” (Draper, “The History of the Intellectual Development of Europe,” Vol. 1, p. 325).
The works of the sages of ancient Greece were not only rescued, collected and preserved by the Arabs. They were profuse commented and improved upon. Complete works of Plato, Aristotle, Euclid, Appolonius, Ptolemy, Hyppocrates and Galen were available to the fathers of modern Europe at first only in Arabic versions, accompanied by erudite commentaries. Modern Europe learned from the Arabs not only medicine and mathematics. The science of astronomy, which widens the vision of man and reveals before him the mechanical laws of nature, was jealously cultivated by the Arabs. With the aid of new instruments of observation, Arab philosophers acquired exact knowledge about the circumference of the earth the position and number of planets. In their hand, astronomy began to outgrow its primitive form, (divinations of Astrology), cultivated more or less by the priests of all Oriental countries, and to develop into an exact science. Although algebra had been invented by Diophantus of Alexandria, it did not become an object of common study until the age of Arabic learning. As a matter of fact, the name of the science has given currency to the theory of its Arabian origin. But the Arabs themselves modestly acknowledged their indebtness to the Greek master. Botany was studied for medical purposes; yet the discovery of two thousand varieties of plants by Dioscorides represented the birth of a new science. Alchemy was a secret, jealously guarded by the priests of ancient Egypt. It was also practiced at Babylon. In a much later period, rudiments of chemistry were also known to the physicians of India. But the science of chemistry owes its origin and initial developments to the industry of the Arabs. “They first invented and named the alembic for the purposes of distillation; analyzed the substances of the three kingdoms of nature; tried the distinction and amenities of alkalis and acids; and converted the precious minerals into soft and salutary medicine.” (Gibbon).
It was in the science of medicine that the Arabs made the greatest progress. Masua and Geber were worthy disciples of Galen, and substantially added to what they had learned from the great master. Avicena, born in distant Bokhara, in the tenth century, reigned in Europe as the undisputed authority of the medical science for five hundred years. The school of Salermo, until the sixteenth century, was the centre of medical learning in Europe. It owed its origin to the Saracens and taught the lessons of Avicena.
The distinctive merit of the Arab scholars was the zeal to acquire knowledge through observation. They discarded the vanity of airy speculation, and stood firmly on the ground known to them. That great merit of Arabian learning is decisively evidenced in the following view of its Doyen Averroes: “The religion peculiar to philosophers is the study of that which is; for no sublimer worship can be given to God than the knowledge of his works, which leads to the knowledge of him and his reality. That is the noblest action in His eyes; the vilest is taxing, as error and vain presumption, the efforts of those who practice this worship, and who in this religion have the purest of religions.” A religion which permitted the propagation of such irreligious views, though garbed in a pious phraseology, could not have its origin in intolerance and fanaticism. For this heterodox view, the philosopher, of course, incurred the wrath of the priesthood; but much more of the Christian than the Muslim.
After a short banishment, Averroes was restituted in his position in the court of the Sultan of Andalusia, and his books survived proscription in the Islamic world. But from their Latin version, the above and similar passages were expunged. Yet, the heretic movements of Europe, during the twelfth, thirteenth and fourteenth century, drew their inspiration from the suppressed teachings of the Arab philosopher; and it was the heretic movement that shook the foundation of the Catholic Church which had held Europe in spiritual subordination throughout the middle-ages. From the twelfth century onwards, until the triumph of modern learning, Averroism was analogous to heresy in the horrified eye of Christian holiness. And it was for nothing that it was so. For, alone the passage quoted above indicated the surest point of departure for the quest of positive knowledge which eventually cleared away the debris of ignorance, sanctified as faith, and glorified as virtue on the authority of theological dogmas.
In this passage, Averroes stated the basic principle of the inductive method-the surest way to true knowledge. On the preconceived notion of a creator is set aside, and of is made to know him (as distinct from the blind faith in his existence) in his reality through the empirical knowledge of his works, that is, nature, the divine object, recedes farther and farther, until it vanishes Into nothingness,- the only demonstrable reality about his existence; and a religion which promoted that singular quest for the knowledge of God certainly represented the greatest advance of human ideology under the garb of religion. The latest of Great Religions, Islam was the greatest; and as such destroyed the basis of all religions. That is the essence of its historical significance.
The centre of Islam and Arabic learning was in those very historical regions where the older civilizations of the Egyptians, Assyrians, Jews, Persians and Greeks had arisen, clashed and fallen. The positive outcome of those earlier civilizations went into the making of the Arabian culture, and the remarkable Monotheism of Mohammad made its own the cardinal principles of the religion of those ancient peoples. It stands to the credit of the Arabian philosophers that they, for the first time, conceived the sublime idea of a common origin of all religions. Not only did they hold the view, singularly broad for the epoch, that all religions were so many efforts of the human mind to solve the great mysteries of life and nature; they went so much farther as to make the bold suggestion that the effort more reconcilable with reason was the greater, nobler and sublimer. This rationalistic view of religion attained the highest clarity in the mind of Averroes.
Thus, together with the invaluable metaphysical and scientific teachings of the sages of Athens and Alexandria, the Arabs contributed something original to the foundation of modern civilization. It was skepticism-that powerful solvent of all faith. As soon as criticism challenges credulity, a new light dawns on the perspective of human progress. A curious book, anonymously published with the title “Three Imposters”, occupies a prominent place in the early history of skepticism in Europe. The credit for that scandalous composition was attributed e1ther to the heretical Christian Emperor Frederic Barbarossa, or the Muslim philosopher Averroes. The imposters were Moses, Christ and Mohammad. One of the suspected authors was a Christian and the other was a Mussulman. Religion certainly had fallen in bad days.
There had been skepticism before the thirteenth century, but no real incredulity. This doctrine and that had been disputed or rejected; but the foundation of Christian faith had never been touched. It was this foundation which was assailed when the idea was conceived that all religions have a common ground. If all religions are essentially the same, then the doctrine and dogmas peculiar to each other should be discarded as pernicious obstacles to the realization of the spiritual unity of mankind. But freed from doctrines and dogmas, religion has no leg to stand upon. Its rationalization amounts to its destruction. The revolutionary idea of the common origin of all religions was conceived for the first time by the Arab thinkers.

[Reply]

saad Reply:
October 10th, 2012 at 2:32 pm

continued………………………………………………………………………….
Although Arabian learning reached its climax in Averroes, he was but the greatest and the latest of a long succession of great thinkers and scholars who flourished from the ninth to the thirteenth century. A brief reference to the substance of the teachings of the more illustrious of them will give some idea of the revolutionary significance of the learning which owed its origin to the cardinal principle of the Mohammedan religion, and was promoted by the staggering achievements of the “Sword of God.”
Having established unity, as the terrestrial reflection of their spiritual unitarianism, and promoted economic prosperity in consequence thereof, the new Islamic nation devoted itself to the culture of the mind. For a hundred years, it modestly learned from others, particularly the ancient Greeks. Thus equipped, it began to produce independent and original thought in every branch of learning.
Al Kandi was the earliest of the great Arabian philosophers. He flourished in the capital of the free-thinking Abbassides, and leaped into fame in the beginning of the ninth century. For teaching that philosophy must be based on mathematics; that is, it should cease to be idle speculation: abstract thought should be guided by precise reasoning, based on concrete facts and established laws, in order to produce positive results. The teacher of this doctrine deserves the great distinction of having anticipated Francis Bacon and Descartes by seven hundred years as a forerunner of modern philosophy. Even to-day there are many “philosophers” and scholars who’ could be profited by the wisdom taught by the Saracen sage a thousand years ago.
Next to be mentioned is Al Farabi who lived in the following century, and taught at Damascus as well as Baghdad. His commentary on Aristotle was studied for centuries as an authoritative work on the subject. He also excelled in the medical science. Roger Bacon learned mathematics from him.
In the latter half of the tenth century appeared Avicena. He belonged to a rich landowning family of Bokhara engaged in prosperous trade. He wrote on mathematics and physics, but went down in history for his contributions to the medical science.
The famous medical school of Salermo was a monument to his memory, and his work was the text book of medicine throughout Europe until the sixteenth century. The great physician’s philosophical views were so unorthodox that even the free-thinking Emir of Bokhara could not resist the pressure of the Imams who were scandalized by the profanity of Avicena. He had to leave the court of his patron, and traveled all over the Arabic Empire teaching medicine and preaching his philosophy at different seats of learning.
In the eleventh century lived Al Hassan who deserves a place among the greatest scientists of all ages. Optics was his special subject. Having learned it from the Greeks, he went farther than they, who corrected their mistaken notion that the rays of light issue from the eye. By anatomical and geometrical reasoning, Al Hassan proved that the rays of light came from the object seen, and impinged on the retina. There is ground for belief, held by many historians of science, that Keppler borrowed his optical views from his Arab predecessor.
In the same century also lived AI Gazali, son of an Andalusian merchant. He anticipated Descartes in reducing the standard of truth to self-consciousness. He stands out as the connecting link between the antique and modern skepticism. His memorable contribution to philosophy is better stated in his own words: “Having failed to get satisfaction from religion, I finally resolved to discard all authority, and detach myself from opinions which have been instilled in me during the unsuspecting years of childhood. My aim is simply to know the truth of things; consequently it is indispensable for me to ascertain what is knowledge. Now, it was evident to me that certain knowledge must be that which explains the object to be known in such a manner that no doubt can remain, so that in future all error and conjecture respecting it must be impossible. Thus, once I have acknowledged ten to be more than three, if anyone were to say: “On the contrary, three is more than ten; and to prove my, assertion I will change this stick into a serpent; and if he actually did the miracle, still my conviction of his error would remain unshaken. His maneuver would only produce in me admiration for his ability, but I should not doubt my own knowledge.”
The principle of acquiring exact knowledge, stated nearly a thousand years ago, by the Muslim savant, still holds as good as then; and the scientific outlook which makes such knowledge possible, is still comparatively rare among the Indians, who even in these days of the twentieth century allow themselves to be imposed by feats of magic and “spiritual” charlatanism, and credit these as serious challenge to the reliability of scientific knowledge.
Al Gazali held that knowledge could not possess such mathematical exactness unless it were acquired empirically, and governed by irrefragable laws established by experience. He was of the opinion that incontestable conviction could be acquired only through sense perceptions, and necessary truth, that is, casualty. In reason (self-consciousness) he found the judge of the correctness of the perception of senses. One is amazed to find such unique boldness of thought in the atmosphere of a religion generally believed to be the most intolerant and fanatical. Yet, AI Gazali’s skepticism was avidly studied throughout the Muslim world of his tine. His place in the history of philosophy can be judged from the opinion of the famous French Orientalist Renan, who thought that the father of modern skepticism, Hume, did not say anything more than what had been said by the Arab philosopher who preceded him by seven hundred years. The immensity of the historical significance of Al Gazali’s views is appreciated still more clearly when we remember that it was skepticism of Hume which gave impetus to Kant’s “all shattering critical philosophy” that laid a cruel axe at the root of all speculative thought. But AI Gazali’s views were a long way ahead of time. Experimental science, as he visualized, was not yet possible. In the absence or infancy of technology, the nature of objects could not be as mathematically ascertained as the philosophers wished. Therefore, in his later years, AI Gazali fell into mysticism; but his fall was not more strikingly inglorious than of Kant. Objective drawbacks clipped the intrepid wings of the soaring spirit of the Arab thinker; whereas subjective predilection of class interest overwhelmed the critical genius of Kant

[Reply]

saad Reply:
October 10th, 2012 at 2:34 pm

continued……………………………………………………
Abubakr, who lived in the twelfth century, was the first astronomer to reject the Ptolemic notion regarding the position of heavenly bodies. He conceived of a planetary system, and celestial motion which tended towards the epoch-making discoveries of Giordano Bruno, Galileo and Copernicus. It is recorded that “in his systems all movements were verified, and therefore no error resulted.” Abubakr dies before having set forth his theory in a complete treatise. His pupil, AI Phetragius, popularized his teaching that all planetary bodies moved regularly. Throughout the middle-ages, the hypothesis was valued as a �great contribution to astronomical knowledge. The teachings of a Muslim philosopher, which upset the biblical view of the universe, penetrated the Christian monasteries. Not only Roger Bacon, but his illustrious opponent, Albertus Magnus, also acknowledged the indebtedness to the astronomical work of Al Phetragius in which Abubakr’s views on planetary movement were expounded.The basic principle of the philosophy of Averroes, the greatest and the latest of the great Arabian thinkers, have already been outlined. He lived at the turning point of the history of the Islamic culture. By the twelfth century, the pinnacle had been reached, and the forces of reaction had gathered strength to overwhelm those of progress. Islamic culture was already on the decline.The freedom of thought permitted by the simple faith of a nomadic people, had attained such soaring heights of boldness as eventually clashed with the temporal interests of the “Commanders of the Faithful.” When the positive outcome of Islamic thought, developed so marvelously during five hundred years, was summarized in the highly revolutionary dictum of Averroes that reason is the only source of truth, Sultan Al Masur of Cordova, under the pressure of the priests, issued an edict condemning such heretical views to hell-fire, on the authority of religion. The denunciation of the noblest product of Islam naturally marked the beginning of its degeneration from a powerful lever of human progress to an instrument of reaction, intolerance, ignorance and prejudice. Having played out its historic role-to rescue the precious patrimony of ancient culture out of the engulfing ruins of two Empires and the blinding darkness of two religions-Islam turned traitor to its original self, and became the black banner of Turkish barbarism and of the depredations of the Mongolian herds. Islam disowned its own. Averroes was driven away from the court of Cordova-the home of free thought for centuries. His books were condemned to the flames, if not actually of fire, to those of the more merciless sacerdotal reaction. Rationalism came to be identified with heresy. The very names of Averroes and his master, Aristotle, became anathema. In course of time, reaction triumphed so completely that for an orthodox Mohammedan, philosophy stood for “infidelity, impiety, and immorality.” But the standard of spiritual progress, admirably held high, and boldly carried forward by the Arabs during five hundred years, could not be lowered and trampled under the fury of vain religiosity any more successfully by Islamic intolerance than previously by Christian piety and superstition. Averroes was disowned by his own people, only to be enthroned by those to whom belonged the future. The fierce contest between Faith and Reason, between despotic ignorance and freedom of thought, which rocked Europe and shook the foundation of the Catholic Church from the twelfth century onwards, drew inspiration from the teachings of the Arab philosophers. Averroes and Averroism dominated the scientific thought of Europe for four hundred years.

[Reply]

Saad

You are quiet a bore. Pretty boring.

How so you assume that all the scientists and philosphers you talked about were actually Muslims.

Are Vikram sarabhai Homi Bhaba, Newton, einsteisn, Abdul Kalam, identified by religion?

In the same manner many of the architects, scientistts you boast about would just be accidently born with Muslim names.

Get over this inferiority complex that you hav e 1% Arab sperm in your genes so you are superior. That is all claptrap drilled into you. None of the invading armies into India came with women.

Show me one painting of those times which show women on a horseback. Infact woman on a burka cannot mount a horse. Recognise your true genes and live today as an Indian

[Reply]

rao Reply:
October 10th, 2012 at 5:45 pm

read about them on internet u will find they were great islamic philospher at the same time.their first knowledge was islamic.

[Reply]

vijay ! Reply:
October 10th, 2012 at 5:55 pm

I think you should get over your iferiiorty complex of trying to be a 2nd class Arab

[Reply]

dronacharya Reply:
October 15th, 2012 at 5:48 am

u are right as u have no awnser.vedic period was the darkest period of indian history.tell me the name of library or university built by hindu kings.budhdhists did great job but u people destroyed.them.base of hinduism is enslavement not development.VIJAY 33 CRORE DEVTAON KE BOJH KE TALE DABA INDIA KYA KAR SAKTA HAI.u have no conversion so u hate each other and always pray for others destruction.

vijay ! Reply:
October 15th, 2012 at 8:02 am

Wow Dronacharya!!

I think you need to have a beer and relax. ALl the hatred and falswe history will come out if you dance on Daler Mehdi’s tunes!

Be liberal.. be free. No book is perfect. Islamic texts need to recognise the rights of Non Muslims, the right to leave Islam, the right of women, the rights of Qadianis and Hindus and CHrtistians.

dronachary Reply:
October 15th, 2012 at 8:48 am

islam recognizes the the right of others.ruffians may do anything they want.killer modi is goining to be india next pm of india.

dronacharya Reply:
October 15th, 2012 at 7:23 am

recently prince charles has said that ..islamic civilization of europe is the base of rennaince and present european civilization

@ Parvez

Beautifully stated man!!

I am taking this quote from your writing for posting to friends

——–”Why do we see our leaders rush to defend this anti-women Muslim personal law? Is it love for Islam?
NO!
it is a broom for suppressing women by giving men an unequal right in marriages.
In case all these leaders loved islam so much, they would have fought for implementation of the Sharia as much as they do for this Muslim personal law. Why don’t we see the Muslim leaders begging that all Muslim criminals in India should get their hands chopped ?
If Sharia law is no longer required today neither is this Muslim personal law which discrimantes against women. “

[Reply]

engrich Reply:
October 16th, 2012 at 2:19 am

vijay women is burnt alive only in india.muslim personal is balanced not descriminatory.that is why 65% of new coverts in europe are women.hindus never treated their women equally or even kindly.as per geeta they are between shudra and chandal whose murder carry no punishment.

[Reply]

vijay ! Reply:
October 17th, 2012 at 9:13 am

@ Engrich

Why dont you dress up as a Muslim woman and live like that for a month. You will discover a new world.

[Reply]

LEARNING FROM HINDUS AND CHRISTIANS:– child marriages

There is no harm in us Muslims in learning from people who have done better than us. In the case of child marriage Muslims have a lot a lot a lot to learn as they have to do in the field of women’s rights.

Some days back an idiotic, foolish and downright court judgement sanctifying child marriages of Muslim girls at the age of 14. As expected all TV Musims– Kamal Farooqi, Sadia Dehlvi and the gang rushed to support this judgement citing Sharia, some chapter in Hadith and the foolish notion that Muslim girls will get “spoilt” in case they are not married early.

All the Congress, SP. Left and national leaders remained quiet lest they lose votes by offending Muslim sentiments. Just showed their hollowness the fact that they are no well wishers of Muslims.

Only Kalbe Sadiq spoke up against it.

NOW SEE THE CONTRAST.

The Khap Panchayat in Haryana asked for child marriages to prevent girls from rape. Chautala, another idiot like Farooqi supported it.

BUT MOST INDIANS, HINDUS AND CHRISTIANS AND ALL POLITICAL PARTIES HAVE COME OUT AGAINST IT.

Nobody is talking that Hindu sentiments will be hurt.

Wrong is wrong. Whether for Muslim, Hindu or christian.

WHY CAN’T WE LEARN FROM THEM INSTEAD OF CONJURING UP FAKE VICTIMHOOD STORIES AND DRUMBEATING THE GLORY OF 9TH OR 12 TH CENTURY?

[Reply]

Anonymous Reply:
October 12th, 2012 at 5:49 pm

Parvez puttar khush keeta. One of yr best posts. Well written. Cannot believe however that Sadia Dehlavi said that. Really ???

[Reply]

SYED ALI Reply:
October 15th, 2012 at 5:40 am

child marriage are not allowed anywhere in muslim world(barring saudi arabia).even in india there is no child marriage practically happens among muslims .while bigamy rape and women burning , is more rampant among hindus.khap adalats of haryana also recommended same to save girls..biggest brothels of the world can be found around yr temples.example is triputi,biggest red light areas of the world exist in our comospolitan cities.IN ISLAM THIS EVIL PRACTICE IS PUNISHABLE BY DEATH.U PEOPLE KEEP UR NAME AFTER PROSTITUTES, like menka was dancer in the court of raja inder and urvashi was prostitute who married her son.
balwinder south indian brhmns wanted sharia to run india.they knew these laws are more perfect and practical.out of hatred for muslims and chamchagiri for britishers,catholic laws were imposed on india.
now they are amending the laws,like now divorce is being made more easy property and divorce rights are given to women also.women can continue her parental name etc.among hindus PATI IS DEVTA SO WOMEN IS COMMODITY,EVEN CHASTITY DO NOT APPLY ON HUSBAND,christian personal laws are bullshit,even if u see ur wife on bed with others on bed u can not divorce her,as pairs are made on sky by god himself.that is why more and more european ladies are converting to islam.sarkozy had 4 muslim women ministers in his cabinet.
balwinder for u anything anti-muslim is KHUSH KEETA…

[Reply]

vijay ! Reply:
October 15th, 2012 at 8:00 am

I think if child marriage is so wrong in your view why dont you go on the streets and say Muslim girls should aonly be allowed marriage after 18 instead of trying to blame Christians, Hindus and the rest of the world.

syed ali Reply:
October 15th, 2012 at 8:41 am

suppose if her father die when she is 14.marriage will be best option.why u have no heart for millioms of indian girls of 14 rotting in various brothels of india.will the marriage not be best option for her.india 14 years girls are raped daily.usually those muslim girls who have proper house girls get marry at 23plus.same as hindu house.
vijay awnser i am blme u or anybody.90%of child marriages take place in villages mostly by hindus.

vijay ! Reply:
October 15th, 2012 at 8:44 am

This is the rot taught to you at the madrassa. A country and state can only move thru laws.

Hindus have tried to get in a just law that girls get equal rights… though in pracitce a lot has to be done. Anybody who opposes these laws is criticised and demolished by Hindus.

Unfortunately for Muslims, the opposite is true. The leaders only talk about laws which imprison women and anybody who opposes them is attacked violently. You are just a small pawn in this game … a foot soldier who does not know that the real puppeteer is Hafeez Saeed.

syed ali Reply:
October 15th, 2012 at 11:02 am

power to women is because of vote politics.hindus always opposed power to women.muslim world women are not burnt alive.like in india.india is the only country where number of women is less than men.moreover hindus always considered
dirty and evil.
ur respect for women is shown by the fact the DELHI IS CONSIDERED RAPE CAPITAL OF WORLD.

vijay ! Reply:
October 15th, 2012 at 12:10 pm

Sex ratio in Pakistan is 1.10 compared to 1.09 in India. Not much difference. Radio Mullah has filled your head with propoganda

syed ali Reply:
October 15th, 2012 at 2:17 pm

pakistan is also bad but in india it is reaching 8/10.that is why so much rape.

vijay ! Reply:
October 16th, 2012 at 8:30 am

In Pakistan lot f donkey sex and camel sex. Google gives proof. Is that what radio Mullah teaches you in name of purity?

vijay ! Reply:
October 16th, 2012 at 8:30 am

In Pakistan lot f donkey sex and camel sex. Google gives proof. Is that what radio Mullah teaches you in name of purity?

Anonymous Reply:
October 12th, 2012 at 6:42 pm

Pervez,

A great post . FYI, Rao/Saad is our old friend Engrich/ Tajender/ Ramavtar.

[Reply]

rex minor Reply:
October 15th, 2012 at 7:01 am

mohanrr,
arushi was around 14w hen found havung sex with his servant.in indian brothels u will find millions of girls around the same age.SUPPOSE IF SOMEBODYS PARENT DIE WHY SHE SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO MARRY,INSTEAD OF GOING TO BROTHELno sane parent want her daughter to marry before graduation but laws are made for all situation.can u tell me .why these monkeys are crying.is it not islamophobia.orphan/unprotected girls should be allowed to marry after mensus.

[Reply]

vijay ! Reply:
October 15th, 2012 at 7:59 am

Rex you are crazy

You should applaud Parvez for his views. WHy dont you say that Muslim boys should also marry at 14 and only have one wife?

rex Reply:
October 15th, 2012 at 8:43 am

we are muslims we are for one wife 4 in special cases. u hindus are one wife and hundreds illegemate relations.

vijay ! Reply:
October 15th, 2012 at 8:45 am

WHich is hre special case. WHy do you oppose laws which say one man one wife?

If out of 100 people10 muslims keep four wives then forty women are gone.

Rest of the Muslims become sexually frustrated then. For this reason they become jehadis and suicide bombers. You will not understand this simple maths.

100 men 100 women
10 men 4 wives
Next ten men 3 wives

women left for 80 men = 30

so in this equation 50 men have the potyential of becoming frustrated and violent.

rex Reply:
October 15th, 2012 at 11:04 am

TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION MILLIONS OF SEX WORKERS
ALL OVER INDIA.

vijay ! Reply:
October 15th, 2012 at 12:05 pm

you mean to say the extra wives of Muslims are sex workers?

Dr Mishra Reply:
October 15th, 2012 at 8:03 pm

VIJAY, Rex Minor is a crazy Pakistani who blogs on PTH Pak Tea House with us. Ignore him completely

aneutralvoice Reply:
October 29th, 2012 at 5:21 am

Vijay, How many muslim you know who have more than one wife? This is well know fact that currently hindus like Dharmender and Hemamalini, Ramvilas Paswan, Mohan chand and Fiza and many more more well know names are exploiting Muslim personal law for their benefit. Please stop Muslim Hate Machine, yes they have different belief and faith but still have very similar human need and feeling like you. Go beyond your comfort zone to make friends from different community, cast or even linguistically different group.

Parvez, good stuff man. Btw introducing sadly here on this blog Rex Minor who is a crazy Pakistani who blogs on PTH Pak Tea House with us. Ignore him completely

[Reply]

rex minor Reply:
October 16th, 2012 at 2:09 am

running away is better as truh will prevail if argument goes.

[Reply]

Actions ReplyReply allForwardDeleteJunkMark as unreadMark as readDelete all from senderPrint messageView message sourceShow message historyHide message historyShow detailsHide detailsMusheer Siddiqui4/4/2012 To: m aFrom:Musheer Siddiqui (mssk47@yahoo.com) This sender is in your contact list.Sent:Wednesday, April 04, 2012 1:18:06 AMTo: m a (mssk46@hotmail.com)IQBAL ACADEMY SCANDINAVIA The teaching of the Qur’an that life is a process of progressive creation necessitates that each generation, guided but unhampered by the work of its predecessors, should be permitted to solve its own problems.
(The Reconstruction of Religious Thought in Islam) SHAKWA AND JAWAB-I SHAKWA(THE COMPLAINT AND RESPONSE TO THE COMPLAINT)BY DR. SIR MUHAMMAD IQBAL
Iqbal wrote the two poems, “Shakwa” and “Jawab-i Shakwa” (Complaint to God and its Response), in early twentieth century. It was the prime time of his poetic revelation, which is called his third period that began in 1908 and ended at his death in 1938. During that time Muslims in India had almost lost their entity as a nation. They had become the most oppressed community in British ruled India. A little before Iqbal, Sir Syed Ahmad Khan (1817-1898) had realised that the major cause of Indian Muslims’ misfortune was their illiteracy and the lack of knowledge. After a long struggle and much hardship he succeeded in establishing an Anglo Oriental College at Aligarh which later on became a university. Presently this university is a big place of learning and research in India. This university became a source of self-awareness among a negligible portion of Muslim minority in India. However, the masses of the community remained deprived of education and ultimately remained suffering in all parts of life. Due to poverty and lack of resources they were unable to educate their children. Among those who were lucky and got education remained unable to get a job. They remained jobless as all the fields of life and key posts were occupied and dominated by non-Muslims and the British. Such a situation gave birth to the persons like Altaf Husain Hali, Shibli Nomani, Maulana Zafar Ali Khan, Ali Brethren, and others who worked in their respective fields to fight for the rights of Muslims. All of them were contemporaries of Iqbal and were among the front-line fighters for freedom. However Iqbal stood alone with his powerful poetic way to waken self confidence in the people of his community. He and his contemporaries (named above) were able to move the masses and carried them forward on the road to get rid of the British rule. Iqbal nurtured the minds of the people and changed the direction of the society through his melodious voice reciting his own songs in a touching way reminding them of their past glory. He was the person who discovered a leader like Muhammad Ali Jinnah and convinced him to lead the nation under whose banner Muslims of India were united and marched towards independence till the world saw a new country “Pakistan” emerged on the world map with the rising sum of the morning of August 14, 1947.
Iqbal’s poem “Shakwa” was one of his most thrilling poems, which he recited personally in the month of April 1911 at the annual session of Anjuman Himayat-i Islam held in the compound of Islamia College, Lahore. It was largely applauded and subsequently published in the magazines and journals of the country. This poem consists of 31 stanzas having six verses each. In the poem Iqbal has highlighted Islam’s living traditions in such a way that it strikes the very heart of a person. The carefully selected and well-knit words of the poem were immensely effective. They filled the hearts of a deprived nation with new life, courage and enthusiasm. The poem “Shakwa” is a unique example of a complaint to God. We have used English translation from Dr. M.A.K. Khalil’s Call of the Marching Bell, which is English rendering of Iqbal’s Bang-i Dara.
In the first stage of this poem Iqbal counts the chivalrous deeds of the Muslims reminding them of their past glory when they happened to be the leaders and teachers of mankind. They implemented the rule of God on the earth and brought revolutionary reforms in the states under their control where justice prevailed. Hereunder I quote three stanzas from this part of “Shakwa”:
Ham jo jeetey thay to jangon ki museebat ke liyeAur marte thay tirey naam ke azmat ke liyeThi na kuch tegh zani apnee hukumat key liyeSar bakaf phirte thay kiya dhar men daulat ke liye?Qaum apni jo zaro-maal-i jahan par martiBut faroshi ke iwaz but shikani kiyum karti?
(If we lived we lived for the calamities of warsIf we died we died for the grandeur of Thy nameWe did not wield the sword for our kingdomsDid we roam about the world fearlessly for wealth?If our nation had been greedy of worldly wealth Why would we have been idol breakers instead of idol sellers?)
Mahfil-i kaun-o Makan men sahar-o sham phirayMa-i tauheed ko ley kar sifat-i jam phirayKoh men’ dasht mey ley kar tira paigham phirayAur maaloom hay tujh ko kabhi nakaam phirayDasht to dasht hain darya bhi na chorey hamnay Bahr-i zulmaat men daura diy-e ghorey hamnay
(We continuously wandered all over the worldWe wandered like the wine cup with Tawhid’s[1] wineWe wandered with Thy message in the mountains, in the desertsAnd doth Thou know whether we ever returned unsuccessful?What of the deserts! we did not spare even oceans!We galloped our horses in the dark ocean.?)
Safah-i dhar se batil ko mitaya hamneyNau-i insan ko ghulami se churaya hamneyTerey kaabe ko jabeenon sey bassaya hamneyTerey Qur’an ko seeno sey lagaya hamneyPhir Bhi hamsey ye gila hai ke wafadar naheen Ham wafadar naheen too bhi to dildar naheen
(We effaced falsehood from the earth’s surfaceWe freed the human race from bonds of slaveryWe filled Thy Kaa’ba with our foreheadsWe put Thy Qur’an to our heartsStill Thou complaineth that we are lacking fealty If we are lacking fealty Thou also art not generous.)
The second part shows the state of decline of Muslim nation. But Iqbal has projected this aspect so beautifully that instead of creating a sense of despair and destitute in the mind it inspires a new vigour and courage to stand up and deal with rival forces. Quoted hereunder are three stanzas of this part:
Ummaten aur bhi hain un men gunahgaar bhi hain Ijz waley bhi hain mast-i ma-e pindar bhi hainInmey kahil bhi hain ghafil bhi hain hushyar bhi hain Saikron hain ke tirey naam se bezaar bhi hainRahmaten hain teri aghyar ke kashanon parBarq girti hai to becharey musalmanon par
(There are other nations, among them are sinners alsoThere are modest people and arrogant ones alsoAmong them are slothful, indolent as well as clever peopleThere are also hundreds who are disgused with Thy nameThy graces descend on the other people’s abodesLightning strikes only the poor Muslims’ abodes.)
But sanam khanon men kahte hain musalmaan gaiHai khushi unko ke Kaabey key nigehbaan gaiManzil-i dhar se unton ke hudi khuwan gaiApni baghlon men dabba-e huey Qur-an ghaiKhanda zan kufr hai ehsaas tujhe hai ke naheenApniTauhid ka kuch paas tujhe hai ke naheen
(The idols in temples say ‘The Muslims are gone’They are glad that the Ka’bah’s sentinels are goneFrom the world’s stage the hudi[2] singers are goneThey, with the Qur’an in their arm pits, are gone.Infidelity is mocking , hast Thou some feeling or not?Dost Thou have any regard for Thy own Tawhid or not?)
Bani aghyar ki ab chahne wali dunyaRahgai apne liye ek khayali dunyaHam to rukhsat hue auron ney sanbhali dunya Phir na kahna hui Tauheed se khali dunyaHam to jeetey hain ke dunya men tera naam raheKaheen mumkin hai ke saaqi na rahey jaam rahe?
(Now the world is the lover of othersFor us it is only an imaginary worldWe have departed, others have taken over the worldDo not complain now that the world has become devoid of TawhidWe live with the object of spreading Thy fame in the worldCan the wine cup exist if the cup bearer does not live?)
The third part of Shakwa is a direct complaint to God. Three beautiful stanzas of this part are quoted as under:
Ye shikayat naheen hain unke khazane maamoor Naheen mahfil men jinhen baat bhi karne ka shaoorQahr to ye hai ke kafir ko milen ****-o qasoorAur becharey musalman ko faqat waida-i hoorAb wo altaaf naheen ham pe inaayaat naheenBaat ye kiya hai ke pheli si madaraat naheen
(We do not complain that their treasures are fullWho are not in possession of even basic social gracesOutrageous that infidel are rewarded with Houries and palaces And the poor Muslims are placated with only promise of Houries
We have been deprived of the former graces and favoursWhat is the matter, we are deprived of the former honours.)
Ishq ki khair wo pehli si ada bhi na sahiJada paimaiye tasleemo raza bhi na sahi Muztarib dil sifat-i qiblanuma bhi na sahiAur paabandiye aaeen-i wafa bhi na sahiKabhi hamse kabhi ghairon se shanasai haiBaat kahney ki naheen too bhi to harjai hai
(Granted that Love has not the former elegance alsoWe may have lost treading the path of Love alsoWe have lost the restless heart like the compass alsoAnd we may have lost the observance of fidelity’s rules alsoThou art changing friendship between us and othersIt is difficult to say but Thou art also unfaithful.)
Sarey faraan pey kiya deen ko kamil too ne Ek isharey pe haszroon kay liye dil tooneAathish andoz kiya ishq ka hasil toonePhoonk di garmiye rukhsaar sey mahfil tooneAaj kiyun seene hmare sharar aabaad naheenHam wohee sokhta saamaan hain tujhey yaad naheen?
(Thou perfected the Din on the peak of Faran[3]Thou captivated the hearts of thousands in a momentThou consumed the produce of Love with the fire Thou burned the congregation with Thy face’s fireWhy are not our breasts filled with love’s sparks now?We are the same lovers, dost Thou not remember now?)
The fourth part of Shakwa is the ending of this poem. Here we find Iqbal singing as a nightingale in a garden praying and expressing his sentiments in the most beautiful and touching manner. Out of these we quote below four stanzas;
Wadiye najd men wo shor-i salasil na raha, Qais deewana-i nazzarai mehmil na rahaHausley wo na rahey ham na rahey dil na rahaGhar ye ujra hai ke too raunaq-i mahfil na rahaAye khush aan rooz ke aayee wa basad naaz aayeeBay hijabana su-i mahfil-i maa baaz aayee
(The noise of lover’s chains in the Najd’s valley has disappeared Qais has no more remained longing for the litter’s sightThose old ambitions, we, as well as the heart have disappeared The house is destroyed as Thou art not present in the houseO that happy day when Thou with elegance will come backWhen Thou unveiled to our congregation will come back.)
Mushkilen ummat-i marhoom ki aasaan ka deMoor-i bey maya ko hamdosh-i Sulaiman ka deJins-i nayab-i mohabbat ko phir arzaan kardeHind key der nasheeno ko musalmaan kardeJoo-i khoon mi chakad az hasrat-i derina-i maMee tapad nala ba nashtarkada-i seena-i ma
(Make easy the difficulties of the blessed UmmahPlace the poor ant shoulder to shoulder to Sulaiman[4]Make the invaluable produce of Love accessible againChange the idolatrous Muslims of India into Muslims againA stream of blood drips from the frustrations mineWailing palpitates in the wounded breast of mine!)
Boo-i gul lay gai bairoon-i chaman raaz-i chamanKiya qayaamat hai ke khud phool hain ghammaz-i chamanAhd-i gul khatm hua toot gaya saz-i chamanUr gai daliyon se zamzama pardaz-i chamanEk bulbul hai ke hai mahv-i tarannum abtakUske seeney men hai naghmoon ka talatum abtak
(The rose’ fragrance took garden’s secret outside the gardenOutrageous that flowers themselves are informers against the gardenThe spring is over, broken is the orchestra of the garden Flown away from branches are the songsters of the gardenOnly nightingale is left which is singing stillIn its breast overflows the flood of songs still.[5])
Lutf marney men hai baqi na maza jeeney menKuch maza hai to yihee khoon-i jigar peeney menKitney betaab hain johar mirey aaeeney menKis Qadar jalway taraptey hain mirey seeney men Is Gulistaan men magar dekhnay waley hi naheenDaagh jo seene men rakhte hoon wo lalay hi naheen
(There is no pleasure in dying and no taste in living isIf there is any pleasure, it in bearing this affliction isMany a virtue is restless in my mirror!Many an effulgence is fluttering in my breast!But there is none in this garden to see themThere is no poppies[6] with love’s stains in their breasts).
After one year of reciting Shakwa Iqbal presented Jawab-i Shakwa in a huge gathering in 1913 at a famous public place Outside Mochi Gate of Lahore City. Jawab-I Shakwa contains 36 stanzas of six lines or verses each. This thrilling poem in a way was a call from God rather than a reply to Iqbal’s complaint. It added fire to the already boiling blood of the nation after Iqbal’s Shakwa, as a result of the Indian Muslims arose with a new life filled with enthusiasm, courage and a determination to change their fate. Inspired by Iqbal’s songs they were united, fought the war of independence and achieved victory. Once again the Muslims of India were a free nation and masters of their own destiny living in an independent country called Pakistan, the new Muslim State appeared on the world map on the 14th of. August 1947.
The revelation of Jawab-I Shakwa and its compilation took a long time of over one year. In this poem a comprehensive reply to Iqbal’s complaint to Allah is given This poem contains 36 stanzas out of which I have selected nine stanzas which are quoted hereunder together with their English translation;At the outset Allah says,
Ham to mayal ba karam hain koi saail hi naeeinRah dikhlaeen kisay rahrav-i manzil hi naheen.Tarbiat aam to hai johar-i qabil hi naheenJis say taamir ho adam ke ye wo gil hi naheenKoi qabil ho to ham shan-i kai detay hainDhoodnay walay ko dunya bhi nayi detay hain.
We[7] are inclined to Mercy, but there is no one to imploreWhom can we show the way? There is no wayfarer to the destinationJewel polishing is common but there is no proper jewelThere is no clay capable of being moulded into AdamWe confer the glory of Kai[8] on the deservingWe confer even a whole new world on those who search.The following three stanzas are in direct reply to the three stanzas in the Complaint (Shakwa):
Wo bhi din thay ke yihi maayai raanaa-i thaa Naazish-i mausami gul laala-i Sahra-i thaJo musalman tha allah ka shaida-i thaKabhi mahboob tumhara yihi harjai thaKisi yakjai sey ab ahd-i ghulaami karlo Millat-i Ahmad-i Mursil ko Moqami karlo
(There was a time when this alone was the source of beauty The wild tulip was the pride of the season of springWhichever Muslim there was, the Lover of Got he wasA while ago your beloved this very Unfaithful wasMake the covenant of fealty now with some local oneMake the Ummah of the Holy Prophet a local one.)
Safah-i dahr sey baatil ko mitaya kisneNau-i insaan ko ghulami sey churaya kisneMerey kaabae ko jabeenon sey basaaya kisne Merey Qur’an ko seenon sey lagaya kisneThay to aaba wo tumharay hi magar tum kiya hoHath par hath dharay muntazir-i farda ho
(Who effaced false worship from the face of the world?Who rescued the human race from slavery?Who adorned my Ka’bah with their foreheads in Love?Who put my Qur’an to their breasts in reverence?They were surely your ancestors, but what are you?Sitting in idleness, waiting for tomorrow are you!)
Kiya kaha bahri musalman hai faqat waadai hoorShakwa beja bhi karay koi to laazim hai shaoorAdl hai faatir-i hasti ka azal sey dastoorMuslim aaeen hua kfir to milay ****-o qasoorTum men hooron ka koi chahnay wala hi naheen Jawai toor to maujood hai Moosa hi naheen
(What did you say? For the Muslims is only the promise of HouriEven if the Remonstrance be unreasonable decorum is necessaryJustice is the Creator of Existence’ custom since eternityWhen the infidel adopts Muslim ways he receives Houris and palacesNot a single one of you is longing for Houris The effulgence of Tur exists but there is no Musa.[9])
At the end of Jawab-i Shakwa the Response offers a new hope for Ummah and also provides the remedy of all diseases of the Muslims. The following 30 verses (five stanzas) are the essence of this poem:
Ummateen gulshan-i hasti men samar cheeda bhi hainAur mahroom-i samar bhi hain khizan deeda bhi hainSankron Nakhl hain kaheeda bhi’ baleeda bhi hainSankron batn-i chaman men abhi poshida bhi hainNakhl-i Islam namuna hai bromandi kaPhal hai ye sankron saddiyun ki chaman bandi ka.
(Some nations in the existence’s garden benefited from their labour areAnd some deprived from fruits and even destroyed by autumn areHundreds of trees deteriorated and hundreds flourishing areHundreds still even concealed in the bosom of the garden areThe tree of Islam a model of flourishing isThis the fruit of cons of gardening efforts is)
Pak hai gard-i watan say sar-i daman teraToo wo Yusuf hai ke har misr hai kanaan teraQafla ho na sakega kabhi veran teraGhair yek bang-i dara kuch naheen saman teraNakhl-i shamasti-o dar shola dawad resha-i toAaqibat soz bawad saya-i andesha-i to
(Your skirt is undefiled by the dust of homelandYou are the Yusuf for whom every Egypt is Kan’an[10] It will never be possible to destroy your caravanNothing except the Clarions’s Call are your chattel You are a candle like tree, it its flame’s smoke your roots are Your thoughts free from the care of the end are.)
Misl-i boo qaid haye ghunche men pareeshan hojaRakht bar dosh hawa-i chmanistaan hoja Hai tunak maya to zarrey say biyabaan hojaNaghma-i Mauj say hangaama-i toofaan hojaQuwwat-i Ishq sey her past koi balaa kardeyDhr men ism-i Muhammad sey Ujala krdey
(Like fragrance you are contained in the flower bud, become scattered Become the chattel travelling on the wings of the breeze of the rose gardenIf you are poor, changed from speck to the wilderness beFrom the melody of wave changed to tumult of the storm beWith the Love’s power elevate every low to elegance With Muhammad’s name illuminate the whole world.)
Ho na ye phool to bulbul ka tarannum bhi na hoChaman-i dhr men kalyun ka tabassum bhi na hoYe na saqi ho to phir mai bhi na ho khum bhi na hoBazm-i tawhid bhi dunya bh na ho tum bhi na hoKhema aflaak ka istada isi naam se haiNabz-i hasti taphis aamada isi nam sey hai
(If there is no flower nightingale music should also not beIn the world’s garden smile of flower buds should also not beIf there is no cup bearer, wine and decanter should also not beTawhid’s Assembly in the world and you should also not beThe system of the universe is stable by this very nameThe existence’ pulse is warm with this very name.)
Aql hai teri sipar ish a shamsheer teriMerey darvesh khilafat hai jehangir teri Ma siwallah ke lia aag hai takbeer teriToo Musalman ho to taqdir hai tadbir teriKi Muhammad se wafa toonay to ham teray hainYe jahan cheez hai kiya lauho qalam tere hain
(Intellect is your shield, Love is your swordMy dervish! Your vicegerency is world-conquering Your Takbir like fire for Godlessness isIf you are Muslim your prudence your destiny isIf you are loyal to Muhammad we are yoursThis universe is nothing the Tablet and the Pen[11] are yours.)

[Reply]

@ Zia

What do you have to say about Salman Khurshid stealing of tricycles and crutches of the handicapped?

His threats to Kejriwal?

It has made me ashamed as a Muslim

[Reply]

Ravi Reply:
October 19th, 2012 at 3:31 pm

Pavez…..what would have been your feelings had the tricycles and crutches been stolen by some one who was not a Muslim.
Would you have said, thank God it was not stolen by a Muslim??

[Reply]

Anonymous Reply:
October 19th, 2012 at 5:20 pm

You are right that his act is that of a corrupt thief and should not be judged on basis of religion.

However on this blog some months back Zia had wirtten on Salman as a modern face of Indian Islam and someone who could be a role model.

On a personal level having seen him speak at one or two gatherings I always looked upto him as some sort of role model. I have been sorely disappointed i the past year or so. First he peddled an agenda which seek d to isolate Muslims from fellow Indians during the UP elections and now he has committed an unpardonable sin. And on top of it his naked deaththreat to Kejriwal …

[Reply]

Ravi Reply:
October 19th, 2012 at 8:29 pm

Parvez

No one can control someone else, but everyone can control themselves.

What communal twaddle Salman does speaks about him, not his religion. Islam did not teach him to be a thief or a liar.

However, how we react to his deeds, and what language we use is all within our own control.

————————————————————————————————–
~~~ WHY CHANGING THE EVIL PERSONAL LAW IS IMPORTANT ~~
————————————————————————————————-

Some time back on this blog I asserted that much of the violence in Muslim societies can be tracked to the anti HUmanity personal law which gives a man four times more rights than a woman

Syed and some people like rex justified this by saying that the law helps in rescuing prostitutes !!

Well here is a true story of an evil jehadi who killed innocent and enjoyed life using this anti Humanity, anti woman personal law.

—————— From NDTV——————

Washington: The man with the wire-rim glasses and bushy beard, speaking calmly in American-accented English, is familiar from dozens of Web videos urging violent jihad against the United States.

But in one astonishing clip, recorded more than a year before the man, Anwar al-Awlaki, was killed by a C.I.A. drone strike in Yemen, the American-born cleric had a very different mission: to propose marriage to a third wife.

“This message is specifically for Sister Aminah,” Mr. Awlaki says in the video to his future bride, a comely 32-year-old blonde from Croatia who he hoped would join him in his fugitive existence. The woman had expressed fervent admiration for Mr. Awlaki on his Facebook page and later made clear in her own video reply that she shared his radical views, saying, “I am ready for dangerous things.”

Neither Mr. Awlaki nor his prospective wife knew it, but their match was being managed by a Danish double agent as part of an attempt to help the Danish intelligence service and the C.I.A. find the cleric’s hiding place in Yemen. The attempt failed, but the undercover agent, Morten Storm, 36, a former motorcycle gang member who had converted to Islam, continued to communicate with Mr. Awlaki. When Mr. Awlaki was killed in a drone strike on September 30, 2011, Mr. Storm was certain his efforts had been instrumental in it.

But eventually Mr. Storm’s resentment at not getting what he regarded as sufficient credit boiled over. He phoned Jyllands-Posten, the second-largest newspaper in Denmark, and told the bewildered receptionist that he had helped track down one of the world’s most wanted terrorist leaders. The Danish newspaper spent 120 hours interviewing Mr. Storm and verifying his account.

Among the evidence that the burly, red-haired Mr. Storm produced to confirm his wild tale, in addition to the video of Mr. Awlaki and e-mail exchanges with him, were postcards from intelligence agents, an audiotape of a C.I.A agent he knew as Michael and a photograph of $250,000 in $100 bills – money he says the C.I.A. paid him for his role as marriage broker.

As part of that plan, the suitcase carried to Yemen by the bride, identified only as Aminah in her video messages to Mr. Awlaki, was secretly fitted with a tracking device that the C.I.A. hoped would reveal the cleric’s location, Mr. Storm told the Danish reporters. But a wary associate of Mr. Awlaki’s had her discard the suitcase when she arrived in Sana, Yemen’s capital. She traveled on to meet and marry Mr. Awlaki, but the C.I.A. plan was thwarted.

Mr. Storm’s tale shows the lengths to which American intelligence officials went to hunt down Mr. Awlaki, a leader of Al Qaeda’s affiliate in Yemen who some counterterrorism officials believed posed a greater threat to the United States than Osama bin Laden did. Their method was a variation on the traditional so-called honey trap, in which spy services use the lure of sex to ensnare male targets. Mr. Awlaki had been arrested during his years as an imam in the United States for hiring prostitutes; his two Arab wives lived apart from him in 2010, and he had asked Mr. Storm to find him a European woman willing to stay with him in hiding.

His eloquent calls for violence, scattered across the Web, helped radicalize dozens of young, English-speaking Muslims. He was added to the Obama administration’s “kill list” after intelligence officials concluded that he had helped plan the failed bombing of a Detroit-bound airliner on Dec. 25, 2009.

[Reply]