Pseudo-Secularism

Hindu dharma is implicitly at odds with monotheistic intolerance. What is happening in India is a new historical awakening... Indian intellectuals, who want to be secure in their liberal beliefs, may not understand what is going on. But every other Indian knows precisely what is happening: deep down he knows that a larger response is emerging even if at times this response appears in his eyes to be threatening.

Saturday, August 06, 2005

Did Akbar give Hindus equal rights?

The bias in history
By Nidhi Bhasin

Medieval history of India records the best of the Mughals was "Akbar-the-Great". He is especially praised for following secular principles and has been credited in the annals of history for acting most secularly and for treating the Hindus and Muslims as subjects. This is nothing but a false twist that has been given to the facts of the history. Modern Indians are kept in dark due to ancient historians falsely recording the history to please the sovereigns and to further help the cause of Islam.

Actually, he attempted to introduce a new religion called "Din-E-Ilahi" (Faith of Divine). Some of his durbaris like Birbal, a Hindu, duly accepted this new faith but there were others like Raja Bhagwandas and Mansingh who refused to accept this new faith. According to Din-E-Ilahi, there did not have to be any religious ceremonies for religious purposes or no priest would spread or promote any religious ritual. Akbar's Din-E-Ilahi ultimately perished with his death.

Condemning his new religious gospel as an anti-Islamist folly, Muslim fundamentalists like Badaumi (Islamic historian) called Akbar a kafir.

The great monarch was less interested in removing the friction between Hindus and Muslims but thought of introducing his own new faith, of which he like Mohammed in Islam, wanted to be considered as God's Prophet on earth—divinely blessed. Most people fail to see through this game of Akbar-the-Great, who, while attempting to unite Hindus and Muslims under his new religion wanted to become a Prophet himself. Akbar himself was an illiterate and at a young age of 15 he won the second battle of Panipat by slaughtering Hemu, considered to be a kafir, and Akbar became a Ghazi for this. What more could Akbar have aspired for after ruling over Hindustan for 56 years and being known as Akbar-the-Great? It was no Indian national idealism that prompted him towards any secularism. He never had any courage to challenge the ulemas or the original Islamic doctrine of hating all other religions except Islam.

While Indian history books and historians do not fail to uplift Akbar by according to him unmerited virtues, Pakistani history books in use in schools and colleges in Pakistan even today fail to accord him the status of Akbar- the-Great.

Akbar had coined a new slogan of greeting among his new followers by uttering words of admiration for his own religion and for himself as a divinely created monarch on earth. The words were essential to be uttered by the followers of Din-e-Ilahi while greeting each other and announcing Allah-o-Akbar and Jallalahu. His own name was Jallaludin Mohammed Akbar. While Indian history books and historians do not fail to uplift Akbar by according to him unmerited virtues, history books in use in schools and colleges in Pakistan even today fail to accord him the status of Akbar-the-Great.

The readers can now see that what has been covered in the Indian history books is far from reality yet Indian students are being taught this myth.

(The author is doing research in History and can be contacted at 9/4, Bradya Flats, Sorab Bharucha Road, Colaba, Mumbai-400 005.)

Links to this post:

Create a Link

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home




Home | Syndicate this site (XML) | Guestbook | Blogger
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. Comments, posts, stories, and all other content are owned by the authors.
Everything else © 2005 Pseudo-Secularism