By: Shachi Rairikar
April 23, 2006
expressed here are author’s own and not of this website. Full disclaimer
is at the bottom.
(The author is a Chartered Accountant working in a software company in
Indore, M.P., India and manage www.indpride.com)
Amongst contradicting reports and confusion, US President George W.
Bush did finally visit Rajghat and pay homage to the Father of the Nation.
Bush"s protocol handlers had earlier notified South Block that the
American President"s deep belief in his born again faith precludes his
visiting Mahatma Gandhi"s Samadhi at Rajghat. Prior to his India visit,
when asked by some reporters, if he will be breaking a decades long
tradition of foreign dignitaries visiting India paying respect to the
Father of India, Bush is believed to have said something about how the
Gospel of Jesus Christ viewing cremation as a pagan practice.
In January, Abdullah bin Abdulaziz al-Saud, ruler of the Kingdom of Saudi
Arabia, the chief guest at the fifty-seventh Republic Day celebrations and
on a state visit to India, broke the hallowed tradition of paying homage
at Rajghat observed by every foreign leader and offered an outrageously
preposterous reason for doing so. The king is reported to have indicated
that a visit to the Mahatma"s memorial would violate the principles of his
While the Indian government meekly accepted these insults, the media did
its best to black out the news. The electronic media, which is looking for
the slightest sensation to be blown up as breaking news, probably found
these issues which concern national pride of no commercial worth.
In sharp contrast to their foreign counterparts who were not ashamed to
place their religion above courtesy and diplomatic norms, the Indians
dignitaries have been trying to show off their secular credentials by
paying tributes to persons who were not only the enemies of their faith
but the enemies of their nation too. The year 2005 saw two great enemies
of the Indian soil being honoured by Indians holding constitutional
positions. One event very understandably created furor that has not
settled even now and promises to remain imprinted in the minds of the
Indian people for long time to come. This was the visit of the leader of
the opposition, L.K. Advani, to mausoleum of Jinnah, the man responsible
for vivisection of India and the founder of Pakistan. The other event,
however, surprisingly did not attract much attention of the media,
intelligentsia or the political fraternity. This was the tribute paid by
the Indian Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh at the tomb of Babar, the man
who brought death and destruction to India.
Babar was a foreign invader who killed thousands of Indians, plundered and
looted and desecrated Hindu temples. Descending in the fifth generation
from Timur, he was born on 14 February 1483. In June 1494, he succeeded
his father, Umar Shaik, as ruler of Farghana, whose revenues supported no
more than a few hundred cavalry. With this force Babar began his career of
conquest. He lost Farghana itself and was ultimately routed from Central
Asia by rival Uzbeg chiefs. In 1504, he made himself master of Kabul and
so came in touch with India whose wealth was a standing temptation. In
1517 and again in 1519, he swept down the Afghan plateau into the plains
of India. He entered Punjab in 1523 on the invitation of Daulat Khan Lodhi,
the governor of the province, and Alam Khan, an uncle of Ibrahim Lodhi,
the Delhi Sultan. But, wars in his home country however, compelled Babar
to return so that his final invasion was not begun until November 1525.
In his first invasion, Babar came as far as Peshawar. The following year
he crossed the Indus and, conquering Sialkot without resistance, marched
on Saidpur, now Aminabad in Pakistan. The town was taken by assault, the
garrison put to the sword and the inhabitants carried into captivity.
During his next invasion in 1524, Babar ransacked Lahore. His final
invasion was launched during the winter of 1525-26 and he became master of
Delhi after his victory at Panipat on 21 April 1526.
Guru Nanak, the first Sikh Guru, was an eye-witness to the havoc created
during these invasions. Thousands of people were massacred and taken
prisoners. The barbarity and mass bloodshed deeply pained Guru Nanak. In
his famous epic named "Babarvani", Nanak Dev describes the atrocities of
Babar and his men in Punjab. Nanak denounced him in no uncertain terms,
giving a vivid account of Babar"s vandalism in Aimanabad. Nanak’s agony is
evident when he asks God, "When there was such suffering, such killing,
such shrieking in pain, did not Thou, O God, feel pity? Creator, Thou art
the same for all!"
Babar’s generals forced people to be converted to Islam, his zamindars and
other influential people bestowed lands and property on the newly
converted Muslims. Babar himself became a Ghazi, which in Islamic
terminology is a positive epitaph and it means "a Muslim who has killed a
non-Muslim", such a person is guaranteed heaven with "beautiful women,
wine and rivers of honey."
According to local tradition and literary sources, Babar descecrated Hindu
and Jain temples and replaced them with mosques. Among many such Babri
Masjids are the mosques of Palam, Sonipat, Rohtak, Panipat, Sirsa and
Sambhal. Materials of Hindu temple can be found in the mosque of Sambhal.
The contemporary Tarikh-i-Babari records that Babar"s troops "demolished
many Hindu temples at Chanderi".
But the best known of all such mosques is the Babri Masjid at Ayodhya
built at the most sacred site of the Hindus, Shree Ram Janmabhoomi. An
inscription on the mosque recording his name shows that the mosque was
built by Babar. It was commonly believed that the mosque stood on an
ancient Hindu temple, but since the early 1990s some leftist historians,
in their “secular” zeal to appease the Muslims, have started disputing
this, without sufficient historical or archaeological evidence to prove
their point. Though the case is now with the court of law, sufficient
evidence has been found during the escavaton of the site to support the
long standing conviction that the mosque had been built on the ruins of a
temple. The Encyclopedia Brittannica of 1989 still reported that the Babri
Mosque stood on an earlier temple dedicated to Rama"s birthplace.
Even an order passed on18th March 1886 by Col. F.E.A. Chamier, the
Faizabad District Judge read that “the Masjid built by Emperor Babar
stands on the border of Ayodhya, that is to say, to the west and south”
and that “it is most unfortunate that a Masjid should have been built on
land specially held sacred by the Hindus”.
The so-called Indian “secular” elite was shocked when Hindu nationalists
demolished the mosque that was a symbol of oppression of the foreign
invaders. Nehru and his brand of secularists have always practiced
minorityism in the name of secularism, while, in fact, the two concepts
are mutually opposed and conflicting. They have always perceived the
Indian Muslims as a vote-bank, treating them as Muslims first and then
Indians and promoted Muslim fundamentalists for electoral gains. It is
their political compulsion to distort history and portray Islamic invaders
as great heroes who were broad-minded and secular. Jawaharlal Nehru,
himself wrote, "Babar was one of the most cultured and delightful person
one could meet. There was no sectarianism in him, no religious bigotry,
and he did not destroy as his ancestors used to."
Babar’s own writings however do not reflect the same, as can be seen from
an extract taken from the Babarnama:
"For Islam"s sake, I wandered the wilds,
Prepared for war with pagans and Hindus,
Resolved myself to meet the martyr"s death,
Thanks be to God! A ghazi I became."
Following the footsteps of his pseudo-secularist predecessors, Indian
Prime Minister Manmohan Singh felt no shame in bowing his head at Babar’s
tomb and paying tribute to the man who was an enemy of the Indian soil.
For this unfortunate Sikh, political correctness had to prevail over his
Guru’s views and nation’s pride. There are definitely costs attached to
every coveted job, especially when one is tightly reined by another power
In an interview with Dilip Padgaonkar for the Times of India, when asked
how he reacted to the demolition of Babri Masjid, noble laureate V.S.
Naipaul answered: "Not as badly, as the others did, I am afraid. The
people who say that there was no temple there are missing the point. Babar,
you must understand, had contempt for the country (that) he had conquered.
And his building of that mosque was an act of contempt for the country."
Be it Jinnah or Babar, independent India does not owe any show of respect
to either of these men. Whatever might have been their personal qualities
or political achievements, both were definitely not friends of India. Both
can by no means be perceived as “secular”, both brought death, destruction
and misery to thousands of Indians and there should be no hesitation in
branding them as enemies of the Indian soil. At the same time disrespect
to the Father of the nation by any guest of the Indian state cannot be
accepted. But how do we explain this to a class of people to whom the
terms national honour and shame appear meaningless in the light of
personal gains and vote-bank politics?
Send your views to author
Do you wish to reach our readers?
your guest column
Copyright and Disclaimer:
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and not of this
website. The author is solely responsible for the contents of this
article. This website does not represent or endorse the accuracy,
completeness or reliability of any opinion, statement, appeal, advice or
any other information in the article. Our readers are free to forward this
page URL to anyone. This column may NOT be transmitted or distributed by
others in any manner whatsoever (other than forwarding or weblisting page
URL) without the prior permission from
us and the author.
Previous articles by:
The Regime of Fatwas
Baba Mourya: An Artist
with a Mission
Shabana Azmi and the
The UPA has done it
Danger comes disguised &
Congress and the Mahatma
Mr. Singh, Don?t Play
With The History
For the sake of
Goa: Murder of
The Hindu Art of
Disgusting Double Standards
Know More About
& Sold Media
Science of Aeronautics
More articles by: