HISTORY IS ALWAYS OF WINNER (NOT FACTS).
This proved again; our Indian historians played very well with our history.
Just to hide short comings of our society, Sanatan (Hindu), led by Brahmins.
95% of Indian historians were Sanatani (Hindu) Brahmins (the only educated class); at that time.
And most of other upper class Sanatani (Hindu), did not know much, even the basics of Muslim society.
We are told; Mughals converted Sanatani (Hindu) subject to Muslim.
The Mughals were Shia Muslims whereas, in India most of Muslims (approx. 95%) are Sunni.
The basic blunder committed, in this statement, is Mughals were Shia; & most of Muslims in India are Sunni.
It is of common sense, if Mughals would have forced Indian subject to convert to Islam, then most of Indian Muslims would have been Shia.
Now the question arises, if mughals did not do, then how Islam was spread in India.
My analysis is, it happened in 1857; at the time of “first war of independence”.
It was first time, Sanatanies [so called lower class Hindus (Shurda)] came in contact with Muslims; and came to know about Islam.
The basics of Islam say
All Muslims - Are equal (No cast classification)
Eat in one plate (No one untouchable)
This persuaded the lower class Sanatanies (hindus) to adopt Islam.
Today also the war between Sanatanies (hindus) & muslims is of lower & upper cast.
Only the colour of banner is changed.
This war is limited to India only.
In the first war of Independence also, one of the main leaders, was Bahadur Shah (Zafar), the last Mughal ruler. (another Shia)
No comments:
Post a Comment