Ram and Krishna never lived

[Guest guest]

Prithviraj and Shivaji war-scared. Rana Pratap died young of "injury

while trying to draw a stiff arrow."

This is UPA nonsense as history

By R. Balashankar

 

Ram and Krishna never lived. Prithviraj Chauhan was "punished" by

Muhummad Ghuri for "conspiracy," Shivaji never faced open battles and

won only by "treachery." These are not extracts from a Pakistani

book. But the "facts" mentioned in the Government of India textbooks,

issued by Arjun Singh's NCERT.

 

The Union HRD minister's campaign to paint the education field red

has resulted in this absurdity being taught as history. The NCERT,

has replaced all the text books in schools. Old Communist historians

have been dusted out of the closet and made to author textbooks for

children. Romila Thapar, Satish Chandra, Ram Sharan Sharma and et al,

have authored the textbooks of various senior classes. Page after

page, the tone, the language and the presentation are aimed at

insulting the national heroes.

 

Sample this, "archaeological evidence should be considered far more

important than long family trees given in the Puranas because Puranic

tradition can be used to date Ram of Ayodhya to 2000 B C but diggings

and extensive exploration in Ayodhya do not show any settlement of

the time." (Ancient India, Ram Sharan Sharma, book for Class XI)

 

And he had this to say about Mahabharata, "Although Krishna played an

important role in Mahabharata, inscriptions and sculptural piece

found in Mathura dating back to 200 BC and 300 AD do not attest to

his presence. Because of this, ideas of an epic based on Ramayana and

Mahabharata have to be discarded."

 

If Ram and Krishna are to be discarded, are we to hold on to Ghuri

and Gazni? On Prithviraj, Satish Chandra says that in his second

battle with Ghuri (lovingly called in the book as Muizzuddin Mohammad

bin Sam) Prithviraj escaped from the battlefield while his side

suffered losses. "he was captured near Saraswati (present day Sirsa)…

he was allowed to rule Ajmer for sometime." Soon, he was "executed on

a charge of conspiracy against Ghuri." Here again, Chandra dismisses

the legend of Prithviraj as bunkum based on a later day folk ballet

written by Chand Bardai. In one sentence he washes off collective

memory and folk sources, now considered as important evidence in

history. Jaichand, who is synonymous with betrayal has been given the

hounours in heroism by Chandra. He died fighting Ghuri, according to

him.

 

Chandra dismisses the legend of Prithviraj as bunkum based on a later

day folk ballet written by Chand Bardai. In one sentence he washes

off collective memory and folk sources, now considered as important

evidence in history.

 

All the books newly introduced by Arjun Singh go on and on about the

greatness of the Mughal rulers, the "strategic" mistakes they

committed. Nowhere the books mention the kind of loot, plunder and

destruction each of the invader unleashed on the Hindu population and

its properties. There is no dearth of primary source to write a

honest history. But these communists are more interested in

suppressing the truth and suggesting falsehood. All these marauders

had their official diarists with them, who recorded the events of the

day. The Marxist historians had sufficient proof readily available

with them to write if they sought for facts. But they didn't.

 

Hasan Nizami, in the early 13th century wrote an eye-witness account

of the conquest of Delhi by Qutbuddin Aibek, in 1192. Here are some

extracts "the conqueror (Aibek) entered the city of Delhi, which is

the source of wealth and the foundation of blessedness. The city and

its vicinity were freed from idols and idol-worship and in its

sanctuaries of the images of the gods, mosques were raised by the

worshippers of one god… Qutbuddin built the Jami Masjid at Delhi and

adorned it with stones and gold obtained from the temples which had

been demolished by elephants and cover it with inscriptions in

Toghra, containing the divine commands."

 

While discussing Ramayana and Mahabharata, the latest findings in

Dwarka are not even mentioned in the NCERT books. The ASI report on

Ayodhya is yet to be released, but the author dismisses the

excavations lightly. When they discuss the Mughal rulers they discuss

their architecture, literature and governance. But on most of the

Hindu rulers, only their battle defeats are elaborated. On Aurangzeb

the biased Chandra says "Aurangzeb has been unjustly maligned … the

Hindus had become disloyal due to the laxity of Aurangzeb's

predecessors, so that Aurangzeb had no choice but to adopt harsh

measures and to try and rally the Muslims on whose support in the

long run the empire had to rest." So to please the Muslims, he

imposed jazia on Hindus. Has anyone heard such non-sense in the

national History textbooks?

 

Shivaji, who is normally addressed by Indians with the sobriquet

Chhatrapati was only a chieftain, according to Chandra.

Shivaji "conquered Javli from the Maratha chief Chandra Rao More. The

Javli kingdom and accumulated treasures of the Mores were important

and Shivaji aquired them by means of treachery," Chapter 19 of the

Medieval India textbook of Chandra says.

 

Shivaji is grudgingly dismissed in two pages. Prithviraj in six

lines. There is hardly any mention of Rana Pratap and Haldighati. The

bias, in these books is unbelievable. It is untruth, myth and fiction

passed off as history. There is no end to Muslim rulers' broad

mindedness and Hindu meanness. And this is the history we are

teaching our children.

 

The Muslims had raised a hue and cry about a book under the NDA

government, which had described Mohammad as the founder of Islam. The

book Comprehensive Study of History and Civics for Class VI in Uttar

Pradesh had said that Quran was a compilation of his teachings. The

Muslims objected saying that the Quran were not teachings but divine

revelations and Mohammad was the last of the Prophets of God.

 

Can historians who are in the pay-roll of ideological groups in the

country get away with distorting our national history? Is this the

heritage that the UPA government wants the children of India to

inherit? Systematically and determinedly, the UPA is trying to

undermine the national pride, self-respect and the glorious history.

Pandering to the communists and the vociferous minorities the

government is abandoning its role in safeguarding the national

interest. Arjun Singh is the henchman for all this.

http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?

name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=88&page=2