The Integrity of our Marxist Historians.

I always wondered why there are so many lies by our Historians. Though I do not have any intention to write or investigate (actually I even do not have skill, even if I want) on this, but some time back (may be one year) I came across this piece, actually a review of a book by Arun Shourie (BJP Politician) titled ‘Eminent Historians: Their Technology, Their Line, Their Fraud’ on the net. Actually I am yet to buy or read this book, but I found the review to be insight in to who actually controls our Media and Education.  Rather than copying and pasting some excerpts from this review, I decided to keep the entire piece here. This is a must read article (review). It was written by C. J. S. Wallia.

Jizya and its meaning (Part 2)

In understanding Jizya, it is worth to focus, if not engross, on distinctness of how Muslim scholars understood this verse 9:29 for 1400 years from the time of birth of Islam and how it was implemented too by Muslim rulers.

Jizya and its real meaning (Part 1)

In Indian history text books one learns that Non Muslims (Hindus) paid Jizya tax to Muslim rulers but why it was imposed on Hindus was never explained. If at all Jizya is explained then it is only in falseness and not even close to truth because authors write “Jizya has nothing to do with religion and this tax is more of political in nature”. Funny, isn’t it? The underlying reasons for this kind of tax and law is not believing in Islam and continuation of adhering to their ancient faiths, yet authors wanted every one to believe that the issue of religion has no role in this. Hmm! Making sense? Their point that this levying of Jizya is only political is half truth from the perspective that Islam is equally a politically ideology; not that authors intend to imply this. Their (Our left intellectuals and Historians) uncompromising effort, out right lies and deceptions to sanitize Islamic history of barbarianism and cruelty becomes itself a worthy science subject to scrutiny and appraisal.

What is Jihad ! (Part 2)

In this part, the views (opinions) of some famous Islamic scholars on Jihad are presented and some of them are classical scholars and some are modern. Personally I do not agree with this distinction between classical and modern because this premise is partially based on assumption of some Islamic reformers (they call themselves) that Koran can be re-interpreted to suit the needs of present day situations. So, at the best Koran can re-interpreted but its content can not be changed. Actually it is not even clear how it can be re-interpreted when Koran is crystal clear in its message i.e. take the verse 8:39 and one has to wonder how this merciful verse can be re-interpreted. That’s precisely I reject this notion of classical and modern scholars,apart from the fact that they belong to different times. After all Koran has not changed, Muslims claim this, and re-interpreting Koran is oxymoron and it is worth recalling that majority of Muslims feel there is nothing wrong with Koran and its message.

What is Jihad ! (Part 1)

Jihad as a word needs no introduction but its meaning (definitions) and implications are misunderstood for variety of reasons and Jihad as a concept remains esoteric to the general Non Muslim public.

In the print media or e-media one hears some Muslims saying Jihad means spiritual struggle and others saying it means a defensive war. On the other hand Muslim Extremists and Terrorists say Jihad means a war on all Non Muslims to  bring the whole world under Sharia Law, but our Politicians, Media, intellectuals and Muslim apologists rush to say that these are misunderstanders of Islam, otherwise a religion of peace.