HINDUS CONSTRUCTED, MUSLIMS DESTROYED

By Stephen Knapp

The fact is that Hindus had constructed buildings while the invading Muslims merely destroyed or captured them. Most tombs, forts, mosques, canals, etc., that are ascribed to various sultans or Mogul rulers are merely usurped Hindu constructions put to Muslim use. And it does not take long for any traveler in India to see how many of the remaining temples in India were defaced or dismantled by the fanatic Muslim invaders. Some of the most beautiful temples you can see have much of their ornate stone carvings disfigured by those marauders who had no appreciation for the art of the “infidels.”

In fact, the Islamic way of life never put much emphasis on the arts. However, dancing and music was always held in high regard in the Vedic lifestyle. So, when people point out the number of Muslim artists or musicians in India as being the Islamic contribution to the arts, they need to remember that most of the tunes and melodies that are used are of immemorial Vedic origin. Secondly, many of the Muslim musicians are either converts or descendants of Hindu artists. Thirdly, many musicians and dancers lead saintly lives in India, and were very often involved in the religious festivals. That is quite the contrary in the Islamic tradition, wherein such artists were often considered unnecessary.

The Koran forbids all decoration, so art can hardly thrive in such an environment. The way most art was made on Islamic structures in the Middle East was due to the fact that invaders into India brought back Indian craftsmen. Only with the help of such Indian architects, engineers and workmen, do the west Asian or Middle-Eastern monuments have a close resemblance to those of India. The telltale sign is to analyze the structures to see how they have been built according to the principles provided in the Vedic text of the Shilpashastra.

In fact, as Mr. Oak explains on page 132 of Some Blunders of Indian Historical Research, “Accounts of Mohammad Ghazni’s and Taimurlang’s invasions confess as much when they state that taken aback by the beauty and grandeur of Indian palaces, temples and river ghats, the otherwise barbaric invaders used to spare skilled workmen and technicians from mass massacres only to drive them at sword point to West Asian lands to have tombs and mosques built comparable to Indian monuments.”

On page 70 and 71 of Some Missing Chapters of World History, Mr. Oak continues, “The great Islamic invader Tamerlain who plundered and burned Delhi confesses in his Memoirs that Mediaeval Muslims were so utterly devoid of any building skill that they were forced to spare the lives of the Hindus whom they deeply hated, so that they could be marched away to distant Islamic lands just to design and build buildings as grand and beautiful as the Hindu buildings in India. Tamerlain observes that before ordering a general massacre of Hindus taken prisoner ‘I ordered that all the artisans and clever mechanics, who were masters of their respective crafts, should be picked out from among them and set aside, and accordingly some thousands of craftsmen were selected to await my command. All these I distributed among the princes and amirs who were present, or who were engaged officially in other parts of my dominions. I had determined to build a Masjid-i-Jami in Samarkand, the seat of my empire, which should be without a rival in any country; so I ordered that all builders and stone masons should be set apart for my own special service,’ (page 447, Vol. III, Elliot and Dowson’s translation of Malfuzat-i-Timuri).

E. B. Havell, the great British scholar, supplies the following quotes from the opening part of his book, Indian Architecture--Its Psychology, Structure and History from the First Mohammedan Invasion to the Present Day. These give evidence at the admiration the Muslims had for Indian architecture. “Albiruni, the Arab historian, expressed his astonishment at and admiration for the works of Hindu builders. ‘Our people,’ he said, ‘when they see them, wonder at them and are unable to describe them, much less to construct anything like them.’

“Abdul Fazal (wrote), ‘It passes our conception of things; few indeed in the whole world can compare with them.’

“Such admissions of Tamerlain, Abdul Fazal, Albiruni and Mahmud Ghanzi quoted above indicate the validity of Mr. Havell’s observation that there is no such thing as Saracenic art in any part of the world, much less in India. Even as far as Samarkand, Baghdad, Mecca and Alexandria all ancient and mediaeval buildings were built according to the architectural styles, techniques and skills developed by the Hindus.”

Another point is that it often takes highly developed skills carefully nurtured and practiced over a number of generations. The invading hordes of West Asian Muslims were mostly uncultured and illiterate desperados unskilled in any human art except fighting. So, how could such people come to India and suddenly begin building the fantastic monuments that they claimed to have built? If such was the case, then why do so many of such monuments show the disfiguring of the carvings by the very Muslims said to have built them? Another point is that the invaders were so engaged in the turmoil of defensive and offensive military activity, when and how did they have time to build such monuments? Furthermore, although India has had a very clear science of architecture, as set down by the Shilpashastra, the ancient Muslim world has nothing to correspond to it. Any community claiming architectural skill must have basic treatises describing structural forms, designs, and material used in construction. Ancient and mediaeval India had these, while the invading Muslims had none.

The fact is that there are many Vedic texts, from varying time periods, that provide a code of architectural procedures and information. Texts such as the Mayamata, Samarangana-sutradhara (dating to the 11th century CE), and the Vishnudharmottara (450-650 CE) elaborately deals with the science of architecture. The Munasara (dating to the 11th to 15th century in its present form) also mentions a 12-storeyed palace for a monarch. So, sky-scrapers were also not unknown at the time. Furthermore, the Arthashastra (2.3,4) includes information on the building of ramparts, tower gates, gopurams, palaces, temples for Deities, and residential quarters for different kinds of people.

The Shilpashastra is also a Vedic classic on architecture, house construction, and town planning. More of the latter is also found in the Vastu Vidya. Some of the information in the Vastu Vidya is in the Jataka stories and Buddhist Pali cannons. This similarity confirms that the technical aspects of the Vastushastra were fully developed no later than the time of Buddha, which is long before any Muslims ever existed. Furthermore, when we consider the descriptions of the opulent buildings and the town planning of Dwaraka city in the Tenth Canto of the Bhagavata Purana, we can understand that such knowledge had already been established and utilized several thousand years ago.

The Vastushastra, along with references in the Vedic epics, the Arthashastra, and Jatakas also make mention of building materials and that different sizes of bricks and stones were used for the building of pillars, lintels, and the construction of dome roofs. This also helps verify that the dome design was a pre-Islamic invention in India long before Muslims arrived. Thus, Muslims were not the inventors of the dome, which had already existed in some of the ancient buildings of India and the Middle East from many years prior. If anything, they were impressed with Indian architecture, such as the dome, and increasingly used it in their own buildings, or even captured Indian craftsmen to take back to their countries to build them. Even the many canals that are credited to Muslim construction does not hold up when specific Vedic texts, such as the Vrikshayarveda portion of the Agni Purana, discuss forms of irrigation by means of canals. This shows that the technical rules and procedures for all kinds of construction were fully developed in India before the time the Muslims began to invade the country, and that any idea of a Muslim contribution to the architecture of India is indeed a production of misinformation.

Another question we should ask is why did the invading Muslims build so many tombs, if that is what they did, rather than building large palaces for themselves? Usually the ruling monarch will build many large palaces for himself and his children before he will concern himself with building a large tomb, or one for a dead ancestor. Furthermore, many of the ruling monarchs at the time were also at war with each other. Why would they allow a large tomb for a rival instead of taking it for themselves? Both of these considerations should convince us that there are so many more tombs than corresponding palaces because the Muslim monarchs built neither tombs nor palaces. They merely usurped the already standing Hindu buildings and used such for themselves.

Many stories are presently told about the glories of Shahjahan and the love he had for Mumtaz, who was only one of many wives. However, there are other stories that tell of how he had illicit relations with the wives of his own kin, like his brother-in-law Shaista Khan and wives of courtiers like Khaliullah Khan, and, as some suspect, even with his own eldest daughter Jahanara.

Shahjahan’s reign of just over 29 years was full of 48 campaigns. He demolished many Hindu temples and murdered many of his rivals. He never engaged in the construction of any buildings. He merely took over the Taj Mahal for himself and made sure that it was recorded that he built it. Shahjahan’s own court chronicle, the Badahahnama, records that he had ordered that not even one Hindu temple must be allowed to stand in his realm. In the district of Allahabad alone 76 temples were destroyed, 48 of which he mentions in his memoirs. It is also known that Shahjahan used to threaten captured Hindus and Christians alike to become Muslims under pain of torturous death.

Thus, after considering all of the information in this chapter, we need to ask: What was the real “Muslim contribution” to Indian culture? It is based mostly on the invasion and rule over India by a host of aliens like Arabs, Turks, Iranians, Iraqis, Kazaks, and Uzbeks during a period of nearly 1,235 years, from Mohammad-bin-Kasim to Bahadurshah Zafar. After all, if a gang of dacoits invade a peaceful village and loot all the people’s wealth, torture and kill the males, or sell them into slavery, rape the women, abduct the girls into harems, and massacre all others, can that be considered a contribution to society? It would be clear to any sensible person that such invaders were never wanted by the Indian people. The invaders also had no respect for India or the people and culture. They only wanted to exploit it to the maximum. They tried to dominate India in every way and reduced it to a land of slums and abject poverty, taking what they could for themselves and leaving the rest in ruins. Al Biruni, a Muslim chronicler who accompanied the invader Mohammad Ghazni, has himself said that Mohammad Ghazni ground to dust the life of the Hindus and scattered it to the winds.

Wherever Islam invaded, the first priority was to force the local people to forget and hate their ancient culture. This was accomplished by destroying old monuments, past historical records, and changing history by writing new records. Thus, Arabian history begins with the words that Arabia was a land lost in turmoil before the appearance of Islam. Throughout the Middle-East, those people who have been forcibly converted to Islam can hardly remember what their previous culture was, and assert that before Islam the whole world was dark. Can a system which has thrived on conversions through torture and terror lay any claim to the word “culture”?

Testimony to the cruelty of the Muslim tyranny is found in Paper Two, in the Papers Relating to East India Affairs, House of Commons, London, dated June 3, 1813. In there is recorded a letter by J. D. Patterson, posted as a judge in Dacca by the erstwhile British East India Company, addressed to the president of the Police Committee in Calcutta, dated August 30, 1799. By this time Islam had completed its 1087-year rule in India. Patterson wrote:

“To give the Board a true account of the Police of this district, it is necessary, in the first place, to make them acquainted with the manners and morals of the people, especially the lower sort.

As a picture of human degradation and depravity can only give pain to a reflecting mind, I shall be as brief as possible.

Under the Hindu dominion, the ranks and professions of men were classed into 36 castes, and the individuals of each were obliged to learn and follow the profession of his ancestors. By this establishment, each individual of a caste had the means of support in his profession. These castes were under the direction of their Pundits and the Punchayats, or General Assembly of the caste, and used to examine the conduct of the member of their society, and the consequence of their censure, was sometimes a total exclusion of the guilty individual from the community.

No Brahmin was supported by the public who was unlearned or who did not contribute his assistance informing the minds of the lower classes, and teach them morality, and the duties enjoined by laws. Under such an establishment for the instruction of the lower classes, it was not difficult to form an efficient Police. But the cruel reverse, which the invasion of the unprincipled and bigoted Musalmans [Muslims] introduced, may account for the wide torrent of corruption that has overflowed this country.

They considered the conquered Hindus as infidels, and treated them with unrelenting persecution and cruelty. They thought that every insult and injury upon them were acts pleasing to God and the Prophet. Their destructive bigotry attacked the books and learning of the Hindus, and the Brahmins, persecuted with incessant atrocities, ceased to exercise their functions. The spirit of despotism completed the corruption of morals, and in process of time, the human mind in this country was completely revolutionized. In this manner for some centuries, under the Pathan Government, they continued, from want of the ancient discipline, to fall from degradation to degradation.

Many of the lower ranks became converts to the Mohammedan faith, without conviction of its being more rational than what they professed before, because it sheltered them from the persecuting bigotry they had suffered, but the mind experienced no rise. The stern despotism of their rules still kept it down.

Unprotected, however, and unsupported by the authority of the Government, the Brahmins themselves sinking under centuries of oppression, were too much involved in the general wreck to think of renewing the ancient discipline. Their learning fell into neglect, and in course of time the Brahmins came to want that instruction themselves which it was their duty to afford to others. Missing in all the selfish squabble of common life, they gradually lost, by their own example, in the eyes of the Hindus, that respect which was so necessary to give force and energy to instruction.”

Herein we can clearly see by the eye-witness account of Judge Patterson how society plummeted into a shambles from what once was the Vedic form of administration. Therefore, according to Judge Patterson, Islam is responsible for the social chaos, corruption, and moral breakdown that occurred.