Know Real Facts about Islam

Memorable Writings of
Anwar Shaikh

HOME

Author

Essays

Books

Reviews

Site Index

 

 

 
 

Table of Contents

 
A Review on Anwar Shaikh's ETERNITY  by Dr. David Frawley, U.S.A.
A Review on Anwar Shaikh's ISLAM: The Arab National Movement by Bhagawandas P. Lathi
Anwar Shaikh reviews P. N. Oak's book Islamic Havoc in India
Anwar Shaikh reviews Baljit Rai's book Is India Going Islamic?
Anwar Shaikh reviews Keshav Dev Sharma's book The Question of Culture
Anwar Shaikh reviews Pandit Ram Nath Kak's book Autumn Leaves - Kashmiri Reminiscences
Anwar Shaikh reviews Subhash Kak's book The Secrets of Ishbar - Poems on Kashmir and Other landscapes
Anwar Shaikh reviews Ibn Warraq's book Why I am not a Muslim
Anwar Shaikh reviews Dr. N. S. Rajaram's book A Hindu View of the World

 
E-mail this page Print this page

Sign GuestBook

Read GuestBook

 

Book Reviews

Anwar Shaikh reviews Baljit Rai's book:

Is India Going Islamic ?

It is a small book of 128 pages, modestly priced at Rs. 125, but, in terms of subject matter, it commands a high value owing to the significance of the report that it presents to the Hindu nation.

Mr. Baljit Rai, a well-known Indian patriot, shows his anguish about the future of his motherland in a way which is masterly in description, and moving and masticating in effect.

He is troubled by two factors - proxy war waged by Pakistan in Kashmir, and massive infiltration of the Bangladeshi Muslims into adjoining states of India where they are changing the political patterns rapidly.

India was partitioned in 1947 on the basis that:

    1. Muslims are not allowed by Allah to live with the Hindus, who are kafirs. Thus, they projected the Two- Nation theory, which claimed that the Muslims are a separate nation who are entitled to a large chunk of India, which shall be the future homeland of all the Indian Muslims.

    2. They put so much emphasis on total separation that all the non-Muslims must leave the territories which were to constitute Pakistan and seek settlement in India, and all Muslims would quit India to become the citizens of Pakistan.

The country was partitioned on 14th August, 1947, and the Hindus, along with their Sikh brethren left their homes in Pakistan under most adverse circumstances but the Muslims did not, though they faced equally grim conditions in India. They were saved by Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi, the greatest Muslim leader, having a Hindu name, that India ever produced. Apparently, being a Hindu patriot, he earned the title of "Mahatma." It was he who intervened by exerting his enormous influence on the Hindus and thus stopped them evicting the Muslims from India according to the terms of the Partition.

The Hindus of India, when pondering over this gigantic Gandhian fallacy, will reaiise that:

    1. Gandhi was a dictator who wore the most fascinating spiritual robe. It is because he had no right to reverse the fundamental principle for dividing India, that is, the Muslims nnust quit India because they claimed to be a separate nation whose religion forbade them to live with the Hindus.

    2. Gandhi obviously thought of India as his personal property, otherwise he could not have abused his influence to stop the Muslim emigration. This folly of Gandhi, however, does not legitimise the stay of the Muslims in India; when a person has been paid the price for his commodity, he must hand it over to the buyer; the Muslims had sold their Indian rights of citizenship in exchange for Pakistan. Gandhi had no mandate to nullify this deal.

    3. It also throws a serious aspersion on Gandhi's character as a Hindu patriot. How could he show such a compassion for those, who had expelled millions of Hindus from the lands that their forefathers had occupied for the last ten thousand years, and which formed the fountain of their faith and culture. These helpless men, women and children certainly deserved precedence over the Muslims who were the sole cause of their destruction and homeiessness.

    4. Not only that, it also demonstrates the total inaptitude of Gandhi as the Hindu leader, who failed to see the future Muslim attitude towards what had been left of India; mercy to a wolf is cruelty to a lamb. The people whose faith is based on the hatred of the Hindus, could not be friendly to Hindustan, the motherland of the Hindus.

Again, this man knew nothing about the realities of life. He was absolutely dedicated to ahimsa (non-violence) which is not only utterly opposed to the Vedic principle of fighting for dharma but also completely unnatural. Dignified living incessantly requires that one must defend oneself against adverse situations. Thus ahimsa is simply a euphemism for cowardice. How such a large nation as of the Hindus, could ever defend itself through ahimsa which is a process of bowing, bending and buckling before an aggressor. In fact, this man wrought psychological ruination of the Hindus in the guise of holiness.

These observations have an historical relevance to what Baljit Rai has reported in his book under discussion.

Of the two threats that he has mentioned, the Illegal Muslim migration into India is far more serious. The Proxy War in Kashmir will eventually bankrupt Pakistan, announcing its total demise. On the contrary, it is proving a good training ground for the Hindus, who have been dazed by the fake brilliance of ahimsa.

Why is illegal Muslim migration from Bangladesh ruinous to India?

A deeper study of the problem reveals that the illegal Muslim migration into India is a form of the Islamic Jehad, which guarantees paradise to Muslims in return for debilitating, damaging and destroying the non-Muslims. Since the Prophet Muhammad declared war a form of deception, the Bangladeshis do not have to take up arms against India. Any ruse or tactic which may prove ruinous to India is a form of Jehad, and refreshing to the Muslim souls. By drawing attentlon to the Bangladeshi infiltration, Mr. Baljit Rai has discharged his patriotic duty handsomely. He states:

"Pressure of population in Bangladesh is so great that at least 20 million (2 crore) Muslims have illegally infiltrated into India. As a result of this massive illegal migration, ten districts of Assam (out of 23) have become Muslim majority districts. In West-Bengal (India) almost all the nine border districts except two or three have become Muslim majority or near Muslim majcrity districts. In 56 constituencies of West Bengal Muslims have a decisive voice."

Mr. Baljit Rai further emphasises the imminent dangers of population explosion in Bangladesh when he states:

"Rate of growth of population in Bangladesh is so high and fast that by the year 2017 ( according to a report of Government of Bangladesh) its population would be 240 million (24 crorer). Where will they live in a small country? There is not enough land and resources even for the existing population."

To impart an idea of the pending population disaster, which is likely to ruin India through illegal Bangladeshi infiltration, Baljit Rai completes the picture when he says:

"Its ( Bangladesh's) density of population per square mile is three times that of India which is 267. In area Bangladesh is 1/25 the size of India but in population it is 1/7th."

The real tragedy as depicted by Bajit Rai is not an internal affair of Bangladesh. He advances an evincing argument when he adds:

"Bangladeshi Muslim infiltrators have demanded second partition of India. This new country will be called 'Muslim Bango Bhoomi' which will comprise large parts of West Bengal, Bihar, and Assam and finally merged with Bangladesh."

This further truncation of India, which the Bangladeshi Muslims seek through illegal infiltration, is quite compatible with the Islamic concept of Jehad which has been more successful through sexuality than swords and spears. This fact emerges clearly when we look at the North African countries such as Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, Algeria, etc. it needed only a few thousand Arab warriors to conquer these lands where they set up huge harems, usually having 100- 1000 native women, and occasionally a lot more. Thus, initially one Arab could produce several hundred children, who would multiply far more rapidly thereafter. This is how these conquered lands became "Arab Countries" by suffering loss of national identity through total destruction of language, culture and religion. It all happened with the consent of Allah who sanctions polygamy, and unlimited concubinage in this world and promises hefty number of most beautiful virgins and pretty boys in the next world as a reward for destroying kafirs such as Hindus.

Now, one can see that the Muslim population explosion, which has been called "Islamic demographic bomb" in the West, is not a wild expression of sexual gratification but a sequence of the sexual philosophy as propounded by the Prophet Muhammad. Hadith no. 137, vol 7 of Bokhari says that some of the Mujahids ( the holy soldiers ) who had captured Kafir women, practised coitus-interruptus with them, in case they became pregnant. When they consulted the Prophet to find out his opinion about the correctness of their behaviour, he expressed his surprise by saying, "Do you really do that?" Repeating this question thrice, he remarked, "There is no soul that is destined to exist but will come into existence, till the Day of Resurrection."

In simple language, it means that whosoever is destined to be born, shall be born. Therefore, it is evil to exercise birth control of any kind. The hadith no. 718 of vol. 3, Bokhari also contains the same statement. Again, the Koran holds practitoners of birth control as murderers. (Children of Israel: 31 and Cattle: 141).

However, when we delve deeper, we find that behind this sexual philosophy of Islam, lies the desire of Muhammad to be the greatest prophet for having the largest number of followers:

    " .... I hope that I will have the greatest following on the Day of Resurrection." (SAHIH MUSLIM: 283)
Yet another hadith says that a good Muslim will make the Prophet proud of him by increasing the number of his followers!

Instead of describing effects of the Muslim population explosion on the world, I may restrict my comments to the contents of "Is India Going Islamic?"

Before proceeding any further, I may remind the reader once again that India was divided in 1947 on the principle:

    1. The Muslims are a separate nation and being pure by virtue of the Islamic faith, cannot live with the Hindus who are unclean for being idolatrous.

    2. All non-Muslims will leave Pakistan to settle in India, and all Muslims of India will emigrate to Pakistan.

As Gandhi and Nehru had no mandate to reverse these fundamental principles of partitions, the Muslim act of not emigrating to Pakistan leads to the following undeniable conclusions:
    a. By demanding partition of India, the Muslims committed an act of high treason against their own motherland, and thus forfeited their rights of citizenship.

    b. The fact that they still want to live with the Hindu "infidels," clearly demonstrates that they no longer hold them "unclean, sordid and firewood of hell" as they did at the time of Partition. This change of mind proves beyond a shadow of doubt that they have given up Islam in principle.

These are the logical conclusions which cannot be defied by reason. The Muslims of India, in fact, still have no patriotic loyalty to this land, and they are staying there because they have nowhere to go. Pakistan put up barriers against their entry in 1951. It shows that Muslims are not one nation. It is just a juristic fraud which is further proved by the fact that Pakistan is not willing to admit 225,000 Pakistanis of Bihari origin who suffered tremendously for Pakistan during the war against India in 1971. This deception of one-Muslim-nationhood is further exposed by the fact that these poor Muslim Biharis have been rotting in the Bangladeshi camps as non-citizens for the last two decades irrespective of the truth that thousands of them were born on the Bangladeshi soil!

It is not just the massive illegal infiltration from Bangladesh, which will ruin India, it is voting power of the immigrants which will spell the doom of the Land of the Hindus. Realising the potency of the Mujlim vote, Maulana Madni has just declared that if a common civil code is introduced, every Muslim man must have four wives and produce 25 children.

There is only one solution to this horrendous problem, that is, disfranchise all Muslims of India. A vote is the right of a patriotic citizen who thinks good of his country and acts accordingly. These people lost their Indian citizenship by dividing their own motherland to create Pakistan. Giving a vote to an "uncitizen" is an insult to a citizen.

However, the voting right may be restored for those who prove their loyalty for India over a period of time. This honour should also be extended to their children.

I must point out that it takes courage to introduce this type of patriotic measures. The Hindus, who have become accustomed to ahimsa, are the most reluctant fighters. Encourage them to adopt their ancestral Ksatriya ways: they must be prepared for the final battle, which is inevitable.

Is India Going Islamic? by Baljit Rai is available from:

    Voice of India
    2/18 Ansari Road
    New Delhi - 110002
    INDIA
Previous ArticlePrevious Review

 

Book Reviews

 

Home   |   Essays   |  Books to Order  
2008 Islam Review and Anwar Shaikh. All rights reserved
No portion of this
site may be reproduced without written permission of publisher.