The Two Myths on Islam Parroted in the History of India

This post is also available in: हिन्दी

The Two Myths on Islam Parroted in the History of India

-By Shalini & Shri Kidambi

H.M. ELLIOT & Co and their 4 P’s Psychophants– Destroyers of culture, Rapists and Looters

H.M. Elliot Apologists Neo Liberal Political Correctness – Saints of Magic and Peace


Ulo Azam:  People Who Have Book known to be from God or Teachers, Gurus – Mohammad Koran

Tantrum Histrionics in Historical Understanding with no logic or Reason and the Intellectual Dissonance in India

Mythical/ Historical Account 1: Peaceful entry of Islam after the splitting of the Moon into two

Mythical/ Historical Account 2: Violent Islamic invasion over Sindh, a faulty and falsified psychopathic history- a 15 Year old Sacking Sindh and Multan and Persia and getting executed on his return back to Arabia when he was 20


Islam as a religion and Muslims as population were and are projected as a religion based on violence, plunder and seen as a major terrorist organization in India, especially when clubbed with our recent creation of western cousins who were manipulated by British American and Western Geo-political interests since last 200 years. But another version was floated in the historical context of India, where in it was stated that they are messengers of peace and spiritual magic and when they entered India, Indian kings accepted them voluntarily and handed over their temples and cultural centers destroying all of the ancient wisdom by themselves so that these messengers of peace can build their mosques/places of worship. Most intriguingly these two streams of Islam entered India within first 100 years of Mohammad Era, HIjra, the violent one entering in North and North West and the Peaceful one entering in the South and South West with a distance gap of more than 2000 kilometers. This is of course what is repeated to death in the Indian history for last 200 years to make it appear as a fact and most of our political decisions were made ‘based on these Indian Believed facts’.  There is no effort ever made either by historians, academicians or security agencies to understand the exact context of the socio-political, religious and spiritual development of Islam in Middle East in particular or Christianity or Judaism in general. In the absence of any effort we are simply parroting the British versions of myths as history. This is leading to a complex situation of not being able to understand the current context of violence/terrorism emanating from certain quarters of “economic Islamic groups” and our approach to fighting terrorism. Even after seventy years of independence we have not corrected this historical fallacy of understanding the present context with the correct historical perspective and make future policies. When we make our national policies based on mythical accounts created for an exclusive purpose of divide and rule, then we will be perpetuating the same divide and rule fracture lines with more severity that will destroy whatever is left as secular institutions of the state. One example of this pathetic state is that five years ago one of the senior Intelligence IG from one of the popular southern states openly stated that they do not know anything about Islam and in fact after his retirement he started studying about Islam.

Please refer to the excellent article on this by the British Former Secretary Alastair Crooke wherein he wrote all the facts except that the current form of Islamic Extremism which has nothing to do with Islam is the British creation by carefully cultivating Wahhabism the official sectorial practice of the Al Saud family and their ‘spiritual mentor’ Wahhab who from his grave cries that all moderate secular true followers of Mohammad’s version of Islam must be beheaded.

Please refer our upcoming article on Middle East Earth Quake

A cursory examination in to the historical facts of these two streams in to the very Arab or Persian historical accounts reveal that both versions were based on absolute and stunning lies, fabrications, paid writings imaginations, and linguistic metaphors passed on as facts and political motivations to create animosity and divide and rule. The so called historical account of violent entry of Islam in to India by Muhammed bin Qasim seems to be a cruel joke of the millennium believed as truth in India and by Indian Historians only. The first version of violent entry in to Sindh by the Arab Mir Qasim goes like this. Arab women during the time of Mohammad travelling from Sri Lanka (even today women in Arabia are not allowed to enter the first floor or balcony of a building) in Arab Naval Ships (again it is a revelation that Arabs were navigators, as during those times all ships, if at all they were there, used to enter current Persian Ports and from there in caravans the goods travelled in to the Dessert. Most of the trade was from India through the land routes from western India, Kashmir in to Persia and then in to Africa and Europe, which now is being usurped by the ‘drugged dragon’ as OBOR) were captured by Pirates (Indian Origin) off the coast of current Gujarat. One 13 year old girl among them/ or an elderly -in the ever changing stunning narrative that makes current Indian television serials serious social accounts- wrote a letter to the Governor of Baghdad for help and he in turn wrote a letter to the King of Sindh to intervene (probably Fed Ex or UPS or Rudimentary Speed Post must be in place then). When the King of Sindh refused stating that, that area was not part of his kingdom and he never had any control over those pirates, the ‘outrageous’ Governor of Baghdad who was fighting with the upcoming Caliphate, sent his 15 year old nephew Qasim to conquer Sindh rather than attacking those pirates and free the captured women, with 14000 men (2000 Arab and rest volunteers) and he did it crossing the entire Persia with whom Arabs were fighting to death at that time, sacked and looted Sindh and came back to Arabia in 5 years only to be captured by the next Caliphate that was victorious in power struggle and got executed along with his uncle . This version doesn’t hold good as it is a known fact that Arabs, that too Arab women were not literates at those times. The other version states that the girl escaped from the pirates and met the Governor herself. The third version states that the girl was able to pass on the information to another group member who was in turn able to escape and convey the information to the Governor. All these versions seems equally odd given the circumstances.

At the same stretch, the peaceful entry of Islam, fabricated after an Arab metaphor of ascribing impossible nonhuman valor, courage or greatness to someone, was the foundation of another unbelievable buffoonish joke only repeated in India with such serious missionary spiritual faith indicating the Intellectual dissonance and the post independent subzero (there is no better term to indicate the state of affairs) IQ levels of Indian historical minds which were the result of continuous subjugation of nation under 4 P’s.   The pre Islamic Arab metaphor Ainshiqaq Al Qamr‎‎ or Shiqaq-Al Qamr or Inshigagh-Al Qamr literally meaning cutting or splitting of the moon (with sword) was ascribed to Mohammad and then to anyone who does humanly impossible tasks. (Inshigagh meaning making something to part) The height of this metaphor in the imagination of Iranian Mullah Ayatollah regime made in to text books of Madrasas where they teach that when US and other countries landed on moon they found the sword cuts on the moon surface from one end to another end indicating that Mohammad really cut the moon in to half and this shows the authenticity of spiritual prowess of the Prophet. Probably all readers must be surprised the above versions are taught as rock bed unalterable facts of Islamic history. Of course there are few self-proclaimed spiritual and Vedic scholars in India who claimed that they pulled the moon and then pushed it back in a two month period towards the earth to prevent the radioactive fallout on India and Japan arising out of Chinese Nuclear weapon testing!

As incredible it sounds the buffoonish joke, sorry.. the Historical Account goes, that one king in South India saw the moon being split, while walking in his garden after his dinner and got amused and then was visited by Arab travelers/messengers from Mohammad who told him the news that Mohammad was responsible for the splitting of the moon in to two. He then renounced kingdom, met Prophet, converted in to Islam and on the way back died in Oman, Prior to his death he sent letters to his associates to help build places of worship for the new found faith and they obliged by tearing down and handing over thousands of years old temples to them who in return peacefully converted them in to mosques only removing the main idols and leaving the structures intact. And one such structure was gifted to King of Saudi Arabia by our honorable PM on his recent trip as detailed in our article A Tale of Two Gifts.

Or, the original Quran which is now in the Beirut Museum is correct. That Persians and people beyond Persia are called Ulo Azam:  ‘People of the Book’ known to be from God or Teachers, Gurus and thus Islam is not for them. And Mohammad specifically instructed to his followers to go even as far as China or India to get educated and gain knowledge as during his time in the entire Hijaj or Arabia there are only four persons who know how to read and write and Prophet is not one among them and he also believed that the people of the east had superior knowledge. The prophet’s ability to understand and guide others did not come from the literary ability to read and write but from the spiritual strength and the penance he did which gave a clear vision of ‘god’ than any one of those times.

Post Prophet’s ascension to heaven, by the time Suleiman I reigned Turkish Ottoman, close to 10000 versions of Quran were in circulation each written for the political convenience of successive rulers and each claiming to be the original, a trend started with the Caliph Omar post prophet. Finally, Suleiman called a grand council meeting and asked to bring all those ‘authentic versions’  and then using his might burned all of them except one which was very convenient for the propagation of his rule and then became a standard for the Ottoman Rule of Turkey. But many researchers believe the original copy of Quran that was compiled immediately after the ascension of the Prophet is preserved in the Beirut Museum of Lebanon along with a very authentic picture of Prophet with no beard, and that was what most of the Arabs and Middle Eastern Muslims emulate.

Following the Palmerston Doctrine of using Islam as a bull work against Russians, and subsequent British and Church collusion to destroy India and her knowledge to prevent anti Catholic doctrines permeating in French and German intellectual and common circles, in the Indian context the Islamic history was rewritten along with creating ‘isms’ within India like Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikhism, Jainism and isms across the world like Judaism, Communism, Capitalism. At the same stretch, the traditional Indian history was erased and a new ‘Hindu’ History of India was rewritten to retrofit to the time line of less than 2000 years falling within the confines of Church history, and pushed through the 4 P’s of British control (Printing, Public Libraries, Public Archives, Public Education and Debates) as a matter of rock solid facts. To solidify these erroneous doctrines, political and spiritual outfits were created and supported by British in both Indian and Islamic circles, the former being created based on Catholic doctrine and Islam was created based on Wahhabism. From then on to oppose these historical facts or jokes or created political spiritual outfits became a blasphemy. The entire millions of years of Indian history or world history was rewritten to retrofit in to 5000 year old Christian frame work in which the most ancient texts Vedas and thousands of astronomical facts were confined to a mere 2000 year historical time line. (Please listen to the CBS Radio Program Bankers of God or God’s Bankers in Podcast)

The pathetic effect of this is that most of the spiritual, religious or nationalist leaders accept and propagate the same idea of Vedas being compiled or written 5000 years ago. It is rather disappointing that our current Nationalist Prime Minister too on his state visit to Russia in an address to the Russian Parliament, to the massive amusement and historical shock for learned Russians, openly stated that Vedas were ‘written’ 2000 years ago with no comment or correction from any spiritual religious historical research circles of India.

This is because of various myths being created and parroted through the 4 P’s for years initially by the British and later by their puppets who were carefully placed at different positions of power and influence throughout the country. This has been responsible to keep the Hindu Muslim irreconcilable division as a constantly burning issue in India till date. The two major ‘historical accounts’ that can be considered in the history of India are the peaceful entry of Islam in Kerala in Southern India and the violent invasion of Islamic rulers in northern Sindh and the later destructions of temples in Kashmir and other parts of India which are examined with available facts below.

Several stories are being floated ‘only’ in the Indian versions of Islamic history that even our western cousins denying/modifying them in a much more bizarre way identifying as Pakistani history. These versions of history/fantasy/ psychopathy appear to any rational mind to be cooked up versions at worst or assumptions at best. Interesting is that no single notable reference or evidence is found in the authentic histories of other countries where these stories originated either of Arab or Persia. However, even the available Indian versions when considered on their face value with ever changing narratives, still point mostly towards the disproval or unacceptance of the said Islam entries in India.

Mythical/ Historical Account 1: Peaceful entry of Islam after the splitting of the Moon into two

Cheraman Perumal Juma Masjid, priorly the Arathali (Saraswathi) Temple, in the present day Kodungallur priorly the Mahodayapuram built by Emperor Lalitaditya, in Kerala proclaims that the mosque was the first of its kind in India, supposed to be established in 629 AD, when Prophet Muhammad was alive. It means that this particular mosque was established before the first mosques in Iraq (639 CE), Syria (715 CE), Egypt (642 CE), and Tunisia (670 CE) thus making it the oldest mosque after the first mosques in current Saudi Arabia. If this date is accurate, then this mosque was established much before the time of Adi Shankara (if we go by the dates of Shankara as ascribed by the Sringeri Sharada Peetham according to British 4P propaganda, this Sringeri is erected to replace the Sarada Sarvajna Peetham of Kashmir) in and around the same time when Huen Tsang was in India. The interesting question is why a mosque would be established so far away from Arabia, despite Mohammed’s preaching not to take Islam to the East as far as India, as there was already well established religion with universal center for learning in Kashmir, Who was behind it? More importantly, if this is the mosque as old as it claims predating the mosques in Iraq then why its style was not copied in Arabia in building other mosques? Of course we can say Islam respects native architecture. But all other mosques in the world except this was built in Persian Architecture and why this structure in 1987 was demolished to match the Persian Architecture?

There is a popular story behind this mosque which is well known in Kerala even today which was recently taken as fact by PMO office to build a golden replica of this structure to donate to Saudi King Salman. Once a King — named/titled Cheraman Perumal — was walking on the balcony of his palace when he spotted the moon splitting into two and joining back again. Bewildered, he consulted a few astrologers, who could not confirm that such an event had indeed occurred and was not a mystical experience.   Few months later, he got a few Arab visitors on their way to Ceylon and from them, the king learned that Prophet Muhammad was behind this miracle and he was the founder of a new religion. The king then did something unimaginably drastic. He abdicated the throne, divvied up the kingdom and set sail to Mecca to meet the Prophet. He met the Prophet, got converted to Islam and lived in Arabia for some time. Then to spread the religion in his homeland, the converted King decided to return to Kerala, but he died in Oman along the way.

Later, few of the followers of Mohammed who accompanied him reached Mahodayapuram or Cranganore or the Kodungallur and it is they who set up the first mosque at Kodungallur followed by many other. According to the legend, Saraf Ibn Malik, Malik Ibn Dinar, Malik Ibn Habib, Ibn Malik and their wives and friends were responsible for establishing the first mosques at Kodungallur, Kollam (in North, not Quilon), Maravi (Matayi), Fakanur, Manjarur (Mangalore), Kanjirakuttu (Kasargod), Jarfattan (Karippat), Dahfattan (Dharmatam), Fandarina (Pantalayani Kollam) and Caliyath (Chaliyam near Beypore). But according to authentic Historical records available in Arabia the only notable individual who visited Mohammad was a Persian Zoroastrian priest Salman Farsi who was claimed by Persians to be behind the spiritual thought of Islam, while the commercial political ideas were borrowed from Old Testament of Jews.

This claim of the mosque being the oldest mosque in India raises many questions.

Firstly, the name Cheraman Perumal itself is surrounded with controversies in the history. Whether it is the name of a person or a title is itself a confusion.

The name Cheraman Perumal is only or often or frequently ascribed to King Bhaskara Varma(4th Century A.D) who ruled Kerala from his Capital town of Mahodayapuram or Kodungallur, and this was authenticated by Roman Trade Records. Mysteriously his ruling and his times were pushed 700 years ahead ‘creating’ a tradition in history by British and their trained Indian historians in the year 1925. Not only that the title Cheraman Perumal was stripped off from Bhaskara Varma and was called an attribute to anyone who ruled Kerala from Chera Dynasties, but the Chera kings after 1000 AD called themselves as Kula Shekharas, yet it was fine for the British to call them Cheraman Perumals. This title of Bhaskara Varma when attributed to all Chera Kings it created a huge historical confusion and academic dissonance among historians as to which Cheraman Perumal infact went to Mecca. Depending on the ever expanding historical awareness King’s name who travelled to Mecca was moved from 629 AD to 1029 AD. Adding to this confusion, the Dutch and the Portuguese also claimed that these Cheraman Perumal kings were in fact converted to Christianity and gave huge temples to be converted in to Churches. After some time all of these groups produced authentic copper plates to back up their claims., which were written in multiple languages-Hebrew, Old Persian, Old Pahlavi and Greek- other than the then official languages of India except as a consolation Old Malayalam was used in some of the inscriptions

There are speculations that Cheraman Perumal lineage is a lie spread by Namboodris of Kerala, to prove their superiority. In one of the records it is mentioned that Brahmins from outside Kerala belonging to Chera kingdom brought the rulers to rule Kerala, accounting to the failure of the local village councils. These rules were called Cheraman and the title Perumal was suffixed to elevate them. This legend points out 12 Cheraman Perumals which contradicts the 25 Cheraman Perumals described in Keralolpathi. This is in conflict with another existing theory that Kerala was predominantly a Buddhist state and hence Perumal might be synonymous with Buddha. Again, Perumal Surname came from Legendary saint king Kulasekhar Alzhwar (Always or Azhwars), who was one of 12 Shree Vaishnava saints. He was an Ardent devotee of Bhagawan (Lord) Rama so he got the Surname Perumal which his descendants use till date including Travancore Kings who add additional surname “Padmanabhadhasa” after the Legendary King Marthandavarma.

Few of the scholars opine that Cheraman Perumal was not any name of any king but a title. While Cheraman was used as a synonym to indicate the name of the dynasty of Chera rulers of Kerala, Perumal meant ‘The Great One’. According to one of the various available versions of Keralolpathi (Origins of Kerala), written in the 17th or 18th century, following various conflicts in the 9th century, the representatives of 64 settlements in Kerala which they believe to be donated by Parashurama brought the Perumals from outside Kerala and each one was to rule for 12 years. With this the history of the mosque which speaks of the conversion of a king named Cheraman Perumal, into Islam and later converting all his family and followers into Islam and becoming responsible for the establishment of the mosque, in  itself doesn’t seem authentic at all.

Even if the fact that there was a King by the name Cheraman Perumal is considered, traditions give different dates for the conversion of the Chera king to Islam. According to one version the Chera king called Shankara Varman or Chengal Perumal (621-640) met the prophet Muhammad around 627 A.D., when he was fifty seven years old. It is recorded in Tarikh ‘Zuhur al Islam fil Malibar , one  of the earliest manuscripts on the genesis of Islam in Kerala, written by Muhammad bin Malik, that a group of pilgrims led by Zahiruddin bin Taqiyuddin, while going to visit the foot  of Adam in Sri Lanka (Ceylon) landed at Kodungallur (Cranganore) and met the Chera King. (Please note that here it is said that a Pilgrimage leader from Arab met the Perumal and not an Arab merchant)

The team explained to the king about Prophet Muhammad and his mission. They also told him about the miracles shown by the Prophet including the splitting of the moon which was witnessed by the king himself. The king was attracted to the faith and he told the team his desire to embrace Islam. When the team returned after their pilgrimage to the Foot of Adam, the king accompanied them to Arabia. The king met the Prophet at Jeddah on Thursday 27th Shawwal, six years before Hijrah (617 A.D.). He embraced Islam and accepted the name Tajuddin (The Crown of Faith). After remaining in Arabia for few years ( few references quote that he stayed there for seventeen days) the king decided to return to Malabar, but on the way he died at Shahar Muqalla in Yemen(few of them consider it to be Oman) on Monday, 1st Muharram in the first year of Hijrah (622 A.D.)

According to Umar bin Muhammad Suhrawardi, the conversion of Cheraman Perumal was due to the influence of Raja of Mahaldeep (Maldive) who had business relations with the Middle East and he was friendly with Cheraman. The Raja knew Malik bin Dinar, a resident of Basara. He got a book describing the miracles of the prophet and there was the splitting of the moon in it. He read it out to Cheraman Perumal and his Prime Minister Krishna Munjad. All the three became interested in Islam and secretly decided to proceed to Arabia and visit the tomb of the prophet. Meanwhile the queen of the Perumal, failing to get the prime minister to her chamber for an illegal sexual relation, forged a false story about him trying to molest her. The king believing the story, ordered the execution of the minister. But he escaped the punishment miraculously with a warning to the king that he had been misguided by the queen and to wash out the sin the king should convert to Islam and go to Mecca. This version is a very good technique probably used to paint the oriental / Indian women dishonest and characterless as well as to show that anybody who can commit any crime however heinous can convert to Islam and go to Mecca to wash off sins. A buy one and get one free kind of blaming both native and Islamic faiths and their practices that was the hall mark of British and then projecting themselves as saviors of human advancement from these barbaric religious faiths and cultural practices.

Still there is a ritual of offering Vattalapayasam, to Krishna at the ChirakkalKadalayi temple to expiate Perumal’s sin. He had four wives from four different royal families, and Sreedevi belonged to the Kolathiri swaroopam (Note: Kolathiris are believed to be the later descendants of Cheras. If this is true, then why mentioned here as a separate clan and the ‘dishonest’ queen belonged to it?). He listened to her word, committed a sin, hence had to go to Mecca-the offering is to? expiate that sin.

The Minister reached Maldives and later along with the king he accepted Islam. The disappointed Perumal in order to purify of his sin left for Mecca along with his nephew prince Kohinoor. Coming to know that Perumal was proceeding to Arabia the relatives, the   minister living at Chaliyam decided to join him. All of them boarded the ship from Cranganore in the year 82 AH (701 A.D) during the caliphate of Walid I. They reached Basara where Malik bin Dinar and his relatives received them. At Basara they were initiated to the faith by Jafar bin Sulyaman. From Basara they moved to Arabia and stayed there for about twelve years. In 94 AH (713 AD), the associates returned to Malabar, and on the way at Shahar Muqalla the Perumal died.

In the 16th century book Tuhafat-ul Mujahidin by Shaik Zainuddin, a Malayali Muslim with Arab ancestry, it is mentioned that the conversion of the Chera King might have taken place two hundred years after the Hijrah (822 A.D), but he too did not believe in its historical authenticity. According to him, this incident did not happen during the lifetime of the Prophet, but two centuries later. But later cut and paste historians seem to have forgotten to add his disclaimer.

Dr. Herman Gundert speaks of two Chera Kings who went to Mecca. One Bana Perumal after embracing Buddhism went to Mecca. At the same time Gundert claims that Bana Perumal had converted to Christianity. Whether the king had been converted to Christianity or Buddhism, the doubt exists that why he had gone to Mecca. If the king had gone to Mecca it can be assumed that he might have embraced Islam. The second Perumal who had gone to Mecca as mentioned in Keralolpathi is Cheraman Perumal. The year of his departure mentioned in the work as 332 A.D., cannot be correct if one considers the purpose behind his journey to Mecca was to meet Muhammed, since the preaching of Islam by prophet Muhammad started only after 600 A.D. Or, if at all we believe a person called Cheraman Perumal Bhaskara Varma had then travelled to Mecca in 322 A.D, then it could for a different purpose. Another version says that Cheraman Perumal left for Mecca in 210 AH (825 A.D.). Probably this is the only authentic version but this was cut and pasted by deleting the name Bhaskara Varma to various centuries of historians pick and choose.

After analyzing the variance in the chronology and the departure of Various Perumals to Mecca as mentioned in the Keralolpathi some incline to think of the possibility of the conversion of two Perumals, Shankaravarma, during the life time of the Prophet and Rama Varma Kulashekharan in a later period. Both of them might have died in Arabia, but the latter ‘might have’ paved the way for the missionary activities under Malik bin Dinar.

Dr. M.G.S.  Narayanan suggests that, the conversion of the Chera king might have taken place not during the Prophet’s time but in 1122 AD. However, according to him this doesn’t mean that in Malabar there were no Muslims before this date. But it was the conversion of Cheraman Perumal that accelerated the growth of Islam in Malabar. This idea of the King willing to bring Islam to Kerala cannot be true as Muhammed always suggested his followers not to take Islam to Eastern countries as it is not for them but for the then degenerated society especially Arabs of those times

It was as directed by Cheraman Perumal the first group of missionary landed at Kodungallur and started their preaching. Though all the sources speak on the mission of Malik bin Dinar and his associates there also exist chronological differences as in the case of the conversion of the Perumal. Since there are more persons bearing the name Malik bin Dinar in the early centuries of Islam, confusion arises who among them came to Malabar.

As indicated by A. Shusterry, the name Malik bin Dinar indicates that he is of Iranian origin rather than a genuine Arab. Most of the sources say that Malik bin Dinar, after his Mission at Malabar had gone to Khurasan and on the way he had died.  Then there is every possibility to believe that Malik bin Dinar who led the missionary to Malabar might be the disciple of the famous Sufi Hasan of Basara who died at Khurasan around 744 A.D.  If this is to be correct the statement in Rihalat al Muluk, that Cheraman Perumal with whose instruction Malik bin Dinar and his associates came to Malabar set off sail to Arabia in 82 A.H. (701.AD) comes closer to the fact. This period of Kerala history is said to have witnessed political turmoil and uncertainty and as observed by Sreedhara Menon the period was also characterized by great religious and   intellectual activity. Hence the possibility of the conversion of one Perumal becomes more evident (?) during this period. In this connection it may be noted that there is the widely held tradition that Kaladi where Shankara was born belonged to a small principality whose king had accepted Islam(?).

It is also said that Malik bin Dinar and his associates were responsible for constructing the first mosque in Kodungallur. If we believe the words of Keralolpathi tradition (which again has various versions and among which the authentic version one is difficult to trace) that before leaving for Mecca, Cheraman Perumal entrusted the duty to protect and look after the Jonakas (Mappilas) including the Qazi to Punturakkon (the Zamorin) it means that there were Muslims and Qazi in Malabar before the departure of Cheraman Perumal and then a mosque becomes inevitable for the Qazi to maintain the Islamic laws. If it is so, the credit of constructing the first mosque wouldn’t come to Malik bin Dinar and his associates who came years after the departure of the Perumal. Husain Raṇṭattāṇi says that there is no mention of any mosque constructed by Dinar either in Kodangallur or the Calicut in Rihalat al Muluk.

Logan says  that Malik bin Dinar  and his associates, even with the exceptional advantages they  possessed, would hardly have been able in so short a time, to establish mosques at various places unless the ground had been prepared earlier for them, to some extent, at least.

The traditions say that Malik bin Dinar and his associates had with them letters from the Perumal to different native rulers seeking their assistance to the missionary activities and construction of the mosques. Thus the ruler of Kodungallur, where the Muslim missionary is said to have landed first, vacated a Buddhist Vihar to Muslims and this came to be known as Cheraman Palli.  It is said that this vihar was constructed by Palli bana Perumal, a convert either to Buddhism or to Islam in the seventh century A.D.  At the time when Muslim missionaries started their work Buddhism had lost its importance and this may be the reason for changing the vihar into the mosque. Thus according to the traditions Cheraman Palli became the first mosque in Malabar. Likewise the mosque at Madayi was constructed with the assistance of the Kolathiri Raja to whom also there was a letter from the last Perumal.

If we have to believe this story then we have to also question the mentality or honesty of the converted King who sent messengers to his homeland as missionaries to spread Islam, towards Muahmmed who always warned his followers not to take Islam to Hind whom he termed as Ulo Azam or the ‘People of Book’. Is it that the king never followed his preacher’s advice? Was he such a dishonest follower of Muhammed? Or, did anyone by the name Cheraman Perumal ever met Muhammed during his lifetime? Or, was it that the intention of the king was not converting to Islam but to meet Muhammed who was spoken of being a great philosopher by the Arab merchants and clear few of his doubts as Indian rulers were always open to all knowledge sources always keen to acquire knowledge? And, the later part of the story of him sending letters to the regional rulers of Malabar was all an act of dishonesty by those who accompanied him? Or, was this a later addition to distort the historical facts?

According to the historical records of the Samudri Dynasty Kodungallur was the capital of the kings of Kerala, and in 622-628 A.D. (Hijra 1 to 7) the ruler was a great savant, by name Cheraman Perumal Bhaskara Ravi Varma. It was here that he was visited by certain Mohammadan pilgrims, who according to tradition, succeeded in inducing the Perumal to turn Mohammadan and undertake the Haj. On the eve of his renunciation of religion, empire and embarkation for Makkah, he is reputed to have distributed Kerala among the many Hindu princes whose scions ruled it until 1947. This is considered to be the earliest conversion to Islam faith. The founder of the Samudri dynasty, a nephew of the departing monarch, was one of the beneficiaries. There was a practice of receiving pan (betel leaf) from a Muslim woman when the King Samudri ascends throne for the first time and telling her ‘I shall guard the sword (kingship) until my uncle returns from Makkah.’ This custom continued until 1890s.” This raises a few questions. If this was the earliest conversion and the Samudri King was the nephew of the departed king, then if the letters of the converted Perumal post his death reached the rulers of Malabar, why it missed the nephew who was also one of the beneficiaries of the divvied kingdom of Perumal?  If the Samudri king knew about it then why this tradition of taking oath in practice for years? Doesn’t it mean the news of Perumal’s death and his letters was not known to all the beneficiaries of the kingdom especially his appointed nephews? Doesn’t the story of the letters of Perumal seem to be faulty?

Interestingly, the same Cheraman Perumal popularly recognized to be Bhaskara Ravi Varma II is also associated in the story of donation of copper plates engraved with a charter of royal privileges to the Jewish leader Joseph Rabban which continued to be enjoyed by his descendants too. Not just that. A sixteenth century composition in an old Ola Manuscript called “St Thomas Parvam” (Ramban Song) from Palayur (near Kodungallur) written by a priest named St Thomas Ramban provides details on the arrival of St Thomas the apostle and his activities in India including an immediate conversion of a Chera king and his nephew to Christianity. Why only the Chera kings who were once the powerful rulers guarding Mahodayapuram being appointed by Lalitaditya alone are subjected to conversions in the History of India? More interestingly the King and his nephew are only converted into either Islam, Judaism or Christianity!!!

Why all these stories are surrounded around Kodungallur which is of great archeological importance even today is a question to be answered. Just the point that it served to be a port site with greater importance for trade may not be it all.. Another interesting fact is that this is the same Mahodayapuram, the capital city of the mighty Cheras/ Keras/ Ksheeras (name derived from their family deity Ksheera Bhavani-a form of goddess of knowledge). These Cheras are said to have belonged the same mighty kingdom of Kashmir of Emperor Lalitaditya. Lalitaditya’s empire included Persia, Africa as well as up to Siberia and included all of present India. He had constructed Sun Temples at all these places and repaired many of the existing ones as per the ancient Persian records. He wanted to build a replica of Martanda Temple in this Mahodayapuram in Southern India and brought all the experts from Kashmir to accomplish that. This was a great solar and lunar and astronomical observatory and he had installed the Saraswati idol here who is the Goddess of knowledge and was the family deity of Kashmiri Kings. This was also considered to be the ‘Nalanda of the South’ as it was also a great Centre of Learning similar to the Sharada Sarvajna Peetha of Kashmir. Most of these details were furnished in the Rajatarangini of Kalhana which is facing lot of critics today. Kalhana’s later generations had preserved three copies of the same and prevented them from getting in to the British hands despite their persistent demands. Were there no other copies available anywhere or was being preserved either in any of the private archives of the royal families and the German or French archives is still not clear. But finally in one of the generations when there was financial instability they had work under the British who put a condition of giving them a copy of Rajatarangini in return. Whether all the three copies were taken out or just one is not known. Why were the British so much interested in Rajatarangini? After acquiring this copy it never was available for the public reference anywhere in India for the next fifty years and after that the British came out with their printed copies of Raja Tarangini. Why did they persistently try to get the original copies from the possession of Kalhana’s family for which they even made a deal with the later generations of Kalhana offering a job in return for the book? Why was it so important for them? Why was this gap of fifty years? What was being done during that time? Was it getting redone in the hands of the British scholars? Did Rajatarangini carry any important information that British found would be a threat to them, their philosophies or their mission if allowed to pass on to the later generations of India? To delink this connection of Chera/Kera/Ksheera kings from the memory of the people was the Rajatarangini distorted by the British to prove it to be unauthentic for reasons unknown? Is there anything of greater importance for which the British had to destroy the history of Kashmir, Mahodayapuram or Kodungallur and similar other places belonging to the empire of Lalitaditya and induce in to it several stories of being a place marking the peaceful entry of Islam and a land of Jews, or Christians etc.?

The point that interests is that lot of archeological diggings are still going on in the Kodungallur area even today. It is evident from historical records that most of the Europeans being lovers of knowledge often visited the knowledge centers of India including the one in Mahodayapuram. This means that along with traders many knowledge seekers also travelled to India both via land and sea, even prior to Vasco Da Gama or Christopher Columbus, It was not mere improving their trade contacts with India that the Portuguese came down to India but also probably they knew something about Mahodayapuram and the Center of learning. It is evident that the purpose of these foreigners to be interested in India may not just be spice trade or even conversion. This place should be of greater significance which has been attracting people from different parts of the world and many also entered under the cover of religion as it was known that Indians were religion-tolerant and were open to any new idea and welcome everyone whole heartedly (as if an invitation for conversion that too in the place ruled by powerful Indian rulers!).

The rulers of Mahodayapuram were very powerful even when the Portuguese entered India. Then it is quite not normal that either the story of ‘peaceful’ entry of Islam, conversion of Arathali temple in to India’s first mosque or the presentation of charters of royal privileges etc. might have happened. This part of the country getting populated with Jews, Islamists, St Thomas Christians, Catholics, one after the other, all attributing the responsibility of their entry and settlement to the Chera Kings, the guards of  Mahodayapuram is a point which needs more research to be conducted. Is there anything that is missing out or being buried in the history of India intentionally?

It was another Kolathiri Raja who constructed the mosque at Valapatanam (Baliapattam) and accorded all facilities for proselytizing activities to Sayyad Abu-Bakr who was the first Qazi of the place during 88 C.A.  Innes had quoted a story from the travelogue of Ibn Battuta, about the conversion of a king of Dadkanan (Baliapattam).  When Ibn Battuta visited here the ruler was an infidel whose grandfather, who had become Muhammadan, built the mosque and made the pond. The cause of grandfather’s receiving Islamism was a tree over which he had built the mosque.

The History of Arakkal dynasty reveals that its founder was a nephew of Cheraman Perumal, named Kohinoor with whom he went to Mecca, embraced Islam and accepted the name Saifuddin Muhammad Ali. Another theory about the origin of the family is that its founder was a Nair minister of Kolathiri Raja. He embraced Islam having broken caste by marrying a Muslim woman. Thus unlike the Sultans or the Mughals of the northern India, Ali Rajas, the only Muslim dynasty of Malabar was of indigenous origin.

The manuscript,”Qissat Shakarwati Farmad” or “Qissat Shakruti Firmad,” by an unknown author, which was translated in the Israel Oriental Studies journal by Dr Yohannan Friedmann in 1975 but has not been historically dated, found in the British Library in London names the king as Chakrawati Farmas and mentions that he observed the splitting of the moon and himself took the initiative to go to Mecca, embraced Islam at the hand of the Prophet and on returning home, died at Zafar in Yemen..

A Chola inscription mentions that the Cheras took to the sea after they were attacked which historians interpret to mean the Cheraman Perumal voyage. It is said that there is evidence even from Arabia about the tomb of a king from Malabar who converted to Islam.

The fascinating tale of a Kerala king meeting the Prophet was first recorded in 1510 CE by the Portuguese writer Duarte Barbosa. He writes about a mighty king by name Cheraman Perumal who ruled Kerala 600 years before making the time of Perumal around 910 AD. He also writes that the kingdom was partitioned into three – Calicut, Cannanore and Quilon to whom the letters from Perumal were handed over as per his instructions. But the point here is that he mentions about the Cheraman Perumal’s dream and his journey to Mecca 600 years from then, i.e. 910 CE. But the popular version of history dates Cheraman Mosque being built in 629 AD after the death of Cheraman Perumal.

Another version of this story came out from another Portuguese writer named Joas de Barros in 1610 CE. According to Barros, the Moors who came as merchants were religious fanatics and converted the king to Mohammedanism. He moved to Calicut and the Moors there made him believe that he had to go to Mecca to get out of the sin he had committed, which he promptly did after giving up his kingdom.

Diogo de Coutos, who completed Barros’ writings, adds another twist in the whole story. According to him, the Perumal was converted to Christianity and not Islam. Coutos also mentions that the Perumal died in the house of Apostle St. Thomas in Mylapore thereby disagreeing his Mecca trip.

Thus we can see different versions of story being told by the Portuguese writers within a century span.

The Dutch chaplain Canter Visscher’s version of the story, and here the Cheraman Perumal is in the year 1723, comes with another twist. While he agrees that Cheraman Perumal was a great king who distributed his kingdom and undertook a voyage he doubts if the Perumal’s journey was, “either to the Ganges in fulfillment of a vow or as the Moors say to visit Mohammed in Arabia for the purpose of embracing his religion” This implies that there were already multiple theories existing by the time of Visscher. The Cheraman Perumal’s story continued in the accounts of Dutch Commander Van Adriaan Moens (1781 CE), Francis Buchanan (1801 CE), and Granthavari (19th century).

Although minor differences are seen the versions of the Portuguese and the Muslim accounts, both agree with the point that a king from Kerala set off on a voyage to Mecca but does not match with the timelines mentioned in the mosque records.

An inscription of Vikrama Chola dating to 1122 CE mentions that while the Pandyas took to the Ghats, the Cheras took to the sea. There are other statements in that inscription which speak about some truth about the Cheras taking to the sea as well. Historians read this to mean that the last Chera Perumal, who was Rama Kulasekhara, left by sea.  There is a record from another temple which mentions that a garland was offered to the deity for the benefit of the Cheraman Rama which meant that the Rama Kulasekhara lived till 1122 CE.

These inscriptions date the Perumal much later than the Portuguese and Muslim records. As per the popular belief a King from Kerala went to Arabia and later sent a few messengers to preach Islam in his homeland. One of the ten mosques established by those messengers is at Matayi, Kerala. Marking the event in the form of stone inscriptions is a normal practice almost everywhere. This mosque also has an inscription which mentions the date of establishment of the mosque which is 1124 CE which is two years after the disappearance of Rama Kulashekhara.

Information about the contemporary rulers or events would be of more help in solving the mystery of the Cheraman. There are inscriptions mentioning two contemporary kings of Rama Kulashekhara although not any such contemporary inscriptions are available regarding the popular Cheraman Perumal story used by the mosque in Kodungallur. Two kings mentioned in connection with the last   Perumal are Udaya Varman of Koluttunad(early 12th Century ) and Kavivamsha of the Tulu kingdom  ( first half of the 12th Century).  It has to be noted that the Perumal story now ranges from 3rd century 8th century to the 12th century, posing more difficulty to solve the myth. To add to this complication, in the year 1882, William Logan recorded an incident where 15 years back a man came from Arabia soliciting funds for the repair of a mosque and tomb. This tomb, located in Zapahar(Zafar?) in the Arabian coast had an inscription which said that it belonged to Abdul Rahman Saimiri, a king of Malabar. The inscription mentions that this man reached in year 212 of the Hijera(827-28 AD) The name in the tomb looks like it was a Samuthiri, but there is no such record of a Zamorin traveling abroad and getting converted.

Another reason for the King’s departure, as mentioned in Keralopathi, is that the king was upset for reigning the kingdom for 36 years, which every Perumal was supposed to reign the land gifted by Parashurama, as they believe, only for 12 years and give way for the next.

Few sources say it is Chengal Perumal(621-640 AD) who left to Mecca to meet the Prophet. Another reference says it was a Zamorin of Kozhikode getting converted to Islam, as Abdul Rahman Zamiri(for Samoodiri),in AD 638. On his return journey from Mecca, Zamiri died at Zafar, Yemen (present salalah Oman). It is said that his qabr is still found there. From then onwards, it was customary for the Zamorin, to dress up as a Muslim, during the Ariyittuvazhcha, or anointing ceremony, and take an oath saying he was a representative of the Perumal who went to Mecca.

There is an interesting story in the legend of Kerala that Ouwayi, a Mappila Muslim, through his extreme devotion made the Goddess of Kozhikode appear before him. There is another story of Uppukuttan Mappila in the legend of Parayi Petta Pandiru who is said to have lived in 378 BC which is much before than the establishment of the first mosque as it has been claimed, which means that Arabs were known to Indians and that Malabar could have been influenced by many of the practices of these pre Islamic Arabs who were idolaters. This fact makes some sense than that of the ‘peaceful’ Islamic conversion of Keralites as early as 629 AD with the establishment of the first mosque in Kodangallur.

None of the early or medieval travelers who visited Kerala have ever referred or mentioned any of the above ever shifting versions of ‘Perumals’ or their conversions or the temples ‘peacefully’ converted in to first mosques in their records. Thus Sulaiman, Al Biruni, Benjamin of Tuleda, Al Kazwini, Marco Polo, Friar Odoric, Friar Jordanus, Ibn Babuta, Abdur Razzak, Nicolo-Conti – none of these travelers spoke of the story of the Cheraman’s alleged conversion to Islam.

Whatever is the story that goes, one point that acquires importance in the history of Kerala is the shifting of centralized power into various small kingdoms. Why could have this disintegration happened? Was it because the King himself divvied the kingdoms before his departure? Was the king’s disappearance responsible for this change or was the change erroneously tagged to the disappearance of the king as the Chera kingdom was constantly under attack by the Cholas and Pandyas? But in fact the Cholas, Cheras and Pandyas were unitedly protecting Mahodayapuram from any attacks and were termed to be the monarchs of the South. If this is true, then why is it constantly parroted in the history that Cheras were with constant war with Cholas and Pandyas? Was this united troop later divided for some reason?

Because of the attacks was the revenue affected since the King was forced to make deals with various other forces which resulted in an ungovernable kingdom and hence the easy way out for the king was to abduct the throne?

Was it the Cholas and Pandya rulers occupied most of the areas in Kerala which made them independent of the central power? And, The Perumal’s Mecca voyage was a symbolic tale which captured all of this.

While this is the first confusion that exists in history about Cheraman Perumal and Malik bin Dinar, the second is about the mosque built.

The mosque at Kodangallur does not follow the norms of any usual mosque.. While all the mosques face towards west, only this particular one faces east like any usual temple, has a pond besides again like any ancient temple of India, has a lamp similar to the ones used in the temples. The pulpit from where the chief priest gives Friday sermons is made of rosewood with carvings similar to those in temples, has many architectures resembling that of temples and even the mosque is unusually resembling the temple architecture of Kerala.

There are sources which speak of the Arathali(A form of Saraswati) temple being converted into a mosque for the establishment of Islam. This seems to hold much weightage as we see a tradition of many including the Hindus even today visiting the mosque for the initiation into learning for their children which is popularly known as Aksharabhyaasa which of course is a common practice in India especially when it comes to Saraswati temples. But the point is why a temple was replaced by a mosque while keeping all temple traditions including the akhanda deeepam or the eternal lamp that was continuously lighted for more than 1600 years. What happened to the idol? Whatever the reason in the tinkered history, it would be common for any rational mind to get these questions.

Was it that the whole of Kodangallur was so crowded that there was not a single place to build a new mosque and the King found that this was the only place to build the mosque for which the people consented? Why not any other temple was converted into a mosque and why only the Arthali temple?

Again another set of historians say it was a Buddhist Vihar before being replaced by a mosque. This cannot be true as Buddhism flourished in Kerala until 12th Century which could not have made it possible for one to replace a Buddhist Vihar with a mosque ‘peacefully’.

Even if we negate the point that it was either a Buddhist Vihar or a temple that was replaced with a mosque but a new mosque that was built there, then why was the normal rules in the construction of a mosque not followed? Why was it different from all other mosques in the world? Why does it face east? Why is there a pond besides and why a lamp inside? Why few archeological evidences that exist resemble that of a temple? And more intriguingly if it was the first mosque why its style of construction was not followed in other mosques in the world.

Is it mere societal conditions prevailing in Kerala at those times as it is believed that led to the replacement of a temple or a Buddhist Vihar with a mosque?

The misbehavior or inhuman practices of the Namboodaris is said to have resulted in unfavorable societal conditions that led to conversions. Not only the Namboodaris of Kerala but all other sub divisions of the Brahminical class are picturized cruel and selfish in the British parroted history.  Not just Brahmins but all sections of the society are shown in one or the other way faulty. It is clear that the basic mission of the British was to disrupt and destroy the Brahminical class which was a major threat to their existence in the sacred land of Bharatabhumi!

The society in India was divided into various groups each designated with a particular duty and responsibility as a part of the society towards the society for the wellbeing of the society as a whole. This led to the diversified yet unified society with diversified cultural practices based on a common Vedic principle. The people lived in harmony yet. Few issues would pop up sometimes which would be quickly resolved by the community leaders or the Kinship. Descend in the qualitative leadership in due course of time resulted in a prolonged process of resolution of issues whenever they popped up or sometimes left unresolved. This created a gap between the different communities. With the later generations losing the logic behind the practices, beliefs and the sole purpose of the creation of communities, transformed into a mechanical lifestyle which turned out to be harmful. This difference was transformed into hatred during the British rule. The communities got to be termed ‘castes’ by now and differences were increased, a communication gap was created. Each one was played against the other. The concept of superior and inferior, upper and lower was created. Few practices were labelled evil and people losing their knowledge about the logic behind, with the constant effort of the British, started to accept whatever they could see, hear or feel, or whatever fed to them by their colonial masters to be the ultimate reality, and stopped searching for the truth. Many practices were induced by them either by force or playing intelligently and we foolishly followed them and continued them believing their teachings to be superior. After a constant, persistent effort the British were able to play one against the other through any possible means. They were able to successfully create a situation, use those who were favorable to them and brainwash people according to their theories. By successfully cutting out the knowledge sources from the people and creating a need in the society for survival and constant feeding of wrong information (made to look real) they finally could divide the society on the basis of religion, language, communities etc. Their primary mission was the destruction of Brahmins and Kshatriyas who played a major role in keeping the society united as they knew these people were the major obstructions for their vision of colonization. The atrocities they committed on these two communities is an untold history. The atrocities they committed on the other classes of people whom they termed ‘lower’ were thrown upon these two ‘upper classes’. They did not hesitate to use people of the same communities they wanted to destroy to accomplish their task of dividing them either by bribing or scaring them. Constant parroting of these untruths for years together at the same time every effort being made to disconnect the public from their rich cultural history finally led to their success in permanent division of every section of the Indian society which otherwise was a unified one. To convert this division into a permanent problem, they discarded our ancient historical and scientific texts as myths reintroduced their versions of our history, science, society and politics. This social engineering project perpetuated through education system exclusively focused on imagined mythical inhuman atrocities committed by the “privileged” sections of the society over the “non-privileged” sections of the society. Thus, the entire non-privileged sections were shown waiting for political freedom from atrocities and spiritual liberation from the tyranny of gods. The British projected themselves along with the Catholic Church to fulfill the role of political and spiritual liberation of all the colonies often times eliminating the entire populations like they did in Africa and America or eliminating the entire historical, cultural and scientific sense and identity of the society through their 4 P’s as they did in India, China and other oriental countries. The choice of elimination of populations or cultural and historical memory is solely made depending on the military might of the colonies. Whenever the division of the society did not work under the banner of “privileged” and “non-privileged” atrocities, they introduced from Americas to India the theory of Aryan Invasion on the Dravidian cultures and languages creating one more ethno linguistic division to conquer the colonies. That is the reason why from the beginning of the British writing of Indian history starting from Elliot the same theme of atrocities and liberation continues whether it is Qasim’s invasions, voluntary conversions of Kerala population into Islam, Judaism or Christianity or the current Kashmir problem. With no way left out to learn about their rich past, everything parroted to them was considered authentic and accepted. Even today we believe these parroted versions without using any logical reasoning or common sense and make no effort to get back our rich tradition, culture and knowledge that always helped not only us but people all over the world. This weakness in us is allowing our current leaders to follow the same principles of the British to divide the society for their selfish motives. No solution can ever come to us until we make an effort to find one for ourselves!!! If we do not realize our mistake even now we ‘the slaves’ will remain slaves forever!!

“While the Namboodaris are being accused” to be the cause of conversion into Islam, there is again another version which states “the Namboodaris themselves” were converted into Christianity by St Thomas as early as 52 A.D. There are historical records that the Namboodaris came along with Lalitaditya when he constructed a replica of Martanda Sun Temple in Mahodayapuram with 64 gates whose geographical extent is still unknown, the southern seaport city built by him, along with a massive solar observatory. These 64 gates represent 64 main knowledge/scientific branches of traditional Indian wisdom and appointed the Namboodaris to be both guardians and protectors of the temple. A kind of warrior saints called as Brahmakshatras, a tradition set to have initiated by Parashurama. Lalitaditya was also called/ titled as Parashurama the Namboodaries believe they have followed Parashurama to Cheranad/Kerala. Not only Namboodaris even the Konkanastha Brahmins and many other Brahmin communities all across the world still hold the tradition that they followed Parashurama/Lalitaditya.

If the King’s letter intended to establish Islam in Kodangallur and that if the rulers respected his words and embraced Islam, how much possible could that be that even the subjects of the kingdom also embrace Islam just because of the King’s letter leaving behind all the practices and traditions they had been following since ages and immediately build a new mosque? Could this be imagined to happen in a country like India that too peacefully without anyone resisting this change? No other neighbor kingdom questioned them that too when the Cholas and Pandyas were powerful rulers at those times? None tried to stop the conversion of a temple into a mosque? None went against this idea? All this seems to be a myth created by the Elliot’s history of India similar to the one regarding the Muslim invasions and destructions of the temples in Sindh and Kashmir and many other places.

Mythical/ Historical Account 2: Violent Islamic invasion over Sindh, a faulty and falsified psychopathic history- a 15 Year old Sacking Sindh and Multan and Persia and getting executed on his return back to Arabia when he was 20

Well, we call it faulty and falsified history because in an attempt (to some extent successful until now) to prove the ridiculous theory that the Arabs did in fact, in the first few years after the death of the Prophet Mohammed, move to conquer most of Asia, the British tried to create and then parade a few almost psychopathic historical records as authentic history. These imaginary records are being parroted even today by most of the historians, but which stand in direct contradiction, most importantly, to all common sense, not to mention the established historical records of both Arab and Persian historians.

We are not denying the fact that there existed a trade between Arabs and Indians thousands of years before the advent of Mohammed and that this was all a land-based trade. Herodotus (484–413 BCE) noted that goods brought by Arabs from Kerala were sold to the Jews at Eden. They intermarried with local people, resulting in formation of the Muslim Mappila community.  The Arabs, who were nomads and desert dwellers, were neither architects nor builders of great cities, nor were they masterful ship builders of the ships that are required for long range and large-scale sea-based trade. In fact, as long as the land routes were never disturbed, most of the empires that rose in those eras (whether Persian, Roman, Turk or Mongol) were land based empires, as in those days, the whole of Africa and Asia were connected with multiple land routes of which the Silk Route was the heart and nerve.

The first few years of the rise of Islam in Arabia, it was mired with internecine warfare among the various factions within Mohammed’s close circle itself, not to mention the fact that over 90% of the Arab population had apostatized after his death. The first problem of any Caliph would be to deal with the severe rebellion within. Not to mention a millennium long war with Persian Empire in the East and contemptuous enslavement by the Byzantine Empire in the North. Over the first century after the Prophet Mohammed, the Persians had introduced a policy of hunting down the Arabs and the entire land routes to the Arabs were closed past Baghdad, thus effectively cutting off the only land route to Sindh and then to what is today’s India. The meticulously chronicled Islamic history of Iran and the Islamic History of Arabs can be referred for more details on this account.

A second fact is that during the time of Mohammed there were very few in the Arabian tribes to whom Mohammed preached Islam who could actually read and write, three of them who were close to Mohammed were Ali, Abu Bakr and Osman. That is one reason why Mohammed specifically preached “No forward looking policy towards the East” except to obtain knowledge and to learn. He had in-fact stated that the Arabs could go up to India and China to learn, obtain knowledge and understand the sciences and that Islam was not meant for those countries as they already had their own spiritual leaders and had holy books already written.

True to the teachings of Mohammed, none of the Arab armies, even in the Haroon Rashid Caliphate, moved into India except to learn or trade. In-fact when much of what they thus learnt was in contradiction with the other information from the Greeks, they always quoted and stood by the dictum of Mohammed that ‘to learn the truth and true knowledge, they have to go as far as China, a dictum upheld in many sharia courts of later Islamic Iran and Arabia when scientists were brought under charges of blasphemy. This is the same policy they use even now for understanding geo-political contexts. Only after first 100 years post Mohammed, did the Osman Caliphate make massive efforts to educate all the Arabs including the women.

It is nearly impossible to believe that it would have been militarily possible for the tribes of Arabia, who could barely read and write, who were looked upon with contempt as slaves by either the Roman, Byzantine or Persian empires who ruled over them for the past millennia, at least, and controlled them for their political battles, to rise in a matter of merely ten years, post the death of Nabi, deal with all the infighting in Arabia itself, handle the near total Arab-apostasy, and then somehow an army from this arid desert zone, with a population less than that of even a single major city in India, could muster an army to smash the Persians in the East, while controlling the Byzantines in the North, move Westwards towards Egypt and North Africa, suddenly acquire an ability to build ships and control the Mediterranean Sea, and then still retain a number of men strong enough to cross Iran, control the Afghans whom even the Soviets had a tough time handling and then enter Sindh and then India!!!! What a ridiculous story we have been told!!!! What was the population of Arabia then? What are the resources required to conduct a war of that magnitude? What resources did they have available with them to pose a war?

But to prove that Arabs did in-fact militarily occupy western India and were the looters of many Indian cultural centers, the British Historian Elliot “discovered” a wonderful account which has no basis in any Arab or Persian contemporary history yet was taken as the authentic version without even a single question being asked by the Indians who followed him, nor even a mere cross-referencing done of any detail in other historical accounts. This complete absence of even a single question on this ridiculous story shows the intellectual fall of Indian mind, perhaps as engineered by the British.

Yet Elliot propagates his “discovery” that bin Quasim attacked Sindh and destroyed Aditya temple. The historical narration of Elliot and the British historians goes typically like this:

——————————start narrative—————————-

“According to Berzin, Umayyad interest in the region occurred because of attacks from Sindh Raja Dahir on ships of Muslims and their imprisonment of Muslim men and women. They had earlier unsuccessfully sought to gain control of the route, via the Khyber Pass, from the Kabul Shahi of Gandhara. But by taking Sindh, Gandhara’s southern neighbour, they were able to open a second front against Gandhara; a feat they had, on one occasion, attempted before.

According to Wink, Umayyad interest in the region was galvanized by the operation of the Meds (a tribe of Scythians living in Sindh) and others. Meds had pirated upon Sassanid shipping in the past, from the mouth of the Tigris to the Sri Lankan coast, in their bawarij and now were able to prey on Arab shipping from their bases at Kutch, Debal and Kathiawar. At the time, Sindh was the wild frontier region of al-Hind, inhabited mostly by semi-nomadic tribes whose activities disturbed much of the Western Indian Ocean. Muslim sources insist that it was these persistent activities along increasingly important Indian trade routes by Debal pirates and others which forced the Arabs to subjugate the area, in order to control the seaports and maritime routes of which Sindh was the nucleus, as well as, the overland passage. During Hajjaj’s governorship, the Meds of Debal in one of their raids had kidnapped Muslim women travelling from Sri Lanka to Arabia, thus providing a casus belli to the rising power of the Umayyad Caliphate that enabled them to gain a foothold in the Makran, Balochistan and Sindh regions.

The Umayyad Caliphate on the eve of the invasions of Spain and Sindh in 710.

Also cited as a reason for this campaign was the policy of providing refuge to Sassanids fleeing the Arab advance and to Arab rebels from the Umayyad consolidation of their rule.

These Arabs were imprisoned later on by the Governor Deebal Partaab Raye. A letter written by an Arab girl who escaped from the prison of Partab Raye asked Hajjaj Bin Yusuf for help. When Hajjaj asked Dahir for the release of prisoners and compensation, the latter refused on the ground that he had no control over those. Al-Hajjaj sent Muhammad Bin Qasim for a revenge expedition against the Sindh kingdom in 711. Muhammad bin Qasim’s expedition was actually the third attempt, the first two having failed due to stiffer-than-expected opposition as well as heat, exhaustion.[1]

———————–end narrative——————————-

Now we ought to ask at least a few questions on this ridiculous story. Qasim who was taken into the care of his uncle, who was the Governor of Basra and was locked into internecine war with others, would send this 15-year lad to conquer Sindh? – A task that would challenge even Alexander ‘the Great’? Are we to believe this nonsense?

We ask our reader to please deliberate on the plausibility of the following points in this story:

  • Muslim women travelling from Sri-Lanka to Arabia? Not today, but shortly around the time of Mohammed? So how fluent were the Muslim Women of Mohammed’s Arabia in the Language of the Sri Lankans? Of course it could be argued that they were either wives or daughters of the Arab merchants who travelled along with them to Sri Lanka. Were they travelling without their male escorts? If the women were kidnapped what happened to those men travelling along with them? Were they all killed or they were all helpless that led the girl to take the lead in contacting the Governor?  At the time of Mohammed only four of his associates knew how to read and write. Only hundred years after the death of Muhammed that most of the Arab men were taught to read and write not only Arabic but Sinhala language. Literacy among arb women was no way found even today. But then in 711 a girl writing a letter to the Governor is an absolute hype beyond insane imagination.

2) These Muslim women enroute- to Arabia were kidnapped by Pirates based around Sindh? With no male escort? Does the state of Muslim Women anywhere in the World today make sense if this story was true? Few versions in the history also state that the King of Ceylon was sending a Ship filled with gifts and beautiful women to the Caliph who were captured by King Dahir Was it that the King Dahir, a cultured Brahmin king could not bear the atrocities conducted over the women, wanted to free them? Did he secure them while the distorted history paints him as a kidnaper? If at all we believe the conquest of Qasim a reality, then this could have been a more logical reason the scientwisters of history could have given rather than the popular version of pirates kidnapping the Arab women and the Caliph rather than attacking the pirates decided to attack the King sparing the pirates which seems to be a funny joke!!!

3) One of these Arab girls “escapes from the prison”? Who was this daring heroine and what became of her finally?

4) This Arab girl on escaping writes a letter to Al-Hajjaj, the Caliphate Governor? Somehow finding the means to survive in a hostile land which did not speak her language? If she wrote a letter after escaping with whom did she send the letter? Or, did she herself carry it? How was she able to reach her homeland?

5) That Mohammed-Bin-Qasim was born in 695 CE, and on the third expedition to attack SIndh started off in 710 CE. So he was a mere 15-year old when he set out to cross Persia and attack India?

6) When there is a sharp animosity between the Persians and the Arabs, what is the chance at all of this Arab 15-year-old-World-Conquerer crossing the entire Persian heartland and coming over to India?

7) With a mere total of 15,000 (6000 Syrian Cavalry, 6000 Iraqi Camel Riders and 3000 infantry), he was able to invade Sindh?? And Defeat the Raja Dahir of Sindh who had a massive army (only the swordsmen numbered 50,000) comprising of elephant-divisions, cavalry as well…this being merely his personal army? Not to mention the countless other defenses all across the Sindh? An Attacking army needs to be at least three times the size of a defensive army to be able to win….unless the howdahs on the elephant’s back can spontaneously combust and the elephants can be fooled into seeing ghosts on the battle-field…as is rumored to have happened to the ‘defeated Raja of Sindh’

8) If he was 15 years old on his third expedition to attack Sindh, what about the previous two expeditions?

Should it be Alexander the Great or Mohammed-Bin-Qasim-the-Great?

9) That a mere 5-years after he started the successful campaign on Sindh, he was executed by the new Caliph in Basra Sulayman bin Abd al-Malik. While this 15-year-old Arab kid Mohammed-Bin-Qasim-the-Great could muster an Army from Syria, Cross the terrible Persia, pursue un-imaginable intrigue with the Gujaratis, Sindhis and the Balochis, permitting him to form alliances to defeat the Raja of Sindh, yet he was unable to handle the rise of the new Caliph back home? Since when did the Arabs master the art of very detailed intrigue needed to pull this operation off in India?

Now sending Arab Women to Sri Lanka to learn (when they have much better places to go to more easily on the land routes) and they being captured by sea-pirates on their way back to Arabia, who are not in control of Raja of Sindh. Out of these captured Arab Women, a 13-year old girl escapes from the prison and manages to write a letter to the Governor of Basra pleading with him to save them. When none in Arabia knew how to read and write a thirteen year girl writing a letter and the pirates who kidnapped her dutifully mailing it in to the Governor and he instead of sending the reply to the Pirates choosing to send a message to the Raja of Sindh and the Raja replying that he cannot do anything and thus the angry governor sending his 15-year old nephew through the treacherous Iranian land route which was at its peak of Scorch-the-Arab policy and that 15-year-old-kid coming to Sindh conquering and destroying Sindh with a rag-tag-army of less than 15,000 against the several hundred-thousand strong Sindhi forces, forgetting to liberate the captured Arab women and going back to Basra/Arabia as a hero somehow gets captured and executed, along with his mentor uncle, by the subsequent Caliph who had always hated the present Caliph….this ridiculous story beats any extent of imagination of all who are at least familiar with the minimum fundamentals of wars or campaigns in those days (101 of Art of war).

Let us also go through few other funny versions of this ‘abduction of Arab women’ and the death of Qasim in Indian history:

  1. Al-Baladhuri’s account (?):


—-“Then, after Mujja’ah, al-Hajjaj appointed Muhammad ibn-Harun ibn Dhira an-Namari, and during his administration the king of the island of Rubies (Ceylon) sent to al-Hajjaj some women who were born in his country as Moslems, their fathers, who had been merchants, having died. He wanted to court favor with al-Hajjaj by sending them back. But the ship in which they were sailing was attacked by some of the Mids of ad-Daibul in barks (bawarij), and was captured with all that was in it. One of the women, who was of the tribe of the banu-Yarbu‘ cried out, “O Hajjaj!” al-Hajjaj heard of this and exclaimed, “Here am I (ya labbayk)(a Whatsapp or skype or VOS- Voice over Space communication from Kerala to Arabia?).” He sent to Dahir, asking him to set the women free, but Dahir replied, “Pirates over whom I have no control captured them.” So al-Hajjaj sent ‘Ubaidallah ibn-Nabhan to raid ad-Daibul, but he was killed. Then al-Hajjaj wrote to Budail ibn-Tahfah al-Bajali, who was in ‘Uman, ordering him to go against ad-Daibul. But when Budail met the enemy his horse ran away with him, and the enemy surrounded him and killed him … Then al-Hajjaj put Muhammad ibn-al-Kasim ibn-Muhammad ibn-al-Hakam ibn-abu-‘Ukail in charge, during the reign of al-Walid ibn ‘Abd-al-Malik. He raided as-Sind—-

  1. The narrative from Chachnamah:

The same is recorded in another early work Tarikh Sind wa Hind, commonly known as Chachnamah:

“It is related that the king of Sarandeb (Ceylon/Sri Lanka) sent some curiosities and presents from the island of pearls, in a small fleet of boats by sea, for Hajjaj. He also sent some beautiful pearls and valuable jewels, as well as some Abyssinian male and female slaves, some pretty presents, and unparalleled rarities to the capital of the Khalifah. A number of Mussalman women also went with them with the object of visiting the Kaabah, and seeing the capital city of the Khalifahs. (To be noted: Muslim women unaccompanied by their male escorts travelled in the ship with a wish to visit Kaabah which really beats one’s imagination!!) When they arrived in the province of Kazrun, the boat was overtaken by a storm, and drifting from the right way, floated to the coast of Debal. Here a band of robbers, of the tribe of Nagamrah, who were residents of Debal, seized all the eight boats, took possession of the rich silken cloths they contained, captured the men and women, and carried away all the valuable property and jewels.

The officers of the king of Sarandeb and the women informed them that, the property was intended for the Khalifah then regnant, but they paid no heed and said: “If there is anyone to hear your complaint, and to help you, purchase your liberty.” Then they all cried with one voice: “O Hajjaj, O Hajjaj, hear us and help us.” The woman who first uttered that cry belonged to the family of Bani Aziz. Wasat Asaadi states that when Debal was conquered he had occasion to see that woman, who was fair-skinned and of tall stature. The merchants (who were in the boats) were brought to Debal, and the people who had fled from the boats came to Hajjaj and informed him of what had happened. “The Mussalman women,” said they, “are detained at Debal and they cry out: ‘O Hajjaj, O Hajjaj, hear us, help us’.” When Hajjaj heard this, he said, as if in reply to the call of the women: “Here am I, here am I.” It is also stated in a tradition about Hajjaj that, when the Mussalman women were asked what they meant by calling Hajjaj to their help, they replied: “We were in a sleep-like repose and we were disturbed in it, and so we called him to save us from the cruel and  unmerciful people, who had confined us in captivity.”

In the above account readers should note that here it is not a young girl of thirteen but a fair skinned Muslim woman and shift in the story from writing a letter as to shouting aloud that could be heard by Hajjaj in Arabia!!!

Supporting this version Jaffar, S.M., in his work “End of ‘Imad-ud-Din Muhammad ibn Qasim. The Arab Conqueror of Sind” in Quarterly Islamic Culture, (Hyderabad Deccan, Jan. 1945) Vol.19, 57-59 says “it is reasonable to say that the book was written not long after that conquest was completed” and H.M. Elliot has an elaborate discussion arguing for the same in his work The History of Indians as told by its Own Historians, Edited by John Dowson, (London: Trubner and Co., 1867) 131, 134-136ff – considering this as one of the sources to rewrite the History of India or a version of Chachnamah created by his team to authenticate the falsified historical event! Elliot and his team brilliantly considered these and similar sources of non-natives to be the ‘words of India’s own historians’! While at the same time rich historical sources and ancient texts of India are discarded as myths. For example: Rajatarangini of Kalhana. Later rewritten versions of Elliot and others became a standard ‘History of Indians as told by its own historians’!

While Mr. Farhan Ahmad Shah writes –“The earliest source mentioning MbQ’s adventure in Sindh is Baladhuri’s ‘Futuh al-Buldan’. No maidens are mentioned therein and they found their way into historical accounts centuries later.” contradicting to the above version of Chachnamah (Elliot’s version?)

According to a researcher, Manan Ahmed Asif, Baladhuri’s history produced in the Abbasid court is removed from the earliest historical events it narrates by more than two hundred years and is thus itself an act of imagining the past and it is the way in which this historiography is repurposed by Chachnama.

According to him, Baladhuri narrated an event during the tenure of Numri, a commander sent by Hajjaj that emerged in later historiography as the casus belli of the Muslim conquest of Sind. The “abduction of Muslim women” is an account that Baladhuri places more than a decade before the campaign of Qasim and during an already forty year old effort to placate the frontier of Makran.

Yet this account dramatically reverberates in the historiography and popular imagination to this day. It is an incredibly potent account, he says – a helpless Muslim woman and her cry for help galvanizing a distant empire into a rescue mission. To the novelists, dramatists, and political commentators, it provides endless permutations of history’s silenced voices and the glory of Islam’s heroic past. Even scholars today have rather uncritically accepted this story as a rationale for invasion.

A Note on Abbasid court Historian/Chronicler Al Baladhuri

The most important question about the HM Elliot Historical sources/hearsay was Al Baladhuri. For some reason it was told to unamusing Indians that Elliot discussed all his psychopathic ‘historical sources’ with peers and finally concluded that Qasim’s invasion of Sindh followed by the 13 year old girl/40 year old woman/or few middle aged women shouting/calling Hajjaj from the captivity in boat and Hajjaj responding that He was there instantly, to be a real fact that happened in the history of India (we have to assume that sound travels in straight line and as she shouted over the open seas thus sound travelled to Baghdad and back instantly through Arabic Physics Laws not familiar or comprehensible  to the Indian minds even today).

But we need to understand the different Caliphates that ruled Hajjaj or current Arabia in those days post death of Mohammad. Mohammad before his ascension appointed Ali, who was youngest among his close followers as his successor. Immediately post ascension of Mohammad, his appointment was suspended citing traditional tribal rules that the eldest tribal leader should succeed. Thus, Abu Bakar became the first Caliph. Ali had to wait for his turn until other two elders Omar and Uthman became Caliphas. This twist in the succession was the foundation of split of Islam in to Sunni and Shia post martyrdom or Ali. Shia consider Mohammad then Ali and his successors/appointees as legitimate and Imams. Sunnis consider the first four Caliphs (Abu Bakar, Omar, Uthman and Ali) and the descendants of Mohammad as legitimate. The first four Caliphas are called Rashidian Caliphate as they took the title of Rashid. Then came Umayyad Caliphate. History tells that Umayyads were those who first opposed Mohammad then joined him and then were responsible to assassinate Ali and his sons and Mohammad’s grandchildren (most of them are close relatives of Mohammad, his uncle Abu Sufian etc). The Umayyad Caliphate later became morally defunct and deviated from the puritanical Islamic principles that Mohammad preached. To counter them the Iranian Sunnis under Abbasid Caliphate over ran Umayyads and destroyed everything of Umayyad as heretical and non-Islamic. Abbasid even does not consider the first three Caliphas of Rashidian Caliphate (Abu Bakar, Omar and Uthman) as legitimate as it was the Mohammad’s wish and decree that Ali should be his successor.  Starting in current day central Iran, the Abbasids moved westward in to Arabia and then moved northwards to Europe and southwards towards Africa. Keeping the tradition of Mohammad in mind they never looked east towards India or Al Hind or Kashmir. Abbasids were responsible to introduce Islamized Arabic life-culture from Persian civilizational achievements, including introducing Arabic Gramar, mass education and Arabic script to name few.

They made sure their court historians erase the Umayyad rule completely or discredit it as morally defunct at the best or illegitimate and insignificant at the worst. Among the first two Caliphates (Rashidian and Umayyad) only Omar when he became Calipha dreamed about setting up a kingdom/territory for Arab followers of Mohammad in the vast dessert sands and declared Persia and Byzantine Empire as prime enemies and in the following existential battles between him and Persians where the territories changed hands as quick as dessert sands. Omar ‘conquered’ or came up to Central Persia or current day of Iran. Scholars believe that few British paid historians tried to attribute the success of Omar to bin Qassim by extending the territories conquered up until Sindh.

Al Baladhuri who was considered as most balanced among such court historians of Abbasid rule still was very critical about Umayyads. The trend to write histories from the perspective of victors in war and erasing all cultural achievements or previous empires/civilizations took its roots during the Abbasid dynasty. This erasing of all previous histories/civilizational achievement of humanity in academic and nonacademic spheres was perfected by Church and probably Abbasids picked the trait from them to a point of re drafting Quran to suit their purposes.

With such a historical background to imagine Al Baladhuri, who was sponsored and paid by Abbasid rulers, wrote praising Qasim especially  mentioning that he crossed the mighty Persian empire 50 years ago to sack Sindh, is only a stretch of lunatic imagination.  Of course it was quite possible that the British carefully cultivated zealot and extremist Mullahs and one such Mullah might have added few ‘paragraphs or phrases. Such paid services are offered to the British by some in the Iranian clerical regime even today post British interaction with the Iranians.

Forget Al Baladhuri, today in the 21st Century, in the land of India, both Central and State Governments recently re wrote educational curriculum based on the parroted British version of history in the light of their political or social ideologies like – Maharana Pratap was never defeated by Akbar but Rana Pratap defeated Akbar; Mahatma Gandhi was never assassinated, Ghodse never killed Gandhi, we never lost the China War but Chinese were defeated in that war yet failed to explain why Tibet and one third of Kashmir are in the hands of China, etc. (

Is it that the import businessmen controlled governments are conditioning the future generations of India that we have no claims against China and the current occupied Kashmir and Tibet belongs to Chinese only? It seems that there has been a clear effort to push an agenda that suits the narrative of majoritarian sentiments and depict India as a Hindu state. The colourful history of this country is now gradually being changed to show that people belonging to one particular community have contributed in nation building, while the rest are either cruel, immoral when it comes to Indians, or invaders, or to say the least outsiders. Even beyond communal identities, the matter has gone further and divided people on political ideologies.

The worst distortion of history being that Mughal history is not worth reading. This point goes directly against the fundamentals of certain political parties’ very existence which based their entire political campaigns blaming Mughals for the destruction of anything and everything in India, making Elliot cry in his grave. Except couple of activists’ heroic struggle to bring the truth out majority of Indian private corporate press tow the line of Central and State Government. Imagine thousand years before were the court historians allowed to write the glories of defeated enemies? Elliot’s assumption/firm belief must be that Indians never can figure out or move on the path of finding truth as they were made in to Mental and Psychological slaves to the British thought.

So the sources of HM Elliot were as questionable as Elliot’s writings at the best or must be discarded completely as false and fake historical accounts at the worst. The amazing and unbelievable audacity Elliot propagated and referenced Al Baladhuri as authentic source of invasion history and we bet the same might be true for all ‘authentic versions’ of Indian history

Rather than trying to erase or change the Elliot created and propagated ‘history’ into a community oriented history intending to fill the Indian minds with a false pride or permanent enmity under the banner of Hindutva, as an effort to escape the psychological and social pressure it has been creating in the society since years started by the British as part of divide and rule or for their political interests, it would be better on the part of the governments and researchers to take necessary steps to find out the fallacies, glaring inconsistencies and absolute lies in Elliot’s version of history which he propagated to suit the interests of the Church and British. This would solve most of the problems, answer most of the questions and put us in a much better status bringing back the glory of this country in general and Bharatavarsha in particular, leaving a sense of pride to its true meaning in the minds of the countrymen as well as the rest of the world. A major effort in this direction has been started since last fifty years under the title of ‘The History of Misleading Indian History’ by both German and French. A similar effort from all the concerned Indians that will reveal the true position of India and her responsible role for the current time and space would be commendable.

Now let us look into the accounts about Qasim’s conquest and subsequent conversion of Sindh.

  1. Coercive conversion has been attributed to early historians like Elliot, the key personality behind the distortion of Indian history. This is one of the two usually voiced antagonistic perspectives viewing Qasim’s actions where he holds the view that the conversion of Sindh was necessitated. Qasim’s numerical inferiority is said to explain any instances of apparent religious toleration, with the destruction of temples seen as a reflection of the more basic, religiously motivated intolerance. The same opinion is carried forward by other historians like Cousens, Majumdar and Vaidya.

Elliot perceived Islam as a religion of “terror, devastation, murder and rapine” where the conquering Arabs were characterized as “ruthless bigots” and “furious zealots” motivated by “plunder and proselytism”. The period of Qasim’s rule has been called by U.T. Thakkur “the darkest period in Sind history”, with the records speaking of massive forced conversions, temple destruction, slaughters and genocides; the people of Sindh, described as inherently pacifist due to their Hindu/Buddhist religious inclinations, had to adjust to the conditions of “barbarian inroad”.

By this he was able to picturize the cruelty of Arabs towards Indians by which he became successful in creating a permanent hatred among Indians and Arabs/Muslims which even today is alive in the minds of people.  This sincere effort of Elliot gave rise to a version in the History where Muhammad bin Qasim became often referred to as the first Pakistani according to Pakistan Studies curriculum. Muhammad Ali Jinnah also acclaimed Muhammad Bin Qasim and claimed that the Pakistan movement started when the first Muslim put his foot on the soil of Sindh, the Gateway of Islam in India!

  1. Voluntary conversion has been attributed to Thomas W. Arnold and modern Muslim historians such as Habib and Qureishi. They believe that the conquest was largely peaceful, and the conversion entirely so, and that the Arab forces enacted liberal, generous and tolerant policies.] These historians mention the “praiseworthy conduct of Arab Muslims” and attribute their actions to a “superior civilizational complex.

On one extreme, the Arab Muslims are seen as being compelled by religious stricture to conquer and forcibly convert Sindh, but on the other hand, they can be seen as being respectful and tolerant of non-Muslims as part of their religious duty, with conversion being facilitated by the vitality, equality and morals of the Islamic religion. Citations of towns taken either violently or bloodlessly, reading back into Arab Sindh information belonging to a later date and dubious accounts such as those of the forcible circumcision of Brahmins at Debal or Qasims consideration of Hindu sentiment in forbidding the slaughter of cows are used as examples for one particular view or the other.

Some historians strike a middle ground, saying that Qasim was torn between the political expediency of making peace with the Hindus and Buddhists; having to call upon non-Muslims to serve under him as part of his mandate to administer newly conquered land; and orthodoxy by refraining from seeking the co-operation of “infidels”. It is contended that Qasim may have struck a middle ground, conferring the status of Dhimmi upon the native Sindhis and permitting them to participate in his administration, but treating them as “noncitizens” (i.e. in the Khilafat, but not of it)

It is believed that after the conquest of Sindh, Qasim adopted the Hanafi school of Sharia law which regarded the Hindus, Buddhists and Jains as “dhimmis” and “People of the Book”, allowing them religious freedom as long as they continued to pay the tax known as “jizya”. This approach would prove critical to the way Muslim rulers ruled in India over the next centuries.

Muhammad bin Qasim had begun preparations for further expansions when Hajjaj died, as did Caliph Al-Walid I, who was succeeded by Sulayman ibn Abd al-Malik, who then took revenge against all who had been close to Hajjaj. Sulayman owed political support to opponents of Hajjaj and so recalled both of Hajjaj’s successful generals Qutaibah bin Muslim and Qasim. He also appointed Yazid ibn al-Muhallab, once tortured by Hajjaj and a son of Al Muhallab ibn Abi Suffrah, as the governor of Fars, Kirman, Makran, and Sindh; he immediately placed Qasim in chains.

Coming to the issue of Qasim’s death, there are different accounts regarding the details:

  1. According to Al-Baladhuri, a 9th-century Persian historian, Qasim was killed due to a family feud with the governor of Iraq. After the death of the caliph Al-Walid I, his brother Sulayman ibn Abd al-Malik became the new caliph. Sulayman became hostile against Qasim because apparently he had followed the order of Hajjaj to declare Sulayman’s right of succession void in all territories conquered by him. When Qasim received the news of the death of Hajjaj he returned to Aror. Qasim was later arrested under the orders of the caliph by the successor governor of Sindh, Yazid ibn Kabsha as-Sasaki, who worked under the new governor of Iraq, Yazid ibn al-Muhallab, and the new fiscal manager, Salih ibn Abd ar-Rahman. Salih, whose brother was executed by Hajjaj, tortured Qasim and his relatives to death. The account of his death by Al-Baladhuri is very brief compared to the one in Chachanama.
  2. The Chachnama narrates a tale in which Qasim’s demise is attributed to the daughters of King Dahir who had been taken captive during the campaign. Upon capture they had been sent on as presents to the Khalifa for his harem in the capital Baghdad (however Baghdad wasn’t built yet and the actual capital was Damascus). The account relates that they then tricked the caliph into believing that Muhammad bin Qasim had violated them before sending them on and as a result of this subterfuge, Muhammad bin Qasim was wrapped and stitched in oxen hides,[25] and returned to Syria, which resulted in his death en route from suffocation. This narrative attributes their motive for this subterfuge to securing vengeance for their father’s death. Upon discovering this subterfuge, the Khalifa is recorded to have been filled with remorse and ordered the sisters buried alive in a wall.

It has to be noted that several authentic Arab and Iranian accounts state clearly that this lad never left Arabia — a fact that Indians who had no difficulty imagining the above stories to be true, never bothered cross referencing.

We are not saying Aditya temple was not destroyed but our question is by whom and when and why? The same stretch of schizophrenic imagination is exhibited regarding the story of the first mosque of Kerala and the gift from India to the Saudi Arabs.

As Bernard Shaw once commented “If we talk to God it is prayer. If God talks back to us it is schizophrenia”. A simple google search on Perumal in Google will come with a huge controversy on literally every version of the story. Even the very person whom they claimed to have accompanied the Perumal to India has very controversial origins. His father’s birth date was 40 years after the date of death of the son!! It was claimed that this individual was an Afghan and converted to Islam, but until after the death of Mohammed, Islam never moved out of Arabia that too for another 100 years following the death of Mohammed there was an internecine warfare of succession among his close associates.

Probably the Nayar Seva Samiti or the Travancore Royal families should be having information about the real facts of this story of the Perumal.

As we can see in the narratives mentioned in the earlier paragraphs, the dates, years, events and personalities are all jumbled-up to the core.

Another common question that gets raised is about the fact that more of ISIS terrorist groups creating blunder in Syria hail from Kerala, which marks the peaceful entry of Islam in the history of India. If Islam preaches peace then why most of the Mohammedans involved in terrorist activities since last two hundred years only? Is it that Mohammedan preaching’s were considered not valuable and hence the later leaders of Islam created their own versions in the names of Mohammed and forcibly imposed them on the followers of Islam? Or is it true that there are hidden hands working in the name of ISIS and similar organizations to create disturbance in the society by dividing the society into pieces in the name of religion for their vested interests? Was it both the Islam invasion theory and the peaceful entry of Islam used by a hidden hand to keep the fire of hatred burning constantly for some reason? If yes, what could that reason be? When the core Hindutva followers could keep the Babri Masjid issue burning even today in Ayodhya, they never ever cared for the replacement of a Saraswati temple or a Buddhist vihar with a mosque? When they could research on the fact that Babri masjid was also a part of the Rama Temple and could research about the Vishnupada in Mecca, why did they remain silent in the issue of the Kodungallur temple/mosque till now? And how do their ever vigilant historians allow their government to gift a golden replica of the temple/mosque to the Same Arabs who were told to us as ones who destroyed our cultural centers?

Whatever the answers are, one point becomes clearer that Islam has been used as a tool by the vested interests to divide the country for their selfish gains. Hindu Muslim division is an ever burning issue even today causing a threat to the peace in India. Both the versions of peaceful entry and the violent Islamic invasions were the falsified stories parroted in the history of India with a purpose. People should start thinking logically and start questioning the facts.

Historical and archival knowledge is a must for the understanding of the current time and space where we live and contemporary problems and to predict what is in store for us in the future.  The Elector of Prussia in his message to his successor has this advice:- “Develop a historical perspective for the problems that beset the current day. Industrious consultation on historical archives should be maintained not only to understand the balance of respective of state and empire but to have an acute sense of present time and its future changed. To be sensitive for the current time and location in history and be charged with awareness of the tensions between the historical continuity and the present and future forces of change as it is very crucial that what is made in history can be un-made if such sensitivity is not maintained, one should strive to preserve this historical continuity in a way not to awaken envy of enemies.”

In this process the intermediary apparatus of state namely the estates and the kings, the dukes were made indispensable in solving regional issues and in answering to the King. A vision adapted from the Raja Dharma of India, emphasized the role of intermediaries as being complimentary to the Central Authority and Provincial Grandees. As the 1684 document explained, the Elector could not be expected to know what all going on in all of his lands and was dependent on elected or appointed officials. But because they are human, were prey to the usual weaknesses and temptations. The role of the intermediaries is to correct and provide balance to the organs of provincial governances. A crucial step that was corrupted by the British has led to the current state of historical-insomnia, coupled with the sycophancy among many intelligentsia of Right, Left and the Center of India.

As a deliberate attempt to disrupt the medium of knowledge and learning, the British banished the entire Persian and Sanskrit as the basis of political cultural social communication and straight-jacketed our history in terms of a Hindu-Muslim dichotomy by inventing Hindi and Urdu as languages, overseen by English, and by propagating their own version of conflict or conflicts as being authentic through the British controlled apparatus of 4 P’s, Press, Public Education, Public Archives/Libraries and Public Debates.

It is high time, we the Indians wake up and recognize fully that our gift to the World is not the Wisdom that it should be, but rather a dangerously distorted mirage that will mislead at least the rest of the Non-Aligned Members and other who look towards us into walking away from the oasis and heading towards a terrible death in the Arid Deserts of History. Let us resolve upon studying History truly, properly, objectively and dutifully, lest we be guilty of committing this Great Sin.

] Source:

error: Content is protected !!