Wednesday, 5 September 2012

Prophet Muhammad [ Peace Be Upon Him] In The Bible & Christian Conspiracy To Suppress The Truth.

By: Maulana Muhammad A. K. Azad [ Abu Arif Al Alawi ]






[‘Jesus predicted coming of Prophet Mohammed’ in Bible found in Turkey.The text, reportedly worth $22 million, is said to contain Jesus’ prediction of the Prophet’s coming but was suppressed by the Christian Church for years. (Al Arabiya)]








                       THE   ALMIGHTY  Allah took pledge from each Prophet that if Rasulullah ( PBUH ) were sent in his lifetime, he would bring iman on him  and  would support him. He also commanded each Prophet  to take a pledge from his Nation that if Rasulullah (PBUH) were sent in their lifetime, they would bring Iman on him (PBUH). So, Each Prophet took pledge from his Ummah in this regard and Hazrat Isa (A) is not exception. But,his followers  took a voltaface and in order to deny Rasulullah (PBUH) they even changed their Holy book. But they failed to suppress truth. Truth prevailed in the form of THE GOSPEL OF BARNABAS. Muslim Scholars have done exhaustive research and silenced the Christian Missionaries . As a consequence, many a Christian desrted Christianity and embraced Islaam. The following research work is based on “ ISLAM AND CHRISTIANITY” by Great Turkey Scholar M SIDDIK GUMUS.


                    A book entitled the Injil was revealed to Hadrat Îsâ. But the Jews eradicated the book within eighty years. TheHoly Bible which appeared later and is now considered the Christians’ holy book sent by Allâhu ta’âlâ consists of two parts. The “OldTestament” contains the dispensations of Prophets that had appeared before Hadrat Îsâ, particularly the Mosaic dispensation. The“New Testament” includes the four books written by his followers Matthew, Mark, Luke and his apostle Johnthat contain information about the life of Jesus, his deeds and admonitions. The great stringency observed in the
 recording of the Qur’ân al-kerîm was not observed in the
preparation of the Bible. Many wrong thoughts, fables, and sillytales were added to the truth. There is detailed information about the Bible in the Arabic books
Risâla-i Samsâmiyya by professor hâji Abdullah Abdi Bey from Manastır (d. 1303/1885)and in the Turkish book
Izâh-ul-Meram, both of which are printed works. Nevertheless, gospels in close proximity to the real Bibles are known to exist today.



          The most important of these isThe Gospel of Barnabas. Barnabas was a Jew born in Cyprus. His real name was Joseph. He was one of the leading followers of Jesus and possessed an important post among the apostles. His nickname, Barnabas, means “a person who gives advice and encourages good deeds.” The Christian world knows Barnabas as a great saint who together with Saint Paul was a man who set out to propagate Christianity. The Christians celebrate June 11th as Saint Paul’s day. Barnabas wrote down exactly what he had heard and learned from Hadrat Îsâ. Barnabas’ book and
other Bibles were popular and were read during the first three hundred years of Christianity. In the year 325, when the first Nicene (Iznik) Council decided to abolish all the Bibles written in the Hebrew language, Barnabas’ Bible was destroyed too.


           This was accomplished by officially threatening to kill anyonewho kept or read the Bibles other than the four booksauthorized. The other Bibles were translated into Latin, butBarnabas’ Bible suddenly disappeared. Pope Damasus got acopy of Barnabas’ Bible by chance in the year 383 and kept it inhis papal library. Until the year 993 (1585), Barnabas’ Bible remained in that library. In that year Fra Marino, a friend of Pope Sixtus, saw the book there and developed a deep interest in it. (Fra means brother and monk in Italian.) This was because Fra Marino knew that around the year 160 Iraneus (130-200), one of the leading exponents of Christianity, had put forward
the belief that “there is only one God, and Jesus is not the son of God.” Iraneus had also said: “Saint Paul wanted to introduce the wrong idea of the Trinity into the Christian creed because he had been influenced by the Roman custom of worshipping many gods.”


             Fra Marino also knew that Iraneus had referred to Barnabas’ Bible as a proof in his criticism against Saint Paul. For this reason, Fra Marino read Barnabas’ Bible with the utmost attention and translated it into Italian between the years 1585-1590. After changing many hands, this Italian manuscript came into the possession of Cramer, one of the counsellors to the King of Prussia. In 1120 (1713), Cramer presented this valuable manuscript to Prince Eugene de Savoie (1663-1736), who had established a great reputation in Europe for having
defeated the Turks at Zanta and for having taken back Hungary and the fortress of Belgrade. After Prince Eugene’s death, Barnabas’ Bible, together with the rest of his private library, was transferred to the Royal Library (Hofbibliothek) in Vienna in 1738.



         Two Britons, Mr. and Mrs. Ragg, who first found the Italian translation of Barnabas’ Bible in the Royal library, translated it into English and that translation was printed in Oxford in 1325 (1907). Strange to say, this translation mysteriously disappeared from the market. Only one copy of the translation exists in the British Museum and another one is in the Library of the U.S. Congress in Washington. With great effort, theQur’anic Council of Pakistan managed to reproduce theEnglish version in 1973. The following passages have been taken from that book:



              From the seventieth chapter of Barnabas’ book: “Jesus answered: ‘And ye; what say ye that I am?’ Peter answered: ‘Thou art Christ, son of God.’ Then was Jesus angry, and with anger rebuked him, saying: ‘Begone and depart from me,because thou art the devil and seekest to cause me offence!’And he threatened the eleven, saying: ‘Woe to you if ye believe this, for I have won from God a great curse against those who
believe this.’ ”


      The seventy-first chapter states: “Then said Jesus: ‘A God liveth, I am not able to forgive sin, nor is any man, but God alone forgiveth.’ ”


     The seventy-second chapter says:“As for me, I am now  come to the world to prepare the way for the messenger of God, who shall bring salvation to the world. But beware that ye be not deceived, for many false prophets shall come, who shall take my words and contaminate my gospel.’ Then said Andrew: ‘Master, tell us some sign, that we may know him.’ Jesus answered: ‘He will not come in your time, but will come some years after you, when my gospel shall be annulled, insomuch
that there shall be scarcely thirty faithful. At that time God will have mercy on the world, and so He will send his real
messenger, over whose head will rest a white cloud. He shall come with great power against the ungodly, and shall destroy idolatry upon the earth, and punish the idolaters. And it rejoicethme because that through him our God shall be known andglorified, and I shall be known to be true; and he will execute vengeance against those who shall say that I am more than man...’ ”


          In the ninety-sixth chapter it writes:“Jesus answered: ‘Iam not the Messiah, whom all the tribes of the earth expect,even as God promised to our father Abraham. But when God shall take me away from the world, Satan will raise again this accursed sedition, by making the impious believe that I am God and son of God. Whence my words and my doctrine shall be contaminated, insomuch that scarcely shall there remain thirty faithful ones; whereupon God will have mercy upon the world,
 and will send His messenger for whom He hath made all things; who shall come from the south with power, and shall destroy the idols with the idolaters; who shall take away the dominion from Satan which he hath over men. He shall bring with him the mercy of God for the salvation of them that shall believe in him, and blessed is he who shall believe his words.’ ”



     From the ninety-seventh chapter : “Then said the priest:‘How shall the Messiah be called and what sign shall reveal his coming?’ Jesus answered: ‘The name of the Messiah is admirable, for God himself gave him the name when He had created his soul, and placed it in a celestial splendour. God said: “Wait Mohammed; for thy sake I will to create paradise,the world, and a great multitude of creatures, whereof I make thee a present, insomuch that whoso shall bless thee shall be blessed, and whososhall curse thee shall be accursed. When I
shall send thee into the world I shall send thee as my
messenger of salvation, and thy word shall be true, insomuch that heaven and earth shall fail, but thy faith shall never fail.”Ahmad is his blessed name.’ Then the crowd lifted up their voices, saying: ‘O God, send us thy messenger; O Ahmad come quickly for the salvation of the world!”

          The hundred and twenty-eighth chapter states:
“Accordingly, brethren, I, a man, dust and clay, that walk upon the earth, say unto you: Do penance and know your sins. I say,brethern, that Satan, by means of the Roman soldiery, deceived you when ye said that I was God. Wherefore, beware that ye believe them not, seeing they are under the curse of God.”


         From the hundred and thirty-sixth chapter:
“This chapter after giving information about Hell, tells how Hadrat Muhammad (’alaihi ’s-salâm) will save his followers from Hell.”



         From the hundred and sixty-third chapter: “The disciples answered: ‘O master, who shall that man be of whom thou speakest, who shall come into the world? Jesus answered with joy of heart. ‘He is Ahmad, messenger of God, and when he cometh into the world, even as the rain maketh the earth to bear fruit when for a long time it hath not rained, even so shall he be an occasion for good works among men, through the abundant mercy which he shall bring. For he is a white cloud full of the mercy of God, which mercy of God shall sprinkle upon the faithful like rain.’ ”



         The Gospel of Barnabas gives the following informationabout the last days of Hadrat Îsâ (’alaihi ’s-salâm), chapters 215-222: “When the Roman soldiers came into the house to arrest Hadrat Îsâ, he was taken out through the window by Kerûbiyyun (four great angels: Gabriel, Michael, Rafael, and Uriel), and they took him up into heaven since they were ordered by Allâhu ta’âlâ to do that. The Roman soldiers arrested Yahûd (Judas), who was leading them, saying, “You are Îsâ.” In spite of all his denials, pleadings and entreaties, they took him by force to a cross which had been prepared, and crucified him. Then, Hadrat Îsâ came into the sight of his mother, Mary (Maryam) and his apostles (hawârîs). He said toMary: ‘Mother! You see I have not been crucified. Instead of
me, the treacherous Judas (Yahûda) has been crucified anddied. Stay away from Satan! He will make every effort to deceive humanity. I will call you as my witnesses for all thethings that you have heard and seen.’ Then, he prayed to Allâhu ta’âlâ for the salvation of the faithful, and for the
conversion of sinners. He turned to his disciples and said: ‘May God’s grace and mercy be with you.’ Then before their eyes the four angels carried him up into heaven.”



         As it is seen, Barnabas’ Bible informs us about the advent of the last Prophet (’alaihi ’s-salâm), six hundred or a thousand years before his coming, and mentions only one God. It rejectsTrinity. European encyclopedias give the following information about Barnabas’ Bible: “A manuscript, introduced as Barnabas’ Bible,but a false book written by an Italian who was converted to Islam in the fifteenth century.”

             This explanation is totally wrong, in the light of the following information: Barnabas’ Bible was excommunicated and annihilated in the third century, i.e., three hundred or seven hundred years before Hadrat Muhammad’s (’alaihi ’s-salâm) coming. This means to say that even in those times there were discourses on the advent of another Prophet, which contradicted the concept of three gods and which did not suit the bigotry of fanatical Christians. Moreover, for it to have been written by a person who had been converted to Islam before its beginning is out of the question. On the other hand, the Italian translator Fra Marino was a Catholic monk, and we have no proofs at hand to claim that he had been converted to Islam.



          Therefore, a motive cannot be found for him to have translated the Bible differently from its original. It should not be forgotten that long ago, that is, between the Christian years 300 and 325,many significant Christian men of religion denied that Hadrat’Îsâ was the son of Allah and referred to Barnabas’ Bible to prove that ’Îsâ was a man like us. Of them, the most preeminent was Luchian, the Bishop of Antioch. And Luchian’sdisciple, Arius (270-336), was even more famous. Arius was excommunicated by Alexander, (d. 328), the Bishop of Alexandria, who later became the Patriarch of Istanbul. Uponthis, Arius went to his friend Eusabios, the Bishop of Nicene İznik). Arius had so many adherents around him that even Constantine, the Emperor of Byzantium, and his sister joinedthe Arian sect. Also, Honorius, who was the pope during the time of Hadrat Muhammad (’alaihi ’s-salâm), conceded that
Hadrat Îsâ was only a human being and that it was wrong to believe in three gods. (Pope Honorius, who died in 630, was officially cursed [anathematized] by the Spiritual Council that assembled in Istanbul in 678, 48 years after his death.) In 1547, L.F.M. Sozzini, influenced by Camillo, a Sicilian priest, appealed to the Frenchman Jean Calvin (1509-1564), who was one of the most outstanding religious authorities of Christendom and the founder of Calvinism, and challenged him, saying: “I do not believe in Trinity.” He also said that he preferred the Arian doctrine and rejected the theory of the “Original Sin.” (This sin is said to be the Prophet Adam’s major sin, and the reason why Hadrat Îsâ had been sent to this world as an atonement for that sin). This is a principle doctrine of Christianity. His cousin, F.P.Sozzini, published a book in 1562, and therein he categorically rejected the deity of Jesus. In 1577, Sozzini moved to the city of Klausenburg, Transylvania, because Sigismund, the leader of that country, was against the doctrine of Trinity.


         Also, Bishop Francis Davis (1510-1579) of the same country was utterly against Trinity and had established a sect denying Trinity.Because this sect was established in the city of Rocow, Poland, its adherents were called
Racovians. They all believed Arius. We add these historical facts into this small book of ours for the purpose of providing its readers with an awareness that the existing Gospels have lost their credibility in the eyes of many
 Christian clergy, who acknowledge that the Gospel of Barnabas is the only true Bible. This insurrection seems to have goaded the Popes and their associates into an assiduous activity to liquidate the Gospel of Barnabas.


          However, despite all the efforts towards falsification, it is still written in various Bibles, which the Christians have today, that another Prophet will come after Jesus (’Îsâ [’alaihi ’s-salâm]). For example, it is written in the 12th and 13th verses of the 16th chapter of John’s Gospel:

       “I have yet many things to say unto you, but you cannot bear them now.” “Howbeit when he, the
Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: ...” (John: 16-12, 13) This message in John’s Gospel is similarly repeated in a slightly different manner on the 885th page of the Turkish translation from its Hebrew origin of the Holy Bible, published in Istanbul and printed in Boyajiyan Agop’s printing house in 1303 (1886) by American and English Companies that publish the Bible. It says on that page as follows: “My departure from the world is more beneficial for you, because, he, who will be consoling you, will not come before I go. When he comes he will purge the world of sins, and establish salvation and order. I still have many things to tell you. But you cannot endure them now.

             However, when he, the Spirit of Truth comes, he will guide you to the truth. He will not utter his own words, but will tell what is revealed, and he will inform you about the things to happen in the future. He will confirm my way and communicate the same.”The word “he” in the passage above is interpreted in the translations of the Bible as “Ghost” or “Holy Ghost,” whereas its Latin origin writes it as “Paraclet” which means “consoler” in Latin. This means to say that despite all their efforts, they have not been able to erase the statement “after me a consoling person will come” from the Bible. Moreover, it is stated in verses 8 to13 of the 13th chapter of The First Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the Corinthians, which is one of the letters written by Paul and accepted as a part of the Holy Bible by Christians:

      “Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease [e.g. Latin and old Greek]; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away [like that of the Middle ages].” “For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.” “But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away.” (1 Cor: 13-8 to 10) This exact excerpt exists on the 944th page of the Turkish book.
Kitâb-ı Mukaddes (Holy Bible). Therefore, Christians
have to believe that there are reports about the advent of a final Prophet in today’s Bibles, which they believe to be true books. An English translation of the Gospel of Barnabas is available at the following ten places.
The Bible was formerly in the Hebrew language. In the

Middle Ages, it was translated into Latin and entitled “Itala.”


              When Christianity began to spread, pagans and Jews stood against it. So much so that the Christians had to keep their faith a secret. They worshipped in temples which were built under ground, in caves, in mountains, and in other secret places. The Jews, in spite of all their treachery and oppression, could not prevent Christianity from spreading. Saul, a preeminent Jew and one of the greatest enemies of Christianity, pretented to be a Christian assigned by Hadrat Jesus with the task of inviting all nations, except the Jews, to become Christians. [See chapter 9 of “The Acts of the Apostles” in the Bible.] He changed his name to Paul. He pretended to be a pious Christian so that he could corrupt Christianity from within. The concept of “Oneness” was replaced by “Trinity.” Îsâism (“Jesusism”) became Christianity. He falsified the Bible. He preached that Jesus Christ was the son of God. He made it permissible for Christians to drink wine and to eat pork. He changed the direction of their qibla towards the east so that it faced the rising sun. He also introducted many other falsities which were not previously communicated by Christ (’alaihi ’s-salâm). Eventually
his corrupt ideas began to spread among the Christians.
Consequently, they divided into various sects. They deviated from the teaching of Îsâ (alaihi’s-salam), and in their place they made up silly fables. They made imaginary pictures and statues of Hadrat ’Îsâ (Jesus [’alaihi ’s-salâm]). They accepted and adopted the cross as their religious emblem (symbol). They began to worship these statues and the cross. In other words, they reverted to paganism. They considered Hadrat Îsâ (Jesus [’alaihi ’s-salâm]) to be the son of God. However, the Prophet
 Jesus had never said such a thing to them; he had only
mentioned the Rûh al-Quds, i.e., the supernatural power
endowed upon him by Allâhu ta’âlâ. Believing in the divinity of Jesus, who was believed to be the son of God, and in the Rûh al-Quds (Holy Ghost) along with the belief in God, caused themto stray from the belief in the one, unchanging Creator, whichhas been the basis of all the true religions, and to lapse into the ridiculous state of worshipping three deities, called “Trinity.”




                 After Christianity had become the official religion of various major states, there began the chaotic period of the Middle Ages. The principles of benevolence, compassion, and affection were completely forgotten. In place of them, Christians adopted bigotry, resentment, hatred, enmity and cruelty. They practiced unimaginable cruelty in the name of Christianity. They tried to destroy all the works of the ancient Greek and Roman civilisations. They became hostile to knowledge and science.They accused Jeanne d’arc (Joan of Arc), who had been struggling for the freedom of her country, of being a magician; consequently, they burned her alive. It is written in Kâmus-ala’lâm and Larousse that with the encouragement of Calvin, one of the founders of Protestanism, they burned alive Michel Serve in 1553, who was a Spanish doctor and theologist and had written a book disapproving Trinity and the divinity of  Hadrat Îsâ (Jesus Christ [’alaihi ’s-salâm]). By establishing the hair-raising tribunal called the Inquisition, they killed by various means of torture hundreds of thousands of people unjustly, claiming these people to be “irreligious” in order to obtain their wealth. They ascribed to the clergy the power of“redemption,” which belongs to Allâhu ta’âlâ only. Consequently, the clergy redeemed people from their sins in return for money.



                Furthermore, they sold parcels from Paradise. As for the popes, who occupied the highest religious rank, they almost dominated the entire world. By excommunicating even kings under various pretexts, they forced kings to come to them and beg for forgiveness. In the year 1077 A.D., the German King HenryIV, who came to Canossa seeking forgiveness from Pope Gregory, who had excommunicated him, waited barefooted in front of the Pope’s palace day after day in the winter, as the season was. The most vicious criminals were among the popes themselves. One of them Borgia, poisoned his opponents and their adherents with various poisons and usurped their property. He committed all sorts of abominations. He cohabited with his sister as husband and wife. But, he was still deemed a sacredand innocent pope. Preposterous rules were inserted into Christianity, such as no marriage for clergymen, no divorce for
 married couples, confession, and redemption. In fact, it was deemed a sin to live on earth.



       The religion of Islam, whose advent had taken place in theseventh century, began to shine like a halo in that darkness. As we will see in the following discourse on Islam, this exalted religion, which is totally based on the most normal, most logical, and most humane principles, easily and immediately gained recognition against reprobated Christianity. It was welcomed with enthusiasm by the wise. Muslims who were deeply and reverently interested in knowledge and science, studied very
 hard, as a result of following the orders of Allâhu ta’âlâ and His Messenger (sall-Allâhu ’alaihi wa sallam). They added many new findings to every branch of science and educated many geniuses in every field. Today, the words CHEMISTRY andALGEBRA (Kimyâ and Jebr) are Arabic in origin. And this itself with many other examples clearly indicates how Arab Muslims served scientific knowledge.
. Hirschfeld, a thinker of world-wide fame said, “No other nation has become so civilized so rapidly as the Arabs did by accepting Islam.”


       While the Christian world represented the pitch darkness of a dungeon and made life a bitter torment for people during the Middle Ages, Islam presented facilities for living in comfort, joy and peace to the human race. Consequently, in order to obtain wealth by usurping the property and money in Muslim countries, Christians attacked Muslims and organized crusade expeditions with a pretext to recover Jerusalem, which they deemed sacred (1096-1270).



                In those crusade expeditions, they shed much Muslim blood unjustly. When they invaded Jerusalem, the stream of blood from the Muslims they massacred in mosques, as they themselves confess, reached the abdomens of their horses. On the other hand, Salâhaddîn
 (Saladin) Eyyûbî showed great magnanimity towards the Christians, when he recaptured Jerusalem from them. His largeheartedness was so great that he set free the King of England, Richard the Lion-Hearted (Richard, Coeur de Lion), whom he had taken captive. Also, the expeditions carried out against the Ottoman Empire were considered crusades against the Muslims by some furious, fanatical Christians. A French historian was so insolent as to describe the Balkan War, 1912-1913, as “the greatest crusade expedition.”


            Indian Rahmatullah Effendi (rahima-hullâhu ta’âlâ)
 silenced the British Protestant priests in various debates held in Delhi in 1270 (1854) and again in Istanbul. He wrote a book containing this great victory, which he won against the priests, and his answers to them in Istanbul. It was published in two Arabic volumes under the name
Izhâr-ul-haq in 1280 (1864). It has recently been reproduced in Egypt. The Turkish translation of its first volume was published with the same title in Istanbul,
 and the Turkish translation of its second volume, under the name Ibrâz-ul-haq, was published in Bosna in 1293 (1877). English, French, Gujratî, Urdu and Persian translations of it were also published. The Arabic book Tuhfat-ul-arîb by Abdullah-i Tarjumân, the Persian book Mîzân-ul-mevâzîn written by Najaf Alî in Istanbul in 1288 (1871), the book Arradd- ul-jamîl by Imâm-ı Ghazâlî (rahmatullâhi ’alaih), and the book As-sirât-ul mustakîm by Ibrâhîm Fasîh Haydarî, are valuable Islamic books which refute the slanders and lies in the so-called
Torah and Bible with many proofs. These books have
been published by offset process by HAKÎKAT K İTÂBEVİ,Istanbul, Turkey.




      MAY ALLAH GUIDE THEM TO BRING IMAN ON OUR BELOVED PROPHET (PBUH) AND AVOID ETERNAL HELLFIRE.

Sarat Chandra Chatterjee & Communalism : A Buried Chapter.


By: Maulana Muhammad A. K. Azad [ Abu Arif Al Alawi ]

      
 










                   Sharat Chandra Chatterjee (15 September 1876 - 16 January 1938) was an eminent Indian Bengali Novelist. He is respected as preacher of Hindu-Muslim harmony and novel-loving many Bengali Muslim youths take him as their role-model. But very few knows about his communal mental set-up. It is true that he appreciated Islaam's greatness in many of his writings, specially in  Narir  Mullya ( VALUE OF WOMEN ) but failed to rise above narrow communalism.  Cats from his bag came out in his essay Bartaman Hindu-Mussalman Samasya.



         Wikipedia writes :           Bartaman Hindu-Mussalman Samasya (literally, Contemporary Hindu-Muslim Problem) is an essay by Sharat Chandra first presented at the Bengal Provincial Conference of 1926. In this short essay, Sharat Chandra argued about the root cause of the inability of Hindu-Muslim unity, and said that it is because of inherent outlook of Muslims. He expressed his observation that the general Muslim behaviour was characterised by "brutality, barbarism and fanaticism", and that Islam lacked any culture altogether. Considering the unity of Hindu-Muslim to be impractical and unnatural, he argued that instead of pursuing that mirage of Hindu-Muslim unity what was required was unity within the Hindu community. He supported the internal consolidation of the Hindu community. Commenting about this, the marxist historian K. N. Panikkar writes that this manner of thinking contributed to the "construction of a new communal consciousness".




         
        WHAT DID SARATCHANDRA WRITE AGAINST ISLAM?




                     V P Vatia, a zealot Hindu analyzed this "ill-famous" speech by Sarat Chandra in RSS mouthpiece, Organizer and used it for their evil communal propaganda. Let me quote this Hinduist :  "However, according to the great Bengali novelist Sarat Chandra Chattopadhyay, the writer fo the much-filmed noval Devdas and a few others like Bipradas, Palli Samaj and Pather Dabi change of religion not only leads to the change of nationality but to the very nature of the convert, if the religion of the convert happens to be Islam. In an address to the Bengal Provincial Hindu Conference of 1926, where he spoke on the subject of "Bartaman Hindu Muslim Samasya" (Present day Hindu Muslim Problem), condemning Muslim violence and plunder in the wake of the failure of the Khilafat Movement which united the Muslims as never before, rousing them to Pan-Islamic consciousness upto the village level and leading to large scale riots against the Hindus all over India especially Pabna district of Bengal because of the mullahs' fanatical propaganda. In fact, both the British administration and the Islamic fanatics joined hands to punish the Hindus for their nationalistic activities.”


                         V P Vatia, The zealot RSS-Man continues:  “While the whole of Sarat Chandra's four-page address needs to be read carefully by all Hindus in the present day context of worldwide Islamic terrorism, the crux of his 1926 speech was that while a Christian may still retain some Hindu qualities after conversion, a Muslim convert changes completely, turning his back on every cultural and civilisational quality of the past, including his humanity. Under the circumstances, Hindu-Muslim unity is an impossible dream. Criticizing Gandhiji's fad of communal unity, he said "To my mind, there is nothing more dishonourable than begging for pity and grovelling for unity (with Muslims). In this country and abroad, I have several Christian friends. Either they or their forefathers adopted a new faith. But unless they tell you themselves that they are  Christians it is impossible to tell them apart from us, or to think they are not still our brothers and sisters. I knew a Christian lady once. She died young, but even so, there are few who have earned as much respect in their life time." Most of them don't change their names and even surnames after conversion to Christianity to avoid undue social stigma.


                     "But Muslims? I had a Brahmin cook once. He sacrificed his religion in order to indulge his passion for a Muslim woman. One year later, he had changed his name, his dress and even his nature. The very face that God gave him had changed beyond recognition. And this is not an isolated instance. Those who know something about village life know that this sort of thing happens frequently. And in the matter of hatred and aggression against Hindus those converts put even their Muslim co-religionist to shame."




                “Hindus should concentrate on the internal unity of Hindu society. According to Sarat Chandra Chattopadhyay Hindu-Muslim unity was an impossible dream because only the Hindus wanted and tried for it. But the Muslims reply only by aggression, repression, violence and plunder of Hindus. So Hindus should for sometime forget about it and let Muslims desire it first. If the Hindus stop running after Muslims for unit, Muslims may ultimately come round and ask for it. Till then Hindus should make no move towards it. The real problem for Hindus was not Hindu Muslim unity but the internal unity of the Hindu society itself - of the upper castes with lower castes, lack of which was eating into the vitals of the Hindu society. Let the Hindus concentrate on it and try sincerely to cultivate feelings of oneness towards their own kith and kin instead of running after those who do not consider India as their own country and are more interested in Pan-Islamic causes.”


                        “In this context, it may be remembered that Islam is not simply a religion, it is a political religion, rather pure politics to conquer the whole world by inflating the number of its followers by hook or crook.”

     Some more extracts from Sarat Chandra Chattopadhyay's above mentioned address are given below:

                 "The one who laboured hardest of this (Hindu-Muslim unity) was Mahatmaji himself. No one else had as much hope, and no one else felt so cheated. In those (Khilafat) days. Muslim politicians were at his right hand and at his left, they were his eyes and his ears. My goodness, was there ever such a spectacle? His last attempt for Hindu-Muslim unity was his twenty-one day fast at Delhi. He is a simple, God fearing man: perhaps the thought that by showing a readiness to suffer, they would take pity on him (and relent). Somehow his life was saved. His dearly beloved friend Mr Mohammed Ali was the one who was most disturbed, it all happens before his eyes. Shedding crocodile tears, he said, 'Oh, what a good man is this Mahatmaji! I want to do something really helpful for him. So let us first go to Mecca, then make an oblation to the Pir, then read the Kalima, and make him renounce the infidel religion'. On hearing this, the disillusioned Mahatma cried, 'Let the earth swallow me.'



              Sarat Chandra Chattopadhyay' further says,  "The truth is that if Muslims ever say that they want to unite with Hindus, there is no greater hoax. The Muslims came to India to plunder it, not to establish a kingdom. They were not satisfied merely with looting, they destroyed temples, they demolished idols, they raped women. The insult to other religions and the injury to humanity was unimaginable.”

          Sarat Chandra Chattopadhyay' further says,  "Even when they became kings they could not liberate themselves from these loathsome desires. Even Akbar, who was famed for his tolerance, was no better than notorious emperors like Aurangzeb. But  today it seems that their practices have become an addiction. Many argue that the monstrous events at Pabna were the work of mullahs from the West (Western India), who excited the innocent and uneducated Muslim peasants and instigated these awful deeds. But if, in the same way, a party of Hindus priests were to arrive in a Hindu-majority area and try to incite the docile Hindu peasantry to burn the homesteads, loot he property and insult the women of their innocent Muslim neighbours, then the same unlettered Hindu peasantry would immediately declare them mad and drive them away from the village.” 



            Sarat Chandra Chattopadhyay' further says,   "Why does this happen? Is it simply the result of illiteracy? If learning is simply knowing how to read and write, there is little difference between Hindu and Muslim peasants and laboures. But if the essence of learning is breadth of mind and culture at one's very heart, then there is no comparison between the two communities. When journalists raise the question of the abduction of Hindu women, why are the Muslim leaders silent? When people of their community regularly commit such grave crimes, why do they not protest? What is the meaning of their silence? To my mind, the meaning is crystal clear. It is only a sense of decorum that prevents them from admitting openly that far from protesting, given the opportunity, they would commit the same crimes themselves!”



             Sarat Chandra Chattopadhyay' further says,   "The problem before Hindus, therefore, is not to bring about his unnatural union between Hindus and Muslims. Their task is to achieve unity within their own community, and to bring an end to the folly of those practising Hindus (Hindu dharmaablambi) who insult some people by calling them 'low caste'. Even more pressing is the need for Hindus to think about how they may let the (religious) truth within them blossom like a flower in their everyday lives and public behaviour. Those who think do not speak, those who speak do not act and those who act are not accepted. If this evil is not checked, even God will not be able to mend the countless holes that are being punched into the fabric of the (Hindus) community.”


          Sarat Chandra Chattopadhyay' further says,   "This is the problem and this is the duty. There is no point in wailing or beating our breasts because Hindu-Muslim unity has not come about. If we stop our own crying, we may be able to hear crying from their quarters.”


             Sarat Chandra Chattopadhyay' further says,   "Hindustan is the homeland of the Hindus. Therefore it is the duty of the Hindus alone to free this nation from the chains of servitude. Muslims look towards Turkey and Arabia, their hearts are not in India. What is the use of bemoaning this facts? To appeal to them in the name of the Soil of Mother India is as pointless as talking to a brick wall. Today it is vital that we understand this point - that this work is the work only of Hindus, and no one else. There is no need to get agitated counting how numerous is the Muslim population. Numbers are not the ultimate truth in this world. There are greater truths, in whose scale of values the arithmetic of counting heads has no place"


[Source: Haripada Ghosh (ed.). Sarat Rachana Samagra ('Collected Works of Sarat Chandra Chattopadhyay'), III, Calcutta 1989, Quoted in Divided Bengal by Joy Chatterjee, Cambridge University Press, Foundation Books 4764/2A, 23 Ansari Road, New Delhi - 110002.]




              Dear Muslim brothers & sisters ! Saratchandra ,  Bankimchandra , Rabindranath etc don't deserve to be our rolemodels . Our rolemodels are only Rasulullah (pbuh), Sahaba e Keram, Ahle Bait & Awliya-Allah.  So Beware and take care.