It is now a widely held consideration that the last Mughal Jawaharlal Nehru nurtured pathological contempt for Sanatana Dharma, Hinduism, Bharatiya identity or anything linked to Bharata. Almost all his decisions and actions reflected his aversion to Hinduism, love for Islam in faith and west for life-style. He was first Prime Minister of the dynasty founded by his so-called father Motilal Nehru in the capacity of Congress President. Let us glance at what celebrity personalities and renowned authors had to comment on purported anti-Hinduism of Jawaharlal Nehru. All his anti-Hindu, anti-Bharata actions, decisions were wrapped in the glossy packaging of Nehruvian secularism. Partition-1947 was organised on religious lines yet anglophile Nehru did not allow Bharata being declared a Hindu-Rashtra while Jinnah bayed for Islamic Pakistan and he attained his goal. Some of examples and instances of his blatant anti-nationalism happen to be undermining gravity of Islamic invasions and multiple Hindu-holocausts, himself falsifying history in his own books, did not legislate Constitutional mandate of Uniform Civil Code, legislated Hindu Code Bill instead that was not the Constitutional mandate, allowed infiltration of Muslims into NE States endangering security of the country, allowed free-hand to Christian missionaries to proselytise innocent gullible Hindus by the dint of inducements, neglected Devanagari script, promoted Urdu and Persian scripts, completely neglected Samskrita, peddled dubious bogey of Hindu-fascism, resolutely opposed renovation of Somnatha Mandira, vehemently opposed participation of President Dr. Rajendra Prasad in Somnatha celebrations, mutilation of education system through indoctrination to cause self-alienation and self-contempt etc. Evil of the last Mughal Nehru was an ardent negationist and rejectionist of Sanatana heritage of Bharata but not Islam and Christianity that had absolutely no roots in the country, could at best be described as infiltrating cults.
Let us commence with quotes from ‘Discovery Of India’, authored by him revealing his venomous contempt for anything Hindu or cultural heritage of the nation, “On the other hand some famous temples in South India, heavy with carving and detail, disturb me and fill me with unease…”,
“…Beautiful buildings combining the old Indian ideals in architecture with a new simplicity and a nobility of line grew up in Agra and Delhi. This Indo-Mughal art was in marked contrast with the decadent, over elaborate and heavily ornamented temples and other buildings of the north and south. Inspired architects and builders put up with loving hands the Taj Mahal at Agra.”,
“A civilization decays much more from inner failure than from an external attack. It may fail because in a sense it has worked itself out and has nothing more to offer in a changing world, or because the people who represent it deteriorate in quality and can no longer support the burden worthily. It may be that the social culture is such that it becomes a bar to advance beyond a certain point, and further advance can only take place after that bar has been removed or some essential qualitative variation in that culture has been introduced. The decay of Indian civilization is evident enough even before the Turkish and Afghan invasions. Did the impact of these invaders and their new ideas with the old India produce a new social context, thus unbinding the fetters of the intellect and releasing fresh energy?”
“And yet I approached her almost as an alien critic, full of dislike for the present as well as for many of the relics of the past that I saw. To some extent I came to her via the West, and looked at her as a friendly westerner might have done. I was eager and anxious to change her outlook and appearance and give her the garb of modernity…” so wrote the last Mughal Jawaharlal Nehru in his ‘Discovery Of India’, the man who never went to any school or college in Bharata, went to UK at the age of 14, didn’t have any social, emotional connect with the nation at all. He was not westernised as he was western himself, an arrogant snob who believed, he had every right to spite Bharata and the nation must accept it in their strides. His works ‘Discovery Of India’ and ‘Glimpses Of World History’ are not based on original research but western narratives re-hashed. Several conclusions and inferences happen to be outright inaccurate. What he wrote to one ‘Lord’ Lothian on Jan. 17, 1936, Nehru exposed his utter lack of understanding of the concept of Bharata so abjectly, “India has never known in the whole course of her long history the religious strife that has soaked Europe in blood…Some conflict arose when Islam came, but even that was far more political than religious…I cannot easily envisage religious conflict in India on any substantial scale…The communalism of today is essentially political, economic and middle class…One must never forget that that communalism in India is a latter-day phenomenon which has grown up before our eyes…With the coming of social issues to the forefront it is bound to recede into the background.” He didn’t even know correct name of the nation !!!
Nehru further wrote in his ‘Discovery of India’, “Of the Indians, Alberuni says that they ‘are haughty, foolishly vain, self-contained, and stolid,’ and that they believe ‘that there is no country like theirs, no kings like theirs, no science like theirs’. Probably a correct enough description of the temper of the people.” To Alberunis description, “The Hindus became like the atoms of dust scattered in all directions and like a tale of old in the mouths of people. Their scattered remains cherish of course the most inveterate aversion towards all Muslims.”, Nehru commented, “This poetic description gives us an idea.” The last Mughal absolutely had no sense of pride for the nation he led as Prime Minister as he was entirely comfortable with derogatory comments on the country, natives, culture or anything linked to Bharata and ridiculed Hindu-holocaust being a ‘poetic description’ for him. Nehru believed, he was empowered to alter history for which even Param Brahmatma was not !!
Legendary historian Dr. RC Majumdar dissected Nehrus knowledge of history ruthlessly, “Did Nehru forget the torrent of Hindu blood through which Mahmud of Ghazni waded to India with Quran in the one hand and sword in the other? Did he forget Timur’s invasion of India to wage ‘war with the infidels’…One would like to know in what sense the iconoclastic fury of Feruz Tughluk, Sikandar Lodi, and Aurangzeb-not to speak of host of others-was political rather than religious? Nor does Nehru seem to have any knowledge of Aligarh Movement and its founder…he was…unable or unwilling to face facts.” The last Mughal did not condescend to mention all that and pogrom of thousands of Hindus, not even sacrifice of a 90 year old Ghogha Ram who stood up to protect the Somnatha deity except just one sentence in ‘Chapter-6 : New Problems’ of his ‘Discovery Of India’, “He met with…on his way back from Somnath in Kathiawar.” So commented Brig. BN Sharma, scathing in his attack on Nehrus dubious intellectualism, “Nehru’s original distortion propounded in the ‘Discovery of India’ in robbing the Indian culture of its soul of Hinduism, and almost making it appear as a composite culture of diverse religious faiths, mainly Islam and Christianity, had far reaching influence on our modern historians…The pack of leftist and socialist historians nursed on Nehru’s half-baked thoughts lost no time in rewriting history… Nehru’s reading of Indian history was thoroughly flawed by the influence of Western writers and his own predilections of looking at it from his Cambridge perch.”
In his not so scholarly ‘Glimpses Of World History’, the last Mughal outright blacked out centuries of multiple Hindu-holocausts berated by VS Naipaul in the Economic Times on Jan.13, 2003, “How do you ignore history? But the nationalist movement, independence movement ignored it. You read the ‘Glimpses of World History’ by Jawaharlal Nehru, it talks about the mythical past and then it jumps the difficult period of the invasions and conquests….Then somehow they don’t tell you what happens, why these places are in ruin. They never tell you why Elephanta Island is in ruins or why Bhubaneswar was desecrated.”
However in ‘Chapter-51 : From Harsha to Mahmud in North India’ of his ‘Glimpses Of World History’, Nehru was magnanimous enough to wash out brutalities, savagery and Islamic Jehad of Ghazni only to mention him in glowing terms, “But it was in Somnath that he got the most treasure…He is looked upon as a great leader of Islam who came to spread Islam in India. Most Muslims adore him; most Hindus hate him. As a matter of fact, he was hardly a religious man. He was a Mohammedan, of course, but that was by the way. Above everything he was soldier, and a brilliant soldier. He came to India to conquer and loot, as soldiers unfortunately do, and he would have done so to whatever religion he might have belonged…We must therefore not fall into the common error of considering Mahmud as anything more than a successful soldier.” Only if the last Mughal Nehru had read the great author Sharad Chandra Chattopadhyay, “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. Even when they became kings they could not liberate themselves from these loathsome desires”. German scholar Koenrad Elst wrote scathing comments on concocted scholarship of Nehru quite bluntly, “He was rather illiterate concerning Indian culture and history…At any rate, his writings contain some crude cases of glorification of Muslim tyrants and concealment or denial of their crimes. With Nehru, negationism became the official line of the Indian National Congress, and after Independence also of the Indian state and Government…”
The last Mughal Jawaharlal Nehru always regarded himself and his family a class apart from brown and dark brown natives of Bharata. Even if he authored those two pieces of falsification of history in the capacity of a British-Indian, it did not behoove him to allow it exist and continue to be sold in market after he was fraudulently installed as Prime Minister. As Nehru had absolutely no commitment to the nation or any emotional bonding with masses worth mentioning, he didn’t care what his derogatory writings meant for the nation and future impact upon the nation thereof.
Discussion about this post