Nirad Chandra Chaudhuri (1897-1999)

 The famous intellectual and the great thinker of the modern times, said :

          Islamic doctrine creates differences with non-Muslims : “According to Islamic doctrine a Muslim is bound to consider all Muslims as his brother and all non-Muslims as his enemy. Due to the inner equality and brotherhood of Muslim society, the Muslims are more conscious about their differences with the non-Muslims.

          Division of world in two parts Islamic and non-Islamic states : According to the Islamic theology, the world is divided into two distinct parts to a Muslim – (1) One is called Dar-ul-Islam, meaning the land ruled by the Islamic laws. (2) The second is Dar-ul-Harb. Meaning, the land of Jihad, the land which the Muslims must have to conquer by war to establish Islamic laws.

          Muslims must constantly fight in Dar-ul-Harb : According to the Islamic doctrine, Muslims can not live under the non-Muslim rule. Not only that, the Muslim world constantly should be at war against the non-Muslim world. That’s why the non-Muslim land is called the Dar-ul-Harb, meaning the Land of war. For this Islamic mandate there can never be any friendship between a state of Muslims and a state of non-Muslims, unless the later becomes a land of Islam. Until that happens every Muslim must have to fight or conduct Jihad against all non-Muslims.

          Jihad gives three choices : As per the theory of Jihad, the non-Muslims have three choices : (a) Either he has to accept Islam (b) Or he has to surrender and accept slavery to the Muslims by paying Zijiya tax or (c) Has to fight. According to Islam there is no fourth option for a Muslim to approach a non-Muslim.”

          (An article namely “Hindu-Muslim-Birodher gorarkotha” (the fundamental reason of Hindus Muslim enmity) in “Aamar Desh, Amar Shatak” (My country-my century) by Nirad Chandra Choudhury compiled in Nirad Chandra Choudhury-Shata barshiki sankalan, published by Mitra and Ghosh, in 2000 pp-170-471)

          Muslims destroyed thousands Hindu temples : “I say that the Muslims do not have the slightest right to complain about the desecration of one mosque. From 1000 A.D., every Hindu temple from Kathiawar to Bihar from the Himalayas to the Vindhyas, has been sacked and ruined. Not one temple was left standing all over northern India… Temples escaped destruction only where Muslim power did not gain access to them for reasons such as dense forests. Otherwise it was a continuous spell of vandalism.

          No nation, with any self-respect, will forgive this. They took over our women. And they imposed the Jaziya, the tax. Why should we forget and forgive all that? What happened in Ayodhya would not have happened, had the Muslims acknowledged this historical argument even once. Then we could have said : All right, let the past remain in the past and let us see how best we can solve this problem…

          Muslims invented permanent revolution : “The gist of the argument is that the Hindu view of life and the Muslim view of the life are completely oriented towards a clash. The Muslims were the first to invent the theory of permanent revolution. The communists took over from them. No Muslims can live under the political dominations of non-Muslims. Secondly, the Muslims divide the world into two : regions of peace and regions of conflict. It is the duty of every Muslim to bring the latter within the fold of Islam”.

          (Sunday Times of India, August 8, 1993; in an interview to its Editor Dileep Padgaonkar)