This is with reference to your DV edit, Feb. 16, 92: “Muslim scholars used to destroy Islam”. Muslims in India are now sought to be fed with such rubbish theories as the one advanced by Dr. Tahir Mahmood who says that “Islam in its original form was a seventh century version of the world’s oldest religion which is today called Hinduism”. In our heart of hearts, we know that Islam is neither “a seventh. century version of Hinduism” nor its modified and improved form. Islam has only one single form and that is original which is maintained intact even today.
That Islam had one form at the time of its inception and another during the subsequent period was never been the case as Tahir Mahmood seeks to make us swallow. The basic doctrine of Islam is Tawhid, that is oneness of god. The whole structure of Islamic faith is based upon this doctrine which is absent in any polytheistic faith. In sharp contrast, Hinduism is a polytheistic religion with many beliefs and cults, tantras and mantras and a whole world of pantheons, gods and demi-gods. In the midst of this heterogeneous godheads, the “one-god” of Islam is completely lost. So, Hinduism cannot be and actually did not become the basis of a new “version” out of which Islam is supposed to have arisen.
Idol-worship In Kaba: Moreover, the religion Introduced by Prophet Ibrahim, a contemporary of Hammurabi of Babylon, who flourished around 1750 BC, was of one-god.
Unfortunately, the Arabs deviated from this faith in subsequent ages and the history tells us that the objects of their worship were akin to those of the Greeks. They further degenerated from their faith as time went by and thereafter idol-worship was introduced in the shrine of Kaba before the advent of Islam. Unlike Hinduism, Judaism, Christianity and Islam-these three semitic religions are more or less unitarian and if Islam had to be modelled on any religion, it was either Judaism or Christianity and not Hinduism.
Adam& Eve story : Dr. Tahir Mahmood has identified. Siva and Parvati with Adam and Eve, Noah with Manu and Moses with Krishna. This view is also erroneous and without any basis in so far as there is no material evidence with which his claim can be substantiated. The creation of Adam and Eve tells a very different story. Adam was created out of clay while Eve from the left rib of Adam. Both the Bible and the Koran are very catetguorical on this point. Siva is Swayambhu, that is, “born of himself”, while Parvati is the daughter of the Himalayas.
So, there is no similarity between the genesis of Adam and Eve and the genesis of Siva and Parvati. Likewise, there is no similarity between Noah and Manu excepting for the fact that the names of both are associated with the Deluge. As for Krishna whom Dr. Tahir Mahmood has identified as Moses, the dissimilarity is so glaring that the least we speak on this point the better.
Now, the legitimate question may arise as to what Dr. Tahir Mahmood had in his mind when he put forward this absurd thesis. Is it to bring grist to the Hindu nazi mill or to promote the cause of the Muslims? His erroneous views will, no doubt, undermine the causes of the Muslims in their struggle for survival against the Hindu nazi onslaught who are hell-bent to drive away the Muslims from the Indian soil.
