The recent Hindu-Christian clashes in Orissa during Christmas where many churches were burnt again shed light on the complexity of religious conditions in India. As usual Hindus and Hindu Organizations are being blamed. But, before getting into these blame games, it’s important to state the facts.
Orissa has been a favorite destination of Christian Missionaries for proselytization.
The illegal conversions are being carried out by missionaries in tribal areas. In Kandhamal District alone the Christian population has increased from 6% in 1970 to 27% in 2001, despite an Act enacted by Orissa Legislature in 1967 to prevent conversion by allurement, coercion, bribery and cheating1. On the eve of Christmas, the community had organized for a massive 'conversion' camp in a predominantly Hindu tribal area.2 When the Hindu tribals under the leadership of Swmi Lakshmanananda protested against this, he was attacked. Everything started from this unprovoked attack by Christian goons on Swami Laxmanananda Saraswati who was visiting his disciples in Darsingbadi village in Kandhmal District on 24 th December.
The issue again highlights the ugly face of religious fundamentalism, in this case Christian fundamentalism. It raises the questions about the motive and inspiration behind the ‘proselytization’.
The missionary works are not new. According to the documents of the Lausanne Committee for World Evangelization, the Biblical authority for missions begins quite early in Genesis 12:1-3, in which Abraham is blessed so that through him and his descendants, all the "peoples" of the world would be blessed. Others point to God's wish, often expressed in the Bible, that all peoples of the earth would worship Him. Therefore, Christian missions go where worship is not, in order to bring worship to God.3 In the 16th century the proselyization of Asia was linked to the Portuguese colonial policy. As soon as Christianity came into power, heathen temples were defaced and closed and their revenues transferred to the Church. "We command that all their (heathens') fanes, temples, shrines, if even now any remain entire shall be destroyed by the command of the magistrates" was the order of the day. (Theodosius Code, 380 A.D.). In Great Britain and Germany, priests and monks moved about destroying the groves and shrines of the people. The last regions to lose their religions in Europe were Prussia and the Baltic states.
Varying attempts to stamp out infidels and heretics often proved to be inadequate, so the Holy Inquisition was formed by Pope Gregory IX in 1231 to make the efforts more organized and efficient. Burning was quickly decided upon as the official punishment. In 1245, the Pope gave Inquisitors the right to absolve their assistants of any acts of violence which they might commit in the fulfillment of their duties. Torture of suspects was authorized by Pope Innocent IV in 1252. The Inquisition was not limited to Europe, as Spaniards brought it to the Americas and used it to punish the native inhabitants. Through the 1500s, 879 heresy trials were recorded in Mexico alone.4 The historian Hernando del Pulgar estimated that the Spanish Inquisition had burned at the stake 2,000 people and reconciled another 15,000 by 1490 just one decade after the Inquisition began.( Cited in Kamen op. cit., p. 62.). Juan de Zumarrage, first Bishop of Mexico, writing in 1531, claimed that he personally destroyed over 500 temples and 20,000 idols of the heathens.5 The Goa inquisition which lasted from 1560 to 1812 is considered as the most violent inquisition ever executed by the Portuguese Catholic Church. Inquisition proceedings were always conducted behind closed shutters and closed doors. Hindus were brutally interrogated, flogged, and slowly dismembered in front of their relatives. Eyelids were sliced off and extremities were amputated carefully6. Viceroy D Constantine de Braganca issued an order on April 2, 1560, instructing that Brahmins should be thrown out of Goa and other areas under Portuguese control.7 At the end of 1567, 300 Hindu temples were destroyed.8
These incidences are not just something to be read in pages of history, but it is very much happening even today. Swami Laxmanananda Saraswati says “There was no problem when Christians were not here in Paikia. With their numbers increasing, they forcefully took away Hindu girls and forced the neo-converts to eat beef. They set several temples on fire. Be it Birupakhya Mahadev´s temple or temple at Malarimaha or my Ashram at Rupagoan, the Christians conspired to set them on fire. They threw mortal remains of cows on mandirs. Kondh tribal´s Goddess Dharani Mata´s places of worship in several villages were dishonored. The sacred sword at a temple at Bramhanigaon was forcibly taken away by the converts who melted the sword in public and prepared their weapons with that looted material” 9
In the Lausanne report ‘Christian Witness to Hindus’, they state in details the methods to be adopted to convert different sections of Hindus. They discuss about Rural Evangelism, Urban Evangelism and Student Evangelism. They explain how ‘Miraculous Healing’ helps to convert people. They give strategies to be employed to use mass media, social gatherings, and seminars to their advantage.10
The Niyogi Report provided details of how much had been contributed by which Western country to the total of Rs. 29.27 crores received by Christian missions in India from January 1950 to June 1954. It notes that USA, UK, Canada and France contributed around 21 crores, 5 crores, 2 crores and 8 lakhs respectively. The Report revealed that the bulk of this foreign money received ostensibly for maintaining educational and medical institutions was spent on proselytization. It has been contended, said the Report, that most of the amount is utilized for creating a class of professional proselytizers, both foreign as well as Indian. There were 480 foreign missionaries working in Madhya Pradesh at that time. Out of them as many as 236 were Americans. The Report gave concrete instances of how mission schools were used to influence the minds of young people. Harijan and Adivasi students came in for special attention. They were given free boarding, lodging and books provided they attended Christian prayers. Bible classes were made compulsory by treating as absent for the whole day those students who failed to be present in those classes. School celebrations were used for showing the victory of the cross over all other symbols. Hospitals were used for putting pressure on poor class patients to embrace Christianity. The richest harvest, however, was reaped in mission orphanages which collected orphans during famines and other natural calamities such as floods and earthquakes. ‘No wonder,’ observed the Report, ‘that the largest number of converts is from such backward classes living in areas where due to various causes only Mission schools and hospitals exist. Most conversions have been doubtless insincere admittedly brought about in expectation of social service benefits and other material considerations’.11
Christianity has been following a policy of ‘Inculturation’. This means that it adopted Pagan elements in Christianized form in order to ease the transition from Paganism to Christianity. Pagan gods became Christian saints. Pagan Festivals became Christian festivals. In this process of inculturation, the Christian Church adapted old forms to its new message, but made sure that through the Pagan veneer the Christian doctrine was impressed upon the converts12. "Indigenization," says Kaj Baago, "is evangelization. It is the planting of the gospel inside another culture, another philosophy, another religion.13” In Indian case, ‘Inculturation’ or ‘Indigenization’ means ‘the incorporation of Jesus in Indian spiritual tradition’. Fr. Bede says "In India we need a Christian Vedanta and a Christian Yoga that is a system of theology which makes use not only of the terms and concepts but of the whole structure of thought of the Vedanta”14
Sita Ram Goel divides Hindu-Christian encounter into 5 phases. The first phase began with arrival of Portuguese and Saint Francis Xavier, where they used all crude and violent methods of proselytization. This ended with end of Portuguese rule. The second phase began establishment of British rule, where the language and methods of missionaries was as crude as before but they were not allowed to use physical methods. This ended with rise of Hindu reformation movements of Raja Ram Mohan Roy, Swami Dayananda Saraswathi, and Swami Vivekananda. The third phase starts with the advent of Mahatma Gandhi and his slogan of sarva-dharma-samabhAva which forced Christian missions to change and soften their language. This phase ended with the Tambram Conference of the International Missionary Council (IMC) in 1938, which decided to reformulate Christian theology in the Indian context. The fourth phase which commenced with the coming of independence where the Christian right to convert Hindus was incorporated in the Constitution. The missionary apparatus multiplied fast and became pervasive. Christianity had never had it so good in the whole of its history in India. The only rift in the lute was the ‘Niyogi Committee Report on Christian Missionary Activities’ published by the Government of Madhya Pradesh in 1956, and Om Prakash Tyagi’s Bill on ‘Freedom of Religion’ introduced in the Lok Sabha in December 1978. The fifth phase which is currently running started with Hindu awakening that resulted in Ram Janmabhumi movement.15
Over these long period of Hindu-Christian encounter, only the language and methods of ‘followers of Jesus’ has changed, but the motive has always remained same. Lausanne report in its introduction says- ‘We give thanks to God Almighty for his gracious act of salvation in Jesus Christ, which has made possible the entrance into the Kingdom of God for over 565 million Hindu people dispersed throughout the world, with the majority in the Indian sub-continent.
We rejoice in the fact that the saving Word of God preached faithfully by God's servants has brought about a Christian population of about 19 million people in India alone. However, we are conscious that God longs for the whole Hindu people to know Jesus Christ and live under his Lordship16’ These words clearly speak out that the sole goal of the missions have been Christianization of whole world including India and in this process destroy the cultures of the world.
This desire to Christianize the whole world is due to the fact that the doctrines of Christianity are intolerant of others faiths. The biblical God is Jealous and Violent. It is assumed that Jesus means ‘Peace’ and the message of Christianity is peace and equality. But Bible says-
‘Think not that I am come to send peace on earth; I came not to send peace, but a sword.”(Matthew, 10/34)
‘God is jealous, and the Lord revengeth; the Lord revengeth, and is furious; the Lord will take vengeance on his adversaries, and he reserveth wrath for his enemies’. (Nahum, 1/2)
The Biblical God is intolerant, ask its followers to torture Non-Believers, to break the idols and images.
And to them it was given that they should not kill them, but that they should be tormented five months; and their torment was as the torment of a scorpion, when he striketh a man.
(Revelation, 9/5)
But thus shall ye deal with them; ye shall destroy their altars, and break down their images, and cut down their groves, and burn their graven images with fire. (Deuteronomy, 7/5)
If a man abides not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.(John, 15/6)
It is this intolerance, which inspired the ‘Followers of Jesus’ to commit great crimes. The source of proselytization by force and fraud lies in Christian doctrines which have heavily been criticized by Nietzsche, Thomas Paine, Voltaire, and Bertrand Russell. But, still it is common in secular brigade to say “All Religions are Equal”. How can we equate a religion which is so intolerant, whose God is jealous and tyrant and exclusive with a religion like Hinduism which is tolerant, inclusive and spreads peace? The best solution to counter the Christian threat is to counter the Christian Dogma which is the source of proselytization.
“Auspiciousness be unto all; peace be unto all;
Fullness be unto all; prosperity be unto all.
May all be happy! May all be free from disabilities!
May all look to the good of others!
May none suffer from sorrow” (Shanti Mantra)
References-
1 http://www.hinduismtoday.com/hpi/2008/1/3.shtml#2
http://www.sanghparivar.org/facts-on-clashes-among-christian-missionaries-and-the-tribals-in-kandhamal-district-of-orissa
2 http://www.haindavakeralam.com/HkPage.aspx?PAGEID=5243&SKIN=C
http://www.organiser.org/dynamic/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=217&page=14
3 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mission_(Christian)
4 http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/christian/blfaq_viol_inquisition.htm
5 http://www.voiceofdharma.org/books/ca/app5.htm
6 http://www.christianaggression.org/item_display.php?type=ARTICLES&id=1111142225
7 http://www.rediff.com/news/1999/mar/16gupta.htm
8 http://www.christianaggression.org/item_display.php?type=ARTICLES&id=1111142225
9 http://www.blogs.ivarta.com/india-usa-blog-column59.htm
10 http://www.lausanne.org/pattaya-1980/lop-14.html
11 Niyogi Committee Report On Christian Missionary Activities published by the Government of Madhya Pradesh in 1956
12 Salvation: Hindu influence on Christianity by Dr. Koenraad Elst.
13 Kaj Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous Christianity, Madras, 1969, p. 85
14 Bede Griffiths, op. cit., p. 24.
15 http://www.voiceofdharma.org/books/ncr/2one.htm
16 http://www.lausanne.org/pattaya-1980/lop-14.html#Int
Monday, January 14, 2008
The Whitewashing of History
The History of India has been whitewashed and distorted first by European rulers which after Independence were continued by eminent historians of India and their supporters the Leftists, Seculars and self claimed Progressives of India to meet their own ends. They have painted the pre-Islamic invasion period as Dark age and have glorified the Islamic period to be very peaceful and prosperous. (The subject of distortions of history had been dealt by me in brief in the article “Indian History and 'Avarana' [Masking] of Truth by Marxists” which I elaborate here)
Ram Swarup says- “Marxists have taken to rewriting Indian history on a large scale and it has meant its systematic falsification. They have a dogmatic view of history and for them the use of any history is to prove their dogma. Their very approach is hurtful to truth…. The Marxists contempt for India, particularly the India of religion, culture and philosophy, is deep and theoretically fortified. It exceeds the contempt ever shown by the most die-hard imperialists”1 Some of the common claims of these eminent historians are-
1] Aryan Invasion Theory is True2
2] Large scale destruction of Buddhists and Jain temples was done by Hindus in pre-Islamic India3
3] The Muslim rulers were religiously tolerant and the Islamic rule was prosperous. The eminent historians deny the destruction of Hindu temples or the killing of Hindus at the hands of Muslim rulers. They also deny the religious motive behind the killing of Hindus at the hands of Muslim rulers.4
Let us examine the Aryan Invasion Theory [AIT].
The AIT was introduced to justify the presence of the British among their Aryan cousins in India, being merely the second wave of Aryan settlement there. It supported the British view of India as merely a geographical region without historical unity, a legitimate prey for any invader capable of imposing himself. It provided the master illustration to the rising racialist worldview-“the dynamic whites entered the land of the indolent dark natives and established their dominance and imparted their language to the natives; they established the caste system to preserve their racial separateness; some miscegenation with the natives took place anyway, making the Indian Aryans darker than their European cousins and correspondingly less intelligent; hence, for their own benefit they were susceptible to an uplifting intervention by a new wave of purer Aryan colonizers.”5
Dr.Koenraad Elst, in his “The Vedic Evidence”6 after examining the Vedic corpus for any evidence for Aryan invasion theory proposed by the Marxist school, concludes- “The status question is still, more than ever, that the Vedic corpus provides no reference to an immigration of the so-called Vedic Aryans from Central Asia….” He further provides Astronomical and Literary evidences against the AIT in his other essays.
Jim Shaffer. Wrote “Current archaeological data do not support the existence of an Indo-Aryan or European invasion into South Asia any time in the pre- or protohistoric periods. Instead, it is possible to document archaeologically a series of cultural changes reflecting indigenous cultural developments from prehistoric to historic periods...”7 Kenneth A. R. Kennedy, a U.S. expert who has extensively studied such skeletal remains, observes- “Biological anthropologists remain unable to lend support to any of the theories concerning an Aryan biological or demographic entity..”8
David Frawley while commenting on the Political and Social Ramifications concludes-“First it served to divide India into a northern Aryan and southern Dravidian culture which were made hostile to each other… Second, it gave the British an excuse for their conquest of India. They could claim to be doing only what the Aryan ancestors of the Hindus had previously done millennia ago. This same justification could be used by the Muslims or any other invaders of India. Third, it served to make Vedic culture later than and possibly derived from the Middle Eastern… Fourth, it allowed the sciences of India to be given a Greek basis… Fifth, it gave the Marxists a good basis for projecting their class struggle model of society on to India, with the invading Brahmins oppressing the indigenous Shudras (lower castes)” He further concludes that- “In short, the compelling reasons for the Aryan invasion theory were neither literary or archeological but political and religious that is to say, not scholarship but prejudice”9
Archaeological evidence in no way contradicts Indian tradition, rather it broadly agrees with it (except for its chronology). Whether from North or South India, tradition never mentioned anything remotely resembling an Aryan invasion into India. Sanskrit scriptures make it clear that they regard the Vedic homeland to be the Saptasindhu, which is precisely the core of the Harappan territory. As for the Sangam tradition, it is equally silent about any northern origin of the Tamil people. These clearly show that AIT which Marxists have been propagating is based on assumptions and pre-conceived notion, rather than hard evidences.
About the alleged destruction of Buddhist and Jain temples by Hindus, Sita Ram Goel observes10- “It is intriguing indeed that whenever archaeological evidence points towards a mosque as standing on the site of a Hindu temple, our Marxist professors start seeing a Buddhist monastery buried underneath. They also invent some Saiva king as destroying Buddhist and Jain shrines whenever the large-scale destruction of Hindu temples by Islamic invaders is mentioned. They never mention the destruction of big Buddhist and Jain complexes which dotted the length and breadth of India, Khurasan, and Sinkiang on the eve of the Islamic invasion, as testified by Hüen Tsang” He asks the eminent historians to produce epigraphic and literary evidences to suggest the destruction of Buddhists and Jain places by Hindus, the names and places of Hindu monuments which stand on the sites occupied earlier by Buddhist or Jain monuments. But, till today no concrete evidence has been given by the eminent historians to substantiate their claim.
But, there are enough evidences to show that Buddhist and Jain temples and monasteries at Bukhara, Samarqand, Khotan, Balkh, Bamian, Kabul, Ghazni, Qandhar, Begram, Jalalabad, Peshawar, Charsadda, Ohind, Taxila, Multan, Mirpurkhas, Nagar-Parkar, Sialkot, Srinagar, Jalandhar, Jagadhari, Sugh, Tobra, Agroha, Delhi, Mathura, Hastinapur, Kanauj, Sravasti, Ayodhya, Varanasi, Sarnath, Nalanda, Vikramasila, Vaishali, Rajgir, Odantapuri, Bharhut, Champa, Paharpur, Jagaddal, Jajnagar, Nagarjunikonda, Amravati, Kanchi, Dwarasamudra, Devagiri, Bharuch, Valabhi, Girnar, Khambhat Patan, Jalor, Chandravati, Bhinmal, Didwana, Nagaur, Osian, Ajmer, Bairat, Gwalior, Chanderi, Mandu, Dhar etc were destroyed by the sword of Islam.11
It should be noted that though Brahmanical, Buddhist and Jain sects and sub-sects had heated discussions among themselves and used even strong language for their adversaries, the occasions when they exchanged physical blows were few and far between. The recent spurt of accusations that Hindus also were bigots and vandals like Christians and Muslims seems to be an after-thought. Apologists, who find it impossible to whitewash Christianity and Islam, are out to redress the balance by blackening Hinduism.
The Islamic conquest has been described as the “Bloodiest”12, as “, monotonous series of murders, massacres, spoliations, and destructions.”13 And as “bigger than the Holocaust of the Jews by the Nazis; or the massacre of the Armenians by the Turks; more extensive even than the slaughter of the South American native populations by the invading Spanish and Portuguese”14
Irfan Husain in his article “Demons from the Past” observes- “While historical events should be judged in the context of their times, it cannot be denied that even in that bloody period of history, no mercy was shown to the Hindus unfortunate enough to be in the path of either the Arab conquerors of Sindh and south Punjab, or the Central Asians who swept in from Afghanistan…The Muslim heroes who figure larger than life in our history books committed some dreadful crimes. Mahmud of Ghazni, Qutb-ud-Din Aibak, Balban, Mohammed bin Qasim, and Sultan Mohammad Tughlak, all have blood-stained hands that the passage of years has not cleansed..Seen through Hindu eyes, the Muslim invasion of their homeland was an unmitigated disaster. Their temples were razed, their idols smashed, their women raped, their men killed or taken slaves. When Mahmud of Ghazni entered Somnath on one of his annual raids, he slaughtered all 50,000 inhabitants. Aibak killed and enslaved hundreds of thousands. The list of horrors is long and painful.These conquerors justified their deeds by claiming it was their religious duty to smite non-believers. Cloaking themselves in the banner of Islam, they claimed they were fighting for their faith when, in reality, they were indulging in straightforward slaughter and pillage...”
Dr.Koenraad Elst while while summarizing the Hindu losses at the hands of Muslim invaders concludes15- “There is no official estimate of the total death toll of Hindus at the hands of Islam. A first glance at important testimonies by Muslim chroniclers suggests that, over 13 centuries and a territory as vast as the Subcontinent, Muslim Holy Warriors easily killed more Hindus than the 6 million of the Holocaust. Ferishtha lists several occasions when the Bahmani sultans in central India (1347-1528) killed a hundred thousand Hindus, which they set as a minimum goal whenever they felt like "punishing" the Hindus; and they were only a third-rank provincial dynasty. The biggest slaughters took place during the raids of Mahmud Ghaznavi (ca. 1000 CE); during the actual conquest of North India by Mohammed Ghori and his lieutenants (1192 ff.); and under the Delhi Sultanate (1206-1526). The Moghuls (1526-1857), even Babar and Aurangzeb, were fairly restrained tyrants by comparison. Prof. K.S. Lal once estimated that the Indian population declined by 50 million under the Sultanate, but that would be hard to substantiate; research into the magnitude of the damage Islam did to India is yet to start in right earnest.”
From Mohamud Quasim to Tipu Sultan, every Mohammedan invader killed, converted, taken as slave or put Jiziya on Hindus. Entire cities were burnt down and the populations massacred, with hundreds of thousands killed in every campaign, and similar numbers deported as slaves. While describing the conquest of Kanauj, Utbi sums up the situation thus: “The Sultan[Ghazni] levelled to the ground every fort, and the inhabitants of them either accepted Islam, or took up arms against him. In short, those who submitted were also converted to Islam. In Baran (Bulandshahr) alone 10,000 persons were converted including the Raja”. The conquest of Afghanistan in the year 1000 was followed by the annihilation of the Hindu population; the region is still called the Hindu Kush, i.e. Hindu slaughter. The Bahmani sultans (1347-1480) in central India made it a rule to kill 100,000 captives in a single day, and many more on other occasions. The conquest of the Vijayanagar empire in 1564 left the capital plus large areas of Karnataka depopulated.
About the Conversion of Hindus to Islam, K.S.Lal observes- “The process of their conversion was hurried. All of a sudden the invader appeared in a city or a region, and in the midst of loot and murder, a dazed, shocked and enslaved people were given the choice between Islam and death. Those who were converted were deprived of their scalp-lock or choti and, if they happened to be caste people, also their sacred thread. Some were also circumcised. Their names were changed, although some might have retained their old names with new affixes. They were taught to recite the kalima and learnt to say the prescribed prayers”.16
When Mahmud Ghaznavi attacked Waihind in 1001-02, he took 500,000 persons of both sexes as captive[This figure is given by Abu Nasr Muhammad Utbi, the secretary and chronicler of Mahmud Gahzni] Next year from Thanesar, according to Farishtah, the Muhammadan army brought to Ghaznin 200,000 captives[Tarikh-i-Farishtah, I, 28]. When Mahmud returned to Ghazni in 1019, the booty was found to consist of (besides huge wealth) 53,000 captives. The Tarikh-i-Alfi adds that the fifth share due to the Saiyyads was 150,000 slaves, therefore the total number of captives comes to 750,000. In 1195 when Raja Bhim was attacked by Aibak 20,000 slaves were captured, and 50,000 at Kalinjar in 1202. Sultan Alauddin Khalji had 50,000 slave boys in his personal service and 70,000 slaves worked continuously on his buildings. In the words of Wassaf, the Muslim army in the sack of Somnath took captive a great number of handsome and elegant maidens, amounting to 20,000, and children of both sexes. Iltutmish, Muhammad Tughlaq and Firoz Tughlaq sent gifts of slaves to Khalifas outside India. To the Chinese emperor Muhammad Tughlaq sent, besides other presents, 100 Hindu slaves, 100 slave girls, accomplished in song and dance and another 15 young slaves. Firoz Tughlaq collected 180,000 slaves.17
About the destruction of Hindu Temples, Sita Ram Goel writes -“Mahmûd of Ghazni robbed and burnt down 1,000 temples at Mathura, and 10,000 in and around Kanauj. One of his successors, Ibrãhîm, demolished 1,000 temples each in Hindustan (Ganga-Yamuna Doab) and Malwa. Muhammad Ghûrî destroyed another 1,000 at Varanasi. Qutbu’d-Dîn Aibak employed elephants for pulling down 1,000 temples in Delhi. “Alî I ‘Ãdil Shãh of Bijapur destroyed 200 to 300 temples in Karnataka. A sufi, Qãyim Shãh, destroyed 12 temples at Tiruchirapalli. Such exact or approximate counts, however, are available only in a few cases. Most of the time we are informed that “many strong temples which would have remained unshaken even by the trumpets blown on the Day of Judgment, were levelled with the ground when swept by the wind of Islãm”.18
Some of the Temples converted into Mosques are19-
Epigraphic evidences-
1. Quwwat al-Islam Masjid, Qutb Minar, Delhi by Qutbud-Din Aibak in 1192 A.D.
2. Masjid at Manvi in the Raichur District of Karnataka, Firuz Shah Bahmani, 1406-07 A.D
3. Jami Masjid at Malan, Palanpur Taluka, Banaskantha District of Gujarat: ?The Jami Masjid was built? by Khan-I-Azam Ulugh Khan, The date of construction is mentioned as 1462 A.D. in the reign of Mahmud Shah I (Begada) of Gujarat.
4. Hammam Darwaza Masjid at Jaunpur in Uttar Pradesh, Its chronogram yields the year 1567 A.D. in the reign of Akbar, the Great Mughal
5. Jami Masjid at Ghoda in the Poona District of Maharashtra, The inscription is dated 1586 A.D. when the Poona region was ruled by the Nizam Shahi sultans of Ahmadnagar
6. Gachinala Masjid at Cumbum in the Kurnool District of Andhra Pradesh, The date of construction is mentioned as 1729-30 A.D. in the reign of the Mughal Emperor Muhammad Shah.
Literary evidences-
7. Jhain[name of the place], Jalalud-Din Firuz Khalji went to the place and ordered destruction of temples, mentioned in Miftah-ul-Futuh.
8. Devagiri, Alaud-Din Khalji destroyed the temples of the idolaters , , mentioned in Miftah-ul-Futuh.
9. Somanath, Ulugh Khan, mentioned in Tarikh-i-Alai
10 Delhi, , Alaud-Din Khalji , Tarikh-i-Alai
11. Ranthambhor, mentioned in Tarikh-i-Alai
12. Brahmastpuri (Chidambaram), Malik Kafur, Tarikh-i-Alai
13. Madura, mentioned in Tarikh-i-Alai
14. Fatan: (Pattan), mentioned in Ashiqa
15. Malabar: (Parts of South India), Tarikh-i-Alai
16 The Mosque at Jaunpur. This was built by Sultan Ibrahim Sharqi
17 The Mosque at Qanauj it was built by Ibrahim Sharqi
18 Jami (Masjid) at Etawah. it is one of the monuments of the Sharqi Sultans
19 Babri Masjid at Ayodhya . This mosque was constructed by Babar at Ayodhya
20 Mosques of Alamgir (Aurangzeb)
According to the reports of Archeological survey of India.
21 Tordi (Rajasthan)- early or middle part of the 15th century
22 Naraina (Rajasthan)- The mosque appears to have been built when Mujahid Khan, son of Shams Khan, took possession of Naraina in 1436 A.D
23 Chatsu (Rajasthan)- At Chatsu there is a Muhammadan tomb erected on the eastern embankment of the Golerava tank. The tomb which is known as Gurg Ali Shah’s chhatri is built out of the spoils of Hindu buildings. The inscription mention saint Gurg Ali (wolf of Ali) died a martyr on the first of Ramzan in 979 A.H. corresponding to Thursday, the 17th January, 1572 A.D.
24 SaheTh-MaheTh (Uttar Pradesh)
25 Sarnath (Uttar Pradesh)- the inscriptions found there extending to the twelfth century A.D
26 Vaishali (Bihar)
27 Gaur and Pandua (Bengal)- The oldest and the best known building at Gaur and Pandua is the Ãdîna Masjid at Pandua built by Sikandar Shãh, the son of Ilyãs Shãh. The date of its inscription may be read as either 776 or 770, which corresponds with 1374 or 1369 A.D? The materials employed consisted largely of the spoils of Hindu temples and many of the carvings from the temples have been used as facings of doors, arches and pillars
28 Devikot (Bengal)- The Dargah of Sultan Pir, The Dargah of Shah Ata are the Muhammadan shrines built on the site of an old Hindu temple
29 Tribeni (Bengal)
These whitewashing of history, the policy of “Suppresio Veri, Suggestio Falsi” followed by ‘Eminent Historians’ of India is not only dangerous to national integration but also the future of the entire nation. It is time that, the self interests are kept aside and the facts of history is made known to the masses.
Footnotes-
1 Indian Express, January 15, 1989, quoted in book “Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 1” by Sita Ram Goel
2 For example, JNU historian Romilla Thapar.[Article titled “Romila Thapar Defends the Aryan Invasion Theory!” by Vishal Agarwal published here- http://www.india-forum.com/articles/60/1 ]
3 In letter published in The Times of India dated October 2, 1986, Romilla Thapar had stated that handing over of Sri Rama’s and Sri Krishna’s birthplaces to the Hindus, and of disused mosques to the Muslims raises the question of the limits to the logic of restoration of religious sites. How far back do we go? Can we push this to the restoration of Buddhist and Jain monuments destroyed by Hindus? Or of the pre-Hindu animist shrines? [ Quoted in book- Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 2
The Islamic Evidence by Sita Ram Goel]
4 In his book Medival India [NCERT 2000], Satish Chandra writes- “The raid into India (by Timur) was a plundering raid, and its motive was to seize the wealth accumulated by the sultans of Delhi over the last 200 years… Timur then entered Delhi and sacked it without mercy, large number of people, both Hindu and Muslim, as well as women and children losing their lives.”, but Timur repeatedly states in his memoirs, the Tuzuk-i-Timuri, that he had a two-fold objective in invading Hindustan. “The first was to war with the infidels,” and thereby acquire, “some claim to reward in the life to come.” The second motive was “that the army of Islam might gain something by plundering the wealth and valuables of the infidels.” He further says “Excepting the quarter of the saiyids, the ulema and other Musulmans, the whole city was sacked.”
5 Koenraad Elst, in “The Politics of the Aryan Invasion Debate”
6 “The Vedic Evidence - The Vedic Corpus Provides no Evidence for the so-called Aryan Invasion of India” by Koenraad Elst
7 Jim G. Shaffer, “The Indo-Aryan Invasions : Cultural Myth and Archaeological Reality,” in Michel Danino “The Indus-Sarasvati Civilization and its Bearing on the Aryan Question”
8 Kenneth A. R. Kennedy, “Have Aryans been identified in the prehistoric skeletal record from South Asia ?” in Michel Danino “The Indus-Sarasvati Civilization and its Bearing on the Aryan Question”
9 David Frawley, in “Myth of Aryan Invasion Theory of India”
10 Sita ram Goel, Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 2-
the Islamic Evidence
11 Sita ram Goel, Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 2 -
the Islamic Evidence
12 Will Durant in “Story of Civilization” observes- “The Mohammedan Conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precarious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace may at any time be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within.”
13 “Histoire de l' Inde” - By Alain Danielou; he notes- “"From the time Muslims started arriving, around 632 AD, the history of India becomes a long, monotonous series of murders, massacres, spoliations, and destructions. It is, as usual, in the name of 'a holy war' of their faith, of their sole God, that the barbarians have destroyed civilizations, wiped out entire races." Mahmoud Ghazni, continues Danielou, "was an early example of Muslim ruthlessness, burning in 1018 of the temples of Mathura, razing Kanauj to the ground and destroying the famous temple of Somnath, sacred to all Hindus. His successors were as ruthless as Ghazni: 103 temples in the holy city of Benaras were razed to the ground, its marvelous temples destroyed, its magnificent palaces wrecked." Indeed, the Muslim policy vis a vis India, concludes Danielou, seems to have been a conscious systematic destruction of everything that was beautiful, holy, refined."
14 Francois Gautier
15 Dr. Koenraad Elst in “Was There an Islamic "Genocide" of Hindus?”
16 K.S. Lal in “Indian Muslims Who Are They”
17 K.S. Lal in “Muslim Slave System in Medieval India”
18 Sita Ram Goel, in “Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 2
The Islamic Evidence”
19 It is taken from the large list of places documented by Sita Ram Goel in his magnum Opus “Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 1- The Preliminary Survey”
Ram Swarup says- “Marxists have taken to rewriting Indian history on a large scale and it has meant its systematic falsification. They have a dogmatic view of history and for them the use of any history is to prove their dogma. Their very approach is hurtful to truth…. The Marxists contempt for India, particularly the India of religion, culture and philosophy, is deep and theoretically fortified. It exceeds the contempt ever shown by the most die-hard imperialists”1 Some of the common claims of these eminent historians are-
1] Aryan Invasion Theory is True2
2] Large scale destruction of Buddhists and Jain temples was done by Hindus in pre-Islamic India3
3] The Muslim rulers were religiously tolerant and the Islamic rule was prosperous. The eminent historians deny the destruction of Hindu temples or the killing of Hindus at the hands of Muslim rulers. They also deny the religious motive behind the killing of Hindus at the hands of Muslim rulers.4
Let us examine the Aryan Invasion Theory [AIT].
The AIT was introduced to justify the presence of the British among their Aryan cousins in India, being merely the second wave of Aryan settlement there. It supported the British view of India as merely a geographical region without historical unity, a legitimate prey for any invader capable of imposing himself. It provided the master illustration to the rising racialist worldview-“the dynamic whites entered the land of the indolent dark natives and established their dominance and imparted their language to the natives; they established the caste system to preserve their racial separateness; some miscegenation with the natives took place anyway, making the Indian Aryans darker than their European cousins and correspondingly less intelligent; hence, for their own benefit they were susceptible to an uplifting intervention by a new wave of purer Aryan colonizers.”5
Dr.Koenraad Elst, in his “The Vedic Evidence”6 after examining the Vedic corpus for any evidence for Aryan invasion theory proposed by the Marxist school, concludes- “The status question is still, more than ever, that the Vedic corpus provides no reference to an immigration of the so-called Vedic Aryans from Central Asia….” He further provides Astronomical and Literary evidences against the AIT in his other essays.
Jim Shaffer. Wrote “Current archaeological data do not support the existence of an Indo-Aryan or European invasion into South Asia any time in the pre- or protohistoric periods. Instead, it is possible to document archaeologically a series of cultural changes reflecting indigenous cultural developments from prehistoric to historic periods...”7 Kenneth A. R. Kennedy, a U.S. expert who has extensively studied such skeletal remains, observes- “Biological anthropologists remain unable to lend support to any of the theories concerning an Aryan biological or demographic entity..”8
David Frawley while commenting on the Political and Social Ramifications concludes-“First it served to divide India into a northern Aryan and southern Dravidian culture which were made hostile to each other… Second, it gave the British an excuse for their conquest of India. They could claim to be doing only what the Aryan ancestors of the Hindus had previously done millennia ago. This same justification could be used by the Muslims or any other invaders of India. Third, it served to make Vedic culture later than and possibly derived from the Middle Eastern… Fourth, it allowed the sciences of India to be given a Greek basis… Fifth, it gave the Marxists a good basis for projecting their class struggle model of society on to India, with the invading Brahmins oppressing the indigenous Shudras (lower castes)” He further concludes that- “In short, the compelling reasons for the Aryan invasion theory were neither literary or archeological but political and religious that is to say, not scholarship but prejudice”9
Archaeological evidence in no way contradicts Indian tradition, rather it broadly agrees with it (except for its chronology). Whether from North or South India, tradition never mentioned anything remotely resembling an Aryan invasion into India. Sanskrit scriptures make it clear that they regard the Vedic homeland to be the Saptasindhu, which is precisely the core of the Harappan territory. As for the Sangam tradition, it is equally silent about any northern origin of the Tamil people. These clearly show that AIT which Marxists have been propagating is based on assumptions and pre-conceived notion, rather than hard evidences.
About the alleged destruction of Buddhist and Jain temples by Hindus, Sita Ram Goel observes10- “It is intriguing indeed that whenever archaeological evidence points towards a mosque as standing on the site of a Hindu temple, our Marxist professors start seeing a Buddhist monastery buried underneath. They also invent some Saiva king as destroying Buddhist and Jain shrines whenever the large-scale destruction of Hindu temples by Islamic invaders is mentioned. They never mention the destruction of big Buddhist and Jain complexes which dotted the length and breadth of India, Khurasan, and Sinkiang on the eve of the Islamic invasion, as testified by Hüen Tsang” He asks the eminent historians to produce epigraphic and literary evidences to suggest the destruction of Buddhists and Jain places by Hindus, the names and places of Hindu monuments which stand on the sites occupied earlier by Buddhist or Jain monuments. But, till today no concrete evidence has been given by the eminent historians to substantiate their claim.
But, there are enough evidences to show that Buddhist and Jain temples and monasteries at Bukhara, Samarqand, Khotan, Balkh, Bamian, Kabul, Ghazni, Qandhar, Begram, Jalalabad, Peshawar, Charsadda, Ohind, Taxila, Multan, Mirpurkhas, Nagar-Parkar, Sialkot, Srinagar, Jalandhar, Jagadhari, Sugh, Tobra, Agroha, Delhi, Mathura, Hastinapur, Kanauj, Sravasti, Ayodhya, Varanasi, Sarnath, Nalanda, Vikramasila, Vaishali, Rajgir, Odantapuri, Bharhut, Champa, Paharpur, Jagaddal, Jajnagar, Nagarjunikonda, Amravati, Kanchi, Dwarasamudra, Devagiri, Bharuch, Valabhi, Girnar, Khambhat Patan, Jalor, Chandravati, Bhinmal, Didwana, Nagaur, Osian, Ajmer, Bairat, Gwalior, Chanderi, Mandu, Dhar etc were destroyed by the sword of Islam.11
It should be noted that though Brahmanical, Buddhist and Jain sects and sub-sects had heated discussions among themselves and used even strong language for their adversaries, the occasions when they exchanged physical blows were few and far between. The recent spurt of accusations that Hindus also were bigots and vandals like Christians and Muslims seems to be an after-thought. Apologists, who find it impossible to whitewash Christianity and Islam, are out to redress the balance by blackening Hinduism.
The Islamic conquest has been described as the “Bloodiest”12, as “, monotonous series of murders, massacres, spoliations, and destructions.”13 And as “bigger than the Holocaust of the Jews by the Nazis; or the massacre of the Armenians by the Turks; more extensive even than the slaughter of the South American native populations by the invading Spanish and Portuguese”14
Irfan Husain in his article “Demons from the Past” observes- “While historical events should be judged in the context of their times, it cannot be denied that even in that bloody period of history, no mercy was shown to the Hindus unfortunate enough to be in the path of either the Arab conquerors of Sindh and south Punjab, or the Central Asians who swept in from Afghanistan…The Muslim heroes who figure larger than life in our history books committed some dreadful crimes. Mahmud of Ghazni, Qutb-ud-Din Aibak, Balban, Mohammed bin Qasim, and Sultan Mohammad Tughlak, all have blood-stained hands that the passage of years has not cleansed..Seen through Hindu eyes, the Muslim invasion of their homeland was an unmitigated disaster. Their temples were razed, their idols smashed, their women raped, their men killed or taken slaves. When Mahmud of Ghazni entered Somnath on one of his annual raids, he slaughtered all 50,000 inhabitants. Aibak killed and enslaved hundreds of thousands. The list of horrors is long and painful.These conquerors justified their deeds by claiming it was their religious duty to smite non-believers. Cloaking themselves in the banner of Islam, they claimed they were fighting for their faith when, in reality, they were indulging in straightforward slaughter and pillage...”
Dr.Koenraad Elst while while summarizing the Hindu losses at the hands of Muslim invaders concludes15- “There is no official estimate of the total death toll of Hindus at the hands of Islam. A first glance at important testimonies by Muslim chroniclers suggests that, over 13 centuries and a territory as vast as the Subcontinent, Muslim Holy Warriors easily killed more Hindus than the 6 million of the Holocaust. Ferishtha lists several occasions when the Bahmani sultans in central India (1347-1528) killed a hundred thousand Hindus, which they set as a minimum goal whenever they felt like "punishing" the Hindus; and they were only a third-rank provincial dynasty. The biggest slaughters took place during the raids of Mahmud Ghaznavi (ca. 1000 CE); during the actual conquest of North India by Mohammed Ghori and his lieutenants (1192 ff.); and under the Delhi Sultanate (1206-1526). The Moghuls (1526-1857), even Babar and Aurangzeb, were fairly restrained tyrants by comparison. Prof. K.S. Lal once estimated that the Indian population declined by 50 million under the Sultanate, but that would be hard to substantiate; research into the magnitude of the damage Islam did to India is yet to start in right earnest.”
From Mohamud Quasim to Tipu Sultan, every Mohammedan invader killed, converted, taken as slave or put Jiziya on Hindus. Entire cities were burnt down and the populations massacred, with hundreds of thousands killed in every campaign, and similar numbers deported as slaves. While describing the conquest of Kanauj, Utbi sums up the situation thus: “The Sultan[Ghazni] levelled to the ground every fort, and the inhabitants of them either accepted Islam, or took up arms against him. In short, those who submitted were also converted to Islam. In Baran (Bulandshahr) alone 10,000 persons were converted including the Raja”. The conquest of Afghanistan in the year 1000 was followed by the annihilation of the Hindu population; the region is still called the Hindu Kush, i.e. Hindu slaughter. The Bahmani sultans (1347-1480) in central India made it a rule to kill 100,000 captives in a single day, and many more on other occasions. The conquest of the Vijayanagar empire in 1564 left the capital plus large areas of Karnataka depopulated.
About the Conversion of Hindus to Islam, K.S.Lal observes- “The process of their conversion was hurried. All of a sudden the invader appeared in a city or a region, and in the midst of loot and murder, a dazed, shocked and enslaved people were given the choice between Islam and death. Those who were converted were deprived of their scalp-lock or choti and, if they happened to be caste people, also their sacred thread. Some were also circumcised. Their names were changed, although some might have retained their old names with new affixes. They were taught to recite the kalima and learnt to say the prescribed prayers”.16
When Mahmud Ghaznavi attacked Waihind in 1001-02, he took 500,000 persons of both sexes as captive[This figure is given by Abu Nasr Muhammad Utbi, the secretary and chronicler of Mahmud Gahzni] Next year from Thanesar, according to Farishtah, the Muhammadan army brought to Ghaznin 200,000 captives[Tarikh-i-Farishtah, I, 28]. When Mahmud returned to Ghazni in 1019, the booty was found to consist of (besides huge wealth) 53,000 captives. The Tarikh-i-Alfi adds that the fifth share due to the Saiyyads was 150,000 slaves, therefore the total number of captives comes to 750,000. In 1195 when Raja Bhim was attacked by Aibak 20,000 slaves were captured, and 50,000 at Kalinjar in 1202. Sultan Alauddin Khalji had 50,000 slave boys in his personal service and 70,000 slaves worked continuously on his buildings. In the words of Wassaf, the Muslim army in the sack of Somnath took captive a great number of handsome and elegant maidens, amounting to 20,000, and children of both sexes. Iltutmish, Muhammad Tughlaq and Firoz Tughlaq sent gifts of slaves to Khalifas outside India. To the Chinese emperor Muhammad Tughlaq sent, besides other presents, 100 Hindu slaves, 100 slave girls, accomplished in song and dance and another 15 young slaves. Firoz Tughlaq collected 180,000 slaves.17
About the destruction of Hindu Temples, Sita Ram Goel writes -“Mahmûd of Ghazni robbed and burnt down 1,000 temples at Mathura, and 10,000 in and around Kanauj. One of his successors, Ibrãhîm, demolished 1,000 temples each in Hindustan (Ganga-Yamuna Doab) and Malwa. Muhammad Ghûrî destroyed another 1,000 at Varanasi. Qutbu’d-Dîn Aibak employed elephants for pulling down 1,000 temples in Delhi. “Alî I ‘Ãdil Shãh of Bijapur destroyed 200 to 300 temples in Karnataka. A sufi, Qãyim Shãh, destroyed 12 temples at Tiruchirapalli. Such exact or approximate counts, however, are available only in a few cases. Most of the time we are informed that “many strong temples which would have remained unshaken even by the trumpets blown on the Day of Judgment, were levelled with the ground when swept by the wind of Islãm”.18
Some of the Temples converted into Mosques are19-
Epigraphic evidences-
1. Quwwat al-Islam Masjid, Qutb Minar, Delhi by Qutbud-Din Aibak in 1192 A.D.
2. Masjid at Manvi in the Raichur District of Karnataka, Firuz Shah Bahmani, 1406-07 A.D
3. Jami Masjid at Malan, Palanpur Taluka, Banaskantha District of Gujarat: ?The Jami Masjid was built? by Khan-I-Azam Ulugh Khan, The date of construction is mentioned as 1462 A.D. in the reign of Mahmud Shah I (Begada) of Gujarat.
4. Hammam Darwaza Masjid at Jaunpur in Uttar Pradesh, Its chronogram yields the year 1567 A.D. in the reign of Akbar, the Great Mughal
5. Jami Masjid at Ghoda in the Poona District of Maharashtra, The inscription is dated 1586 A.D. when the Poona region was ruled by the Nizam Shahi sultans of Ahmadnagar
6. Gachinala Masjid at Cumbum in the Kurnool District of Andhra Pradesh, The date of construction is mentioned as 1729-30 A.D. in the reign of the Mughal Emperor Muhammad Shah.
Literary evidences-
7. Jhain[name of the place], Jalalud-Din Firuz Khalji went to the place and ordered destruction of temples, mentioned in Miftah-ul-Futuh.
8. Devagiri, Alaud-Din Khalji destroyed the temples of the idolaters , , mentioned in Miftah-ul-Futuh.
9. Somanath, Ulugh Khan, mentioned in Tarikh-i-Alai
10 Delhi, , Alaud-Din Khalji , Tarikh-i-Alai
11. Ranthambhor, mentioned in Tarikh-i-Alai
12. Brahmastpuri (Chidambaram), Malik Kafur, Tarikh-i-Alai
13. Madura, mentioned in Tarikh-i-Alai
14. Fatan: (Pattan), mentioned in Ashiqa
15. Malabar: (Parts of South India), Tarikh-i-Alai
16 The Mosque at Jaunpur. This was built by Sultan Ibrahim Sharqi
17 The Mosque at Qanauj it was built by Ibrahim Sharqi
18 Jami (Masjid) at Etawah. it is one of the monuments of the Sharqi Sultans
19 Babri Masjid at Ayodhya . This mosque was constructed by Babar at Ayodhya
20 Mosques of Alamgir (Aurangzeb)
According to the reports of Archeological survey of India.
21 Tordi (Rajasthan)- early or middle part of the 15th century
22 Naraina (Rajasthan)- The mosque appears to have been built when Mujahid Khan, son of Shams Khan, took possession of Naraina in 1436 A.D
23 Chatsu (Rajasthan)- At Chatsu there is a Muhammadan tomb erected on the eastern embankment of the Golerava tank. The tomb which is known as Gurg Ali Shah’s chhatri is built out of the spoils of Hindu buildings. The inscription mention saint Gurg Ali (wolf of Ali) died a martyr on the first of Ramzan in 979 A.H. corresponding to Thursday, the 17th January, 1572 A.D.
24 SaheTh-MaheTh (Uttar Pradesh)
25 Sarnath (Uttar Pradesh)- the inscriptions found there extending to the twelfth century A.D
26 Vaishali (Bihar)
27 Gaur and Pandua (Bengal)- The oldest and the best known building at Gaur and Pandua is the Ãdîna Masjid at Pandua built by Sikandar Shãh, the son of Ilyãs Shãh. The date of its inscription may be read as either 776 or 770, which corresponds with 1374 or 1369 A.D? The materials employed consisted largely of the spoils of Hindu temples and many of the carvings from the temples have been used as facings of doors, arches and pillars
28 Devikot (Bengal)- The Dargah of Sultan Pir, The Dargah of Shah Ata are the Muhammadan shrines built on the site of an old Hindu temple
29 Tribeni (Bengal)
These whitewashing of history, the policy of “Suppresio Veri, Suggestio Falsi” followed by ‘Eminent Historians’ of India is not only dangerous to national integration but also the future of the entire nation. It is time that, the self interests are kept aside and the facts of history is made known to the masses.
Footnotes-
1 Indian Express, January 15, 1989, quoted in book “Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 1” by Sita Ram Goel
2 For example, JNU historian Romilla Thapar.[Article titled “Romila Thapar Defends the Aryan Invasion Theory!” by Vishal Agarwal published here- http://www.india-forum.com/articles/60/1 ]
3 In letter published in The Times of India dated October 2, 1986, Romilla Thapar had stated that handing over of Sri Rama’s and Sri Krishna’s birthplaces to the Hindus, and of disused mosques to the Muslims raises the question of the limits to the logic of restoration of religious sites. How far back do we go? Can we push this to the restoration of Buddhist and Jain monuments destroyed by Hindus? Or of the pre-Hindu animist shrines? [ Quoted in book- Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 2
The Islamic Evidence by Sita Ram Goel]
4 In his book Medival India [NCERT 2000], Satish Chandra writes- “The raid into India (by Timur) was a plundering raid, and its motive was to seize the wealth accumulated by the sultans of Delhi over the last 200 years… Timur then entered Delhi and sacked it without mercy, large number of people, both Hindu and Muslim, as well as women and children losing their lives.”, but Timur repeatedly states in his memoirs, the Tuzuk-i-Timuri, that he had a two-fold objective in invading Hindustan. “The first was to war with the infidels,” and thereby acquire, “some claim to reward in the life to come.” The second motive was “that the army of Islam might gain something by plundering the wealth and valuables of the infidels.” He further says “Excepting the quarter of the saiyids, the ulema and other Musulmans, the whole city was sacked.”
5 Koenraad Elst, in “The Politics of the Aryan Invasion Debate”
6 “The Vedic Evidence - The Vedic Corpus Provides no Evidence for the so-called Aryan Invasion of India” by Koenraad Elst
7 Jim G. Shaffer, “The Indo-Aryan Invasions : Cultural Myth and Archaeological Reality,” in Michel Danino “The Indus-Sarasvati Civilization and its Bearing on the Aryan Question”
8 Kenneth A. R. Kennedy, “Have Aryans been identified in the prehistoric skeletal record from South Asia ?” in Michel Danino “The Indus-Sarasvati Civilization and its Bearing on the Aryan Question”
9 David Frawley, in “Myth of Aryan Invasion Theory of India”
10 Sita ram Goel, Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 2-
the Islamic Evidence
11 Sita ram Goel, Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 2 -
the Islamic Evidence
12 Will Durant in “Story of Civilization” observes- “The Mohammedan Conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precarious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace may at any time be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within.”
13 “Histoire de l' Inde” - By Alain Danielou; he notes- “"From the time Muslims started arriving, around 632 AD, the history of India becomes a long, monotonous series of murders, massacres, spoliations, and destructions. It is, as usual, in the name of 'a holy war' of their faith, of their sole God, that the barbarians have destroyed civilizations, wiped out entire races." Mahmoud Ghazni, continues Danielou, "was an early example of Muslim ruthlessness, burning in 1018 of the temples of Mathura, razing Kanauj to the ground and destroying the famous temple of Somnath, sacred to all Hindus. His successors were as ruthless as Ghazni: 103 temples in the holy city of Benaras were razed to the ground, its marvelous temples destroyed, its magnificent palaces wrecked." Indeed, the Muslim policy vis a vis India, concludes Danielou, seems to have been a conscious systematic destruction of everything that was beautiful, holy, refined."
14 Francois Gautier
15 Dr. Koenraad Elst in “Was There an Islamic "Genocide" of Hindus?”
16 K.S. Lal in “Indian Muslims Who Are They”
17 K.S. Lal in “Muslim Slave System in Medieval India”
18 Sita Ram Goel, in “Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 2
The Islamic Evidence”
19 It is taken from the large list of places documented by Sita Ram Goel in his magnum Opus “Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 1- The Preliminary Survey”
Pandit Nehru, not Krishna Menon was the culprit
The news item in the Top stories titled “Nehru feared coup by Cariappa, claims book” (Pioneer,Nov 11), rightly notes that India's flawed China policy led to the Himalayan blunder.
But, it must be pointed out that, the flaw in India’s Foreign policy was due Pandit Nehru’s infatuation for Communism which had made him blind towards the designs Red China and Krishna Menon was just made a scapegoat.
If, we assume that Krishna Menon was really the reason, then it implies that Pandit Nehru was more dependent on his advisors judgments rather than his own. But, Pandit Nehru in his long political carrier has proved himself to be easily the most astute politician. Hence, it is very wrong to suggest that Nehru depended on others judgment or that he was powerless in front of Krishna Menon.Krishna Menon no doubts was a Communist. But, Pandit Nehru was himself a Communist, an admirer not only of the Soviet socio-political and economic system but also of the Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist ideology on which the Soviet system was based.
In his book “Soviet Russia: Some Random Sketches And Impressions” which is a compilation of series of articles by Pandit Nehru after his return from a visit to Moscow in November 1927, he writes “Russia thus interests us because it may help us to find some solution for the great problems which face the world today. It interests us specially because conditions there have not been, and are not even now, very dissimilar to conditions in India. Both are vast agricultural countries with only the beginnings of industrialization and both have to face poverty and illiteracy. If Russia finds a satisfactory solution for these, our work in India is made easier”1
In “Discovery of India” he writes- “"A study of Marx and Lenin produced a powerful effect on my mind and helped me to see history and current affairs in a new light. The long chain of history and of social development appeared to have some meaning, some sequence and the future lost some of its obscurity. The practical achievements of the Soviet Union were also tremendously impressive.”
These clearly show that Pandit Nehru was the real culprit behind Flawed India’s Foreign policy. Sita Ram Goel concludes- “If something is seriously wrong somewhere (In India’s Foreign policy), Pandit Nehru and not Krishna Menon is the real author of it. If we are in search of a culprit, we should get at Pandit Nehru and not at Krishna Menon”2
Sources-
1 http://www.voiceofdharma.com/books/gagon/ch02.htm
2 http://www.voiceofdharma.com/books/gagon/ch01.htm
But, it must be pointed out that, the flaw in India’s Foreign policy was due Pandit Nehru’s infatuation for Communism which had made him blind towards the designs Red China and Krishna Menon was just made a scapegoat.
If, we assume that Krishna Menon was really the reason, then it implies that Pandit Nehru was more dependent on his advisors judgments rather than his own. But, Pandit Nehru in his long political carrier has proved himself to be easily the most astute politician. Hence, it is very wrong to suggest that Nehru depended on others judgment or that he was powerless in front of Krishna Menon.Krishna Menon no doubts was a Communist. But, Pandit Nehru was himself a Communist, an admirer not only of the Soviet socio-political and economic system but also of the Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist ideology on which the Soviet system was based.
In his book “Soviet Russia: Some Random Sketches And Impressions” which is a compilation of series of articles by Pandit Nehru after his return from a visit to Moscow in November 1927, he writes “Russia thus interests us because it may help us to find some solution for the great problems which face the world today. It interests us specially because conditions there have not been, and are not even now, very dissimilar to conditions in India. Both are vast agricultural countries with only the beginnings of industrialization and both have to face poverty and illiteracy. If Russia finds a satisfactory solution for these, our work in India is made easier”1
In “Discovery of India” he writes- “"A study of Marx and Lenin produced a powerful effect on my mind and helped me to see history and current affairs in a new light. The long chain of history and of social development appeared to have some meaning, some sequence and the future lost some of its obscurity. The practical achievements of the Soviet Union were also tremendously impressive.”
These clearly show that Pandit Nehru was the real culprit behind Flawed India’s Foreign policy. Sita Ram Goel concludes- “If something is seriously wrong somewhere (In India’s Foreign policy), Pandit Nehru and not Krishna Menon is the real author of it. If we are in search of a culprit, we should get at Pandit Nehru and not at Krishna Menon”2
Sources-
1 http://www.voiceofdharma.com/books/gagon/ch02.htm
2 http://www.voiceofdharma.com/books/gagon/ch01.htm
Tuesday, October 02, 2007
Maryada Purushotham Ram
Maryada Purushotham Ram
by Nithin.S
The word Ramayan has been derived from two words ram and ayan. Ram ramayate 1 means to remain engrossed in one’s target. It is with reference to remaining engrossed in Bliss which is derived from spiritual practice. In the quote “Samasya ayanam Ramayanam”2 “ayan” means speed, the path or to go. Hence Ramayan is that which leads one to, ‘The Supreme Lord’. In other words, King Rama or the Lord Rama as he is often addressed to shows the path to reach Moksha (which the ultimate Purushartha of all hindus) by example of his own life.
Among the pantheon of Hindu Gods and Goddesses and Avatars, Rama probably is the only God, who is worshiped all over India, not just worshipping, he is respected and revered all over India. Even in places like Gujarat where Krishna worship predominates or in West Bengal, where Kali worship predominates; the respect and the devotion which Hindus have in their minds for Rama is same as in other parts of the world. The reason for it is Lord Ram is considered an ‘Ideal Human’. His life is considered as ‘Ideal Life’. For this reason, Rama is referred as ‘Maryada Purushotham’ Rama, and his Kingdom, the ‘Ramarajya’ as the ideal state.
Rama belongs to the "Ikshvaagu Vamsaa", which starts with Lord Brahmma and Brahmma's son 'Mareechi' takes over the reigns and from him his son 'Kasyapaa', 'Vaivaswathaa', 'Manu', 'Ikshvaagu'. Then it goes on hereditarily to 'Manthaatha' to 'Bagiratha', then to 'Raghu' (hence the other name 'Raghu Vamsaa') to 'Yayaathi' to 'Ajan', the father of 'Dasaratha' from whom Lord Rama takes over the reigns.
Rama is considered an Ideal son, because he gave up his rightful claim to the throne, and agreed to go into exile for fourteen years, to fulfill the vow that his father had given to Kaikeyi, one of King Dashratha's wives. He is considered as Ideal Husband who practiced the Ideal of Monogamy even though polygamy was common practice among the Kshatriyas. Even after he banished Sita, he remained loyal to her and was doing penance with a gold statue of Sita. He was an Ideal Friend who helped Sugriv, Bibhishan, etc. during catastrophes in their lives. Most importantly Rama is an Ideal King who chose his ‘Raja Dharma’ over his ‘Pathi Dharma’ when he banished Sita because his subjects expressed doubts about the chastity of Sita, ignoring his personal relationship with her.
Rama may or may not be historical, but he represents the values, morals and ethics of Hindus. Rama is the symbolism of Dharma. In short Rama teaches the ideals of Sanatana Dharma by living life according to it. The unique position and importance Lord Ram has in the Hindu scheme of things is due to this position of being Maryada Purushotham.
Source-
1, 2 - http://www.hindujagruti.org/hinduism/knowledge/article/what-is-the-real-meaning-of-ramarajya.html#11
by Nithin.S
The word Ramayan has been derived from two words ram and ayan. Ram ramayate 1 means to remain engrossed in one’s target. It is with reference to remaining engrossed in Bliss which is derived from spiritual practice. In the quote “Samasya ayanam Ramayanam”2 “ayan” means speed, the path or to go. Hence Ramayan is that which leads one to, ‘The Supreme Lord’. In other words, King Rama or the Lord Rama as he is often addressed to shows the path to reach Moksha (which the ultimate Purushartha of all hindus) by example of his own life.
Among the pantheon of Hindu Gods and Goddesses and Avatars, Rama probably is the only God, who is worshiped all over India, not just worshipping, he is respected and revered all over India. Even in places like Gujarat where Krishna worship predominates or in West Bengal, where Kali worship predominates; the respect and the devotion which Hindus have in their minds for Rama is same as in other parts of the world. The reason for it is Lord Ram is considered an ‘Ideal Human’. His life is considered as ‘Ideal Life’. For this reason, Rama is referred as ‘Maryada Purushotham’ Rama, and his Kingdom, the ‘Ramarajya’ as the ideal state.
Rama belongs to the "Ikshvaagu Vamsaa", which starts with Lord Brahmma and Brahmma's son 'Mareechi' takes over the reigns and from him his son 'Kasyapaa', 'Vaivaswathaa', 'Manu', 'Ikshvaagu'. Then it goes on hereditarily to 'Manthaatha' to 'Bagiratha', then to 'Raghu' (hence the other name 'Raghu Vamsaa') to 'Yayaathi' to 'Ajan', the father of 'Dasaratha' from whom Lord Rama takes over the reigns.
Rama is considered an Ideal son, because he gave up his rightful claim to the throne, and agreed to go into exile for fourteen years, to fulfill the vow that his father had given to Kaikeyi, one of King Dashratha's wives. He is considered as Ideal Husband who practiced the Ideal of Monogamy even though polygamy was common practice among the Kshatriyas. Even after he banished Sita, he remained loyal to her and was doing penance with a gold statue of Sita. He was an Ideal Friend who helped Sugriv, Bibhishan, etc. during catastrophes in their lives. Most importantly Rama is an Ideal King who chose his ‘Raja Dharma’ over his ‘Pathi Dharma’ when he banished Sita because his subjects expressed doubts about the chastity of Sita, ignoring his personal relationship with her.
Rama may or may not be historical, but he represents the values, morals and ethics of Hindus. Rama is the symbolism of Dharma. In short Rama teaches the ideals of Sanatana Dharma by living life according to it. The unique position and importance Lord Ram has in the Hindu scheme of things is due to this position of being Maryada Purushotham.
Source-
1, 2 - http://www.hindujagruti.org/hinduism/knowledge/article/what-is-the-real-meaning-of-ramarajya.html#11
Wednesday, August 15, 2007
1947-Partition of India
1947-Partition of India
Nithin.S
The Partition of India was a partition that led to the creation on 14 August 1947 and 15 August 1947, respectively, of the sovereign states of Dominion of Pakistan (later Islamic Republic of Pakistan) and Union of India (later Republic of India) upon becoming free from British rule. In particular, it refers to the partition of the Bengal province of British India into the East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) and the Indian state of West Bengal, as well as the similar partition of the Punjab region of British India into the Punjab province of West Pakistan and the Indian state of Punjab.
Most Indians today happily celebrate August 15th as Independence Day, but all seem to have forgotten that August 15 marks a day when our Holy Motherland, our Akhand Bharathvarsha was divided, when about 1/3 of our land was taken away from us, when a large number of Hindus were killed and more number became refugees in their own Nation. H.V Sheshadri in his Book, The Tragic Story of Partition says-
“In the [past] one thousand years many parts of our country had been ruled by the Muslims and then by the British, but the nation had never compromised, in principle, its sovereignty over any part of the motherland. As a result, our nation had never ceased to strive for throwing out the aggressors and liberate those parts. And history tells us that ultimately it did succeed in freeing the entire land from the clutches of foreign invaders. However, for the first time, Partition conceded the moral and legal right to them over certain parts of the country and declared an ignominious finale to the one thousand years old heroic struggle for freedom. Thus it was an act of humiliating surrender on the point of principle. The usual interpretation of Partition, however, does not utter a word about this aspect. Even while conceding Partition to be a tragedy, it is sought to be made out as the only practical way out then available - as the inevitable price for achieving freedom.”1
Throughout the history of Bharathavarsha, we find that even though there was no political unity, the whole Bharath was united together by a stronger bond of culture, that is, Sanatana Dharma. Akhand Bharat for Hindus was never a mere clod of clay. It was verily the Matrubhoomi, the Punyabhoomi, the Dharmabhoomi, the Devabhoomi, the Karmabhoomi - all sublimated into one single majestic figure of Bharat Mata. This Bharathavarsha was later painted as “Indian Sub-continent” by the English men for breaking the Hindu Morale. The territorial unity and integrity of Bharatavarsha - the land that lies south of the Himalayas, east of Sakadvipa (Seistan), south-east of Vãhlîka (Balkh), west of Burma and between the two seas - was never a political contrivance created by the sword of a conqueror. On the contrary, it was meant and manifested by Mother Nature herself as the cradle of an incomparable culture - the culture of Sanãtana Dharma.2
But, in 1947, this Bharathvarsha was divided due to the political unwillingness and the muslim appeasing policies of our national leaders Gandhi, Nehru and their Congress party. To quote the appropriate words of Prafull Goradia in this context: "For Mahatma Gandhi, no price was too great for appeasing Muslims, so that they did not oppose Hindus. That he did not understand the Muslims was proved by the conduct of the Muslim League and by the vivisection of the country."3
No one among the national leadership had the time or the talent to take stock of the situation, see the forces at work in a historical setting, and give a resounding call for a new national resolve - to foil the consolidation of Islamic imperialism in several parts of Bharatavarsha, and to launch another struggle for winning back all our people and every bit of national territory from the stranglehold of a theocratic state that was fast taking shape. The millions of Hindus who had to abandon their ancestral homes in East and West, became refugees at the very dawn of freedom for which they had worked so hard and made so many sacrifices. Their dream of becoming the proud citizens of a country freed from every vestige of foreign imperialism had suddenly turned into a nightmare. Something had gone seriously wrong somewhere.4
Pakistan grew out of the two-nation theory of the Muslim League, The very name of the State which the Muslim League envisaged-and achieved-is, in the context in which it was adopted, a standing insult to the Hindus and other non-Muslims living in India. This name-Pakistan-means literally the Land of the Pure or of Purity. This implies clearly that Hindus and all that belongs to them credally and materially is impure, defiled and unholy.5 Dr. Mohammad Iqbal in his presidential address at the Annual Muslim League Session held at Allahabad in 1930, said that he felt a separate nation for Muslims was essential.6 In the January of 1933 appeared, on behalf of certain Indian Muslim students at Cambridge, headed by Chaudhari Rehmat Ali, a pamphlet entitled Now or Never. This pamphlet advocated a complete break away of the Muslims of North-Western zones of India from the rest of the Indian nation.7 At the 1940 AIML conference in Lahore, Jinnah made clear his commitment to two separate states, a position from which the League never again wavered: “The Hindus and the Muslims belong to two different religions, philosophies, social customs and literature… To yoke together two such nations under a single state, one as a numerical minority and the other as a majority, must lead to growing discontent and final destruction of any fabric that may be so built up for the government of such a state.”8
The Direct Action of the Muslim League was launched on August the 16th, 1946 after cabinet Mission failed. The Muslim League Bengal Government declared August 16, 1946 to be a public holiday throughout Bengal. This Direct Action Day, also known as Great Calcutta killings, left 5,000 Hindus dead and about 15,000 injured. The Direct Action Day riots in Calcutta spread to other regions, reaching this district where a massive pogrom was organized against the Hindu minority. An important incident following Direct Action Day was the Noakhali district massacre on October 1946. The death toll is estimated to be in the thousands, with 51-75 thousand Hindus ethnically cleansed from the region. In the words of S. L. Ghosh of the Ananda Bazar Patrika- "The horror of the Noakhali outrage is unique in modern history in that it was not a simple case of turbulent members of the majority community (Muslims) killing off helpless members of the minority Hindu community, but was one whose chief aim was mass conversion, accompanied by loot, arson and wholesale devastation... No section of the Hindu community has been spared, the wealthier classes being dealt with more drastically. Abduction and outrage of Hindu women and forcible marriages were also resorted. The slogans used and the methods employed indicate that it was all part of a plan for the simultaneous establishment of Pakistan." An attack on Hindus occurred in Delhi on the 12th August, 1946. There was rioting in such vastly different places as Cawnpore, Bombay, Poona, Ahmedabad, Dacca and a few others. The lesson of it all was becoming very abundantly clear. The Muslim League was waging its war in earnest on non-Muslims to achieve its Pakistan. This was followed by genocide of Hindus and Sikhs by Muslim League in Punjab.According to Richard Symonds “at the lowest estimate, half a million people perished and twelve million became homeless”
August 15th marks this bloody partition, where Hindus not only lost a major chunk of their motherland, but also left thousands dead and millions as refugees. On the midnight of August 15th, 1947, Pandit Nehru made historic speech where he said- “Long years ago we made a tryst with destiny, and now the time comes when we shall redeem our pledge, not wholly or in full measure, but very substantially. At the stroke of the midnight hour, when the world sleeps, India will awake to life and freedom. A moment comes, which comes but rarely in history, when we step out from the old to the new, when an age ends, and when the soul of a nation, long suppressed, finds utterance. It is fitting that at this solemn moment we take the pledge of dedication to the service of India and her people and to the still larger cause of humanity.”9
I am forced to ask the question H.V. Sheshadri asks, “Did the tryst with destiny which our leaders had made long years ago include this crucial twist of history also? Was it a picture of a divided Bharat which had been the cherished vision of our freedom fighters including Pandit Nehru?”
Finally, Mahayogi Sri Aurobindo in his birthday message on 15th August 1947, said- “India today became free but she has not achieved Unity… The old communal division into Hindus and Muslims seems now to have hardened into permanent political division of the country. It is hoped that this settled fact will not be accepted as settled forever, as anything more than a temporary expedient. For if it lasts, India may be seriously weakened, even crippled; civil strife may remain always possible, possible even a new invasion and foreign conquest. India’s internal development and prosperity may be impeded, her position among nations weakened, her destiny impaired or even fractured. This must not be; the Partition must go. By whatever means, in whatever way, the division must go; unity must and will be achieved, for it is necessary for the greatness of the India’s future”10
Sources-
1 The Tragic Story of Partition, p. 12.
2 Muslim Separatism Causes and Consequences, Chapter 2, Sita Ram Goel
3 http://www.ivarta.com/columns/OL_070120.htm
4 Muslim Separatism Causes and Consequences, Chapter 3, Sita Ram Goel
5, Muslim League Attack on Sikhs and Hindus in the Punjab 1947, Chapter 1
Compiled for the SGPC, By S. Gurbachan Singh Talib
6,8 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_of_India
7 Muslim League Attack on Sikhs and Hindus in the Punjab 1947, Chapter 2
Compiled for the SGPC, By S. Gurbachan Singh Talib
9 http://my-utterances.sulekha.com/blog/post/2007/08/tryst-with-destiny-rare-vi...
10 Sri Aurobindo, Complete works, Vol 26
Nithin.S
The Partition of India was a partition that led to the creation on 14 August 1947 and 15 August 1947, respectively, of the sovereign states of Dominion of Pakistan (later Islamic Republic of Pakistan) and Union of India (later Republic of India) upon becoming free from British rule. In particular, it refers to the partition of the Bengal province of British India into the East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) and the Indian state of West Bengal, as well as the similar partition of the Punjab region of British India into the Punjab province of West Pakistan and the Indian state of Punjab.
Most Indians today happily celebrate August 15th as Independence Day, but all seem to have forgotten that August 15 marks a day when our Holy Motherland, our Akhand Bharathvarsha was divided, when about 1/3 of our land was taken away from us, when a large number of Hindus were killed and more number became refugees in their own Nation. H.V Sheshadri in his Book, The Tragic Story of Partition says-
“In the [past] one thousand years many parts of our country had been ruled by the Muslims and then by the British, but the nation had never compromised, in principle, its sovereignty over any part of the motherland. As a result, our nation had never ceased to strive for throwing out the aggressors and liberate those parts. And history tells us that ultimately it did succeed in freeing the entire land from the clutches of foreign invaders. However, for the first time, Partition conceded the moral and legal right to them over certain parts of the country and declared an ignominious finale to the one thousand years old heroic struggle for freedom. Thus it was an act of humiliating surrender on the point of principle. The usual interpretation of Partition, however, does not utter a word about this aspect. Even while conceding Partition to be a tragedy, it is sought to be made out as the only practical way out then available - as the inevitable price for achieving freedom.”1
Throughout the history of Bharathavarsha, we find that even though there was no political unity, the whole Bharath was united together by a stronger bond of culture, that is, Sanatana Dharma. Akhand Bharat for Hindus was never a mere clod of clay. It was verily the Matrubhoomi, the Punyabhoomi, the Dharmabhoomi, the Devabhoomi, the Karmabhoomi - all sublimated into one single majestic figure of Bharat Mata. This Bharathavarsha was later painted as “Indian Sub-continent” by the English men for breaking the Hindu Morale. The territorial unity and integrity of Bharatavarsha - the land that lies south of the Himalayas, east of Sakadvipa (Seistan), south-east of Vãhlîka (Balkh), west of Burma and between the two seas - was never a political contrivance created by the sword of a conqueror. On the contrary, it was meant and manifested by Mother Nature herself as the cradle of an incomparable culture - the culture of Sanãtana Dharma.2
But, in 1947, this Bharathvarsha was divided due to the political unwillingness and the muslim appeasing policies of our national leaders Gandhi, Nehru and their Congress party. To quote the appropriate words of Prafull Goradia in this context: "For Mahatma Gandhi, no price was too great for appeasing Muslims, so that they did not oppose Hindus. That he did not understand the Muslims was proved by the conduct of the Muslim League and by the vivisection of the country."3
No one among the national leadership had the time or the talent to take stock of the situation, see the forces at work in a historical setting, and give a resounding call for a new national resolve - to foil the consolidation of Islamic imperialism in several parts of Bharatavarsha, and to launch another struggle for winning back all our people and every bit of national territory from the stranglehold of a theocratic state that was fast taking shape. The millions of Hindus who had to abandon their ancestral homes in East and West, became refugees at the very dawn of freedom for which they had worked so hard and made so many sacrifices. Their dream of becoming the proud citizens of a country freed from every vestige of foreign imperialism had suddenly turned into a nightmare. Something had gone seriously wrong somewhere.4
Pakistan grew out of the two-nation theory of the Muslim League, The very name of the State which the Muslim League envisaged-and achieved-is, in the context in which it was adopted, a standing insult to the Hindus and other non-Muslims living in India. This name-Pakistan-means literally the Land of the Pure or of Purity. This implies clearly that Hindus and all that belongs to them credally and materially is impure, defiled and unholy.5 Dr. Mohammad Iqbal in his presidential address at the Annual Muslim League Session held at Allahabad in 1930, said that he felt a separate nation for Muslims was essential.6 In the January of 1933 appeared, on behalf of certain Indian Muslim students at Cambridge, headed by Chaudhari Rehmat Ali, a pamphlet entitled Now or Never. This pamphlet advocated a complete break away of the Muslims of North-Western zones of India from the rest of the Indian nation.7 At the 1940 AIML conference in Lahore, Jinnah made clear his commitment to two separate states, a position from which the League never again wavered: “The Hindus and the Muslims belong to two different religions, philosophies, social customs and literature… To yoke together two such nations under a single state, one as a numerical minority and the other as a majority, must lead to growing discontent and final destruction of any fabric that may be so built up for the government of such a state.”8
The Direct Action of the Muslim League was launched on August the 16th, 1946 after cabinet Mission failed. The Muslim League Bengal Government declared August 16, 1946 to be a public holiday throughout Bengal. This Direct Action Day, also known as Great Calcutta killings, left 5,000 Hindus dead and about 15,000 injured. The Direct Action Day riots in Calcutta spread to other regions, reaching this district where a massive pogrom was organized against the Hindu minority. An important incident following Direct Action Day was the Noakhali district massacre on October 1946. The death toll is estimated to be in the thousands, with 51-75 thousand Hindus ethnically cleansed from the region. In the words of S. L. Ghosh of the Ananda Bazar Patrika- "The horror of the Noakhali outrage is unique in modern history in that it was not a simple case of turbulent members of the majority community (Muslims) killing off helpless members of the minority Hindu community, but was one whose chief aim was mass conversion, accompanied by loot, arson and wholesale devastation... No section of the Hindu community has been spared, the wealthier classes being dealt with more drastically. Abduction and outrage of Hindu women and forcible marriages were also resorted. The slogans used and the methods employed indicate that it was all part of a plan for the simultaneous establishment of Pakistan." An attack on Hindus occurred in Delhi on the 12th August, 1946. There was rioting in such vastly different places as Cawnpore, Bombay, Poona, Ahmedabad, Dacca and a few others. The lesson of it all was becoming very abundantly clear. The Muslim League was waging its war in earnest on non-Muslims to achieve its Pakistan. This was followed by genocide of Hindus and Sikhs by Muslim League in Punjab.According to Richard Symonds “at the lowest estimate, half a million people perished and twelve million became homeless”
August 15th marks this bloody partition, where Hindus not only lost a major chunk of their motherland, but also left thousands dead and millions as refugees. On the midnight of August 15th, 1947, Pandit Nehru made historic speech where he said- “Long years ago we made a tryst with destiny, and now the time comes when we shall redeem our pledge, not wholly or in full measure, but very substantially. At the stroke of the midnight hour, when the world sleeps, India will awake to life and freedom. A moment comes, which comes but rarely in history, when we step out from the old to the new, when an age ends, and when the soul of a nation, long suppressed, finds utterance. It is fitting that at this solemn moment we take the pledge of dedication to the service of India and her people and to the still larger cause of humanity.”9
I am forced to ask the question H.V. Sheshadri asks, “Did the tryst with destiny which our leaders had made long years ago include this crucial twist of history also? Was it a picture of a divided Bharat which had been the cherished vision of our freedom fighters including Pandit Nehru?”
Finally, Mahayogi Sri Aurobindo in his birthday message on 15th August 1947, said- “India today became free but she has not achieved Unity… The old communal division into Hindus and Muslims seems now to have hardened into permanent political division of the country. It is hoped that this settled fact will not be accepted as settled forever, as anything more than a temporary expedient. For if it lasts, India may be seriously weakened, even crippled; civil strife may remain always possible, possible even a new invasion and foreign conquest. India’s internal development and prosperity may be impeded, her position among nations weakened, her destiny impaired or even fractured. This must not be; the Partition must go. By whatever means, in whatever way, the division must go; unity must and will be achieved, for it is necessary for the greatness of the India’s future”10
Sources-
1 The Tragic Story of Partition, p. 12.
2 Muslim Separatism Causes and Consequences, Chapter 2, Sita Ram Goel
3 http://www.ivarta.com/columns/OL_070120.htm
4 Muslim Separatism Causes and Consequences, Chapter 3, Sita Ram Goel
5, Muslim League Attack on Sikhs and Hindus in the Punjab 1947, Chapter 1
Compiled for the SGPC, By S. Gurbachan Singh Talib
6,8 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partition_of_India
7 Muslim League Attack on Sikhs and Hindus in the Punjab 1947, Chapter 2
Compiled for the SGPC, By S. Gurbachan Singh Talib
9 http://my-utterances.sulekha.com/blog/post/2007/08/tryst-with-destiny-rare-vi...
10 Sri Aurobindo, Complete works, Vol 26
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
Secularists, Marxists and the ‘Avarana’ of Truth by Nithin.S
Secularists, Marxists and the ‘Avarana’ of Truth
Nitthin.S
During the recent book release function of the Kannada book “Aavaranada Anaavarana (The unraveling of ‘Book’Aavarana)”, written by N.S.Shankar in Bangalore, noted writer and Jnanapeeta award winner U.R.Ananthamurthy, while speaking about the book for its “critical analysis” of Kannada novel Aavarana by noted author S.L.Byrappa said-
“Bhyrappa does not know either Hindu religion or the art of story-telling. He is only a debater…He does not go beyond his opinions. He constructs the plot and selects characters only to suit his opinions and end up as a debater, rather than a creative writer.”
Further Chandrashekhar Kambar and G.K. Govinda Rao who were also present said “Avarana is a bad book” and “Reject the book” respectively.1
Let us examine how valid are their comments.. S.L.Byrappa is one of the most popular writer and Kannada novelist. He has a Phd in Philosophy; his doctoral dissertation entitled “Satya Mattu Soundarya” (Truth and Beauty) explores complex relationships between truth, ethics, beauty, art, existence, and philosophy. He has written some of the celebrated novels like “Vamsha Vruksha”, “Daatu”, most notably his magnum opus, “Parva”.
The present novel “Avarana” meaning “veil” or “truth masking”, is his second historical novel covering the time period between 8th - 14th centuries of India. His first historical novel 'SArTa' covered the time up to 8th century. The latest novel Avarana is already going for its 10th edition2. The novel has seen nine editions in four months after it was first published in February last. The conflict of truth v/s untruth is the topic explored in his previous novel SAkshi at individual level. AvaraNa explores the same problem at the global level. The twin objectives of the novel- explore history and expose historians, who are distorting it. In the book Byrappa tries to show the real history of India under Moghuls.
The Marxists and Seculars have created the myth that Muslim rulers were tolerant. They deny that there was mass temple destruction and mass Killing of Hindus. But, Dr.Koenraad Elst in his book “Negationism in India Concealing the record of Islam”3 writes- “The Muslim conquests, down to the 16th century, were for the Hindus a pure struggle of life and death. Entire cities were burnt down and the populations massacred, with hundreds of thousands killed in every campaign, and similar numbers deported as slaves. Every new invader made (often literally) his hills of Hindus skulls. Thus, the conquest of Afghanistan in the year 1000 was followed by the annihilation of the Hindu population; the region is still called the Hindu Kush, i.e. Hindu slaughter. The Bahmani sultans (1347-1480) in central India made it a rule to kill 100,000 captives in a single day, and many more on other occasions. The conquest of the Vijayanagar empire in 1564 left the capital plus large areas of Karnataka depopulated. And so on.”
About the destruction of Hindu Temples, Sita Ram Goel writes in his book “Hindu Temples :What Happened To Them -Volume II :The Islamic Evidence”4-
“Mahmûd of Ghazni robbed and burnt down 1,000 temples at Mathura, and 10,000 in and around Kanauj. One of his successors, Ibrãhîm, demolished 1,000 temples each in Hindustan (Ganga-Yamuna Doab) and Malwa. Muhammad Ghûrî destroyed another 1,000 at Varanasi. Qutbu’d-Dîn Aibak employed elephants for pulling down 1,000 temples in Delhi. “Alî I ‘Ãdil Shãh of Bijapur destroyed 200 to 300 temples in Karnataka. A sufi, Qãyim Shãh, destroyed 12 temples at Tiruchirapalli. Such exact or approximate counts, however, are available only in a few cases. Most of the time we are informed that “many strong temples which would have remained unshaken even by the trumpets blown on the Day of Judgment, were levelled with the ground when swept by the wind of Islãm”. Further, Goel takes pain to make a long list of places where temples were converted to mosques. I shall list here only a few important ones5-
Epigraphy evidences[temples have been converted to mosques]
1. Quwwat al-Islam Masjid, Qutb Minar, Delhi by Qutbud-Din Aibak in 1192 A.D.
2. Masjid at Manvi in the Raichur District of Karnataka, Firuz Shah Bahmani, 1406-07 A.D
3. Jami Masjid at Malan, Palanpur Taluka, Banaskantha District of Gujarat: ?The Jami Masjid was built? by Khan-I-Azam Ulugh Khan, The date of construction is mentioned as 1462 A.D. in the reign of Mahmud Shah I (Begada) of Gujarat.
4. Hammam Darwaza Masjid at Jaunpur in Uttar Pradesh, Its chronogram yields the year 1567 A.D. in the reign of Akbar, the Great Mughal
5. Jami Masjid at Ghoda in the Poona District of Maharashtra, The inscription is dated 1586 A.D. when the Poona region was ruled by the Nizam Shahi sultans of Ahmadnagar
6. Gachinala Masjid at Cumbum in the Kurnool District of Andhra Pradesh, The date of construction is mentioned as 1729-30 A.D. in the reign of the Mughal Emperor Muhammad Shah.
Literary Evidences-
1. Jhain[name of the place], Jalalud-Din Firuz Khalji went to the place and ordered destruction of temples, mentioned in Miftah-ul-Futuh.
2. Devagiri, Alaud-Din Khalji destroyed the temples of the idolaters , , mentioned in Miftah-ul-Futuh.
3. Somanath, Ulugh Khan, mentioned in Tarikh-i-Alai
4. Delhi, , Alaud-Din Khalji , Tarikh-i-Alai
5. Ranthambhor, mentioned in Tarikh-i-Alai
6. Brahmastpuri (Chidambaram), Malik Kafur, Tarikh-i-Alai
7. Madura, mentioned in Tarikh-i-Alai
8. Fatan: (Pattan), mentioned in Ashiqa
9. Ma?bar: (Parts of South India), Tarikh-i-Alai
These evidences clearly prove that there was indeed Hindu holocaust and the destruction of temples. Dr.Koenraad Elst while while summarizing the Hindu losses at the hands of Muslim invaders concludes6- “There is no official estimate of the total death toll of Hindus at the hands of Islam. A first glance at important testimonies by Muslim chroniclers suggests that, over 13 centuries and a territory as vast as the Subcontinent, Muslim Holy Warriors easily killed more Hindus than the 6 million of the Holocaust. Ferishtha lists several occasions when the Bahmani sultans in central India (1347-1528) killed a hundred thousand Hindus, which they set as a minimum goal whenever they felt like "punishing" the Hindus; and they were only a third-rank provincial dynasty. The biggest slaughters took place during the raids of Mahmud Ghaznavi (ca. 1000 CE); during the actual conquest of North India by Mohammed Ghori and his lieutenants (1192 ff.); and under the Delhi Sultanate (1206-1526). The Moghuls (1526-1857), even Babar and Aurangzeb, were fairly restrained tyrants by comparison. Prof. K.S. Lal once estimated that the Indian population declined by 50 million under the Sultanate, but that would be hard to substantiate; research into the magnitude of the damage Islam did to India is yet to start in right earnest.”
S.L.Byrappa, shows all these facts by using the story-within-a-story technique. The novel’s main character, Lakshmi turned Razia, discoveres the truth of Islamic history of India and writes a novel to express her understanding and to oppose the system that is creating an AvaraNa[veil] to prevent society from understanding the truth. The novel ends with Lakshmi/Razia trying to publish her novel, to find it banned by the government. This is similar to the many books banned like “Understanding Islam through Hadis” by Ram Swarup, “The Calcutta Quran Petition” by Sita Ram Goel which has tried to question Islam or the Islamic history of India. The historical facts about the medieval India under Islamic rule have been taken from104 references from 51 authors. The list of books that appear in the novel ranges from Babur Nama to Naipaul to Artha Shastra of Kautilya.7
If we just examine the history texts books prescribed in the schools, we will notice how history has been suppressed, distorted and misrepresented and complete falsehood has been propagated. Just few days back there was uproar in Rajya Sabha over distortions in NCERT school textbooks, including description of freedom fighter Balgangadhar Tilak as “terrorist” and terming Jat community as “marauders”.8 Ram Swarup has this to say about Marxist historians and their distortions- “Marxists have taken to rewriting Indian history on a large scale and it has meant its systematic falsification. They have a dogmatic view of history and for them the use of any history is to prove their dogma. Their very approach is hurtful to truth…. The Marxists contempt for India, particularly the India of religion, culture and philosophy, is deep and theoretically fortified. It exceeds the contempt ever shown by the most die-hard imperialists”9
Some of the other falsehood these Secular-Marxist historians propagate are-
1] Aryan Invasion Theory
2] Large scale destruction of Buddhists and Jain temples at the hands of Hindus in pre-Islamic India
Let us examine the Aryan Invation Theory [AIT]. Dr.Koenraad Elst, in his “The Vedic Evidence”10 after examining the Vedic corpus for any evidence for Aryan invasion theory proposed by the Marxist school, concludes- “The status question is still, more than ever, that the Vedic corpus provides no reference to an immigration of the so-called Vedic Aryans from Central Asia. This need not be taken as sufficient proof that such an invasion never took place... Perhaps such an invasion from a non-Indian homeland into India took place at a much earlier date…But at least, such an ?Aryan invasion? cannot be proven from the information provided by the Vedic narrative itself.” He further provides Astronomical and Litarary evidences against the AIT in his other essays.
In his book “Myth of Aryan Invasion Theory of India”11, David Frawley while commenting on the Political and Social Ramifications concludes-
“First it served to divide India into a northern Aryan and southern Dravidian culture which were made hostile to each other… Second, it gave the British an excuse for their conquest of India. They could claim to be doing only what the Aryan ancestors of the Hindus had previously done millennia ago. This same justification could be used by the Muslims or any other invaders of India. Third, it served to make Vedic culture later than and possibly derived from the Middle Eastern… Fourth, it allowed the sciences of India to be given a Greek basis… Fifth, it gave the Marxists a good basis for projecting their class struggle model of society on to India, with the invading Brahmins oppressing the indigenous Shudras (lower castes)” He further concludes that- “In short, the compelling reasons for the Aryan invasion theory were neither literary or archeological but political and religious that is to say, not scholarship but prejudice”
These clearly show that AIT which Marxists have been propagating is based on assumptions and pre-conceived notion, rather than hard evidences.
Now let us examine the second claim. Sita Ram Goel12 while comenting on the issue says- “It is intriguing indeed that whenever archaeological evidence points towards a mosque as standing on the site of a Hindu temple, our Marxist professors start seeing a Buddhist monastery buried underneath. They also invent some ?aiva king as destroying Buddhist and Jain shrines whenever the large-scale destruction of Hindu temples by Islamic invaders is mentioned. They never mention the destruction of big Buddhist and Jain complexes which dotted the length and breadth of India, Khurasan, and Sinkiang on the eve of the Islamic invasion, as testified by Hüen Tsang.”
Further he names some of the important places like Delhi, Mathura, Hastinapur, Kanauj, Sravasti, Ayodhya, Varanasi, Sarnath, Nalanda, Vikramasila where Buddhist and Jain temples were destroyed by the swordsmen of Islam.Finally he concludes in the following words- “It was also conceded that though Brahmanical, Buddhist and Jain sects and subsects had had heated discussions among themselves and used even strong language for their adversaries, the occasions when they exchanged physical blows were few and far between. The recent spurt of accusations that Hindus also were bigots and vandals like Christians and Muslims, seems to be an after-thought. Apologists who find it impossible to whitewash Christianity and Islam, are out to redress the balance by blackening Hinduism” These things clearly proves the claims of JNU historians as wrong.
The character assassination of Byrappa done by Ananthamurthy is uncalled for and progressives and intellectuals stoop into. The controvercy between Ananthamurthy and Byrappa ended when after few days, when he declared that he will not take part in literary functions in future. This is a clear case of what can be called as “Spit and Run”. This has been a general strategy used by these pseudo-secularists.
Just few months back there was another controversy, courted by DV Shankaramurthy, the education minister of Karnataka when he said that Tipu Sultan was anti-Kannada and that he should not be glorified. Then, noted Dramatist of Karnataka Girish Karnard called for an open debate with the minister and firmly contested that Tipu Sultan was a national hero. Previously he had written a play titled - "The Dreams of Tipu Sultan" in which he portrayed Tipu Sultan as a magnanimous character and national hero. This stand of glorification of Tipu Sultan and the suppression of atrocities he committed against Hindus was countered by S.L.Byrappa with facts and figures. But, when Karnad gave his response to Byrappa, instead of countering the points rised by Byrappa and justifying his glorification of Tipu Sultan, he accused Byrappa of becoming a "dhiDIr"(quick) historian overnight.13 Another case of character assassination.
These accounts clearly shows how these self-proclaimed “progressives” and “intellectuals” are building an “Avarana” around the “Satya”[Truth] of History and Religion and how they are misguiding the common Indians under the guise of “National Ingetration” and “Communal Harmony”. S.L.Byrappa wrote that “The relationships between communities, (Hindu and Muslim in this context) should not be built on false foundations - but on solid truths”14. Indeed, True National Integration can only occur when the facts of history are accepted and a new beginning is made.
Sources-
1
http://thatskannada.oneindia.in/sahitya/article/280507avarana_ananthmurthy_debate.html
http://churumuri.wordpress.com/2007/06/02/sl-bhyrappa-versus-ur-anantha-murthy/
2
http://www.starofmysore.com/main.asp?type=news&item=13343
3
http://koenraadelst.voiceofdharma.com/books/negaind/ch2.htm
4
http://www.voi.org/books/htemples2/ch8.htm
5
http://www.voi.org/books/htemples1/ch2.htm
6
http://koenraadelst.voiceofdharma.com/articles/irin/genocide.html
7
http://live-views.sulekha.com/blog/post/2007/02/anavarana-by-s-l-byrappa.htm
http://rand-rambler.blogspot.com/2007/02/avarana-by-sl-bhyrappa-eye-opener.html
8
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2006/20060819/nation.htm#13
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=4§ion=0&article=78114&d=19&m=8&y=2006
http://www.ivarta.com/columns/OL_070609.htm
9
http://www.voi.org/books/htemples1/ch6.htm
10
http://koenraadelst.voiceofdharma.com/articles/aid/vedicevidence.html
11
http://www.hindubooks.org/david_frawley/myth_aryan_invasion/political_and_social_ramifications/page1.htm
12
http://www.voi.org/books/htemples2/ch5.htm
13
http://www.hindu.com/2006/09/20/stories/2006092004540400.htm
http://rand-rambler.blogspot.com/2006/10/girish-karnad-sl-bhyrappa-tipu-sultan.html
14
http://rand-rambler.blogspot.com/2006/10/girish-karnad-sl-bhyrappa-tipu-sultan.html
Nitthin.S
During the recent book release function of the Kannada book “Aavaranada Anaavarana (The unraveling of ‘Book’Aavarana)”, written by N.S.Shankar in Bangalore, noted writer and Jnanapeeta award winner U.R.Ananthamurthy, while speaking about the book for its “critical analysis” of Kannada novel Aavarana by noted author S.L.Byrappa said-
“Bhyrappa does not know either Hindu religion or the art of story-telling. He is only a debater…He does not go beyond his opinions. He constructs the plot and selects characters only to suit his opinions and end up as a debater, rather than a creative writer.”
Further Chandrashekhar Kambar and G.K. Govinda Rao who were also present said “Avarana is a bad book” and “Reject the book” respectively.1
Let us examine how valid are their comments.. S.L.Byrappa is one of the most popular writer and Kannada novelist. He has a Phd in Philosophy; his doctoral dissertation entitled “Satya Mattu Soundarya” (Truth and Beauty) explores complex relationships between truth, ethics, beauty, art, existence, and philosophy. He has written some of the celebrated novels like “Vamsha Vruksha”, “Daatu”, most notably his magnum opus, “Parva”.
The present novel “Avarana” meaning “veil” or “truth masking”, is his second historical novel covering the time period between 8th - 14th centuries of India. His first historical novel 'SArTa' covered the time up to 8th century. The latest novel Avarana is already going for its 10th edition2. The novel has seen nine editions in four months after it was first published in February last. The conflict of truth v/s untruth is the topic explored in his previous novel SAkshi at individual level. AvaraNa explores the same problem at the global level. The twin objectives of the novel- explore history and expose historians, who are distorting it. In the book Byrappa tries to show the real history of India under Moghuls.
The Marxists and Seculars have created the myth that Muslim rulers were tolerant. They deny that there was mass temple destruction and mass Killing of Hindus. But, Dr.Koenraad Elst in his book “Negationism in India Concealing the record of Islam”3 writes- “The Muslim conquests, down to the 16th century, were for the Hindus a pure struggle of life and death. Entire cities were burnt down and the populations massacred, with hundreds of thousands killed in every campaign, and similar numbers deported as slaves. Every new invader made (often literally) his hills of Hindus skulls. Thus, the conquest of Afghanistan in the year 1000 was followed by the annihilation of the Hindu population; the region is still called the Hindu Kush, i.e. Hindu slaughter. The Bahmani sultans (1347-1480) in central India made it a rule to kill 100,000 captives in a single day, and many more on other occasions. The conquest of the Vijayanagar empire in 1564 left the capital plus large areas of Karnataka depopulated. And so on.”
About the destruction of Hindu Temples, Sita Ram Goel writes in his book “Hindu Temples :What Happened To Them -Volume II :The Islamic Evidence”4-
“Mahmûd of Ghazni robbed and burnt down 1,000 temples at Mathura, and 10,000 in and around Kanauj. One of his successors, Ibrãhîm, demolished 1,000 temples each in Hindustan (Ganga-Yamuna Doab) and Malwa. Muhammad Ghûrî destroyed another 1,000 at Varanasi. Qutbu’d-Dîn Aibak employed elephants for pulling down 1,000 temples in Delhi. “Alî I ‘Ãdil Shãh of Bijapur destroyed 200 to 300 temples in Karnataka. A sufi, Qãyim Shãh, destroyed 12 temples at Tiruchirapalli. Such exact or approximate counts, however, are available only in a few cases. Most of the time we are informed that “many strong temples which would have remained unshaken even by the trumpets blown on the Day of Judgment, were levelled with the ground when swept by the wind of Islãm”. Further, Goel takes pain to make a long list of places where temples were converted to mosques. I shall list here only a few important ones5-
Epigraphy evidences[temples have been converted to mosques]
1. Quwwat al-Islam Masjid, Qutb Minar, Delhi by Qutbud-Din Aibak in 1192 A.D.
2. Masjid at Manvi in the Raichur District of Karnataka, Firuz Shah Bahmani, 1406-07 A.D
3. Jami Masjid at Malan, Palanpur Taluka, Banaskantha District of Gujarat: ?The Jami Masjid was built? by Khan-I-Azam Ulugh Khan, The date of construction is mentioned as 1462 A.D. in the reign of Mahmud Shah I (Begada) of Gujarat.
4. Hammam Darwaza Masjid at Jaunpur in Uttar Pradesh, Its chronogram yields the year 1567 A.D. in the reign of Akbar, the Great Mughal
5. Jami Masjid at Ghoda in the Poona District of Maharashtra, The inscription is dated 1586 A.D. when the Poona region was ruled by the Nizam Shahi sultans of Ahmadnagar
6. Gachinala Masjid at Cumbum in the Kurnool District of Andhra Pradesh, The date of construction is mentioned as 1729-30 A.D. in the reign of the Mughal Emperor Muhammad Shah.
Literary Evidences-
1. Jhain[name of the place], Jalalud-Din Firuz Khalji went to the place and ordered destruction of temples, mentioned in Miftah-ul-Futuh.
2. Devagiri, Alaud-Din Khalji destroyed the temples of the idolaters , , mentioned in Miftah-ul-Futuh.
3. Somanath, Ulugh Khan, mentioned in Tarikh-i-Alai
4. Delhi, , Alaud-Din Khalji , Tarikh-i-Alai
5. Ranthambhor, mentioned in Tarikh-i-Alai
6. Brahmastpuri (Chidambaram), Malik Kafur, Tarikh-i-Alai
7. Madura, mentioned in Tarikh-i-Alai
8. Fatan: (Pattan), mentioned in Ashiqa
9. Ma?bar: (Parts of South India), Tarikh-i-Alai
These evidences clearly prove that there was indeed Hindu holocaust and the destruction of temples. Dr.Koenraad Elst while while summarizing the Hindu losses at the hands of Muslim invaders concludes6- “There is no official estimate of the total death toll of Hindus at the hands of Islam. A first glance at important testimonies by Muslim chroniclers suggests that, over 13 centuries and a territory as vast as the Subcontinent, Muslim Holy Warriors easily killed more Hindus than the 6 million of the Holocaust. Ferishtha lists several occasions when the Bahmani sultans in central India (1347-1528) killed a hundred thousand Hindus, which they set as a minimum goal whenever they felt like "punishing" the Hindus; and they were only a third-rank provincial dynasty. The biggest slaughters took place during the raids of Mahmud Ghaznavi (ca. 1000 CE); during the actual conquest of North India by Mohammed Ghori and his lieutenants (1192 ff.); and under the Delhi Sultanate (1206-1526). The Moghuls (1526-1857), even Babar and Aurangzeb, were fairly restrained tyrants by comparison. Prof. K.S. Lal once estimated that the Indian population declined by 50 million under the Sultanate, but that would be hard to substantiate; research into the magnitude of the damage Islam did to India is yet to start in right earnest.”
S.L.Byrappa, shows all these facts by using the story-within-a-story technique. The novel’s main character, Lakshmi turned Razia, discoveres the truth of Islamic history of India and writes a novel to express her understanding and to oppose the system that is creating an AvaraNa[veil] to prevent society from understanding the truth. The novel ends with Lakshmi/Razia trying to publish her novel, to find it banned by the government. This is similar to the many books banned like “Understanding Islam through Hadis” by Ram Swarup, “The Calcutta Quran Petition” by Sita Ram Goel which has tried to question Islam or the Islamic history of India. The historical facts about the medieval India under Islamic rule have been taken from104 references from 51 authors. The list of books that appear in the novel ranges from Babur Nama to Naipaul to Artha Shastra of Kautilya.7
If we just examine the history texts books prescribed in the schools, we will notice how history has been suppressed, distorted and misrepresented and complete falsehood has been propagated. Just few days back there was uproar in Rajya Sabha over distortions in NCERT school textbooks, including description of freedom fighter Balgangadhar Tilak as “terrorist” and terming Jat community as “marauders”.8 Ram Swarup has this to say about Marxist historians and their distortions- “Marxists have taken to rewriting Indian history on a large scale and it has meant its systematic falsification. They have a dogmatic view of history and for them the use of any history is to prove their dogma. Their very approach is hurtful to truth…. The Marxists contempt for India, particularly the India of religion, culture and philosophy, is deep and theoretically fortified. It exceeds the contempt ever shown by the most die-hard imperialists”9
Some of the other falsehood these Secular-Marxist historians propagate are-
1] Aryan Invasion Theory
2] Large scale destruction of Buddhists and Jain temples at the hands of Hindus in pre-Islamic India
Let us examine the Aryan Invation Theory [AIT]. Dr.Koenraad Elst, in his “The Vedic Evidence”10 after examining the Vedic corpus for any evidence for Aryan invasion theory proposed by the Marxist school, concludes- “The status question is still, more than ever, that the Vedic corpus provides no reference to an immigration of the so-called Vedic Aryans from Central Asia. This need not be taken as sufficient proof that such an invasion never took place... Perhaps such an invasion from a non-Indian homeland into India took place at a much earlier date…But at least, such an ?Aryan invasion? cannot be proven from the information provided by the Vedic narrative itself.” He further provides Astronomical and Litarary evidences against the AIT in his other essays.
In his book “Myth of Aryan Invasion Theory of India”11, David Frawley while commenting on the Political and Social Ramifications concludes-
“First it served to divide India into a northern Aryan and southern Dravidian culture which were made hostile to each other… Second, it gave the British an excuse for their conquest of India. They could claim to be doing only what the Aryan ancestors of the Hindus had previously done millennia ago. This same justification could be used by the Muslims or any other invaders of India. Third, it served to make Vedic culture later than and possibly derived from the Middle Eastern… Fourth, it allowed the sciences of India to be given a Greek basis… Fifth, it gave the Marxists a good basis for projecting their class struggle model of society on to India, with the invading Brahmins oppressing the indigenous Shudras (lower castes)” He further concludes that- “In short, the compelling reasons for the Aryan invasion theory were neither literary or archeological but political and religious that is to say, not scholarship but prejudice”
These clearly show that AIT which Marxists have been propagating is based on assumptions and pre-conceived notion, rather than hard evidences.
Now let us examine the second claim. Sita Ram Goel12 while comenting on the issue says- “It is intriguing indeed that whenever archaeological evidence points towards a mosque as standing on the site of a Hindu temple, our Marxist professors start seeing a Buddhist monastery buried underneath. They also invent some ?aiva king as destroying Buddhist and Jain shrines whenever the large-scale destruction of Hindu temples by Islamic invaders is mentioned. They never mention the destruction of big Buddhist and Jain complexes which dotted the length and breadth of India, Khurasan, and Sinkiang on the eve of the Islamic invasion, as testified by Hüen Tsang.”
Further he names some of the important places like Delhi, Mathura, Hastinapur, Kanauj, Sravasti, Ayodhya, Varanasi, Sarnath, Nalanda, Vikramasila where Buddhist and Jain temples were destroyed by the swordsmen of Islam.Finally he concludes in the following words- “It was also conceded that though Brahmanical, Buddhist and Jain sects and subsects had had heated discussions among themselves and used even strong language for their adversaries, the occasions when they exchanged physical blows were few and far between. The recent spurt of accusations that Hindus also were bigots and vandals like Christians and Muslims, seems to be an after-thought. Apologists who find it impossible to whitewash Christianity and Islam, are out to redress the balance by blackening Hinduism” These things clearly proves the claims of JNU historians as wrong.
The character assassination of Byrappa done by Ananthamurthy is uncalled for and progressives and intellectuals stoop into. The controvercy between Ananthamurthy and Byrappa ended when after few days, when he declared that he will not take part in literary functions in future. This is a clear case of what can be called as “Spit and Run”. This has been a general strategy used by these pseudo-secularists.
Just few months back there was another controversy, courted by DV Shankaramurthy, the education minister of Karnataka when he said that Tipu Sultan was anti-Kannada and that he should not be glorified. Then, noted Dramatist of Karnataka Girish Karnard called for an open debate with the minister and firmly contested that Tipu Sultan was a national hero. Previously he had written a play titled - "The Dreams of Tipu Sultan" in which he portrayed Tipu Sultan as a magnanimous character and national hero. This stand of glorification of Tipu Sultan and the suppression of atrocities he committed against Hindus was countered by S.L.Byrappa with facts and figures. But, when Karnad gave his response to Byrappa, instead of countering the points rised by Byrappa and justifying his glorification of Tipu Sultan, he accused Byrappa of becoming a "dhiDIr"(quick) historian overnight.13 Another case of character assassination.
These accounts clearly shows how these self-proclaimed “progressives” and “intellectuals” are building an “Avarana” around the “Satya”[Truth] of History and Religion and how they are misguiding the common Indians under the guise of “National Ingetration” and “Communal Harmony”. S.L.Byrappa wrote that “The relationships between communities, (Hindu and Muslim in this context) should not be built on false foundations - but on solid truths”14. Indeed, True National Integration can only occur when the facts of history are accepted and a new beginning is made.
Sources-
1
http://thatskannada.oneindia.in/sahitya/article/280507avarana_ananthmurthy_debate.html
http://churumuri.wordpress.com/2007/06/02/sl-bhyrappa-versus-ur-anantha-murthy/
2
http://www.starofmysore.com/main.asp?type=news&item=13343
3
http://koenraadelst.voiceofdharma.com/books/negaind/ch2.htm
4
http://www.voi.org/books/htemples2/ch8.htm
5
http://www.voi.org/books/htemples1/ch2.htm
6
http://koenraadelst.voiceofdharma.com/articles/irin/genocide.html
7
http://live-views.sulekha.com/blog/post/2007/02/anavarana-by-s-l-byrappa.htm
http://rand-rambler.blogspot.com/2007/02/avarana-by-sl-bhyrappa-eye-opener.html
8
http://www.tribuneindia.com/2006/20060819/nation.htm#13
http://www.arabnews.com/?page=4§ion=0&article=78114&d=19&m=8&y=2006
http://www.ivarta.com/columns/OL_070609.htm
9
http://www.voi.org/books/htemples1/ch6.htm
10
http://koenraadelst.voiceofdharma.com/articles/aid/vedicevidence.html
11
http://www.hindubooks.org/david_frawley/myth_aryan_invasion/political_and_social_ramifications/page1.htm
12
http://www.voi.org/books/htemples2/ch5.htm
13
http://www.hindu.com/2006/09/20/stories/2006092004540400.htm
http://rand-rambler.blogspot.com/2006/10/girish-karnad-sl-bhyrappa-tipu-sultan.html
14
http://rand-rambler.blogspot.com/2006/10/girish-karnad-sl-bhyrappa-tipu-sultan.html
Thursday, May 31, 2007
Does M.F.Hussain deserve Raja Ravi Varma Award?
Does M.F.Hussain deserve Raja Ravi Varma Award?
By Nithin.S
The recent decision of Kerala Government to felicitate noted Painter M.F.Hussain with Raja Ravi Varma Award1, needs critical examination due to the fact that about 1250 formal police complaints, 7 court cases 2 have been registered against M.F. Hussain for denigrating Hindu deities by painting them in the nude.
Some of the paintings of the said painter depict Goddess Durga in sexual union with Tiger, Goddess Lakshmi naked on Shree Ganesh's head, Naked Saraswati, Naked Shri Parvati, Naked Lord Hanuman and Goddess Sita sitting on thigh of Ravana , Naked Bharatmata, Naked Lord Hanuman looking at sex action of Lord Ram and Seeta, Naked Shri Ganga and Shri Yamuna relaxing in water, Full Clad Muslim King and naked Hindu Brahmin, Muslim poets Faiz, Galib are shown well-clothed, Prophet's Daughter Fatima fully clothed3. These clearly shows that his paintings are basically for denigrating Hinduism by showing its Gods and Goddesses in nudity where as showing Muslim kings and poets as fully clothed. This hypocrisy on the part of noted painter like M.F.Hussain is not desirable and rises doubts about his motive for painting these portraits.
Further, if we compare his paintings with that of done by Raja Ravi Varma we recognize a stark contrast. The paintings of Raja Ravi Varma are sattwik (aesthetically pure), whereas that of Hussain can be termed as pornography under the garb of Modern Art. Hence, it is very rational to ask the Kerala Government that are they not insulting Raja Ravi Varma by giving this award to M.F.Hussain? are they not legitimizing the denigration done by Hussain in his paintings?
Some people may argue that Art is a medium of expression of our feelings and thoughts and every artist should have freedom to express himself. But, they should note that there is a difference between self-expressing art and deliberate denigration of the beliefs of a particular community. There is a difference between genuine art and pornography. For, more than 1000 years Hindus have been oppressed and their beliefs and practices have been made fun off.
First it were Muslim rulers, who not only smashed and burned Hindu idols but also used them as lavoratory seats or handed over to butchers to be used as weights while selling meat. . Sculptures in relief on walls and pillars were disfigured or scraped away or torn down. Sacred vessels and scriptures used in worship were defiled and scattered or burnt. Cows were slaughtered on the temple sites so that Hindus could not use them again.4 Then, it was Christian missionaries and British who invented the Aryan invasion theory and published numerous anti- Hindu writings. Now it is a combined brigade of all these people who paint Hindu Gods naked or depict Hindu deities on toilet seats.
If any self respecting Hindus protest these denigrations, they are termed as communalist and Hindu fanatics by the self claimed intellectual secular forces of India. But, the question remains why did not they raise a voice, when Muslims all over the world agitated when Danish Newspaper published cartoons depicting Prophet Mohammad? Why this hypocrisy? This is because, Hindus are taken for granted. The legendary Hindu tolerance is being misused by people to serve their self interest.
It is high time that Hindus should come out of their inertia and inaction and openly address and fight for their concerns. Shunning all fear of being branded “obscurantists”, Hindus must turn perspicacious to distinguish between real art and its pretence. It is time for mass awareness as no political party has so far been convincing enough in its role of a true representative of Hindu concerns.
Sources-
1 http://www.zeenews.com/znnew/articles.asp?aid=370931&sid=REG
2 http://www.hindujagruti.org/activities/campaigns/national/mfhussain-campaign/hjsletter.php
3 http://www.hindujagruti.org/activities/campaigns/national/mfhussain-campaign/
4 http://www.voi.org/books/htemples1/ch2.htm
By Nithin.S
The recent decision of Kerala Government to felicitate noted Painter M.F.Hussain with Raja Ravi Varma Award1, needs critical examination due to the fact that about 1250 formal police complaints, 7 court cases 2 have been registered against M.F. Hussain for denigrating Hindu deities by painting them in the nude.
Some of the paintings of the said painter depict Goddess Durga in sexual union with Tiger, Goddess Lakshmi naked on Shree Ganesh's head, Naked Saraswati, Naked Shri Parvati, Naked Lord Hanuman and Goddess Sita sitting on thigh of Ravana , Naked Bharatmata, Naked Lord Hanuman looking at sex action of Lord Ram and Seeta, Naked Shri Ganga and Shri Yamuna relaxing in water, Full Clad Muslim King and naked Hindu Brahmin, Muslim poets Faiz, Galib are shown well-clothed, Prophet's Daughter Fatima fully clothed3. These clearly shows that his paintings are basically for denigrating Hinduism by showing its Gods and Goddesses in nudity where as showing Muslim kings and poets as fully clothed. This hypocrisy on the part of noted painter like M.F.Hussain is not desirable and rises doubts about his motive for painting these portraits.
Further, if we compare his paintings with that of done by Raja Ravi Varma we recognize a stark contrast. The paintings of Raja Ravi Varma are sattwik (aesthetically pure), whereas that of Hussain can be termed as pornography under the garb of Modern Art. Hence, it is very rational to ask the Kerala Government that are they not insulting Raja Ravi Varma by giving this award to M.F.Hussain? are they not legitimizing the denigration done by Hussain in his paintings?
Some people may argue that Art is a medium of expression of our feelings and thoughts and every artist should have freedom to express himself. But, they should note that there is a difference between self-expressing art and deliberate denigration of the beliefs of a particular community. There is a difference between genuine art and pornography. For, more than 1000 years Hindus have been oppressed and their beliefs and practices have been made fun off.
First it were Muslim rulers, who not only smashed and burned Hindu idols but also used them as lavoratory seats or handed over to butchers to be used as weights while selling meat. . Sculptures in relief on walls and pillars were disfigured or scraped away or torn down. Sacred vessels and scriptures used in worship were defiled and scattered or burnt. Cows were slaughtered on the temple sites so that Hindus could not use them again.4 Then, it was Christian missionaries and British who invented the Aryan invasion theory and published numerous anti- Hindu writings. Now it is a combined brigade of all these people who paint Hindu Gods naked or depict Hindu deities on toilet seats.
If any self respecting Hindus protest these denigrations, they are termed as communalist and Hindu fanatics by the self claimed intellectual secular forces of India. But, the question remains why did not they raise a voice, when Muslims all over the world agitated when Danish Newspaper published cartoons depicting Prophet Mohammad? Why this hypocrisy? This is because, Hindus are taken for granted. The legendary Hindu tolerance is being misused by people to serve their self interest.
It is high time that Hindus should come out of their inertia and inaction and openly address and fight for their concerns. Shunning all fear of being branded “obscurantists”, Hindus must turn perspicacious to distinguish between real art and its pretence. It is time for mass awareness as no political party has so far been convincing enough in its role of a true representative of Hindu concerns.
Sources-
1 http://www.zeenews.com/znnew/articles.asp?aid=370931&sid=REG
2 http://www.hindujagruti.org/activities/campaigns/national/mfhussain-campaign/hjsletter.php
3 http://www.hindujagruti.org/activities/campaigns/national/mfhussain-campaign/
4 http://www.voi.org/books/htemples1/ch2.htm
Saturday, April 21, 2007
The Book lost in translation?
The Book lost in translation?
Nithin.S
Apropos to the editorial “Islam's enemy within” [April-15] the author portrays a picture, that the root cause of Islamic terrorism lies in misinterpretation of the Islamic doctrines by the priesthood. The author while commenting that the present teaching of Islamic priesthood writes-“ most of which reflect nothing beyond prejudice, superstition and a range of values derived from the local culture, and that have little to do with the teachings of the Prophet.”
I would like to bring few facts into notice. Biographers of Muhammad have listed as many as eighty-two expeditions which he mounted against various tribes of Arabia and the neighboring lands, in a brief span of ten years between his migration to Medina in 622 CE and his death in 632 CE1.
Sita Ram Goel, renowned Historian after making an analysis of the life of Prophet Mohamud and his wars concludes that- “In fact, prophets other than Muhammad had arisen in Arabia itself, before, alongside and after Muhammad. But all of them had failed because they did not raise armies and assemble arsenals. Muhammad succeeded because he equipped his mission with a mailed fist. It may be noted that while he had only 301 ill-equipped warriors with him in the Battle of Badr (622 CE), he had 10,000 well-equipped men when he marched into Mecca eight years later (630 CE) and 30,000 when he planned an invasion of Palestine on the eve of his death (632 CE).2”
The Quran does not permit the existence or continuance of other faiths and their religious practices. Of the 6236 ayats in the Quran about 3,900 fall into two categories - those relating to Muslims who for their faith will be rewarded and those relating to Kafirs or nonbelievers who are to be punished.3
Nirad Chaudhury has pointed out, the division of Islam into two variants - the one Fundamentalist and the other Liberal - is the result of “either ignorance or repulsive hypocrisy”. Suhas Majumdar has concluded Jihad in these words- “To put the whole matter in a nutshell: the Koran as the word of Allah supplies the injunction; the Hadis in the language of the Prophet confirms it; and the Sunnah gives a practical demonstration of the same and thereby acts as an exemplar to future performers of the hallowed exercise called jihãd.4”
1 http://www.voi.org/books/tcqp/chi3.htm
2 http://www.voi.org/books/tcqp/chi4.htm
3 http://www.voi.org/books/tpmsi/ch01.htm
4 http://voiceofdharma.org/books/jihad/
Nithin.S
Apropos to the editorial “Islam's enemy within” [April-15] the author portrays a picture, that the root cause of Islamic terrorism lies in misinterpretation of the Islamic doctrines by the priesthood. The author while commenting that the present teaching of Islamic priesthood writes-“ most of which reflect nothing beyond prejudice, superstition and a range of values derived from the local culture, and that have little to do with the teachings of the Prophet.”
I would like to bring few facts into notice. Biographers of Muhammad have listed as many as eighty-two expeditions which he mounted against various tribes of Arabia and the neighboring lands, in a brief span of ten years between his migration to Medina in 622 CE and his death in 632 CE1.
Sita Ram Goel, renowned Historian after making an analysis of the life of Prophet Mohamud and his wars concludes that- “In fact, prophets other than Muhammad had arisen in Arabia itself, before, alongside and after Muhammad. But all of them had failed because they did not raise armies and assemble arsenals. Muhammad succeeded because he equipped his mission with a mailed fist. It may be noted that while he had only 301 ill-equipped warriors with him in the Battle of Badr (622 CE), he had 10,000 well-equipped men when he marched into Mecca eight years later (630 CE) and 30,000 when he planned an invasion of Palestine on the eve of his death (632 CE).2”
The Quran does not permit the existence or continuance of other faiths and their religious practices. Of the 6236 ayats in the Quran about 3,900 fall into two categories - those relating to Muslims who for their faith will be rewarded and those relating to Kafirs or nonbelievers who are to be punished.3
Nirad Chaudhury has pointed out, the division of Islam into two variants - the one Fundamentalist and the other Liberal - is the result of “either ignorance or repulsive hypocrisy”. Suhas Majumdar has concluded Jihad in these words- “To put the whole matter in a nutshell: the Koran as the word of Allah supplies the injunction; the Hadis in the language of the Prophet confirms it; and the Sunnah gives a practical demonstration of the same and thereby acts as an exemplar to future performers of the hallowed exercise called jihãd.4”
1 http://www.voi.org/books/tcqp/chi3.htm
2 http://www.voi.org/books/tcqp/chi4.htm
3 http://www.voi.org/books/tpmsi/ch01.htm
4 http://voiceofdharma.org/books/jihad/
A Call to Nation
A Call to Nation
Nithin.S
Over the last decade about 20,000 people1 have been killed in Jammu and Kashmir due to Pakistan supported Islamic terrorism. In 2005, naxalite violence has claimed 669 lives including 153 police personnel in 1594 incidents as against 556 casualties in 1533 incidents in 2004.2 The attempts have been made for the Christianization of Tirupathi3- Hindu holy place in Andra Pradesh by Christian missionaries.
The appeasement of minorities especially the Muslim community has increased with the tabulation of fraud report of Jaustic Sachar Committee4
In India, Hindus who are in numerical Majority are in Moral minority. The Hindu interests are neither taken care of nor protected. It may be Government control of Hindu temples5 and diverting its funds for non-Hindu causes or the propagation of the Aryan invasion lie6 or even the negationism of the holocaust experienced by Hindus in the past.7 For last thousand years, Hindu society is continuously being targeted first, by Islamic invaders, then by Christian British rulers, and now, after independence by Islamic terrorism, Christian Misionaryism, Marxist Goondaism, and Nehruvian Psuedo-secularism.
The War against Hindus had started with the unsuccessful attempts made by Caliph Umar[634AD-644AD] to infiltrate into Sindh region of Bharath of that time8 and is still going on. About 80 million9 Hindus lost their lives while fighting the Islamic rule in the middle ages, and thousands died during freedom struggle. But even now suffering of Hindus have not ended. 300,00010 Kashmiri Pandits had been driven out of their ancestral land in the name of Ethnic cleansing by the Muslim fundamentalists of Kashmir, But, still Media which blown out of proportion, the murder of Graham Stains, didn’t even gave the attention they deserved. In India, secularism for all practical purposes have become Anti-Majority[Hindus] and Pro-Minority.
In one side, Jehadis are trying to bring another partition of India, by isolating North-East from rest of India [Jan 15,2005,The Pioneer], on Other side, Hindus are being forcibly converted into Christianity. Then, the Marxists and Pseudo-secularists are assisting these Anti-national forces. Hindus have to get united forgetting their difference in caste, community, beliefs, region, language and sex and protect Hindu Nation. This war which Hindus have been fighting for almost 1400 years is a war which they have to Fight for Honor, for Nation, culture and existence because their very existence is in question. This is a call to Nation, a call to Hindus and all Nationalists to Fight for Victory.
1 http://www.kashmir-information.com/Terrorism/machine.html
2 http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/document/papers/06Mar13_Naxal% 0Problem%20.htm
3 http://www.hvk.org/articles/0706/28.html
4 http://www.newstodaynet.com/2007sud/apr07/030407.htm
5 http://www.hinduismtoday.com/archives/2006/4-6/30-33_acharya.shtml
6 http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/articles/aid/davidduke.html
7 http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/books/negaind/index.htm
8 http://www.voi.org/books/hhrmi/ch2.htm
9 http://www.voi.org/books/negaind/ch2.htm
10 http://www.kashmir-information.com/Terrorism/machine.html
Nithin.S
Over the last decade about 20,000 people1 have been killed in Jammu and Kashmir due to Pakistan supported Islamic terrorism. In 2005, naxalite violence has claimed 669 lives including 153 police personnel in 1594 incidents as against 556 casualties in 1533 incidents in 2004.2 The attempts have been made for the Christianization of Tirupathi3- Hindu holy place in Andra Pradesh by Christian missionaries.
The appeasement of minorities especially the Muslim community has increased with the tabulation of fraud report of Jaustic Sachar Committee4
In India, Hindus who are in numerical Majority are in Moral minority. The Hindu interests are neither taken care of nor protected. It may be Government control of Hindu temples5 and diverting its funds for non-Hindu causes or the propagation of the Aryan invasion lie6 or even the negationism of the holocaust experienced by Hindus in the past.7 For last thousand years, Hindu society is continuously being targeted first, by Islamic invaders, then by Christian British rulers, and now, after independence by Islamic terrorism, Christian Misionaryism, Marxist Goondaism, and Nehruvian Psuedo-secularism.
The War against Hindus had started with the unsuccessful attempts made by Caliph Umar[634AD-644AD] to infiltrate into Sindh region of Bharath of that time8 and is still going on. About 80 million9 Hindus lost their lives while fighting the Islamic rule in the middle ages, and thousands died during freedom struggle. But even now suffering of Hindus have not ended. 300,00010 Kashmiri Pandits had been driven out of their ancestral land in the name of Ethnic cleansing by the Muslim fundamentalists of Kashmir, But, still Media which blown out of proportion, the murder of Graham Stains, didn’t even gave the attention they deserved. In India, secularism for all practical purposes have become Anti-Majority[Hindus] and Pro-Minority.
In one side, Jehadis are trying to bring another partition of India, by isolating North-East from rest of India [Jan 15,2005,The Pioneer], on Other side, Hindus are being forcibly converted into Christianity. Then, the Marxists and Pseudo-secularists are assisting these Anti-national forces. Hindus have to get united forgetting their difference in caste, community, beliefs, region, language and sex and protect Hindu Nation. This war which Hindus have been fighting for almost 1400 years is a war which they have to Fight for Honor, for Nation, culture and existence because their very existence is in question. This is a call to Nation, a call to Hindus and all Nationalists to Fight for Victory.
1 http://www.kashmir-information.com/Terrorism/machine.html
2 http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/document/papers/06Mar13_Naxal% 0Problem%20.htm
3 http://www.hvk.org/articles/0706/28.html
4 http://www.newstodaynet.com/2007sud/apr07/030407.htm
5 http://www.hinduismtoday.com/archives/2006/4-6/30-33_acharya.shtml
6 http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/articles/aid/davidduke.html
7 http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/books/negaind/index.htm
8 http://www.voi.org/books/hhrmi/ch2.htm
9 http://www.voi.org/books/negaind/ch2.htm
10 http://www.kashmir-information.com/Terrorism/machine.html
Scandals Of UPA
Scandals Of UPA
Nithin.S
With reference to the article “Govt lies on 'Q'”1 The Bofors scandal had surfaced again. The reluctance of UPA government to arrest and question Quatrrochi, as this may place Rajeev Gandhi and Congress party in compromising position, is proved again. It appears that “Congress ka Haath, Aam Admi nahi, Sonia Gandhi and Gandhi family ke Saath Hai” The last 3 years of UPA rule, is full of scandals, some new and some old ones resurfaced.
Apart from Bofor’s scandal, Volckar report, Office of Profit Bill, Mitrokin archives, Issue of tainted ministers have surfaced.
In Iraq’s food-for-oil scam, Congress party is still silent about how its name figured in the Volcker report as one of the recipients of slush money. Even though Natwar Singh is no longer in the cabinet, no other from congress party had been questioned. This shows that UPA government had made Natwar Singh a scapegoat.2 The Office of Profit Bill, passed by the government providing exemptions to 45 posts including National Advisory Council chairmanship which was occupied by Sonia Gandhi and others occupied mostly by Congress and Left MPs.3 This behaviour of the government clearly shows that people in power are more concerned with maintaining their position than with solving the problems of country.
Two chapters of The Mitrokhin Archives: II which was published in 2005, are devoted to India.
It reveals that, India was the only country outside the Soviet bloc to be most successfully penetrated by the KGB, right up to the office of the prime minister.4 This shows that, under Indira’s Governement, KGB tried to communize and Sovietize India. It also shows the extent of corruption present in the then Congress government. We have to ask whether is it safe to allow a Congress party which tried to sell India to KGB and Left parties which supported 1962 Chinese invasion to rule our beloved motherland ?
The conviction of Former Coal Minister Shibu Soren in the murder of Shashinath Jha5, and the fact that
UPA cabinet consisted of many tainted ministers like Lalu Prasad Yadav and Taslimuddin 6 shows the government is full of corrupt people and people with criminal backgrounds who have come to power using illegal and immoral means. Further UPA is involved in numerous other scandals like premature decommissioning of the Mukherjee Commission investigating Netaji's disappearance, which might have shown Nehru in bad light. Probably, no newspaper article can can accomodate all the scandals by Congress functionaries.
Sources-
1 http://www.dailypioneer.com/archives2/default12.asp?main_variable=front%5Fpage&file_name=story1%2Etxt&counter_img=1&phy_path_it=D%3A%5Cdailypioneer%5Carchives2%5Cfeb2807
2 http://www.bjp.org/today/july_0206/july_0206_p_5.htm
3 http://www.indianexpress.com/story/5492.html
4 http://www.worldthreats.com/Asia/Kgbmolesinfiltratedindiraspmo.htm
5 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shibu_Soren
6 http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/2004/07/08/stories/2004070805291100.htm
Nithin.S
With reference to the article “Govt lies on 'Q'”1 The Bofors scandal had surfaced again. The reluctance of UPA government to arrest and question Quatrrochi, as this may place Rajeev Gandhi and Congress party in compromising position, is proved again. It appears that “Congress ka Haath, Aam Admi nahi, Sonia Gandhi and Gandhi family ke Saath Hai” The last 3 years of UPA rule, is full of scandals, some new and some old ones resurfaced.
Apart from Bofor’s scandal, Volckar report, Office of Profit Bill, Mitrokin archives, Issue of tainted ministers have surfaced.
In Iraq’s food-for-oil scam, Congress party is still silent about how its name figured in the Volcker report as one of the recipients of slush money. Even though Natwar Singh is no longer in the cabinet, no other from congress party had been questioned. This shows that UPA government had made Natwar Singh a scapegoat.2 The Office of Profit Bill, passed by the government providing exemptions to 45 posts including National Advisory Council chairmanship which was occupied by Sonia Gandhi and others occupied mostly by Congress and Left MPs.3 This behaviour of the government clearly shows that people in power are more concerned with maintaining their position than with solving the problems of country.
Two chapters of The Mitrokhin Archives: II which was published in 2005, are devoted to India.
It reveals that, India was the only country outside the Soviet bloc to be most successfully penetrated by the KGB, right up to the office of the prime minister.4 This shows that, under Indira’s Governement, KGB tried to communize and Sovietize India. It also shows the extent of corruption present in the then Congress government. We have to ask whether is it safe to allow a Congress party which tried to sell India to KGB and Left parties which supported 1962 Chinese invasion to rule our beloved motherland ?
The conviction of Former Coal Minister Shibu Soren in the murder of Shashinath Jha5, and the fact that
UPA cabinet consisted of many tainted ministers like Lalu Prasad Yadav and Taslimuddin 6 shows the government is full of corrupt people and people with criminal backgrounds who have come to power using illegal and immoral means. Further UPA is involved in numerous other scandals like premature decommissioning of the Mukherjee Commission investigating Netaji's disappearance, which might have shown Nehru in bad light. Probably, no newspaper article can can accomodate all the scandals by Congress functionaries.
Sources-
1 http://www.dailypioneer.com/archives2/default12.asp?main_variable=front%5Fpage&file_name=story1%2Etxt&counter_img=1&phy_path_it=D%3A%5Cdailypioneer%5Carchives2%5Cfeb2807
2 http://www.bjp.org/today/july_0206/july_0206_p_5.htm
3 http://www.indianexpress.com/story/5492.html
4 http://www.worldthreats.com/Asia/Kgbmolesinfiltratedindiraspmo.htm
5 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shibu_Soren
6 http://www.hinduonnet.com/thehindu/2004/07/08/stories/2004070805291100.htm
Saturday, February 24, 2007
Bangladeshi Infiltrations – A Silent Invasion
Bangladeshi Infiltrations – A Silent Invasion
Nithin.S
Bangladesh, officially the People's Republic of Bangladesh was formed in 1971, under the leadership of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman after the bloody Bangladesh Liberation War, in which it was supported by India.1 But, today Bangladesh had become home for Islamic terrorist outfits like Harkat-ul-Jehad-al-Islami (HuJI), Jagrata Muslim Janata Bangladesh (JMJB) ,Jama'atul Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB), Purba Bangla Communist Party (PBCP).2 North-East India’s separatist outfits like ULFA [Assam], ANVC[Meghalaya],NLFT[Tripura], NSCN[Nagaland], PLA[Manipur] have there camps in Bangladesh. These organizations are involved not only in creating chaos in India but also ethnic cleansing of minorities in Bangladesh. The Hindu population of Bangladesh[then East Pakistan] in 1947 was 29.17%, but it decreased to 2.5% in 2001.4
According to the 2001 census report Indian population is 1,027,015,247.3 Of this, 1.5 crore people of Bangladeshi Infiltrators who are living in India.5 The Intelligence Bureau has reportedly estimated, after an extensive survey, that the present number is about 16 million. The August 2000 report of the Task Force on Border Management placed the figure at 15 million, with 300,000 Bangladeshis entering India illegally every month.6 It is estimated that about 13 lakh Bangladeshis live in Delhi alone. It has been reported that 1 crore Bangladeshis are missing from Bangladesh[August 4,1991,Morning Sun] and it implies that those people have infiltrated India. These infiltrators mainly settle in North-East India and in West Bengal. This is shown by the fact that there has been irregular increase in the muslim population in these states and many of the districts have become Muslim majority. The proportion of Muslims in Assam had increased from 24.68% in 1951 to 30.91% in 2001.Whereas in the same time period the proportion of Muslims in India increased from 9.91% to 13.42%.7 In West Bengal, the Muslim population in west Dinajpur, Maldah, Birbhum and Murshidabad percentage wise in 36.75, 47.49, 33.06 and 61.39 respectively according to 1991 census.
This has not only caused the burden on the Indian Economy, but also threatens the Identity of the Indigenous people of the North-East of India. In Tripura, another north eastern state of India, the local population have been turned into a minority community over time by the sheer numbers of cross border migrants from Bangladesh. In 1947, 56 per cent of Tripura’s population consisted of tribal (or indigenous) population. Today this stands at a quarter of the total.8 In many districts these infiltrators are the one who decides the outcome of elections. Outcomes of the 32% of Vidhana Sabha seats in Assam and 18% of seats in West Bengal are decided by them.9 This is due to the fact that political parties are helping them to get Ration Cards and Voters ID and hence using them to win elections.
North-Eastern region is connected to rest of India by a small strip called “The Siliguri Corridor” or “Chickan’s Neck”.The militants have planned to isolate North-East of India from the rest of India and to create a new Muslim nation called “Islamistan”. This Operation is named as “Operation Pincode”. For this they have planned to infiltrate 3000 Jihadis into North Eastren region.[Jan 15, 2005,The Pioneer]. The “Mughalistan Reaserch Institute Of Bangladesh” has released a map where a muslim corridor named “Mughalistan” connects Pakistan and Bangladesh via India. According to the task force, there are 905 Mosques and 439 Madrasas along Indo-Bangladesh border on the Indian side10.
These clearly indicate the intensity of the problem. Bangladesh with the help of ISI is silently invading India. If we do not take necessary measures India will undergo another partition. The present laws to counter the infiltration issues is not enough. We need to enact stringent laws. Indians should economically boycott them and create a hostile situation for them.
Sources-
1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladesh
2 http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/bangladesh/terroristoutfits/index.html
3 http://www.censusindia.net/results/resultsmain.html
4 Neighbour or invader by Dina Nath Mishra, The Pioneer
http://www.hvk.org/articles/0902/5.html
5 Future of Hindus in Bangladesh by Bhupendra Kr. Bhattacharyya, Organiser
http://www.hvk.org/articles/0203/263.html
6 , 7,8 Refugees, Illegal Migrants and Local Perceptions in India'sFar East, by Anup Saikia
http://72.14.235.104/search?q=cache:gj-sjspYVCEJ:iussp2005.princeton.edu/download.aspx%3FsubmissionId%3D50219+number+of+bangladeshis+in+delhi&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=51
9,10 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8270892181742796978
Nithin.S
Bangladesh, officially the People's Republic of Bangladesh was formed in 1971, under the leadership of Sheikh Mujibur Rahman after the bloody Bangladesh Liberation War, in which it was supported by India.1 But, today Bangladesh had become home for Islamic terrorist outfits like Harkat-ul-Jehad-al-Islami (HuJI), Jagrata Muslim Janata Bangladesh (JMJB) ,Jama'atul Mujahideen Bangladesh (JMB), Purba Bangla Communist Party (PBCP).2 North-East India’s separatist outfits like ULFA [Assam], ANVC[Meghalaya],NLFT[Tripura], NSCN[Nagaland], PLA[Manipur] have there camps in Bangladesh. These organizations are involved not only in creating chaos in India but also ethnic cleansing of minorities in Bangladesh. The Hindu population of Bangladesh[then East Pakistan] in 1947 was 29.17%, but it decreased to 2.5% in 2001.4
According to the 2001 census report Indian population is 1,027,015,247.3 Of this, 1.5 crore people of Bangladeshi Infiltrators who are living in India.5 The Intelligence Bureau has reportedly estimated, after an extensive survey, that the present number is about 16 million. The August 2000 report of the Task Force on Border Management placed the figure at 15 million, with 300,000 Bangladeshis entering India illegally every month.6 It is estimated that about 13 lakh Bangladeshis live in Delhi alone. It has been reported that 1 crore Bangladeshis are missing from Bangladesh[August 4,1991,Morning Sun] and it implies that those people have infiltrated India. These infiltrators mainly settle in North-East India and in West Bengal. This is shown by the fact that there has been irregular increase in the muslim population in these states and many of the districts have become Muslim majority. The proportion of Muslims in Assam had increased from 24.68% in 1951 to 30.91% in 2001.Whereas in the same time period the proportion of Muslims in India increased from 9.91% to 13.42%.7 In West Bengal, the Muslim population in west Dinajpur, Maldah, Birbhum and Murshidabad percentage wise in 36.75, 47.49, 33.06 and 61.39 respectively according to 1991 census.
This has not only caused the burden on the Indian Economy, but also threatens the Identity of the Indigenous people of the North-East of India. In Tripura, another north eastern state of India, the local population have been turned into a minority community over time by the sheer numbers of cross border migrants from Bangladesh. In 1947, 56 per cent of Tripura’s population consisted of tribal (or indigenous) population. Today this stands at a quarter of the total.8 In many districts these infiltrators are the one who decides the outcome of elections. Outcomes of the 32% of Vidhana Sabha seats in Assam and 18% of seats in West Bengal are decided by them.9 This is due to the fact that political parties are helping them to get Ration Cards and Voters ID and hence using them to win elections.
North-Eastern region is connected to rest of India by a small strip called “The Siliguri Corridor” or “Chickan’s Neck”.The militants have planned to isolate North-East of India from the rest of India and to create a new Muslim nation called “Islamistan”. This Operation is named as “Operation Pincode”. For this they have planned to infiltrate 3000 Jihadis into North Eastren region.[Jan 15, 2005,The Pioneer]. The “Mughalistan Reaserch Institute Of Bangladesh” has released a map where a muslim corridor named “Mughalistan” connects Pakistan and Bangladesh via India. According to the task force, there are 905 Mosques and 439 Madrasas along Indo-Bangladesh border on the Indian side10.
These clearly indicate the intensity of the problem. Bangladesh with the help of ISI is silently invading India. If we do not take necessary measures India will undergo another partition. The present laws to counter the infiltration issues is not enough. We need to enact stringent laws. Indians should economically boycott them and create a hostile situation for them.
Sources-
1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bangladesh
2 http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/bangladesh/terroristoutfits/index.html
3 http://www.censusindia.net/results/resultsmain.html
4 Neighbour or invader by Dina Nath Mishra, The Pioneer
http://www.hvk.org/articles/0902/5.html
5 Future of Hindus in Bangladesh by Bhupendra Kr. Bhattacharyya, Organiser
http://www.hvk.org/articles/0203/263.html
6 , 7,8 Refugees, Illegal Migrants and Local Perceptions in India'sFar East, by Anup Saikia
http://72.14.235.104/search?q=cache:gj-sjspYVCEJ:iussp2005.princeton.edu/download.aspx%3FsubmissionId%3D50219+number+of+bangladeshis+in+delhi&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=51
9,10 http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8270892181742796978
Sunday, January 21, 2007
ULFA- A Threat To Nationalism
ULFA- A Threat To Nationalism
Nithin.S
The recent killings of more than 50 Hindi speaking population of Assam1 are the remainder of how situation in Assam is out of control. About 138,212,194,149 and 96 civilians have been killed in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006 respectively due to terrorist violence. From 1992 onwards about 4443 people have been killed in terrorist violence of which 1373 terrorists and 611 security forces have been killed.2
There are many insurgent groups operating in Assam like-National Democratic Front of Bodoland (NDFB), United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA), Adivasi Cobra Force (ACF), Muslim United Liberation Tigers of Assam (MULTA) United People's Democratic Solidarity (UPDS), Bodo Liberation Tigers [BLT].Only NDFB and ULFA are banned organizations. ULFA was banned in 1990.
United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA) was formed on April 7, 1979 by Bhimakanta Buragohain, Rajiv Rajkonwar alias Arabinda Rajkhowa, Golap Baruah alias Anup Chetia, Samiran Gogoi alias Pradip Gogoi, Bhadreshwar Gohain and Paresh Baruah at the Rang Ghar in Sibsagar to establish a "sovereign socialist Assam" through an armed struggle.3 It considers itself a "revolutionary political organization" engaged in a "liberation struggle" against India for the establishment of a sovereign, independent Assam.4
Some of the major assassinations by ULFA include that of Surendra Paul in May 1990, the brother of businessman Lord Swraj Paul, that precipitated a situation leading to the sacking of the Government of Assam under Prafulla Mahanta and the beginning of Operation Bajrang. In 1997, Sanjay Ghose, a social activist and a relative of a high ranking Indian diplomat, was kidnapped and killed An unsuccessful assassination attempt was made on AGP Chief Minister Prafulla Kumar Mahanta in 1997. A mass grave, discovered at a destroyed ULFA camp in Lakhipathar forest, showed evidence of executions committed by ULFA.5
During the Kargil conflict, the ULFA issued a statement condemning Indian Government's role in Kashmir. The language of the above statement was exactly the same as that issued by the Harkat-ul-Mujahideen, a Pakistan based terrorist outfit controlled by the ISI. There are enough evidences to prove that ISI had provided training to many cadres of ULFA apart from arms supply to them.6
According to ULFA Assam is not a part of India but an independent country. It has been killing Hindi-speaking people on the basis that Hindi speakers are Indians. But if we allow this type of tendency to grow, and then there will be an ULFA in every non-Hindi speaking state. ULFA is a threat to India’s unity and integrity. It was a blunder on the part of the government to announce ceasefire or try to have negotiation with such an organization helping them to regroup and increase their strength. Realization of this blunder made Gogoi to say on Jan 15-“In retrospect, I admit that the judgment may be a little wrong when we offered a ceasefire to the ULFA.”7
Sources-
1 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6236475.stm
http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/states/assam/data_sheets/insurgency_related_killings.htm
2 http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/states/assam/data_sheets/insurgency_related_killings.htm
3 http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/states/assam/terrorist_outfits/ulfa.htm
4 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Liberation_Front_of_Asom
5 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Liberation_Front_of_Asom#Assassinations
6 http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/states/assam/documents/papers/isi_activities.htm
7 http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/states/assam/timelines/index.html
Nithin.S
The recent killings of more than 50 Hindi speaking population of Assam1 are the remainder of how situation in Assam is out of control. About 138,212,194,149 and 96 civilians have been killed in 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, and 2006 respectively due to terrorist violence. From 1992 onwards about 4443 people have been killed in terrorist violence of which 1373 terrorists and 611 security forces have been killed.2
There are many insurgent groups operating in Assam like-National Democratic Front of Bodoland (NDFB), United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA), Adivasi Cobra Force (ACF), Muslim United Liberation Tigers of Assam (MULTA) United People's Democratic Solidarity (UPDS), Bodo Liberation Tigers [BLT].Only NDFB and ULFA are banned organizations. ULFA was banned in 1990.
United Liberation Front of Asom (ULFA) was formed on April 7, 1979 by Bhimakanta Buragohain, Rajiv Rajkonwar alias Arabinda Rajkhowa, Golap Baruah alias Anup Chetia, Samiran Gogoi alias Pradip Gogoi, Bhadreshwar Gohain and Paresh Baruah at the Rang Ghar in Sibsagar to establish a "sovereign socialist Assam" through an armed struggle.3 It considers itself a "revolutionary political organization" engaged in a "liberation struggle" against India for the establishment of a sovereign, independent Assam.4
Some of the major assassinations by ULFA include that of Surendra Paul in May 1990, the brother of businessman Lord Swraj Paul, that precipitated a situation leading to the sacking of the Government of Assam under Prafulla Mahanta and the beginning of Operation Bajrang. In 1997, Sanjay Ghose, a social activist and a relative of a high ranking Indian diplomat, was kidnapped and killed An unsuccessful assassination attempt was made on AGP Chief Minister Prafulla Kumar Mahanta in 1997. A mass grave, discovered at a destroyed ULFA camp in Lakhipathar forest, showed evidence of executions committed by ULFA.5
During the Kargil conflict, the ULFA issued a statement condemning Indian Government's role in Kashmir. The language of the above statement was exactly the same as that issued by the Harkat-ul-Mujahideen, a Pakistan based terrorist outfit controlled by the ISI. There are enough evidences to prove that ISI had provided training to many cadres of ULFA apart from arms supply to them.6
According to ULFA Assam is not a part of India but an independent country. It has been killing Hindi-speaking people on the basis that Hindi speakers are Indians. But if we allow this type of tendency to grow, and then there will be an ULFA in every non-Hindi speaking state. ULFA is a threat to India’s unity and integrity. It was a blunder on the part of the government to announce ceasefire or try to have negotiation with such an organization helping them to regroup and increase their strength. Realization of this blunder made Gogoi to say on Jan 15-“In retrospect, I admit that the judgment may be a little wrong when we offered a ceasefire to the ULFA.”7
Sources-
1 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/6236475.stm
http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/states/assam/data_sheets/insurgency_related_killings.htm
2 http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/states/assam/data_sheets/insurgency_related_killings.htm
3 http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/states/assam/terrorist_outfits/ulfa.htm
4 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Liberation_Front_of_Asom
5 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Liberation_Front_of_Asom#Assassinations
6 http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/states/assam/documents/papers/isi_activities.htm
7 http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/states/assam/timelines/index.html
Sunday, December 24, 2006
The Myth of Jesus Christ- by Nithin.S
“The question which has so much exercised the minds of men — whether Jesus was the historic Christ (= Messiah) — is answered in the sense that everything
that is said of Him, everything that is known of Him, belongs to the
world of imagination, that is, of the imagination of the Christian community,
and therefore has nothing to do with any man who belongs to the real
world.”
This has been said by Bauer in 1850-51.
Jesus of Nazareth also known as Jesus Christ is the central figure in the Christianity.
Christianity is a monotheistic religion centered on Jesus of Nazareth and his life, death, resurrection, and teachings as presented in the New Testament. Christianity is based on a belief that Jesus is the Son Of God and the Messiah prophesied in the Old Testament.
The main sources of information regarding Jesus' life and teachings are the four canonical Gospels of the New Testament: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. The historicity of Jesus Christ as described in the gospels has been for a long time one of the principal dogmas of all Christian denominations.
The scope of this article is to analyze the historicity of the Jesus of Nazareth.
Jewish historians who lived and wrote during the same period or a little
later, fail to notice him as well as the religion supposed to have been
founded by him. It may be Philo, who wrote a history of the Jews, Justus of Tiberius,
or Flavius Josephus who lived from AD 36 or 37 to 99 or 100 knows no Jesus Christ and no Christians. The Greeks and Romans have left to posterity a vast historical and philosophical literature written in or referring to the time-bracket when Jesus is supposed to have lived. But it is unaware of him. Seneca (2 BC-66 AD), Pliny the Elder (23-79 AD), Martial (40-102 AD), Plutarch(45-125 AD), Juvenal (55-140 AD), Apuleius (d. 170 AD), Pausanius(d. 185 AD), and Dio Casius (155-240 AD) do not mention any Jesus or
Christ. Referring to Jesus Christ of the Gospels, Sita Ram Goel, noted scholar and historian writes-“ All languages which have been influenced by Christianity contain the
expression, “gospel truth”. But truth is exactly what we find completely
missing from the gospels when it comes to the life and teaching of
their hero — Jesus of Nazareth. In fact, the gospels violate one of the
Ten Commandments — thou shalt not bear false witness — and can be
easily caught in the act.”.
When we analyze the different gospels we see that there is contradicting data relating to the year,date and the place of birth of Jesus, his genealogy and parentage.Luke places the birth of Jesus to 2BC. Whereas John places at 22-15 BC. Eusebius placeshis death in 22 AD, which takes his birth to 9 BC if he was 30 when hedied, to 12 BC if he was 33, and to 28 BC if he was nearing 50. Theyear 1 AD as the year of his birth was assumed by the sixth century Romanmonk, Dionysius Exiguus. Christmas, the day of the birth of Jesus is celebrated on 25th December. Reffering to the inconsistancy of this date of Christmas, Sita Ram Goel writes-“As for the date of Christmas, the chances are no better than 1 in 365 that Jesus’ birthday fell on 25 December. A number of different dates have contended for the title — including 20 May, 19 April, 17 November, 28 March, 25 March and 6 January — and it took nearly five hundred years before 25 December
came to be generally accepted. The reason for the choice of this dat eowes nothing to historical evidence but a great deal to the influence of other religions. It was no accident that 25 December happened to be the birthday of the ‘Unconquered Sun’ (Sol Invictus), the chief festival of the Mithraic cult, a popular mystery religion of the late Roman Empire which shared quite a number of elements with Christianity, notably its emphasis on rebirth and salvation.” About the place of birth Goel asks-“ Was Jesus really born in Bethlehem? Unfortunately, even the Christian scriptures disagree among themselves. Matthew and Luke both say yes, while John (7: 41-2) and Mark (1:9 ; 6:1) give the impression of never even having heard of Jesus’ supposed birth at Bethlehem but
assume that his birthplace was Nazareth, a small town in the northern region of Galilee, at the opposite end of the country from Bethlehem.” He continues-“ Nazareth fares no better as the place of Jesus’ birth. There is no positive proof that this place existed at the time when he is supposed to have been born. It does not occur in any Roman maps, records or documents relating to that time. It is not mentioned in the Talmud. It is not associated with Jesus in any of the writings of Paul. Josephus who commanded troops in Galilee does not mention it. It appears for the first time in Jewish records of the seventh century”. In clears words Goel demonstrates that even if we assume that Jesus was a historical Charater and not a myth there are only few evidences about the time and place of birth of Jesus which are contradictory among themselves.
Mathew and Luke try to trace Jesus back to King David. But here also both differ in facts and figures. Matthew accommodates 28 and Luke 41 generations of Jesus’ ancestors in the same span of time.There are only three names that are common in the two family trees. Even the name of Joseph’s father and Jesus’ grandfather is not the same. About Virgin Mary, Goel quotes Ian Stephens- “Tamar was a temple prostitute; Rahab was the madam of a brothel; Ruth, the most moral, indulged in some pretty shameless sexual exploitation; and Bathsheba committed adultery with King David. Was the author of the Matthew genealogy implying something about the only other woman mentioned, Mary herself?”. Further, Goel quotes Michael Arnheim -“ The real reason for floating the myth of virgin birth seems to be that “there had always been a question mark hanging over Mary’s sexual morality” and that “it was clearly a subject which caused the early Christians acute embarrassment”. In fact, there has been a long-standing tradition among the Jews that Jesus was the fruit of an adulterous union between Mary and a Roman soldier named Panthera”. These are beautifully summarized by Will Durant when he says- “The virgin birth is not mentioned by
Paul or John, and Matthew and Luke trace Jesus back to David through
Joseph by conflicting genealogies; apparently the belief in the virgin birth
rose later than in the Davidic descent.”
When the Gospels are studied in the light of the prevalent Jewish laws and administration in Palestine, some difficulties arises in the story of Gospels. Goel quotes Paul Winter-“ Jewish scholars have examined the gospel accounts in the light of Jewish laws and administration prevailing in Palestine at the time Jesus is supposed to have been tried by the Jewish authorities. They have come to the conclusion that the whole story of Jesus being tried by the Jewish authorities for blasphemy sounds spurious. Firstly, they hold that in terms of the Jewish law it was not blasphemy for any Jew to claim to be the Messiah or the Son of God. Secondly, they point out that sessions of the Sanhedrin could not be held at the times and in the ways mentioned in the three gospels. Finally, they maintain that if Jesus had been found guilty of blasphemy for saying something which is not mentioned in the gospels, the Jewish authorities at Jerusalem were quite competent to get him stoned to death, the penalty prescribed by Jewish law, and were not at all called upon to hand him over to the Roman governor for getting him crucified. The very fact that Jesus was crucified and not stoned to death goes to prove that he must have violated a Roman and not a Jewish law”. We can further recognize the contradictions among the Gospels about the details of Crucifixion. Regarding Resurrection Goel writes-“ We are entitled to dismiss the gospel stories of Resurrection like the rest of Jesus’ miracles. We are entitled not to treat it as history at all. But as Resurrection happens to be the core of the Christian creed, we will better see what sort of puerile invention it is.” According to scholars, Jesus’ appearance after his death formed no part of the original gospel of Mark and has been appended to it later. Now Mark being one of the four Gospels, which is written about thirty years after Jesus’ death, it is impossible to imagine that Mark had failed to recognize this, if Jesus really had appeared after his death. The accounts of Resurrection of all the four Gospels differ in their details. Goel writes-““There seems even less prospect,” observes James P. Mackey, “of arriving at a concordant account of the details of the appearances of Jesus than there is in the case of the empty tomb stories, when at least Mary Magdalene is consistently a principal character. That has to be recognized at the very outset. Apart from the major discrepancy amongst the gospels as to whether the appearances of Jesus took place in Galilee or in and around Jerusalem, all the appearance stories have different settings, details and messages. As Reumann, I think, it was, pointed out, there is not even, as in the case of passion narratives, an agreed framework for the appearance narratives within which discrepancies of detail occur and by comparison to which they could reasonably he counted as negligible...”Further, the Jewish tradition confirms that the story of Resurrection and Ascension were created by the diciples.
Gospels claims to be the witness and the recorders of truth. But on closer observation we see that it had been distorted over the years and also that they contradict each other.Goel observes-“We have, however, seen that the gospels contradict and cancel out each other when it comes to the salient features in the story of Jesus — the date and year and place of his birth, his ancestry and parentage, his ministry, his trial and death, and his resurrection. This claim on behalf the gospels, therefore, falls to the ground.”Goel continues-“ In fact, this claim was dismissed most forcefully by David Friedrich
Strauss who published his two-volume work, The Life of Jesus Critically Examined, in 1835-36. “Because of the discrepancies he found, he cogently argued that none of the gospels could have been by eye-witnesses, but instead must have been the work of writers of a much later generation, freely constructing their material from probably garbled traditions about Jesus in circulation in the early Church.”
Will Durant, noted historian obsevers that-“Matthew relies more than the other evangelists on the miracles ascribed to Jesus, and is suspiciously eager to prove that many Old Testament prophecies were fulfilled in Christ... The Fourth Gospel does not pretend to be a biography of Jesus; it is a presentation of Christ from the theological point of view, as the divine Logos or Word, creator of the world and redeemer of mankind. It contradicts the synoptic gospels in a hundred details and in its general picture of Christ... In summary, it is clear that there are many contradictions between one gospel and another, many dubious statements of history, many suspicious resemblances to the legends told of pagan gods, many incidents apparently designed to prove the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies, many passages possibly aiming to establish a historical basis for some later doctrine or ritual of the Church.”
On every points Gospels contradict themselves and no other evidences corroborated their stories. Gospels and its Jesus Christ has been proved to be a product of imagination and not of reality. Albert Schweitzer, the world famous theologian and missionary, has traced in a well-known book published in 1906 the progress of Christology from Hermann Samuel Reimarus, who wrote in the middle of the eighteenth century, to Wilhelm Wrede whose book on this subject was published in 1901. “The study of the Life of Jesus,” he says, “has had a curious history. It set out in quest of the historical Jesus, believing that when it had found Him it could bring Him straight into our time as a Teacher and Saviour...” Coming to the “Results”, he mourns, “There is nothing more negative than the result of the critical study of the Life of Jesus. The Jesus of Nazareth who came forward publicly as the Messiah, who preached the ethic of the Kingdom of God, who founded the Kingdom of Heaven upon earth, and died to give His work its final consecration, never had any existence. This image has not been destroyed from without. It has fallen to pieces, cleft and disintegrated by the concrete historical problems which came to the surface one after another, and in spite of all the artifice, art, artificiality, and violence which was applied to them, refused to be planed down to fit the design on which Jesus of the theology of the last hundred and thirty years had been constructed and were no sooner covered over than they appeared again in a new form..” He concludes, “We thought that it was for us to lead our time by the roundabout way through the historical Jesus, as we understood Him, in order to bring it to the Jesus who is a spiritual power in the present. This roundabout way has now been closed by genuine history.”
The basic foundation on which Christianity survived so long has been crushed. The Jesus of Nazareth or the so called Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Savior, is no more a Historical Character, but the invention the followers of the monotheistic theology of Christianity. Today Christianity has been reduced to a hollow religion without any historical or philosophical foundation. This plight of Christianity is well explained by Michael Arnheim. He writes-““By the early twentieth century the so-called ‘quest for the historical Jesus’ was bogged down in negativism. The Gospels, according toan influential schools of Protestant theologians, were to be taken as theological rather than as historical documents, and they could yield no authentic information about the life and deeds, or even the sayings and teachings, of Jesus. Such a conclusion might have been expected to have a cataclysmic effect upon Christianity. For, after all, there could surely be no Christianity without Christ, and there could be no Christ without Jesus? But if Jesus were so shadowy a figure as to belong more to the realm of myth and legend than to that of history and fact, the whole edifice of Christianity must surely crumble?”
Today, the Church and the Christians who for centuries had been committing atrocities against people of other religions in the name of Jesus, who had been proselytizing people in order to save them has no justification. There is no Christianity without Jesus and Jesus has been proved a myth. Hence Christianity can no longer claim to be the Only True Religion.
Bibliography
Jesus Christ
An Artifice for Aggression
Sita Ram Goel
VOICE OF INDIA
that is said of Him, everything that is known of Him, belongs to the
world of imagination, that is, of the imagination of the Christian community,
and therefore has nothing to do with any man who belongs to the real
world.”
This has been said by Bauer in 1850-51.
Jesus of Nazareth also known as Jesus Christ is the central figure in the Christianity.
Christianity is a monotheistic religion centered on Jesus of Nazareth and his life, death, resurrection, and teachings as presented in the New Testament. Christianity is based on a belief that Jesus is the Son Of God and the Messiah prophesied in the Old Testament.
The main sources of information regarding Jesus' life and teachings are the four canonical Gospels of the New Testament: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. The historicity of Jesus Christ as described in the gospels has been for a long time one of the principal dogmas of all Christian denominations.
The scope of this article is to analyze the historicity of the Jesus of Nazareth.
Jewish historians who lived and wrote during the same period or a little
later, fail to notice him as well as the religion supposed to have been
founded by him. It may be Philo, who wrote a history of the Jews, Justus of Tiberius,
or Flavius Josephus who lived from AD 36 or 37 to 99 or 100 knows no Jesus Christ and no Christians. The Greeks and Romans have left to posterity a vast historical and philosophical literature written in or referring to the time-bracket when Jesus is supposed to have lived. But it is unaware of him. Seneca (2 BC-66 AD), Pliny the Elder (23-79 AD), Martial (40-102 AD), Plutarch(45-125 AD), Juvenal (55-140 AD), Apuleius (d. 170 AD), Pausanius(d. 185 AD), and Dio Casius (155-240 AD) do not mention any Jesus or
Christ. Referring to Jesus Christ of the Gospels, Sita Ram Goel, noted scholar and historian writes-“ All languages which have been influenced by Christianity contain the
expression, “gospel truth”. But truth is exactly what we find completely
missing from the gospels when it comes to the life and teaching of
their hero — Jesus of Nazareth. In fact, the gospels violate one of the
Ten Commandments — thou shalt not bear false witness — and can be
easily caught in the act.”.
When we analyze the different gospels we see that there is contradicting data relating to the year,date and the place of birth of Jesus, his genealogy and parentage.Luke places the birth of Jesus to 2BC. Whereas John places at 22-15 BC. Eusebius placeshis death in 22 AD, which takes his birth to 9 BC if he was 30 when hedied, to 12 BC if he was 33, and to 28 BC if he was nearing 50. Theyear 1 AD as the year of his birth was assumed by the sixth century Romanmonk, Dionysius Exiguus. Christmas, the day of the birth of Jesus is celebrated on 25th December. Reffering to the inconsistancy of this date of Christmas, Sita Ram Goel writes-“As for the date of Christmas, the chances are no better than 1 in 365 that Jesus’ birthday fell on 25 December. A number of different dates have contended for the title — including 20 May, 19 April, 17 November, 28 March, 25 March and 6 January — and it took nearly five hundred years before 25 December
came to be generally accepted. The reason for the choice of this dat eowes nothing to historical evidence but a great deal to the influence of other religions. It was no accident that 25 December happened to be the birthday of the ‘Unconquered Sun’ (Sol Invictus), the chief festival of the Mithraic cult, a popular mystery religion of the late Roman Empire which shared quite a number of elements with Christianity, notably its emphasis on rebirth and salvation.” About the place of birth Goel asks-“ Was Jesus really born in Bethlehem? Unfortunately, even the Christian scriptures disagree among themselves. Matthew and Luke both say yes, while John (7: 41-2) and Mark (1:9 ; 6:1) give the impression of never even having heard of Jesus’ supposed birth at Bethlehem but
assume that his birthplace was Nazareth, a small town in the northern region of Galilee, at the opposite end of the country from Bethlehem.” He continues-“ Nazareth fares no better as the place of Jesus’ birth. There is no positive proof that this place existed at the time when he is supposed to have been born. It does not occur in any Roman maps, records or documents relating to that time. It is not mentioned in the Talmud. It is not associated with Jesus in any of the writings of Paul. Josephus who commanded troops in Galilee does not mention it. It appears for the first time in Jewish records of the seventh century”. In clears words Goel demonstrates that even if we assume that Jesus was a historical Charater and not a myth there are only few evidences about the time and place of birth of Jesus which are contradictory among themselves.
Mathew and Luke try to trace Jesus back to King David. But here also both differ in facts and figures. Matthew accommodates 28 and Luke 41 generations of Jesus’ ancestors in the same span of time.There are only three names that are common in the two family trees. Even the name of Joseph’s father and Jesus’ grandfather is not the same. About Virgin Mary, Goel quotes Ian Stephens- “Tamar was a temple prostitute; Rahab was the madam of a brothel; Ruth, the most moral, indulged in some pretty shameless sexual exploitation; and Bathsheba committed adultery with King David. Was the author of the Matthew genealogy implying something about the only other woman mentioned, Mary herself?”. Further, Goel quotes Michael Arnheim -“ The real reason for floating the myth of virgin birth seems to be that “there had always been a question mark hanging over Mary’s sexual morality” and that “it was clearly a subject which caused the early Christians acute embarrassment”. In fact, there has been a long-standing tradition among the Jews that Jesus was the fruit of an adulterous union between Mary and a Roman soldier named Panthera”. These are beautifully summarized by Will Durant when he says- “The virgin birth is not mentioned by
Paul or John, and Matthew and Luke trace Jesus back to David through
Joseph by conflicting genealogies; apparently the belief in the virgin birth
rose later than in the Davidic descent.”
When the Gospels are studied in the light of the prevalent Jewish laws and administration in Palestine, some difficulties arises in the story of Gospels. Goel quotes Paul Winter-“ Jewish scholars have examined the gospel accounts in the light of Jewish laws and administration prevailing in Palestine at the time Jesus is supposed to have been tried by the Jewish authorities. They have come to the conclusion that the whole story of Jesus being tried by the Jewish authorities for blasphemy sounds spurious. Firstly, they hold that in terms of the Jewish law it was not blasphemy for any Jew to claim to be the Messiah or the Son of God. Secondly, they point out that sessions of the Sanhedrin could not be held at the times and in the ways mentioned in the three gospels. Finally, they maintain that if Jesus had been found guilty of blasphemy for saying something which is not mentioned in the gospels, the Jewish authorities at Jerusalem were quite competent to get him stoned to death, the penalty prescribed by Jewish law, and were not at all called upon to hand him over to the Roman governor for getting him crucified. The very fact that Jesus was crucified and not stoned to death goes to prove that he must have violated a Roman and not a Jewish law”. We can further recognize the contradictions among the Gospels about the details of Crucifixion. Regarding Resurrection Goel writes-“ We are entitled to dismiss the gospel stories of Resurrection like the rest of Jesus’ miracles. We are entitled not to treat it as history at all. But as Resurrection happens to be the core of the Christian creed, we will better see what sort of puerile invention it is.” According to scholars, Jesus’ appearance after his death formed no part of the original gospel of Mark and has been appended to it later. Now Mark being one of the four Gospels, which is written about thirty years after Jesus’ death, it is impossible to imagine that Mark had failed to recognize this, if Jesus really had appeared after his death. The accounts of Resurrection of all the four Gospels differ in their details. Goel writes-““There seems even less prospect,” observes James P. Mackey, “of arriving at a concordant account of the details of the appearances of Jesus than there is in the case of the empty tomb stories, when at least Mary Magdalene is consistently a principal character. That has to be recognized at the very outset. Apart from the major discrepancy amongst the gospels as to whether the appearances of Jesus took place in Galilee or in and around Jerusalem, all the appearance stories have different settings, details and messages. As Reumann, I think, it was, pointed out, there is not even, as in the case of passion narratives, an agreed framework for the appearance narratives within which discrepancies of detail occur and by comparison to which they could reasonably he counted as negligible...”Further, the Jewish tradition confirms that the story of Resurrection and Ascension were created by the diciples.
Gospels claims to be the witness and the recorders of truth. But on closer observation we see that it had been distorted over the years and also that they contradict each other.Goel observes-“We have, however, seen that the gospels contradict and cancel out each other when it comes to the salient features in the story of Jesus — the date and year and place of his birth, his ancestry and parentage, his ministry, his trial and death, and his resurrection. This claim on behalf the gospels, therefore, falls to the ground.”Goel continues-“ In fact, this claim was dismissed most forcefully by David Friedrich
Strauss who published his two-volume work, The Life of Jesus Critically Examined, in 1835-36. “Because of the discrepancies he found, he cogently argued that none of the gospels could have been by eye-witnesses, but instead must have been the work of writers of a much later generation, freely constructing their material from probably garbled traditions about Jesus in circulation in the early Church.”
Will Durant, noted historian obsevers that-“Matthew relies more than the other evangelists on the miracles ascribed to Jesus, and is suspiciously eager to prove that many Old Testament prophecies were fulfilled in Christ... The Fourth Gospel does not pretend to be a biography of Jesus; it is a presentation of Christ from the theological point of view, as the divine Logos or Word, creator of the world and redeemer of mankind. It contradicts the synoptic gospels in a hundred details and in its general picture of Christ... In summary, it is clear that there are many contradictions between one gospel and another, many dubious statements of history, many suspicious resemblances to the legends told of pagan gods, many incidents apparently designed to prove the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies, many passages possibly aiming to establish a historical basis for some later doctrine or ritual of the Church.”
On every points Gospels contradict themselves and no other evidences corroborated their stories. Gospels and its Jesus Christ has been proved to be a product of imagination and not of reality. Albert Schweitzer, the world famous theologian and missionary, has traced in a well-known book published in 1906 the progress of Christology from Hermann Samuel Reimarus, who wrote in the middle of the eighteenth century, to Wilhelm Wrede whose book on this subject was published in 1901. “The study of the Life of Jesus,” he says, “has had a curious history. It set out in quest of the historical Jesus, believing that when it had found Him it could bring Him straight into our time as a Teacher and Saviour...” Coming to the “Results”, he mourns, “There is nothing more negative than the result of the critical study of the Life of Jesus. The Jesus of Nazareth who came forward publicly as the Messiah, who preached the ethic of the Kingdom of God, who founded the Kingdom of Heaven upon earth, and died to give His work its final consecration, never had any existence. This image has not been destroyed from without. It has fallen to pieces, cleft and disintegrated by the concrete historical problems which came to the surface one after another, and in spite of all the artifice, art, artificiality, and violence which was applied to them, refused to be planed down to fit the design on which Jesus of the theology of the last hundred and thirty years had been constructed and were no sooner covered over than they appeared again in a new form..” He concludes, “We thought that it was for us to lead our time by the roundabout way through the historical Jesus, as we understood Him, in order to bring it to the Jesus who is a spiritual power in the present. This roundabout way has now been closed by genuine history.”
The basic foundation on which Christianity survived so long has been crushed. The Jesus of Nazareth or the so called Jesus Christ, the Son of God, the Savior, is no more a Historical Character, but the invention the followers of the monotheistic theology of Christianity. Today Christianity has been reduced to a hollow religion without any historical or philosophical foundation. This plight of Christianity is well explained by Michael Arnheim. He writes-““By the early twentieth century the so-called ‘quest for the historical Jesus’ was bogged down in negativism. The Gospels, according toan influential schools of Protestant theologians, were to be taken as theological rather than as historical documents, and they could yield no authentic information about the life and deeds, or even the sayings and teachings, of Jesus. Such a conclusion might have been expected to have a cataclysmic effect upon Christianity. For, after all, there could surely be no Christianity without Christ, and there could be no Christ without Jesus? But if Jesus were so shadowy a figure as to belong more to the realm of myth and legend than to that of history and fact, the whole edifice of Christianity must surely crumble?”
Today, the Church and the Christians who for centuries had been committing atrocities against people of other religions in the name of Jesus, who had been proselytizing people in order to save them has no justification. There is no Christianity without Jesus and Jesus has been proved a myth. Hence Christianity can no longer claim to be the Only True Religion.
Bibliography
Jesus Christ
An Artifice for Aggression
Sita Ram Goel
VOICE OF INDIA
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)