DISTORTION OF INDIAN HISTORY FOR MUSLIM APPEASEMENT, Part 5A
Submitted by Dr Radhasyam Br... on Mon, 06/15/2009 - 06:46
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
PDF versionWritten by Faithfreedom.org Contributing Editor Dr Radhasyam Brahmachari
Akbar, The Great (?) Monarch:
It is really amazing and ridiculous that, not only the so called pseudo secular and the Marxist historians of India , but also the Western historians portray the Mughal emperor Akbar as a great monarch. But are there sufficient grounds to project him as a great man? The Indian historians, according to the guideline set by the ongoing politics of Muslim appeasement, have to glorify each and every Muslim ruler including Akbar as a compulsion. But it is really incomprehensible why the historians of the West are also in the race in glorifying Akbar, who, in reality, was a foreign invader and came to India to plunder this country. Above all, Akbar was a Muslim and, like each and every Muslim, he possessed three basic Islamic qualities – treachery, lechery and butchery. In several occasions, Akbar played vile treachery with the Hindu kings. Akbar was a cruel killer, who butchered innocent Hindus in millions. As a lecher, Akbar maintained a harem of 5000 women, most of whom were abducted Hindu housewives. So it is necessary to make a fresh estimate of Akbar to asses his greatness.
Picture of Emperor Akbar
Abu'l-Fath Jalal-ud-din Muhammad Akbar was born on 23 November 1542 at Umarkot Fort, Sind and died on27 October 1605, at the age of 63 at Fatehpur Sikri, Agra. His father was Nasiruddin Humayun and his mother’s name was Nawab Hamida Banu Begum Sahiba. At birth Akbar was named Badruddin Mohammed Akbar, because he was born on the night of a badr (full moon). After the capture of Kabul by Humayun his date of birth and name were changed to throw off evil sorcerers. His name was changed to Jalal-ud-din Muhammad Akbar and his birthdate was officially changed to October 15, 1542. He was given the name Akbar at birth after his maternal grandfather, Shaikh Ali Akbar Jami. [1]
He succeeded his father Humayun as ruler of the Mughal Empire from 1556 to 1605. He was the grandson of Babur who founded the Mughal dynasty in India . On the eve of Akbar’s death in 1605, the Mughal empire spanned almost 1 million square kilometers. [1]
Akbar, widely considered the greatest of the Mughal emperors, was only 14 when he ascended the throne in
Delhi, by defeating the Hindu king Samrat Hem Raj Vikramaditya, also called Himu at the Second Battle of Panipat He was descended from Turks, Mongols, and Iranians — the three peoples who predominated in the political elites of northern India in medieval times. He consolidated his power, during first two decades of his reign and bring parts of northern and central India into his realm. He also reduced external military threats from the Pashtun (Afghan), the descendants of Sher Shah, by waging wars against Afghan. He also solidified his rule in India by pursuing diplomacy with the powerful Rajput rulers of northern part of the country, and by admitting Rajput princesses in his harem. [1]
Picture of Samrat Hem Raj Vikramaditya
Akbar spent a part of his early life in the Princely State of Rewa (in present day Madhya Pradesh) where Akbar grew up in the village of Mukundpur . Akbar and prince Ram Singh who later became the Maharaja of Rewa grew up together and stayed close friends through life. Humayun was the eldest son of Babur. For some time, Akbar was raised by his uncle Askari and his wife in the eastern country of Persia and Afghanistan.He spent his youth learning to hunt, run, and fight, but he never learned to read and write. The so called pseudo-secular and Marxist historians paint Akbar as a generous, kind hearted tolerant king free from religious bigotry, and a genius with refined tastes in the arts, architecture, music and literature. But it is to be seen, how far their portrayal is true.
It has been mentioned earlier that Sher Shah ascended the throne of Delhi on May 17, 1540, by defeating Humayun in a battle near Kannauj and he died in an accident in 1545 AD, in Kalinjar. After his death, anarchy appeared again. The nobles made Jalal Khan, the second son of Sher Shah, the Sultan of Delhi , depriving the eldest Adil Khan as the latter was incompetent, lazy, and ease-loving. After ascending the throne, Jalal Khan assumed the title of Islam Shah. Soon after, a group of nobles made a conspiracy to murder Islam Shah and put Adil Khan on the throne. But the plan divulged and Islam Shah put all the conspirators to the sword.
Chaos after the Death of Sher Shah:
On November 22, 1554, Islam Shah, after ruling for 9 years and' 6 months, died and his nobles put his minor son Firuz on to the throne. But after a few months, Mubariz Khan, a cousin of Firuz, murdered him and ascended the throne assuming the new name of Muhammad Adil Shah. But he was unsuitable as a ruler. On the other hand, the news of Islam Shah's death inspired Humayun to invade India and recover his lost territory. At this juncture, Bairam Khan came to Humayun's help that enhanced his strength considerably and enabled him to re-conquer Kabul, News of these developments made Adil Shah very shaky and he gave up all the responsibilities to his most trusted employee Himu, a Hindu officer, and this incident facilitated Himu to raise himself as the most important man in North Indian politics.
This was the time when the star of Himu's fortune shone brightest- Adil Shah appointed him the Wzir (Prime Minister) and the incident initiated his rapid rise. But most of the Muslim historians did not like an infidel to hold the highest post in the court of a Muslim king and hence they tried to blacken his character it every opportunity.
Who this Himu was ? Historian R. C, Majumdar, in this regard, writes, “Himu was born in a poor family of Dhansar section of the Baniya caste, living in a town in the southern part of Alwar".[2] Muslim historian Badayuni has described him as a resident of a small town called Rewari in the taluk of Mewat, and according to him, Himu began his life as a green vendor.[2] Others believe that Himu was a hawker in the town of Mewat.[2] However, at a certain stage, he succeeded to draw the attention of Adil Shah, who appointed him the Superintendent of the Delhi market. But by dint of his sincerity and sense of responsibility, he became a favourite of Adil, who started to elevate him to more and more responsible posts. When Adil Shah died, Himu was the Chief of the Intelligence Department and, at the same time, the Head of the Postal Department (Daroga-i-Dak Chowki).
To introduce Himu, the Muslim historian Ahmmad Yadgar, in his Tarikh-I-Salatin-i-Afghana, writes, “There was a man named Himu, who was a weighman in the bazar, who found means to approach the King on different affairs, and in whom he daily reposed more and more confidence. By degrees he became very powerful and influential, so that he managed the business of the State”. [3]
At that time, Junaid Khan, the governor of Bayana, and his son, the phaujdar of Ajmir rebelled. Adil Shah sent Jamal Khan against him with a large force. But in a severe battle at Kanulapur, Junaid became victorious. The incident made Adil Shah very depressed. Then Himu said, “O Lord of the World, if you will trust me with a small force, I will either overcome Junaid Khan, or perish in the attempt". [4] The King yielded to his solicitations and sent Himu with 3000 or 4000 horsemen and four war-elephants. Junaid deputed his assistant Daulat Khan to defend Himu. A battle was fought and Daulat Khan was defeated and slain.
Then Junaid himself advanced with 8000 strong cavalry to confront Himu, while Himu had only 3000 horses. So he decided to attack the enemy in the darkness of night and Ahremad Yadgar, in his Tarikh-i-Salatin-i-Afghana, writes, “The enemy remained on the alert during the three watches of the night; but in the last watch they grew negligent and fell asleep, The soldiers of Adil Shah fell furiously on them on all sides. Himu did not give the time to put enemy their armour and the Afghans, sword in hand, passed through their enemy slaughtering all they met.”[5] Himu then went to the court of Adil Shah and Yadgar writes, “He (Himu) then stood with folded hands in front of the throne. Adil Shah honoured him with a purple khilat (garment), the coller and the skirt of which were covered with jewels".[6]
At that time, Ibrahim Khan, a cousin of Adil.Shah and the governor of Agra , rebelled. Adil Shah sent a detachment against him, but Ibrahim routed them. Then Ibrahim marched towards Delhi and ultimately occupied the city. Inspired by the success of Ibrahim, Ahmmad Khan Sur, the governor of Lahore and brother-in-law of Adil, assumed the name Sikandar Shah and rebelled. In the east, Muhammad Khan Sur, the governor of Bengal revolted and assumed the title of Shamsuddin Muhammad Ghazi. So the empire of Sher Shah got divided into four parts, Delhi and Agra went to Ibrahim Khan, Punjab went to Sikandar Shah, Bengal to Shamsuddin Muhammad and the remaining part under the control of Adil Shah.
Meanwhile, in 1555, Sikandar Shah invaded Delhi , in a severe battle he defeated Ibrahim and thus Delhi went under the control of Sikandar. On the other hand, the rivalry among the Afghans provided a great opportunity for the Mughals to recover their lost empire. In November 1554, Humayun left Kabul , advanced towards Lahore , and in February 1555, gained control over the city almcst without any resistance. Then Sikandar Shah marched against Humayun with a 30,000 strong cavalry. A severe battle took place at Machhiara near Ludhiana and Sikandar Shah suffered a complete defeat. Sikandar then marched again against Humayun with 80,000 horsemen, but he was again defeated in a battle near Sirhind and fled to Sivallk Hills.
Ascendency of Himu:
In that hour of crises, Adil Shah Appointed Himu the Wazir, or the Prime Minister of his court and handed over civil, military, finance and, in fact, every other responsibility to him. It is really surprising that Adil Shah, a Muslim king, selected a Hindu kafir for the highest position of his government, and there is no doubt that had Adil could find Muslim candidate suitable for the post, he would certainly not have selected an infidel like Himu for the post. The incident shows that the competency of Himu, for the post, was beyond any dispute.
After assuming the new responsibility, Himu at once marched against Ibrahim and defeated him twice, first at Kalpi and then at Khanwa. To narrate Himu's victory, Nizamuddin Ahmroad in his Tabakat-i-Akbari, writes, “Adil now sent, the bakkal, who was the Wazir, with a large force, and with 500 war-elephants and artillery, against Agra and Delhi . When Himu reached Kalpi, he resolved to dispose of Ibrahim first and hastened to meet him. A great battle followed, in which Himu was victorious, and Ibrahim fled to his father at Bayana, Himun followed and Invested Bayana, which he besieged for three months".[7] Himu then marched against Muhammad Shah and a battle was fought at Chhapparghatta , a place 20 miles away from Kalpl. Muhammad Shah was defeated and Himu gained control over Bengal.[8]
Following the chaos over the succession of Islam Shah (Sher Khan Suri's son), as mentioned above, Humayun reconquered Delhi in 1555, with the help of an army partly provided by his Persian ally Shah Tahmasp.But a few months later, on January 26, 1556, Humayun died and Bairam Khan, the guardian of Akbar, cleverly concealed the report of Humayun's death in order to prepare for Akbar's accession to the throne. On February 24, 1556, Akabar, a 13 year-old boy, was proclaimed Shahanshah (Persian for "King of Kings") of Hindustan . by Bairam Khan at Kalanaur (Gurdaspur, Punjab).
At that time, Himu sought permission of Adil to attack Delhi . Ahmmad Yadgar narrates, “Himun went in front of the throne and said, “O King, the case is this; he (Akbar) is now a child of ten years old, who has lost his father, and the Mughal army is not yet firmly established. It is easy to root up a small plant". Adil Shah derived confidence from his speech and prepared a powerful force. He sent 7000 horsemen and 20 war-elephants with Himun, who went march by march to Gwalior”.[9] From Gwallor, Himu advanced towards Agra and Adil Shah, on the other hand, went to the safe place at the fort of Chunar.
As Himu got closer to Agra , frightened Iskandar Khan, the Mughal governor of the city, fled to Delhi . So Himu occupied Agra practically without resistance and then the victorious Wazir marched towards Delhi . Alikuli Khan, the Mughal governor of Delhi , also prepared a strong force to confront Himu and a fierce battle followed. Ahmmad Yadgar, to narrate the incident, writes, “When Himu saw that the Mughals were in good spirit and the Afghans disheartened, he advanced with his own division and routed them. They (Mughals) were unable to rally, and as they were utterly defeated, they took to flight. Himu pursued them and slaughtered many, ... So much plunder of Mughal army fell into Himun's hands that it was impossible to take an account of it -160 elephants, l000 horses of Arab breed and an immense quantity of property and valuables". [10]
Then victorious Himu entered Delhi and Nizamuddin Ahmmad, in his Tarikh -i-Akbari , writes,"Himun had greatly vaunted his achievements at Delhi and had taken to himself the title of Raja Bikrsmjit”.[11] To narrate the same victory, Ahmmad Yadgar, in his Tarikh-i-Salatin-i-Afghana, writes, “Himun rejoiced this victory, sent an account of his success, together with the Spoils captured from the Mughals, to Adll Shah, who was exceedingly pleased when he received it,…He (Adil Shah) gave a great festival and sent Himun a dress of honour, adorned with jewels and worked with gold threads”[12] Ahmmad Yadgar continues to write," ... he (Himu) entered Delhi, raised the Imperial Canopy over him and ordered coins to be struck in his name. He appointed a governor (of Delhi) of his own and brought the Delhi territory and the neighbouring parganas under his control and in order to console the King, he sent an account of the victory in these words,"Your slave, by the royal fortune, has routed the Mughal army, … but I hear that Humayun's son commands a numerous force and advancing against Delhi”.[13]
Himu’s Misfortune:
The news of defeat of the Mughal governor of Delhi and the skill and braveiy of Himu reached the Mughal prince Akber in time. Nearly 10 months later, Akbar, with a great force of 26,000 horsemen under the command of Bairam Khan marched towards Delhi . So Ahmmad Yadgar, in his Tarikh-i-Salatin-i-Afghana, writes, "He (Akbar) marched without halting, with Bairam Khan. …When they reached Thanesar, a census was taken of the army, which was found to consist of 26,000 horsemen". [14] And to describe Himu's army, Nizamuddin Ahmmad in his Tarikh-i-Akbari, writes, "He (Himu) had gathered under his command a mighty force and had 1600 war-elephants. With those, he hastened to meet the Imperial (Mughal) army”. [15]
The battle began in the morning on 5th November, 1556, at Panipat and to describe the same, Nizamuddim Ahmmad writes, “Himun then advanced with his elephants, and made such a determined charge on the Imperial army that the left wing was shaken…. Himu then drew off his forces, and made an assault upon the centre, which was under the command of Khan-Zaman. He led all his elephants against the Khan's men, who received him with shower of Arrows. An arrow pierced the eye of Hemun, and came out at the back of his head. When those who were fighting under him saw his condition, their hands were paralyzed, and they broke. The Imperial forces pursued them, and cut many of then, to pieces.” [16] According to Abul Fazl, Himu had divided his army into three divisions and he himself was leading the central division with 500 elephants and 20,000 Afghan and Rajput horsemen. [17] So, many believe, when Himu was on the verge of winning the this battle, the accident occured, leading to his defeat.
Ahmad Yadgar had tried to invent a reason for Himu's defeat, which is extremely incredible. He writes, "The evening preceding the day on which he (Himu) expected the battle, he went to the sanctified mausoleum Kutub-ul-Aktab of His Highness Kutb-ul-Hakk, (the pole-star of religion of Islam), ......and placing the head of entreaty on the august threshold, vowed that, if he were destined to conquer Delhi, if the throne of Delhi were granted to him, he would become a Musulman on his return to Delhi, and diffuse the religion of Muhammad" [18] Yadgar continues, “The Almighty (Allah) gave them (Mughals) victory. But he (Himu) perjured himself, and did not become a Musulman, or forsake his heathen prejudices; nay, he even persecuted the Musulmans. But at last he saw, what he did see". [18]
Yadgar also writes that, on the previous night, Himu became extremely disheartened after a dream of bad omen. He writes, ”.. he (Himu) beheld in a dream, a torrent come down and carry away the elephant on which he was mounted. When he was nearly drowned, a Mughal came and cast a chain round his neck, and drew him out". On the next day, an interpreter said, "The torrent which you saw is the Mughal army,..and the chain signifies; the blood which will flow from your body when you are wounded.” [18] This made Himu much frightened, but he said, “The very reverse of the dream will happen". [18]
But, in fact, it was Akbar who got frightened by observing the valour of Himu and his mighty force, and Bairam Khan, to inspire him, said, "This is the commencement of His Majesty's reign. This infidel has routed the whole Mughal army, and is now making preparations against us. If you do your best in this business, with one heart and soul, Hindustan is yours. I place my trust in Allah. If we fail in this, you, whose homes are at a distance of 500 kos (1000 miles), will not be able to find an sylum”. [19]
However, the military skill and bravery that Himu displayed in the battle field on November 5, could not have been ignored by even the Muslim historians. So Ahmmad Yadgar writes, “Himu, having made himself ready for action came out into the plain, and seated himself in a howda on an elephant in order the that he might be able to overlook and superintend his troops, .... Bairan Khan also drew up the people of Chaghatai to the right and left in battle array,.. Bairam Khan placed Akbar Mirza's own private tent in an elevated position, and left 3000 horse to guard him, ... Himu was excessively arrogant on account of his troops and elephants. He advanced, fought, and routed the Mughals, whose heads lay in heaps, and whose blood flowed in streams. He thus at first vanquished the Mughals……” [20]
But fortune was not with Himu and his victory turned into a defeat due to an accident and Ahmmad Yadgar writes, "... by the decree of the Almighty, an arrow struck Himu in the forehead. He told his elephant driver to take the elephant out of the field of battle, then the Afghans saw that the animal was retreating, they believed that Himun was flying. … as no benefit is ever derived from disloyalty, he Sustained a complete defeat". [20]
To narrate the same incident, Vincent Smith writes, “On November 5, Himu succeeded in throwing both the right and the left wings of his opponents into confusion, and sought to make his victory decisive by bringing all his mountain-like elephants to bear on the centre of the enemy, commanded by Khan Zaman. Probably he would have won but for the accident that he was struck in the eye by an arrow which pierced his brain and rendered him unconscious" [21]
Akbar’s Display of Greatness:
After the battle was ended, in accordance with the ghastly custom of the times, a tower was built with the heads of the slain. This "tower of heads" tradition and ceremony was religiously observed by the "magnanimous" Akbar, like his ancestors.
According to Yadgar, Alikuli Khan could trace the elephant of Himu in the forest, brought it back and placed Himu before Bairam Khan, and writes, "Bairam Khan ... caused Himu to descend from the elephant, after which he bound his hands, and took him before the young and fortunate Prince, and said, "As this is our first success, let your Highness's own august hand smite this infidel with the sword". The Prince, accordingly, struck him, and divided his head from his unclean body". [22]
Nizamuddin Ahmmad, to describe the incident, writes, "Shah Kuli Khan,… drove the elephant , along with several others which had been captured in the field, to the presence of the Emperor. Bairam Khan Khan Kanan then put Himu to death with his own hand.” [23] So, according to Nizamuddln Ahmmad, Bairam Khan executed himu with his own hand. And similar was the view maintained by Badayuni, Abul Fazl and Faizi. So, Badayuni writes, “Bairam Khan said, "This is your first war (ghazd), prove your sword on this infidel, for it will be a meritorious deed", Akbar replied, "He is now no better than a dead man, how can I strike him? If he had sense and strength, I would try my sword”. Then, in the presence of them all, the Khan, the warrior of the faith, cut him down with his sword. Himun's head was sent to Kabul, and his body to Delhi, to be exposed over the gates".[23]
But according to Vincent Smith, Akbar himself struck Himu with his sword to earn the title of Ghazi , and writes, "Bairam Khan desired Akbar to earm the title of Ghazi, or slayer of the infidel, by fleshing his sword on the captive. The boy naturally obeyed his guardian and smote Hemu on the neck with his scimitar. The bystanders also plunged their swords into the bleeding corpse. Hemu's head was sent to Kabul to be exposed, and his trunk gibbeted at one of the gates of Delhi ". [24]
He also writes, "Akbar, a boy of fourteen cannot be justly blamed for complying with the instructions of Bairam Khan. ... The official story, that a magnanimous sentiment of unwillingness to strike a helpless prisoner already half dead compelled him (Akbar) to refuse to obey his guardian's instructions, seems to be the late invention of courtly flatterers, and is opposed to the clear statement of Ahmed Yadgar and the Dutch writer, van der Broecke, as well as to the probabilities of the case". [24] That was the pathetic end of the saga of a great son of Mother India, who tried his best to restore independence of this ancient country, our beloved motherland, by defeating the Muslim invaders and occupiers, but did not succeed only due to a mere accident. Furthermore, it is a matter of great regret that the people of this country have forgotten that great Hindu hero and the fascinating story of his life, achievements and sacrifice.
Akbar’s Subsequent Display of Greatness:
But the tale of Himu did not end with his death. Intelligence came to Akbar that Himu's father, his widow and other members of his family were living in Alwar, with their properties and wealth, and, on the pretext of a possible revolt by Haji Khan, the governor of Alwar, he sent a detachment to Alwar, under the command of Nasir-ul-mulk, a.k.a, Pir Muhammad. The Mughal has brought the Mewat region under the rule of Delhi and Pir Muhammad executed Himu's father. To narrate the incident, Abul Fazl, in his Akbamama, writes, “Himu's father was taken alive, and brought before Nasir-ul-mulk, who tried to convert him to the faith (of Islam); but the old man said, "For eighty years, I have worshipped God in way of my own religion; how can I forsake my faith? Shall I, through fear of death, embrace your religion without understanding it?” Maulana Pir Muhammad treated his question as unheard, but gave an answer with the tongue of the sword”. [25] Immense treasures were taken with the family of Hemu whose aged father was executed." This "tower of heads" tradition and ceremony was religuously preserved by the "magnanimous" Akbar.
Historian R. C, Majumdar, while offering his respect to Himu, writes, "Such was the noble end of the family of a great Hindu who was born in a humble life, but made his way to the throne of Delhi by dint of sheer ability and military skill - a unique episode in the history of India during the Muslim rule” [26]
Almost all the Muslim chroniclers have tried to paint Himu a traitor and disloyal, because he ascended the throne of Delhi , in stead of offering the same to his master Adil Shah. But, in this context, R. C. Majumdar writes "No one today can reasonably claim to know the thoughts in Himu's mind. But a little reflection will show that there was nothing unreasonable or immoral in the aspiration of Himu. No doubt, personal ambition played a great part, but it may not be altogether wrong to think that he was also inspired by the idea of founding a Hindu Raj. This is supported by his assumption to the title of Vikramaditya". [27] And, perhaps, most shameful as well as most deplorable is the role of the so called secular and the Marxist historians, the most despicable group of people of independent India who, like the Muslim historians, are continuing their efforts to blacken Himu's character by portraying him a betrayer to his Muslim Master.
So, the historian R. C. Majumdar, in this context, writes, “Unfortunately, Himu's history has been written almost wholly by his enemies who dreaded him most, and, far from doing justice to his greatness, they have tarnished his name with unmerited odium. It is time to resuscitate the memory and give a true account of the life of Hemchandra, a really great hero, whose dreams and achievements have been forgotten by his countrymen”.[26]
So, it is really unfortunate that our so called secular historians, following their sinister political guideline of Muslim appeasement, are glorifying the foreign Muslim invaders, including Akbar, by concealing their demonic activities, while projecting a real patriotic fighter, like Himu, as a villain. These people, guided by the said policy of Muslim appeasement and motivated by allurement, are going on writing distorted history of this country and thus depriving the people and their posterity from getting acquainted with their real history.
The Muslim rulers who massacred hundreds of thousands of innocent Hindus within a single day in umpteen occasions, these historians are projecting those killers as honest and benevolent rulers. Those blood-thirsty Muslim rulers who, by coercion and torture, converted hundreds of millions of Hindus to Islam at the point of sword, these despicable sub-humans called secular historians are portraying those Muslim despots as noble hearted magnanimous kings. The foreign Muslim invaders who demolished hundreds of thousands of Hindu temples or converted them into mosques, these historians are describing them as generous people liberal in the matter of religion. The abominable and lecherous Muslim invaders, who carried hundreds of thousands of Hindu women and children as captives to the Middle East to be sold as slaves, these wicked historians are painting them as kind and soft-hearted rulers. Those foreign Muslim invaders, who forcibly occupied the forts and palaces of Hindu kings and did not lay a single brick, these historians are highlighting them as great admirers of architecture or great architects, and we fools are cramming those narrations years after years, without assessing the realities of those narrations.
But we, the citizens of free India , have every right to know their true history. They have every right to know, who this Himu was and what were his achievements. We have the right to know the spectacular life of this great son of India , a great patriot who sacrificed his life to defend the foreign occupier Akbar. And, had not by an accident, an arrow pierced Himu's eye and rendered him unconscious on November 5, 1556, the day on which the Second Battle of Panipat was fought, the people of India would have a different history to read- the chapter of Mughal Dynasty would have been replaced by the Hindu Dynasty of Vikramaditya Heraraj. And at same the time, the hour has arrived to decide who was really Great, Akbar or the Emperor Vikramaditya Hemraj, who now being slighted as Himu.
References:
[1] http://www.culturalindia.net/indian-history/akbar.html, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomb_of_Akbar_the_Great , http://www.boloji.com/history/011.htm
[2] R. C, Majumdar, The History and Cultures of the Indian People, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan (in 12 Vols) , VII ,97
[3] H. M.Elliot and J, Dowson, History of India ; As Told by Its Own Historians, Low Price Publications , Delhi , (in 8 Vols) , V, 48,
[4] H. M. Ellict and J. Dowson, ibid, V, 48.
[5] H. M, Elliot and J. Dowson, ibid, V, 50.
[6] H. M. Hllict and J. Dowson , ibid, V, 51.
[7] H. M. Elliot and J, Dowson, ibid, V, 244
[8] H. M., Elliot and J- Dcwson, ibid, V, 490.
[9] H. M. Elliot and J, Dowson, ibid, V, 59.
[10] H. M. Elliot and J, Dowson, ibid, V, 61
[11] H. M, Elliot and J. Dowson , ibid, V, 252.
[12] H. M- Elliot and J. Dowson, ibid, V, 60,
[13] H. M. Elliot and J. Dowson, ibid, V,61-62,
[14] H. M. Elliot and J. Dowson, ibid, V,62,
[15] H. M. Elliot and J. Dowson, ibid, V, 252.
[16] H. M. Elliot and J. Dowson , ibid, V, 252.
[17] H. M. Elliot and J. Dowson, ibid, V, 252-53.
[18] H. M, Elliot and J. Dcwson, ibid, V, 63.
[19] H. M, Elliot and J, Dowscn, ibid, V, 64.
[20] H. M. Elliot and J. Dowson, ibid, V, 65.
[21] V. A. Smith, Akbar the Great Mogul, Oxford Clarendon Press, 38.
[22] H. M. Elliot and J. Dowson, ibid, V, 66.
[23] H. m. Elliot and J. Dowson, ibid, V, 253.
[24] V. A. Smith, ibid, 39.
[25] H. M. Elliot and J. Dowson, ibid, VI, 21.
[26] R.C. Majumdar, ibid, Bharatiya Vidya Bnavan , VII ,100.
[27] R. C. Majumdar, ibid, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, VII, 101.
******
- Op-Ed
- Business
- Entertainment
- Human Interest
- Labor
- Law
- Technology
- War
- Delhi
- Kabul
- Employment Change
- Employment Relation
- Family Relation
- Person Attributes
- Person Career
- Person Travel
- Political Relationship
- Quotation
- paint
- Adil Shah
- Ahmad Yadgar
- Akbar Mirza
- emperor
- historian
- Jalal Khan
- King
- Muhammad Akbar
- Nasiruddin Humayun
- Prince
- Raj Vikramaditya Akbar
- Shah Kuli Khan
- So Himu
Great article...keep us
Great article...keep us informed through such articles which enlighten us......
Not everybody knows this....
Even tipu sultan was like akbar...cruel as mozzies r expected 2 b.....
muslims and their apologists have fooled,trying to fool and fooling people for long..not now though!
in this age people can c through their gameplan....
Hope good sense prevails on non-muslims apologists batting for mozzies.....
Peace for the world.......
But we, the citizens of free
But we, the citizens of free India , have every right to know their true history.
Thankyou Sir.
[...] DISTORTION OF INDIAN
[...] DISTORTION OF INDIAN HISTORY FOR MUSLIM APPEASEMENT, Part 5A …Inspired by the success of Ibrahim, Ahmmad Khan Sur, the governor of Lahore and brother-in-law of Adil, assumed the name Sikandar Shah and rebelled. In the east, Muhammad Khan Sur, the governor of Bengal revolted and assumed the title … [...]
Why would historians paint
Why would historians paint Akbar good to please Muslims doesn't make sense. Because Akbar was not a Muslim himself. He was the follower of Din e Elahi, a religion founded by himself which had elements of Hinduism and Islam in it. Just because he had a Muslim name doesn't make him Muslim.
Akbar enjoyed the killings
Akbar enjoyed the killings and the loot. A typical sign of a muslim. Later on he studied hinduism and christianity also. He understood the trick of muhammed and wanted to be another muhammed with a new religion din-e-ilahi.
But few generation later a monster called Aurangzeb came and the destruction to hindu civilization was immense. But this also marked the raise of Shivaji in difficult situation and also raise of khalsa of the sikhs and within a span of 100 years mughal empire crumbled. Unfortunately Hindus missed the chance to reconvert back all the muslims to there ancestoral hindu religion. They forgot that Muslims mean enemy of all....
Dr. Brahmachari, You are
Dr. Brahmachari,
You are writing about history, which is fine. There is something more urgent to be attended to in your own state. Please read the article below and if possible publish something on this issue ASAP. Islamic atrocities are intolerable ad I do not understand why Hindus keep electing anti-Hindu governments in West bengal. The deafening silence of anti-Hindu secular media in this regard is very very painful.
haindavakeralam.com/HKPage.aspx?PageID=8812&SKIN=B
Karl Marx, who never visited
Karl Marx, who never visited India and got all the inputs from fellow Britishers who returned from India, said thus about Hindus [Indians]:
"Hindus are a political morons. They have no political ambitions. Its sad that such a huge section of mankind is so backward politically. They can't last long. They'll vanish into oblivion soon enough."
That was nearly 150 years ago.
The same is true about Hindus even today.
The British India will soon be lost into smaller states ruled by caste headmen.
Blaming history or cursing historians is just another gimmick of bankrupt Hindu society.
Hindus never were any good and are NOT any better today.
kokamal, True spirituality
kokamal,
True spirituality has no political ambitions. Hinduismi s indeed truly spiritual religion, unlike abrahamic counterparts. However this has become a great disadvantage for Hindus and they must soon learn to adapt. I am hopeful this will happen in future. They will be forced to deal with reality soon.
Great article. This article
Great article. This article gives much historical insight into the horrors brought upon India by Islam.
The blood-soaked, treacherous history of the Muslims is shameful indeed. Non-Muslim Islamic apologists and appeasers are complicit in furthering the cause of the evil ideology of Islam.
Becoming a Muslim was the most foolish thing that i have ever done. Leaving Islam and deciding to speak out against it is probably the best move i have ever made. Islam is the fraud of sick little Muhammad that brings certain collective disaster to those unfortunate nations that succumb to its horrors.
A wonderful article Dr.
A wonderful article Dr. Brahmachari. When I was studying in college in sixties, I took Islamic history as the ancilliary subject. The professor who taught the subject was a Hindu. Whatever you wrote now was told my professor but I didn't believe him at that time. Now after reading almost all articles in Faithfreedom I was stunned to baffle myself about the stupidity I had in my mind about Islam. Though I was born as a Hindu, I adore the people of Hindu religion for their tolerant nature. But even today when fellow Hindu is being killed right in front of their eyes, no body cares in India. In Sri Lanka more than 200,000 Hindus and Christians were killed by Sri Lankan army. Can you show any Hindu in India raised his/her voice against these politicians in Delhi. It is also shame to note that Indian Government encouraged Sri Lankan Government for killing all these innocent people. Moreover India with its arch enemies Pakistan and China joined together in supplying arms and ammunitions to kill these Hindu Brothers. They also supplied chemical bombs to kill those victims. Hindus and Christians in Sri Lanka asked only basic rights for the last sixty years. Now look nearly 300,000 Hindus and Christians are kept in Sri Lanka in the Holocaust type barbed wire camps without even basic amenities. What India needs is now a real strong Hindu ruler, not the power hungry petty politicians.
Historians site two historic
Historians site two historic rulers of India as 'the great'. One is Buddhist Asoka. The next is Muslim Akbar. The subcontinent has been the abode of Hindus throughout history, but why has there NOT been a single Hindu ruler who could earn the honorific 'The great'? Why couldn't Hinduism produce one? What is wrong with Hinduism?
Not only was this guy a
Not only was this guy a barbarian, he was also very ugly. Ewwww! My butt looks better then him. The sight of his picture will definitely give me nightmares.
Unfortunately the Indian
Unfortunately the Indian History was written by Britishers and they wanted to show that British empire was the best thing for India and after independence Leftist took over.
There were innumerable great hindu kings were there. Alexander although was able to defeat Paurus a Hindu king, but the fight was so frightening that his soldiers revolted for any further attack on India and thus he started moving backward from there to Greek.
Chandragupta defeated the Greek army left in India and he consolidated his empire till Persia including present day Afghanistan, Pakistan and North India.
Ashoka was his grandson and he liked buddhism and propagated it to far of places. The last remnants of Bamiyan Buddha which Muslim taliban destroyed just recently.
It was the Hindu Kings efforts that muslims were unable to progress into India till 1000 AD. It was sheer treachery that muslims were able to overcame them.
Vijyanagara Kingdom , Chola were very great and powerful kingdoms, Rajput rulers who faught so valiantly that muslims were unable to make hindu india completely muslim and still india is 80 % hindus and only 13 % muslims.
Shivaji was one of the greatest hindu kings, he faught and defeated the mughal empire in many battles during there peak, In the deccan there was a long war where 2,00,000 hindu soldiers and 5,00,000 muslims were killed.
Also Sikh path/religion was formed from the hindus only, who resorted to simple and spritual living and created one of the best warriors. Unfortunately Hindus and sikhs failed to prosyletize the defeated people, which in turn created pakistan in the grab of democracy.
Muslims initially were high in numerical strength and using trachery they used to fight thats why they got success. Now its more of technical and strategic thats why muslims cant defeat any other non-muslim country.
They just want to use demographics and after getting a certain mass do rioting, raping, looting. Thats there trick.
The hindu kings did not try
The hindu kings did not try to convert the people because they did not give much importance to religion. They must have thought that these muslims will remain loyal to their kingdom, motherland.
Perhaps islam does not have any concept of loyalty ,muslims bombing and terrorizing their own countrymen even fellow muslims in the name of shia and sunni
Thank you Dr Radhasyam I was
Thank you Dr Radhasyam
I was eagerly waiting for your coverage on akbar shah and here it is. Thanks. However, Mr Radha did not include akbar's initiation of diin ilahi.
Ms Marie, the picture is not real portrayal of him and do not be terrified at the so called ugliness. The Mughal emporers were to answer all of their brutalities but separate that from emotionally judging their appearance.
Humanity is but one family. :)
Our history books are
Our history books are seriously outdated:(......
As a kid, I had a lot of respect for Akbar...
I even liked the recent movie "Jodhaa Akbar"..Out of curiosity, I browsed the Wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akbar) and was sad to discover that he was just like the rest of the mughal kings.
The Indian movie makers are the worst! They could not dare make anything that is anti-Islamic.
Dr,
the wiki article says that "Akbar left Islam and found Din-i-llahi"...How much truth is there in that? Did he actually leave Islam?
#3. Ananta - The Infinity
#3. Ananta - The Infinity Says:
"" ---Akbar was not a Muslim himself. He was the follower of Din e Elahi, a religion founded by himself which had elements of Hinduism and Islam in it.---""
I doubt if any Muslim pig or for that matter the pseudo secular of present day India can digest that. You mean to say India could convert a Muslim pig like Akbar?
Dear Dr Brahmachari, I fully
Dear Dr Brahmachari,
I fully subscribe to your thought on distorted version of Indian history that has gone down Indians throat. Everything goes with Muslim appeasement and fear of Islam. the weak kneed Indian leaders have no spine and akin to earthworms who get trampled always. Please read following that was written some time ago by me and it throws light on the fact of Indians incompetence in saying spade a spade.
Ramaraya the defacto king of Vijayanagar empire during the reign of Sadasivarayalu ( after the death of Great Sri Krishna devaraya) fought Tallikota battle with combined army of Deccani Mohammedan sultans who declared Jihad on Hindu state in 1565. Muslim soldiers and the generals betrayed Ramaraya on battle field and went over to the enemy. Ramaraya was at onne killed by Sultan Husein Nizam shah of Ahmed nagar when captive Ramaraya was broughtto him. Vijaynagr and Hampi were vadalised for 6 moths and ruins stand testimony even today. The hatred aginsnt Hindus is fully evident even today in the devastation . But Our historians down play Mslim atrocities at Hampi and Vijayanagar and skip it in history books. Ramaraya was a true soldier who defended Hindu empire and arrested Muslims for twenty long years. It is shameful that our Historians down play Ramaraya's role and glorify Deccani sultans to appease Muslims. Ibrahim kutubshaha of Golconda who took refuge with Ramaraya for eight long years fearing his brother Jamshed Kutubshah subsequently joined the combined army and paved way for Ramaraya's death. Even a dog does not bite the hand that feeds once. But Ibrahim was ungrateful and Indian poets in his court have described him as Malki bhram while our books clapped. Shame indeed.
Vandalisation of Hampi Vijaynagar was most unwanted in Indian History
NAKED TRUTH -- RAPE OF HINDUISM
Prof Dr Colonel K Prabhakar rao ( retired)
Hampi and vijayanagar stand testimony even today
Wanton acts stare at us done by the Muslim kings
Linger fresh in the minds of all
As muslim kings in Deccan formed an evil ring
Belur and Halebid temples mock at us
With defaced idols and broken statues
Hindu culture stands vitiated to the core
While pseudo secularists lack basic virtues
Looking back at these temples across our land
That lay scattered across our nation
Idols and sculptures stare with broken limbs
And my heart aches with sorrow and pain
Solid granite was sculptured as if by the gods
While Indian sculptors struggled day and nights
Wanton acts of invading blockheads
Have done untold harm in the useless fights
Scores of Hindu gods and SivaLingas
And the gracefully sitting stone bulls
All are put to fire and hammer
Damage has been done by the clouded and dull
Ghazni broke the Linga into pulp and dust
Took away the stones to his kingdom
Alas!the stones were spread on stairs at a mosque
While lakhs of Indians met their martyrdom
Pseudo secularism is the order of the dayTo appease some the leaders are ready to eat grass
Our history books are filled with distorted versions
And the nation has been brought to a pathetic pass
It is high time the things are set right
And children are taught truthful things of past
Pseudo secularists be floored on the mat at once
Only then the truth would eternally last
Dr K Prabhakar Rao
(Hampi and Vijaynagar was the capital of Vijaynagar kings in14 to 16 centuries which was vandalized and destroyed by muslim armies of Deccan after Tallikota battle fought in 16 century fought between Aliya Ramaraya and the combined armies of Bijapur Ahmednagar , Golconda , and Bidar .Rama Raya was betrayed by his muslim generals and their troops on the battle field which led to his capture and subsequent killing at the hands of Hussain Nizam Shah of Ahmed nagar who held a personal grudge against him .The shamless acts of destruction as a result of Hindu hatred can be seen even today which our pseudo historians try to hide to appease a section of people ,else their sentiments would be adversely affected in secular India.What a tragedy indeed ? It is time to show the pseudo secularists the door so that the country is saved from disaster and doom which is lurking around the corner .)
I always doubted that Akbar
I always doubted that Akbar was a great king and respected other religions from his heart. Until now I thought that Hemu was a traitor, and had a negative personality. Well thank you very much Dr. for this article as it was an eye opener.
Akabr was a hypocrite and was no different than other Muslim kings. He knew that he could not rule India without the help of Local rajput kings so he removed Jazia tax for a while to so show his good face and eventually fool the innocent Hindus. And on the other hand he never missed any opportunity to slaughter or convert the non Muslims into Islam.
As stated in this article that he tried to refuse the beheading of Dead Hemu, gives an idea that he had some Humanity in the beginning as he was illiterate (Did not know about the true Islamic teachings), But with the time as he came closer to true Islamic teachings, he started showing his true Islamic color.
HERE ARE FEW POINTS WHICH ARE VERY SIGNIFICANT IN JUDGING THE TRUE FACE OF AKBAR, UNFORTUNATELY DR. DID NOT DISCUSSED THESE POINTS IN THIS ARTICLE, MAY BE HE WILL ELABORATE IT IN HIS NEXT PART (5B)
HE REPEALED THE JIZYA TAX SECOND TIME IN 1580.
LADIES OF ROYAL HAREM OF AKBAR WERE FORCED TO RETURN FROM HAJJ AND WERE INSULTED BY AUTHORITISED OF MECCA AND MADINA IN 1580
HE LEFT THE ISLAM AND CREATED A NEW RELIGION CALLED DIN I ILAHI IN 1581.
IN MY VIEW, IT WAS ALSO THE INCIDENTS OF INSULT / RACISMS OF HIS ROYAL MUSLIM HAREM FROM MECCAN ISLAMIC AUTHORITIES WHICH LED HIM TO LEAVE ISLAM AND START A NEW RELIGION. THE PSEUDO SECULAR HISTORIANS CALL HIM TOLERANT AND GREAT KING BECAUSE HE LEFT ISLAM AND STARTED A NEW RELIGION.
For 3. Ananta - The Infinity
He was a Muslim for most of his barbaric life but later he left Islam and started a new religion. However I agree with you that next generation after Akabr can not be Called or listed as Islamic because they were the decendents of non Muslim parents ie Akbar ( Din I Ilahai) and Harkha Bai or Jodha bai (Hinduism).
For 14. kenmirzz
You should be very glad as you have been waiting for an article on Akbar.
I request Dr Brahamchari to
I request Dr Brahamchari to translate all of these historic articles into the commonly used Indian Languages and link them somewhere in this website. Only after knowing their real history, Indians will realize, wake up and eventually stand up against the Muslim appeasers.
Do you haters seriously
Do you haters seriously believe that Islam has no good in it? Seriously.
kabirlaw, name calling is not allowed on FFI. This might be a given on Islamic forums but in FFI we abide by civilized principles. Refer the rules of commenting before posting futher comments.
kabirlaw wrote: Do you
kabirlaw wrote:
Do you haters seriously believe that Islam has no good in it? Seriously.
Why don't ask the Muslims who blow themselves up if Islam has no good in it.
Now. I would'nt go ask Hitler
Now. I would'nt go ask Hitler about the good of Christianity simply because he is a Christian.
I'm asking you. Do you seriously believe that Islam has not got a single shred of good in it?
kabirlaw wrote: Now. I
kabirlaw wrote:
Now. I would’nt go ask Hitler about the good of Christianity simply because he is a Christian.
Hitler was not a Christian, he hated Christianity and plotted to have it replaced with his own brand of ideology. In fact he plotted to have the pope kidnapped.
I’m asking you. Do you seriously believe that Islam has not got a single shred of good in it?
With the current state of affairs in the Islamic world, my answer is no Islam does not have a single shred of good in it. If Muslims perform good deeds, they do this despite what Islam says.
My friend why in the foul mood today?
correction, why are you in a
correction, why are you in a foul mood today?
20. kabirlaw Says: "Do you
20. kabirlaw Says:
"Do you haters seriously believe that Islam has no good in it? Seriously"
"There is nothing wrong in following any religion as long as it support and promotes the humanitarian values and creates a society free from Discrimination for all".
Ask yourself this question and judge it at ground/Practical level.
Hope you would get the answer.
To Kafir123 You
To Kafir123
You wrote:
“There is nothing wrong in following any religion as long as it support and promotes the humanitarian values and creates a society free from Discrimination for all”.
Ask yourself this question and judge it at ground/Practical level.
What you are trying to describe is a utopia at any given place at any given time. Is what you are saying practical or even realistic at all. E.g. Does a Christian not think his own religion is correct? Does a Jew not think that his own religion is correct? Does a Hindu not thinks that his way is proper? etc etc. Naturally, there would be a stigma, albeit even if it is minor, that adherents of other systems are inferior in some way or the other. This can even extend to political systems, e.g. Would the communists not think that their system is superior to a Democrat's.
Islam proclaims to be the truth and as such it states that other systems are not proper for mankind. Naturally, it inspires people to turn to Islam. In doing so it has to explain the erroneous ways of the other systems.
You state that there is nothing wrong in following a religion but they must adhere to the rules you have mentioned above. Well, with all due respect, who are you to put forward such a criterion for qualification. If something is the truth it is the truth. simple. no matter how brutally honest it appears to be.
I am a Muslim and as a result
I am a Muslim and as a result you have an image of me built up according to your own understandings. You probably think that I am inferior to you because you are following the truth (I assume a humanistic brand of atheism) and that I am a blind bigot stuck in the middle ages having been fooled by a false prophet. This is only natural and if you are honest to yourself you will have this feeling even if it is in the inner reaches of your soul. Islam does not shy away from this because it is fiercly blunt and honest. So as a Muslim I believe the opposite to be true, that you are misguided (with respect) and not me.
Humans have desires that can lead to good and bad otherwise there would be no conflict in your non muslim lands, no world wars, no vietnam, no atmic bombs, catch my drift? islam teaches to channel and control these desires and it does not shy away from the truth because the aim is to create a peaceful and just world wher the one true God alone is worshipped.
26 & 27 kabirlaw I did not
26 & 27 kabirlaw
I did not know that you are a Muslim.
You gave me the whole Lecture, thanks for that.
What I meant from practical or Ground level is that Lets say:
1. You are a Muslim living in Sweden
2. You are a non muslim living in Sharia ruled true Islamic state.
You are the same human living in two countries with two beliefs. Now, its time to ask a question, keeping in mind that Almighty is only one.
to Mr. Kabirlaw
to Mr. Kabirlaw #22,26,27
Hitler was in fact not a christian though he made some christian-friendly speech to build more support and gain more strength. He also never proclaimed himself to be a christian believer though. Even if he was an "impious" christian, why the overwhelming majority of muslims supported him? Was it out of the supposed hatred against the jews? There is a Russian proverb that says: "If the wolf killed your enemy, it does not mean that the wolf is your friend".
you said: What you are trying to describe is a utopia at any given place at any given time. Is what you are saying practical or even realistic at all.
dont you think that the implementation of full and perfect shariah is a utopia too? The Islamic empire from the Ummayad till the collapse of Ottoman Caliphate never did apply the shariah to the fullest due to its impossibility in application. The hand's amputation was discontinued by the Ottoman Caliphate. Nowadays, there is virtually no model Islamic governance that worth being imitated by the "Kaafir System" at all.
Does this not an indication of the deficiency of Islamic religion? Perhaps you may answer in this way; well, the muslims are not perfect. My reply is that the imperfection lies not solely in muslims but Islam itself.
You said: E.g. Does a Christian not think his own religion is correct? Does a Jew not think that his own religion is correct? Does a Hindu not thinks that his way is proper? etc etc.
Sorry pal, dont lump up everything together. The first two religions are correctly described because they are Abrahamic faiths while Hinduism never claim to be the sole right path. Buddhism which branches out of the former also apply similar approach.
You said: Islam proclaims to be the truth and as such it states that other systems are not proper for mankind. Naturally, it inspires people to turn to Islam. In doing so it has to explain the erroneous ways of the other systems.
What about if we discuss about the erroneous way of Islamic religion? A person who claimed to be morally fortified, mercy to all creation will not practice marrying 9 wifes, keeping 2 concubines, and allowed the female captive of wars to be violated. A crime is still a crime even though it occured thousand years ago.
You said: You state that there is nothing wrong in following a religion but they must adhere to the rules you have mentioned above. Well, with all due respect, who are you to put forward such a criterion for qualification. If something is the truth it is the truth. simple. no matter how brutally honest it appears to be.
That is why muslims must open their mind and critically examine, analyze and scrutinize quran, hadith and siraah minutely to obtain a clear and unclouded perspective of Islam, whether it was from God or not. A blind faith that merely rely on the judgment of minority few mulla is not welcoming and definitely serve as no gauge to determine the truth.
You said: Humans have desires that can lead to good and bad otherwise there would be no conflict in your non muslim lands, no world wars, no vietnam, no atmic bombs, catch my drift? islam teaches to channel and control these desires and it does not shy away from the truth because the aim is to create a peaceful and just world wher the one true God alone is worshipped.
Read the history of Islam, since the demise of prophet muhammad till now. Should i mention the bloodshed, betrayal and conspiracy involved among followers of the "true God"? How can you amply resolve the conflict in non muslim land when your antidote to cure is causing another method of conflict? Should we risk our life and civilization for the sake of something we are unsure about? the answer is a BIG NO.
Humanity is but one family. :)
Kabirlaw, Yes we do think
Kabirlaw, Yes we do think that you were fooled by a false prophet, but Muslims are much more than just believers of a faith, so we like and respect many Muslims. And Islam is very powerful and growing very fast demographically speaking. Now we hear a part of Islamic clerical leaders and also ordinary followers proclaim that democracy is a manmade system and sharia law is better and should be imposed instead of it, all over the world. Also we witness ever more the grim realities of countries in which Muslims are in majority and power. Hence we see a threat, looking at the long term, say until 2050.
With we I mean the followers of say 6 other sorts of faiths; Jews, Christians, Hindus, Buddhists + the category of Atheists-Freethinker-Openminded people and for completeness the followers of all other faiths. These 6 other faiths seem to have reached an understanding with each other to by and large leave each other alone, tolerate conversion from and into other faiths etc. In the democracies in the world they live side by side, enjoying equal rights and equal opportunities. Islam however dominates in a manifestly unjust way in countries where it has the majority. And we fear it wants to dominate in the countries where it is growing eventually too.
We want reciprocity, we want Muslims to join us in our protests against anti-apostasy-laws, discrimination of followers of other faiths in Islamic countries, very dominant, one-sided propaganda for Islam. Isn't that fair?
You asked if we thought there was nothing good in Islam. Of course there is a lot of good in Islam. But we do not think the Quran is perfect, as Muslims claim it is. We think it is OK if you perceive your chosen religion/ way of life/ way of organizing society is the best, better than all the others and if you are very proud of it. However, that is not enough for Muslims. They would not be Muslims if they not also believed that they are the ONLY true religion, that all others are UNTRUE.
And that is what we also contradict, as you know. We even think Islam was manifestly untrue. But for living together, we would be glad if you just said your religion was the best, as opposed to the ONLY right one.
And if Islam is no more true than other faiths, or even less, this takes away a limit on Muslims to acquire fine guidance from all over the world. Supplementing their Islamic beliefs with a lot of other beliefs and growing because of it. This is what we recommend to Muslims.
Once the question of truth of a faith is out of the way, then the question of its usefulness enters. Here we think that Islam has nothing special to offer, even if it does have much good in it. But that good is already practised by many followers of the other 6 faiths also, so Islam really is superfluous and irrelevant in our view. I mean, it is OK to follow it, but for personal happiness, organizing societies well, so that they are prosperous and just, we see it as really irrelevant in the 21st century.
Kabirlaw As long as Islam
Kabirlaw
As long as Islam advocates discriminatory rules like Different type of punishment for the same crime for different ethnical group o sex, Poll taxes on Non Muslims, intolerance towards other Faith etc etc. Being a religious person one should always remember that God will never differentiate among his own creation just because he himself gave them birth in different religions.
As per the Prophet, Koran can not be changed as it was final command from Allah, makes your question irrelevant that if Koran has any good in it, as Koran will never stop advocating discriminatory rules against non Muslims and there is nothing you could do about it.
No one in this world has born to hate Muslims or Islam or any other religion, these are the Situation or Circumstances or social rules which makes one to think in that way.
Thanks
Correction: Kabirlaw As
Correction:
Kabirlaw
As long as Islam advocates discriminatory rules like Different types of punishment for the same crime for different ethical group or sex, Poll taxes on Non Muslims, intolerance towards other Faith etc etc, does not make Islam to qualify for a religion from Almighty. Being a religious person one should always remember that God will never differentiate among his own creation as he himself gave them birth in different religion.
As per the Koran, its revelation can not be changed as it was final command from Allah, makes your question irrelevant that if Koran has any good in it, as Koran will never stop advocating discriminatory rules against non Muslims and there is nothing you could do about it.
No one in this world has born to hate Muslims or Islam or any other religion, these are the Situation or Circumstances or social rules which makes one to think in that way.
Thanks
Birth of Akbar was like birth
Birth of Akbar was like birth of another piglet --- what's so great about that? I don't understand why the pseudo secular Indian Historians give so much emphasis on Akbar the Pig ?
20. kabirlaw Says "" Do you haters seriously believe that Islam has no good in it?""
Good and bad are relative terms. How do you define Good and Bad or should I say Good/Bad according to Islam ?
Thing is --One can find good things in Islam as--" a fly can find good smell in putrid meat or lump of steaming sh!t". The fragrance of sandalwood is foul for a Islamic fly.
35. kabirlaw Says: You say:
35. kabirlaw Says:
You say: "The Jizya tax on non-Muslims ......................... against members of other faiths."
1. Are you saying that non Muslims were not suppose to fight for their county?
I could see discrimination here.
2. Are you saying that a Muslim, who do not want to go to war, could simply pay the poll taxes and could stay at home?
Does not it go against the basic guidelines of Islam?
3. Were those fights were for the country or for the expansion of Islam?
4. If a non Muslim did not have enough money to pay Jizya tax and did not want to convert, than what was the punishment?
5. Were not those countries were invaded by Muslims and their citizen were made to pay Poll taxes or forced to fight against their own countryman?
There could be many more questions which will simply lead to discrimination.
If you are a Muslim from south Asian region, than you must know that most of the converts belongs to very poor category. This is more than enough to say that there were only two choices either convert or Pay taxes.
Do not try to create new verses of Koran by your self, history itself is a big proof. It is shame on to the converted Muslims, who now support the same cult which has destroyed and given a very bad time to their ancestors.
Always remember, Creator or God will never differentiate among his own creation or will never ask any of his Prophets to do so, as God has sent humans to this world by himself in different religion.
No society is perfect, one need to take measures to make it better. In case of Islam it is not Possible as it is not allowed by Prophet/Allah while other religion has already took the corrective steps.
Do not go to Imam or make your verses of Koran to explain the wrong doings of Islam.. Allah has given you brain to think and analyze at Ground level.
You can take the evil book,
You can take the evil book, qrand and stuff it where the sun does not shine
proudkafir wrote: You can
proudkafir wrote:
You can take the evil book, qrand and stuff it where the sun does not shine
That would be hell.
kabirlaw [16 June 2009]
kabirlaw [16 June 2009] says:
"Now, Do you seriously believe that Islam has not got a single shred of good in it?"
Now, kabirlaw , do you KNOW of one -- just ONE -- good thing that Islam has and is acknowledged by non-Muslims?
Name it, kabirlaw, and stay away from posting beliefs.
[...] Himun, Hindu Genocide,
[...] Himun, Hindu Genocide, Islam Shah, Panipat, Pseudo secularism, Rajput, Samrat Hem Raj Vikramaditya Original Source: Article by Dr Radhasyam Brahmachari, the great historian who has done extensive research on [...]
Thankyou Dr. Iam very much
Thankyou Dr. Iam very much thankful for your article. In my primary education we were gone through the real history of this kind. When our political motives melted to only get in power,almost all the political parties running to appease the minority religions.Our History congress which is filled with the leftist influenced mentalities have been raping Indian history.The word Hindu is not religious.It is geographical.We the all countrymen belongs to this great land, can be called as Indians,Aryans ,Bharathvasis or Hindustanis,it wont effect on our great souls.Nowadays Hindu word is being treated as communal.Because the rest of the world people is identifying themselves as a religionists,and is being called themselves that they are committed to their religious faith.But only an real Indian or a Hindu is left over as a International man.The pure and great thougt and art of living,now is being called as Hindutva.Hindutva is ment for the whole man kind.The great thoughts of Hindutva made us peaceful, pure and tolerent. This country i,e India never been ruled under Theocratic rulers.The Indian rulers were only guided by the great souls or saints.When Islam was being used for forming Dynasties,humanity was diappeared.Cristians and Muslims declared Crusades and Jihads against mankind and were used to attack on the Lands of the world.In one of responses for your article one brother(Yohan on June 15 2009 at 7.30 pm)put a question That why this Land have not produced a warrior.The meaning of warrior is treating only as winner of war.The real meaning of the warrior is who protect the man kind from evil forces or from eliments of inhuman forces.And who establish peaceful respectfull atmosphere among the reign is called warrior.A warrior can not destroy the culture and arts.A warrior can not ebolish the living values.All the muslim evaders and British imperialists tried to wipe up the great values and living values of this great country.Entering into past that Indian or hindu rulers ruled entire world.King Vikramaditya ruled the whole world.America,Mexico,Africa,Australia as well as Asia.Where the Hinduism was not established great moral values?.Whereever whenever a country suffers with instability a Hindu representative was being sent to that land to establish perfect ruling system.We can know from history that if we look into past .My world men please find what have been hiding in the history and bring up the real history.This world have experimented with many theories and philosophies and still hunger and thirsty for eternal truth.The search of the man will end at Hinduism or Bharathiya philosophy.The almighty game with the man is to search the truth himself.The truth is one.The truth is God ,The God is truth.The truth implies in all the fields,even in history too.A government or a ruler can not hide the truth.The truth can not be burried.If any body tries to burry,it blasts out the conspiraters and their principles.The almighty establish the truth again with vanishing the illfaiths.This land Bharath is worships only truth.The Hinduism will not believe in worshiping the physical victories,but in spiritual(Adyathmika)victory.Hinduism ruled the whole world with Great phylosophy only,not by the mustle power.Hinduism will again rule the world.One Akbar or A barber is not important for man kind.Hinduism worships only philosophy not a man.