dogra

Over three hundred years ago, The ninth Guruji of the Sikh faith along with disciples: Bhai Mati Dass, Bhai Dyal Dass and Bhai Sati Das, sacrificed their lives for a group of opressed people, this self sacrifice is an example to all humanity. http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/M...u_Tegh_Bahadur http://www.sikh-history.com/sikhhist/gurus/nanak9.html http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religi...hbahadur.shtml 24th November in the Gurdwaras people wil go and pay their respects to this great example to all humanity!

and some other facts: "And what did the Hindus that were fighting the Muhammadan invaders do for Buddhism during the invasions? Here are some excerpts from Alexander Berzin’s “The Historical Interaction between the Buddhist and Islamic Cultures before the Mongol Empire”: Although the Mithila rulers were Shaivite Hindus, they continued the Pala patronage of Buddhism and offered strong resistance against the Ghurids. They stopped, for example, an attempted drive to take Tibet in 1206. The Sena king (Hindu) installed defensive garrisons at Odantapuri and Vikramashila Monasteries, which were

Myth #4: Adi Shankaracharya instigated Hindu kings to rid India of Buddhism "The debates that Shankara engaged in had the criterion that the one that lost the debate should embrace the faith of the victor. When Buddhist scholars lost debate after debate with Shankara, they had no choice but to honor the commitment and when they did so, the king / prince to whom these Buddhist scholars were mentors ended up following suit. There is nothing in the historical records, even remotely, to suggest that Shankara forced Hindu kings to unleash violence against the Buddhists. While he did engage in

also: "So what the above instances go to show is that Hindu kings were not Hindu extremists that destroyed Buddhism, as, the modern day historians try to claim. Given the obvious gaps in their falsified accunts, some of the historians use King Mihirakula as a Hindu poster boy that unleashed violence against Buddhists. But what they willfully gloss over is that this king was not a Hindu but was a Hun ruler that belonged to a clan (of Central Asian Xionites origin) that invaded North West India. The historians claim that King Mihirakula was a Shiavitie but in his campaigns against the kingdom

then we have: "Myth #2: King Pushyamitra was a Hindu bigot that slaughtered Buddhist monks. there are historical accounts of King Pushyamitra patronizing the construction of many Buddhist monasteries. This is where the statement of the historian Etienne Lamotte assumes significance: “To judge from the documents, Pushyamitra must be acquitted through lack of proof.” (History of Indian Buddhism, Institut Orientaliste, Louvain-la-Neuve 1988/1958, p.109) " then some more: "Myth #3: Hindu rulers systematically uprooted Buddhism. This is a very generic myth and to counter it we are

Have heard statements that bhuddism declined due to persecution, but some things dont add up, lets see http://agniveer.com/5936/were-buddhists-persecuted-by-hindus/ King Asoka, whose chariot wheel adorns the Indian flag, became bhudist and gave India just and humane edicts, but we have: "As we all know, Ashoka, propelled by a sense of guilt after the bloodbath in Kalinga embraced Buddhism as some form of redemption to overcome the same. Not many Marxist historians and Islamic historians in India do seem to acknowledge a little fact that Emperor Ashoka was helped by two of his Hindu me

This account goes into detail of what happended: http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Muslim_League_Attack_on_Sikhs_and_Hindus_in_the_Punjab_1947 But their were Muslim faith community leaders who were against great evil of partition, such as Allah Baksh-Sind province first premier and Abdul Ghaffar Khan-NWFP leader: Great human beings. http://www.sasnet.lu.se/news-sources/article-shamsul-islam http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khan_Abdul_Ghaffar_Khan#Ghaffar_.22Badshah.22_Khan The apostles of pacifism surrendered to fascist violence of the league: "The new Interim Government to which

http://agniveer.blogspot.com/2010/06/origin-of-vedas.html

may not be straighforward but enough examples have been given. any person can be anyone depending on his work and qualifications:

Birth based caste is not in scriptures, which is older then when it came about through corruption through number of people at top jobs who wanted to maintain their kids intop positions, and 21st century is not when a number of Hindu faith have said no birth based caste, Ramanuja one thousand years ago: then later we had Sri Ramanand: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ramananda Scriptures thousands of years ago have not mentioned birth based caste, and so have a number of individuals, there is more to be done and discussions and arguments are taking place to remove this social evil of

First place do not recognise this 'dalits' term, birth based cased divisions which reject, as God resides in heart of all beings, our functions of course are different, but each function is to be respected, anyway lets see: http://agniveer.com/888/caste-system/

Vedas were written in India, and this aryan invasion theory which dispersed the Harrapan civilisation, has been slam dunked to the dustbin of human history: My link Take river saraswati a river mentioned in vedas, and scientifically proven to exist, this river dried out, and hence the harappan civilisation dispersed, and thats a fact! Therre of course were later migrations and earliers ones, as well invasions, point is of Harrapan civilisation disappearance here. Lets see some more: My link

Is sanatan dharma worshipping many gods or one: It is quite clear -one god, but many manifestations. Now is there idol worship in scriptures: No idol worship, but sanatan dharma does not speak against other practices as there many paths to god all deserving of respect