Jump to content

Bachitar Natak & Mentioning Of Mohmaad(PBUH)


Guest Javanmard

Recommended Posts

Baba Tirath Singh writes:

If the issue of the earlier avatars only propogating their own names, surely then the Guru is just as guilty of it with Raam and numerous pseudonyms for Krishna being used in Gurbani! What the actual teaching of the 'naatak' or allegorical play is, is that the followers started meditating on the SARGUN attributes of Ram and Krishan bhagwan, rather than their nirgun essence.

http://www.sikhawareness.com/sikhawareness...66&start=15

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I am not surprised to find support for the ethnic cleansing of Muslims, Jews and Mozarab Christians on this site. I doubt whether this is in line with the teachings of Hazrat Baba Nanak Shah (ra). Allahu 'alim."

Rich coming from a man who has repeatedly cursed and wished death on the Jewish, Sunni and Sikh communities. No one on here advocates ethnic cleasning apart from you.

Before I continue, I want to clearly state, that this is not an attack on Muhammed Sahib or Islam, but rather the spread of Islam which you seem to have such a disillusioned image of.

I care not of it refers to Sunni/Shia, it's Islamic history - whether you like/acknowledge it or not.

These facts are not for your entertainment, but rather "anymore" simpletons who may actually be believing your illusionery vision of the evolving Islamic nation.

Name Of The Book: Hindustan Islami Ahad mein (India under Islamic Rule)

Name Of The Historian: Maulana Abdul Hai.

About The Author: He is a highly respected scholar and taken as an authority on Islamic history. Because of his scholarship and his services to Islam, Maulana Abdul Hai was appointed as the Rector of the Darul Nadwa Ullum Nadwatal-Ulama. He continued in that post till his death in February 1923.

The following section is taken from the chapter Hindustan ki Masjidein (The mosques of India) of the above mentioned book. Here we can see a brief description of few important mosques in India and how each one of them was built upon plundered Hindu temples.

Qawwat al-Islam Mosque at Delhi: "According to my findings the first mosque of Delhi is Qubbat al-Islam or Quwwat al_Islam which, Qutubud-Din Aibak constructed in H. 587 after demolishing the hindu temple built by Prithvi Raj and leaving certain parts of the temple outside the mosque proper; and when he returned from Ghazni in H. 592 he started building, under orders from Shihabud -Din Ghori, a huge mosque of inimitable red stones, and certain parts of the temple were included in the mosque..."

The Mosque at Jaunpur: "This was built by Sultan Ibrahim Sharqi with chiselled stones. Originally it was a Hindu temple after demolishing which he constructed the mosque. It is known as the Atala Masjid.."

The Mosque at Qanauj: "It is well known that this mosque was built on the foundations of some Hindu temple that stood here. The mosque was built by Ibrahim Sharqi in H. 809 as is recorded in Gharbat Nigar"

Jami Masjid at Etwah: "This mosque stands on the bank of the Jamuna at Etawah. There was a Hindu temple at this place, on the site of which this mosque was constructed.."

Babri Masjid at Ayodhya: "This mosque was constructed by Babar at Ayodhya which Hindus call the birth place of Ramchandraji... Sita had a temple here in which she lived and cooked for her husband. On that very site Babar constructed this mosque in H.963 "

Mosque at Benaras: "Mosque of Benares was built by Alamgir Aurangzeb on the site of Bisheshwar Temple. That temple was very tall and held as holy among Hindus. On this very site and with those very stones he constructed a lofty mosque, and its ancient stones were rearranged after being embedded in the walls of the mosque. It is one of the renowned mosques of Hindustan."

Mosque at Mathura: "Alamgir Aurangzeb built a mosque at Mathura. This mosque was built on site of the Govind Dev Temple which was very strong and beautiful as well as exquisite.."

Name Of The Book: Futuhu'l-Buldan

Name Of The Historian: Ahmed bin Yahya bin Jabir

About The Author: This author is also known as al- Biladhuri. He lived at the court of Khalifa Al- Mutawakkal (AD 847-861) and died in AD 893. His history is one of the major Arab chronicles.

The Muslim Rulers He Wrote About:

Ibn Samurah (AD 653)

Siestan (Iran)

"On reaching Dawar, he surrounded the enemy in the mountain of Zur, where there was a famous Hindu temple." "...Their idol of Zur was of gold, and its eyes were two rubies. The zealous Musalmans cut off its hands and plucked out its eyes, and then remarked to the Marzaban how powerless was his idol..."

Qutaibah bin Muslim al-Bahili (AD 705-715)

Samarkand (Farghana)

"Other authorities say that Kutaibah granted peace for 700,000 dirhams and entertainment for the Moslems for three days. The terms of surrender included also the houses of the idols and the fire temples. The idols were thrown out, plundered of their ornaments and burned..."

Mohammed bin Qasim (AD 712-715)

Debal (Sindh)

"...The town was thus taken by assault, and the carnage endured for three days. The governor of the town, appointed by Dahir, fled and the priests of the temple were massacred. Muhammad marked a place for the Musalmans to dwell in, built a mosque, and left 4,000 Musalmans to garrison the place..."

"...'Ambissa son of Ishak Az Zabbi, the governor of Sindh, in the Khilafat of Mu'tasim billah knocked down the upper part of the minaret of the temple and converted it into a prison..."

Multan (Punjab)

"...He then crossed the Biyas, and went towards Multan...Muhammad destroyed the water-course; upon which the inhabitants, oppressed with thirst, surrendered at discretion. He massacred the men capable of bearing arms, but the children were taken captive, as well as ministers of the temple, to the number of 6,000. The Musalmans found there much gold in a chamber ten cubits long by eight broad..."

Hasham bin 'Amru al-Taghlabi

Khandahar (Maharashtra)

"He then went to Khandahar in boats and conquered it. He destroyed the Budd (idol) there, and built in its place a mosque."

Name Of The Book: Tarikh-i-Tabari

Name Of The Historian: Abu Ja'far Muhammad bin Jarir at-Tabari

About The Author: This author is considered to be the foremost historian of Islam. The above mentioned book written by him is regarded as the mother of histories.

The Muslim Rulers He Wrote About:

Qutaibah bin Muslim al-Bahili (AD 705-715)

Beykund (Khurasan)

"The ultimate capture of Beykund (in AD 706) rewarded him with an incalculable booty; even more than had hitherto fallen into the hands of the Mohammedans by the conquest of the entire province of Khorassaun; and the unfortunate merchants of the town, having been absent on a trading excursion while their country was assailed by the enemy, and finding their habitations desolate on their return contributed further to enrich the invaders, by the ransom which they paid for the recovery of their wives and children. The oranments alone, of which these women had been plundered, being melted down, produce, in gold, 150,000 meskals; of a dram and a half each. Among the articles of the booty, is also described an image of gold, of 50,000 meskals, of which the eyes were two pearls, the exquisite beauty and magnitude of which excited the surprise and admiration of Kateibah. They were transmitted by him, with a fifth of the spoil to Hejauje, together with a request that he might be permitted to distribute, to the troops, the arms which had been found in the palace in great profusion."

Samarkand (Farghana)

"A breach was, however, at last effected in the walls of the city in AD 712 by the warlike machines of Kateibah; and some of the most daring of its defenders having fallen by the skill of his archers, the besieged demanded a cessation of arms to the following day, when they promised to capitulate. The request was acceded to the Kateibah; and a treaty was the next day accordingly concluded between him and the prince of Samarkand, by which the latter engaged for the annual payment of ten million of dhirems, and a supply of three thousand slaves; of whom it was particularly stipulated, that none should either be in a state of infancy, or ineffective from old age and debility. He further contracted that the ministers of his religion should be expelled from their temples and their idols destroyed and burnt; that Kateibah should be allowed to establish a mosque in the place of the principal temple...."

"...Kateibah accordingly set set fire to the whole collection with his own hands; it was soon consumed to ashes, and 50,000 meskals of gold and silver, collected from the nails which had been used in the workmanship of the images."

Yaqub bin Laith (AD 870-871)

Balkh and Kabul (Afghanistan)

"He took Bamian, which he probably reached by way of Herat, and then marched on Balkh where he ruined (the temple) Naushad. On his way back from Balkh he attacked Kabul..."

"Starting from Panjhir, the place he is known to have visited, he must have passed through the capital city of the Hindu Sahis to rob the sacred temple -- the reputed place of coronation of the Sahi rulers -- of its sculptural wealth..."

"The exact details of the spoil collected from Kabul valley are lacking. The Tarikh [-i-Sistan] records 50 idols of gold and silver and Mas'udi mentions elephants. The wonder excited in Baghdad by baghdad by elephants and pagan idols forwarded to the Caliph by Ya'qub also speaks for their high value."

Name Of The Book: Tarikhu'l-Hind

Name Of The Historian: Abu Rihan Muhammad bin Ahmad al-Biruni al-Khwarizmi.

About The Author: This author spent 40 years in India during the reign of Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni (AD 997 - 1030). His history treats of the literature and learning of the Hindus at the commencement of the 11th century.

The Muslim Rulers He Wrote About:

Jalam ibn Shaiban (9th century AD)

Multan (Punjab)

"A famous idol of theirs was that of Multan, dedicated to the sun, and therefore called Aditya. It was of wood and covered with red Cordovan leather; in its two eyes were two red rubies. It is said to have been made in the last Kritayuga .....When Muhammad Ibn Alkasim Ibn Almunaibh conquered Multan, he inquired how the town had become so very flourishing and so many treasures had there been accumulated, and then he found out that this idol was the cause, for there came pilgrims from all sides to visit it. Therefore he thought it best to have the idol where it was, but he hung a piece of cow's flesh on its neck by way of mockery. On the same place a mosque was built. When the Karmatians occupied Multan, Jalam Ibn Shaiban, the usurper, broke the idol into pieces and killed its priests..."

Sultan Mahmud of Gazni (AD 997-1030)

Thanesar (Haryana)

"The city of Taneshar is highly venerated by Hindus. The idol of that place is called Cakrasvamin, i.e. the owner of the cakra, a weapon which we have already described. It is of bronze, and is nearly the size of a man. It is now lying in the hippodrome in Ghazna, together with the Lord of Somnath, which is a representation of the penis of the Mahadeva, called Linga."

Somnath (Gujrat)

"The linga he raised was the stone of Somnath, for soma means the moon and natan means master, so that the whole word means master of the moon. The image was destroyed by the Prince Mahmud, may God be merciful to him! --AH 416. He ordered the upper part to be broken and the remainder to be transported to his residence, Ghaznin, with all its coverings and trappings of gold, jewels, and embroided garments. Part of it has been thrown into the hippodrome of the town, together with Cakrasvamin , an idol of bronze, that had been brought from Taneshar. Another part of the idol from Somnath lies before the door of the mosque of Ghaznin, on which people rub their feet to clean them from dirt and wet."

Name Of The Book: Kitabu'l-Yamini

Name Of The Historian: Abu Nasr Muhammad ibn Muhammad al Jabbaru'l-Utbi.

About The Author: This author's work comprises the whole of the reign of Subuktigin and that of Sultan Mahmud down to the year AD 1020.

The Muslim Rulers He Wrote About:

Amir Sbuktigin Of Ghazni

Lamghan (Afghanistan)

"The Amir marched out towards Lamghan, which is a city celebrated for its great strength and abounding wealth. He conquered it and set fire to the places in its vicinity which were inhabited by infidels, and demolishing idol temples, he established Islam in them. He marched and captured other cities and killed the polluted wretches, destroying the idolaters and gratifying the Musulmans."

Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni (AD 997-1030)

Narain (Rajasthan)

"The Sultan again resolved on an expedition to Hind, and marched towards Narain, urging his horses and moving over ground, hard and soft, until he came to the middle of Hind, where he reduced chiefs, who, up to that time obeyed no master, overturned their idols, put to the sword the vagabonds of that country, and with delay and circumspection proceeded to accomplish his design..."

Nardin (Punjab)

"After the Sultan had purified Hind from idolatry, and raised mosques therein, he determined to invade the capital of Hind to punish those who kept idols and would not acknowledge the unity of God...He marched with a large army in the year AH 404 (AD 1013) during a dark night..."

"A stone was found there in the temple of the great Budda on which an inscription was written purporting that the temple had been founded 50,000 years ago. The Sultan was surprised at the ignorance of these people, because those who believe in the true faith represent that only seven hundred years have elapsed since the creation of the world, and the signs of resurrection are even now approaching . The Sultan asked his wise men the meaning of this inscription and they all concurred in saying that it was false, and no faith was to be put in the evidence of a stone."

Thanesar (Haryana)

"The chief of Tanesar was...obstinate in his infidelity and denial of God. So the Sultan marched against him with his valiant warriors, for the purpose of planting the standards of Islam and extirpating idolatry.."

"The blood of the infidels flowed so copiously, that the stream was discoloured, not withstanding its purity, and people were unable to drink it...The victory gained by God's grace, who has established Islam for ever as the best religions, notwithstanding that idolaters revolt against it...Praise be to God, the protector of the world, for the honour he bestows upon Islam and Musulmans."

Mathura (Uttar Pradesh)

"The Sultan then departed from the environs of the city, in which was a temple of the Hindus. The name of this place was Mahartul Hind... On both sides of the city there were a thousand houses, to which idol temples were attached, all strengthened from top to bottom by rivets of iron, and all made of masonry work..."

"In the middle of the city there was a temple larger and firmer than the rest, which can neither be described nor painted. The Sultan thus wrote respecting it: --'If any should wish to construct a building equal to this, he would not be able to do it without expending an 100,000,000 red dinars, and it would occupy 200 years even though the most experience and able workmen were employed'... The Sultan gave orders that all temples should be burnt with naptha and fire, and levelled with the ground."

Kanauj (Uttar Pradesh)

"In Kanauj there were nearly 10,000 temples, which the idolaters falsely and absurdly represented to have been founded by their ancestors two or three hundred thousand years ago...Many of the inhabitants of the place fled and were scattered abroad like so many wretched widows and orphans, from the fear which oppressed them, in consequence of witnessing the fate of their deaf and dumb idols. Many of them thus effected their escape, and those who did not fly were put to death."

Name Of The Book: Diwan-i-Salman

Name Of The Historian: Khawajah Masud bin Sa'd bin Salman

About The Author: Khawajah Masud bin Sa'd bin Salman was a poet. He wrote poems in praise of the Ghaznavid Sultans- Masu'd, Ibrahim and Bahram Shah. He died sometime between AD 1126 and 1131.

The Muslim Rulers He Wrote About:

Sultan Abu'l Muzaffar Ibrahim (AD 1059-1099)

"As power and the strength of a lion was bestowed upon Ibrahim by the Almighty, he made over to him the well-populated country of Hindustan and gave him 40,000 valiant horsemen to take the country, in which there were more than 1000 rais...The army of the king destroyed at one time a thousand temples of idols, which had each been built for more than a thousand years. How can I describe the victories of the King..."

Jalandhar (Punjab)

"The narrative of any battles eclipses the stories of Rustam and Isfandiyar...By morning meal, not one soldier, not one Brahmin remained unkilled or uncaptured. Their heads were levelled with the ground with falming fire..Thou has secured the victory to the country and to religion, for amongst the Hindus this achievement will be remembered till the day of resurrection."

Malwa (Madhya Pradesh)

"..On this journey, the army detsroyed a thousand idol-temples and thy elephants trampled over more than a hundred strongholds. Thou didst march thy army to Ujjan; .. The lip of infidelity became dry through fear of thee, the eye of plural-worship became blind.."

Name Of The Book: Chach-Namah

Name Of The Historian: Mohammed Al bin Hamid bin Abu Bakr Kufi

About The Author: The Persian history was translated from arabic by the above mentioned author in the time of Nasiruddin Qabacha, a slave of Mohammed Ghori.

The Muslim Rulers He Wrote About:

Mohammed bin Qasim (AD 712-715)

Siwistan and Sisam (Sindh)

Mohammed bin Qasem wrote to al-Hajjaj, the governor of Iraq:

"The forts of Siwistan and Sism have been already taken. The nephew of Dahir, his warriors and principla officers have been despatched, and infidels converted to Islam or destroyed. Instead of idol temples, mosques and other places of worship have been built, pulpits have been erected, the Khutba is read, the call to prayers is raised so that devotions are performed at sacred hours."

Multan (Punjab)

.."Mohammed Qasem arose and with his counsellors, guards and attendants, went to the temple. He saw there an idol made of gold. and its two eye were bright red rubies. "..Muhammed Qasem ordered the idol to be taken up. Two hundred and thirty "mans" of gold were brought to the treasury together with the gems and pearls and treasures which were obtained from the plunder of Multan. "

Name Of The Book: Jamiu'l-Hikayat

Name Of The Historian: Maulana Nuruddin Muhammed `Ufi

About The Author: The author was born in or near the city of Bukhara in Transoxiana. He came to India and lived in Delhi for some time in the reign of Shamsu'd-Din Iltutmish (AD 1210-1236)

The Muslim Rulers He Wrote About:

Amru bin Laith (AD 879-900)

Sakawand (Afghanistan)

"It is related that Amru Lais conferred the governorship of Zabulistan on Fardaghan and sent him there at the head of four thousand horses. There was a large Hindu place of worship in that country, which was called Sakawand and people used to come on pilgrimage from the most remote parts of Hindustan to the idols of that place. When Fardaghan arrived in Zabulistan he led his army against it, took the temple, broke the idols in pieces and overthrew the idolators..."

Name Of The Book: Taju'l-Ma'sir

Name Of The Historian: Sadru'd-Din Muhammed Hasan Nizamii

About The Author: The author was born at Nishapur in Khurusan. He had to leave his ancestral place because of the Mongol invasion. He came to India and started writing his history in AD 1205.

The Muslim Rulers He Wrote About:

Sultan Muhammed Ghuri (AD 1175-1206)

Ajmer (Rajasthan)

"He destroyed the pillars and foundations of the idol temples and built in their stead mosques and colleges, and the precepts of Islam, and the customs of the law were divulged and established..."

Kuhram and Samana (Punjab)

"The Government of the fort of Kohram and Samana were made over by the Sultan to Kutuu-din..He purged by his sword the land of Hind from the filth of infidelity and vice, and freed it from the thorn of God-plurality, and the impurity of idol-worship and by his royal vigour and intrepidity, left not one temple standing..."

Meerut (Uttar Pradesh)

"Kutub-d din marched from Kohran and when he arrived at Meerut which is one of the celebrated forts of the country of Hind, for the strength of its foundations and superstructure, and its ditch, which was as broad as the ocean and fathomless- an army joined him, sent by the dependent chiefs of the country. The fort was captured, and a Kotwal was appointed to take up his station in the fort, and all the idol temples were converted into mosques."

Delhi

"He then marched and encamped under the fort of Delhi...The city and its vicinity were freed from idols and idol-worhips, and in the sanctuaries of the images of the Gods, nosques were raised by the worshippers of one God. Kutub-d din built the Jami Masjid at Delhi and adorned it with stones and gold obtained from the temples which had been demolished by the elephants, and covered it with inscriptions in Toghra, containing the divine commands."

Varanasi (Uttar Pradesh)

"From that place (Asni) the royal armi proceeded towards Benares which is the center of the country of Hind and here they destroyed nearly 1000 temples, and raised mosques on their foundations and the knowledge of the law became promulgated, and the foundations of religion were established.."

Aligarh (Uttar Pradesh)

"There was a certain tribe in the neighbourhood of Kol which had..occasioned much trouble..Three bastions were raised as high as heaven with their heads, and their carcases became the food of beasts of prey. That tract was freed from idols and idol-worship and the foundation of infidelity were destroyed"..

Bayana (Rajasthan)

"When Kutub-d din heard of Sultan's march from Ghazna, he was much rejoiced and advanced as far as Hansi to meet him.. In the year AH 592 (AD 1196), they marched towards Thangar, and the center of idolatry and perdition became the abode of glory and splendour.."

Kalinjar (Uttar Pradesh)

"In the year AH 599 (Ad 1202), Kutub-d din proceeded to the investment Kalinjar, on which expedition he was accompanied by the Sahib-Kiran, Shamsu-d din Altmash... The temples were converted into mosques and abodes of goodness, and the ejaculations of bead counters and voices of summoners to prayer ascended to high heaven, and the very name of idolatry was annihilated.."

Sultan Shamsu'd-Din Iltutmish (AD 1210-1236)

Delhi

"The Sultan then returned from Jalor to Delhi..and after his arrival 'not a vestige or name remained of idol temples which had raised their heads on high; and the light of faith shone out from the darkness of infidelity..and the moon of religion and the state became resplendent from the heaven of prosperity and glory."

Name Of The Book: Kamilu't-Tawarikh

Name Of The Historian: Ibn Asir

About The Author: The author was born in AD 1160 in the Jazirat ibn Umar, an island on the Tigris above Mosul.

The Muslim Rulers he Wrote About:

Khalifa Al-Mahdi (AD 775-785)

Barada (Gujrat)

"In the year 159 (AD 776) Al Mahdi sent an army by sea under Abdul Malik bin Shahabu'l Musamma'i to India..They proceeded on their way and at length disembarked at Barada. When they reached the place they laid siege on it..The town was reduced to extremities and God prevailed over it in the same year. The people were forbidden to worship the Budd, which the Muhammadans burned."

Name Of The Book: Tarikh-i-Jahan-Kusha

Name Of The Historian: Alaud-Din Malik ibn Bahaud-Din Muhammed Juwaini

About The Author: The author was born a native of Juwain in Khurasan near Nishapur. He was the Halaku during the Mongol campaign against the Ismai'lians and was later appointed the governor of Baghdad. He fell from grace and was imprisoned at Hamadan.

The Muslim Rulers he Wrote About:

Sultan Jalalud-Din Mankbarni (AD 1222-1231)

Debal (Sindh)

"The Sultan then went towards Dewal and darbela and Jaisi... The Sultan raised Masjid at Dewal, on the spot where an idol temple stood."

Name Of The Book: Mifathu'l-Futuh

Name Of The Historian: Amir Khusru

About The Author: The author, Amir Khusru was born at Delhi in 1253. His father occupied high positions in the reigns of Sultan Shamsu'd Din Iltutmish (AD 1210-1236) and his successors. Reputed to be the dearest disciple of Shykh Nizamuddin Auliya, he became the lick-spittle of whoever came out victorious in the contest for the throne at Delhi. He became the court poet of Balban's successor, Sultan Kaiqbad.

The Muslim Rulers he wrote About:

Sultan Jajalu'd-Din Khalji (AD 1290-1296)

Jhain (Rajasthan)

"The Sultan reached Jhain in the afternoon of the third day and stayed in the palace of the Raya..he greatly enjoyed his stay for some time. Coming out, ho took a round of gardens and temples. The idols he saw amazed him .. Next day he got those idols of gold smashed with stones. The pillars of wood were burnt down by his order... A cry rose from the temples as if a second Mahmud has taken birth. Two idols were made of brass, one of which weighed nearly thousand "mans".He got both of them broken, and the pieces were distributed among his people so that they may throw them at the door of Masjid on their return to Delhi."

Sultan Alaud-Din Khilji (AD 1296-1316)

Vidisha (Madhya Pradesh)

"When he advanced from the capital of Karra, the Hindus, in alarm, descended into the earth like ants. He departed towards the garden of Behar to dye that soil with blood as red as tulip. He cleared the road road to Ujjain of vile wretches, and created consternation in Bhilsan. When he affected his conquests in that country, hew drew out of the river the idols which had been conceled in it.

Devagiri (Maharshtra)

"But see the mercy with which he regarded the broken-hearted, for, after seizing the rai, he set him free again. He destroyed the temples of the idolaters, and erected pulpits and arches for mosques. "

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Be nam-e Khoda

Shaheediyan wrote:

"I am not surprised to find support for the ethnic cleansing of Muslims, Jews and Mozarab Christians on this site. I doubt whether this is in line with the teachings of Hazrat Baba Nanak Shah (ra). Allahu 'alim."

Rich coming from a man who has repeatedly cursed and wished death on the Jewish, Sunni and Sikh communities. No one on here advocates ethnic cleasning apart from you.

Before I continue, I want to clearly state, that this is not an attack on Muhammed Sahib or Islam, but rather the spread of Islam which you seem to have such a disillusioned image of.

I care not of it refers to Sunni/Shia, it's Islamic history - whether you like/acknowledge it or not.

These facts are not for your entertainment, but rather "anymore" simpletons who may actually be believing your illusionery vision of the evolving Islamic nation.

Name Of The Book: Hindustan Islami Ahad mein (India under Islamic Rule)

Name Of The Historian: Maulana Abdul Hai.

About The Author: He is a highly respected scholar and taken as an authority on Islamic history. Because of his scholarship and his services to Islam, Maulana Abdul Hai was appointed as the Rector of the Darul Nadwa Ullum Nadwatal-Ulama. He continued in that post till his death in February 1923.

The following section is taken from the chapter Hindustan ki Masjidein (The mosques of India) of the above mentioned book. Here we can see a brief description of few important mosques in India and how each one of them was built upon plundered Hindu temples.

Qawwat al-Islam Mosque at Delhi: "According to my findings the first mosque of Delhi is Qubbat al-Islam or Quwwat al_Islam which, Qutubud-Din Aibak constructed in H. 587 after demolishing the hindu temple built by Prithvi Raj and leaving certain parts of the temple outside the mosque proper; and when he returned from Ghazni in H. 592 he started building, under orders from Shihabud -Din Ghori, a huge mosque of inimitable red stones, and certain parts of the temple were included in the mosque..."

The Mosque at Jaunpur: "This was built by Sultan Ibrahim Sharqi with chiselled stones. Originally it was a Hindu temple after demolishing which he constructed the mosque. It is known as the Atala Masjid.."

The Mosque at Qanauj: "It is well known that this mosque was built on the foundations of some Hindu temple that stood here. The mosque was built by Ibrahim Sharqi in H. 809 as is recorded in Gharbat Nigar"

Jami Masjid at Etwah: "This mosque stands on the bank of the Jamuna at Etawah. There was a Hindu temple at this place, on the site of which this mosque was constructed.."

Babri Masjid at Ayodhya: "This mosque was constructed by Babar at Ayodhya which Hindus call the birth place of Ramchandraji... Sita had a temple here in which she lived and cooked for her husband. On that very site Babar constructed this mosque in H.963 "

Mosque at Benaras: "Mosque of Benares was built by Alamgir Aurangzeb on the site of Bisheshwar Temple. That temple was very tall and held as holy among Hindus. On this very site and with those very stones he constructed a lofty mosque, and its ancient stones were rearranged after being embedded in the walls of the mosque. It is one of the renowned mosques of Hindustan."

Mosque at Mathura: "Alamgir Aurangzeb built a mosque at Mathura. This mosque was built on site of the Govind Dev Temple which was very strong and beautiful as well as exquisite.."

Name Of The Book: Futuhu'l-Buldan

Name Of The Historian: Ahmed bin Yahya bin Jabir

About The Author: This author is also known as al- Biladhuri. He lived at the court of Khalifa Al- Mutawakkal (AD 847-861) and died in AD 893. His history is one of the major Arab chronicles.

The Muslim Rulers He Wrote About:

Ibn Samurah (AD 653)

Siestan (Iran)

"On reaching Dawar, he surrounded the enemy in the mountain of Zur, where there was a famous Hindu temple." "...Their idol of Zur was of gold, and its eyes were two rubies. The zealous Musalmans cut off its hands and plucked out its eyes, and then remarked to the Marzaban how powerless was his idol..."

Qutaibah bin Muslim al-Bahili (AD 705-715)

Samarkand (Farghana)

"Other authorities say that Kutaibah granted peace for 700,000 dirhams and entertainment for the Moslems for three days. The terms of surrender included also the houses of the idols and the fire temples. The idols were thrown out, plundered of their ornaments and burned..."

Mohammed bin Qasim (AD 712-715)

Debal (Sindh)

"...The town was thus taken by assault, and the carnage endured for three days. The governor of the town, appointed by Dahir, fled and the priests of the temple were massacred. Muhammad marked a place for the Musalmans to dwell in, built a mosque, and left 4,000 Musalmans to garrison the place..."

"...'Ambissa son of Ishak Az Zabbi, the governor of Sindh, in the Khilafat of Mu'tasim billah knocked down the upper part of the minaret of the temple and converted it into a prison..."

Multan (Punjab)

"...He then crossed the Biyas, and went towards Multan...Muhammad destroyed the water-course; upon which the inhabitants, oppressed with thirst, surrendered at discretion. He massacred the men capable of bearing arms, but the children were taken captive, as well as ministers of the temple, to the number of 6,000. The Musalmans found there much gold in a chamber ten cubits long by eight broad..."

Hasham bin 'Amru al-Taghlabi

Khandahar (Maharashtra)

"He then went to Khandahar in boats and conquered it. He destroyed the Budd (idol) there, and built in its place a mosque."

Name Of The Book: Tarikh-i-Tabari

Name Of The Historian: Abu Ja'far Muhammad bin Jarir at-Tabari

About The Author: This author is considered to be the foremost historian of Islam. The above mentioned book written by him is regarded as the mother of histories.

The Muslim Rulers He Wrote About:

Qutaibah bin Muslim al-Bahili (AD 705-715)

Beykund (Khurasan)

"The ultimate capture of Beykund (in AD 706) rewarded him with an incalculable booty; even more than had hitherto fallen into the hands of the Mohammedans by the conquest of the entire province of Khorassaun; and the unfortunate merchants of the town, having been absent on a trading excursion while their country was assailed by the enemy, and finding their habitations desolate on their return contributed further to enrich the invaders, by the ransom which they paid for the recovery of their wives and children. The oranments alone, of which these women had been plundered, being melted down, produce, in gold, 150,000 meskals; of a dram and a half each. Among the articles of the booty, is also described an image of gold, of 50,000 meskals, of which the eyes were two pearls, the exquisite beauty and magnitude of which excited the surprise and admiration of Kateibah. They were transmitted by him, with a fifth of the spoil to Hejauje, together with a request that he might be permitted to distribute, to the troops, the arms which had been found in the palace in great profusion."

Samarkand (Farghana)

"A breach was, however, at last effected in the walls of the city in AD 712 by the warlike machines of Kateibah; and some of the most daring of its defenders having fallen by the skill of his archers, the besieged demanded a cessation of arms to the following day, when they promised to capitulate. The request was acceded to the Kateibah; and a treaty was the next day accordingly concluded between him and the prince of Samarkand, by which the latter engaged for the annual payment of ten million of dhirems, and a supply of three thousand slaves; of whom it was particularly stipulated, that none should either be in a state of infancy, or ineffective from old age and debility. He further contracted that the ministers of his religion should be expelled from their temples and their idols destroyed and burnt; that Kateibah should be allowed to establish a mosque in the place of the principal temple...."

"...Kateibah accordingly set set fire to the whole collection with his own hands; it was soon consumed to ashes, and 50,000 meskals of gold and silver, collected from the nails which had been used in the workmanship of the images."

Yaqub bin Laith (AD 870-871)

Balkh and Kabul (Afghanistan)

"He took Bamian, which he probably reached by way of Herat, and then marched on Balkh where he ruined (the temple) Naushad. On his way back from Balkh he attacked Kabul..."

"Starting from Panjhir, the place he is known to have visited, he must have passed through the capital city of the Hindu Sahis to rob the sacred temple -- the reputed place of coronation of the Sahi rulers -- of its sculptural wealth..."

"The exact details of the spoil collected from Kabul valley are lacking. The Tarikh [-i-Sistan] records 50 idols of gold and silver and Mas'udi mentions elephants. The wonder excited in Baghdad by baghdad by elephants and pagan idols forwarded to the Caliph by Ya'qub also speaks for their high value."

Name Of The Book: Tarikhu'l-Hind

Name Of The Historian: Abu Rihan Muhammad bin Ahmad al-Biruni al-Khwarizmi.

About The Author: This author spent 40 years in India during the reign of Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni (AD 997 - 1030). His history treats of the literature and learning of the Hindus at the commencement of the 11th century.

The Muslim Rulers He Wrote About:

Jalam ibn Shaiban (9th century AD)

Multan (Punjab)

"A famous idol of theirs was that of Multan, dedicated to the sun, and therefore called Aditya. It was of wood and covered with red Cordovan leather; in its two eyes were two red rubies. It is said to have been made in the last Kritayuga .....When Muhammad Ibn Alkasim Ibn Almunaibh conquered Multan, he inquired how the town had become so very flourishing and so many treasures had there been accumulated, and then he found out that this idol was the cause, for there came pilgrims from all sides to visit it. Therefore he thought it best to have the idol where it was, but he hung a piece of cow's flesh on its neck by way of mockery. On the same place a mosque was built. When the Karmatians occupied Multan, Jalam Ibn Shaiban, the usurper, broke the idol into pieces and killed its priests..."

Sultan Mahmud of Gazni (AD 997-1030)

Thanesar (Haryana)

"The city of Taneshar is highly venerated by Hindus. The idol of that place is called Cakrasvamin, i.e. the owner of the cakra, a weapon which we have already described. It is of bronze, and is nearly the size of a man. It is now lying in the hippodrome in Ghazna, together with the Lord of Somnath, which is a representation of the penis of the Mahadeva, called Linga."

Somnath (Gujrat)

"The linga he raised was the stone of Somnath, for soma means the moon and natan means master, so that the whole word means master of the moon. The image was destroyed by the Prince Mahmud, may God be merciful to him! --AH 416. He ordered the upper part to be broken and the remainder to be transported to his residence, Ghaznin, with all its coverings and trappings of gold, jewels, and embroided garments. Part of it has been thrown into the hippodrome of the town, together with Cakrasvamin , an idol of bronze, that had been brought from Taneshar. Another part of the idol from Somnath lies before the door of the mosque of Ghaznin, on which people rub their feet to clean them from dirt and wet."

Name Of The Book: Kitabu'l-Yamini

Name Of The Historian: Abu Nasr Muhammad ibn Muhammad al Jabbaru'l-Utbi.

About The Author: This author's work comprises the whole of the reign of Subuktigin and that of Sultan Mahmud down to the year AD 1020.

The Muslim Rulers He Wrote About:

Amir Sbuktigin Of Ghazni

Lamghan (Afghanistan)

"The Amir marched out towards Lamghan, which is a city celebrated for its great strength and abounding wealth. He conquered it and set fire to the places in its vicinity which were inhabited by infidels, and demolishing idol temples, he established Islam in them. He marched and captured other cities and killed the polluted wretches, destroying the idolaters and gratifying the Musulmans."

Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni (AD 997-1030)

Narain (Rajasthan)

"The Sultan again resolved on an expedition to Hind, and marched towards Narain, urging his horses and moving over ground, hard and soft, until he came to the middle of Hind, where he reduced chiefs, who, up to that time obeyed no master, overturned their idols, put to the sword the vagabonds of that country, and with delay and circumspection proceeded to accomplish his design..."

Nardin (Punjab)

"After the Sultan had purified Hind from idolatry, and raised mosques therein, he determined to invade the capital of Hind to punish those who kept idols and would not acknowledge the unity of God...He marched with a large army in the year AH 404 (AD 1013) during a dark night..."

"A stone was found there in the temple of the great Budda on which an inscription was written purporting that the temple had been founded 50,000 years ago. The Sultan was surprised at the ignorance of these people, because those who believe in the true faith represent that only seven hundred years have elapsed since the creation of the world, and the signs of resurrection are even now approaching . The Sultan asked his wise men the meaning of this inscription and they all concurred in saying that it was false, and no faith was to be put in the evidence of a stone."

Thanesar (Haryana)

"The chief of Tanesar was...obstinate in his infidelity and denial of God. So the Sultan marched against him with his valiant warriors, for the purpose of planting the standards of Islam and extirpating idolatry.."

"The blood of the infidels flowed so copiously, that the stream was discoloured, not withstanding its purity, and people were unable to drink it...The victory gained by God's grace, who has established Islam for ever as the best religions, notwithstanding that idolaters revolt against it...Praise be to God, the protector of the world, for the honour he bestows upon Islam and Musulmans."

Mathura (Uttar Pradesh)

"The Sultan then departed from the environs of the city, in which was a temple of the Hindus. The name of this place was Mahartul Hind... On both sides of the city there were a thousand houses, to which idol temples were attached, all strengthened from top to bottom by rivets of iron, and all made of masonry work..."

"In the middle of the city there was a temple larger and firmer than the rest, which can neither be described nor painted. The Sultan thus wrote respecting it: --'If any should wish to construct a building equal to this, he would not be able to do it without expending an 100,000,000 red dinars, and it would occupy 200 years even though the most experience and able workmen were employed'... The Sultan gave orders that all temples should be burnt with naptha and fire, and levelled with the ground."

Kanauj (Uttar Pradesh)

"In Kanauj there were nearly 10,000 temples, which the idolaters falsely and absurdly represented to have been founded by their ancestors two or three hundred thousand years ago...Many of the inhabitants of the place fled and were scattered abroad like so many wretched widows and orphans, from the fear which oppressed them, in consequence of witnessing the fate of their deaf and dumb idols. Many of them thus effected their escape, and those who did not fly were put to death."

Name Of The Book: Diwan-i-Salman

Name Of The Historian: Khawajah Masud bin Sa'd bin Salman

About The Author: Khawajah Masud bin Sa'd bin Salman was a poet. He wrote poems in praise of the Ghaznavid Sultans- Masu'd, Ibrahim and Bahram Shah. He died sometime between AD 1126 and 1131.

The Muslim Rulers He Wrote About:

Sultan Abu'l Muzaffar Ibrahim (AD 1059-1099)

"As power and the strength of a lion was bestowed upon Ibrahim by the Almighty, he made over to him the well-populated country of Hindustan and gave him 40,000 valiant horsemen to take the country, in which there were more than 1000 rais...The army of the king destroyed at one time a thousand temples of idols, which had each been built for more than a thousand years. How can I describe the victories of the King..."

Jalandhar (Punjab)

"The narrative of any battles eclipses the stories of Rustam and Isfandiyar...By morning meal, not one soldier, not one Brahmin remained unkilled or uncaptured. Their heads were levelled with the ground with falming fire..Thou has secured the victory to the country and to religion, for amongst the Hindus this achievement will be remembered till the day of resurrection."

Malwa (Madhya Pradesh)

"..On this journey, the army detsroyed a thousand idol-temples and thy elephants trampled over more than a hundred strongholds. Thou didst march thy army to Ujjan; .. The lip of infidelity became dry through fear of thee, the eye of plural-worship became blind.."

Name Of The Book: Chach-Namah

Name Of The Historian: Mohammed Al bin Hamid bin Abu Bakr Kufi

About The Author: The Persian history was translated from arabic by the above mentioned author in the time of Nasiruddin Qabacha, a slave of Mohammed Ghori.

The Muslim Rulers He Wrote About:

Mohammed bin Qasim (AD 712-715)

Siwistan and Sisam (Sindh)

Mohammed bin Qasem wrote to al-Hajjaj, the governor of Iraq:

"The forts of Siwistan and Sism have been already taken. The nephew of Dahir, his warriors and principla officers have been despatched, and infidels converted to Islam or destroyed. Instead of idol temples, mosques and other places of worship have been built, pulpits have been erected, the Khutba is read, the call to prayers is raised so that devotions are performed at sacred hours."

Multan (Punjab)

.."Mohammed Qasem arose and with his counsellors, guards and attendants, went to the temple. He saw there an idol made of gold. and its two eye were bright red rubies. "..Muhammed Qasem ordered the idol to be taken up. Two hundred and thirty "mans" of gold were brought to the treasury together with the gems and pearls and treasures which were obtained from the plunder of Multan. "

Name Of The Book: Jamiu'l-Hikayat

Name Of The Historian: Maulana Nuruddin Muhammed `Ufi

About The Author: The author was born in or near the city of Bukhara in Transoxiana. He came to India and lived in Delhi for some time in the reign of Shamsu'd-Din Iltutmish (AD 1210-1236)

The Muslim Rulers He Wrote About:

Amru bin Laith (AD 879-900)

Sakawand (Afghanistan)

"It is related that Amru Lais conferred the governorship of Zabulistan on Fardaghan and sent him there at the head of four thousand horses. There was a large Hindu place of worship in that country, which was called Sakawand and people used to come on pilgrimage from the most remote parts of Hindustan to the idols of that place. When Fardaghan arrived in Zabulistan he led his army against it, took the temple, broke the idols in pieces and overthrew the idolators..."

Name Of The Book: Taju'l-Ma'sir

Name Of The Historian: Sadru'd-Din Muhammed Hasan Nizamii

About The Author: The author was born at Nishapur in Khurusan. He had to leave his ancestral place because of the Mongol invasion. He came to India and started writing his history in AD 1205.

The Muslim Rulers He Wrote About:

Sultan Muhammed Ghuri (AD 1175-1206)

Ajmer (Rajasthan)

"He destroyed the pillars and foundations of the idol temples and built in their stead mosques and colleges, and the precepts of Islam, and the customs of the law were divulged and established..."

Kuhram and Samana (Punjab)

"The Government of the fort of Kohram and Samana were made over by the Sultan to Kutuu-din..He purged by his sword the land of Hind from the filth of infidelity and vice, and freed it from the thorn of God-plurality, and the impurity of idol-worship and by his royal vigour and intrepidity, left not one temple standing..."

Meerut (Uttar Pradesh)

"Kutub-d din marched from Kohran and when he arrived at Meerut which is one of the celebrated forts of the country of Hind, for the strength of its foundations and superstructure, and its ditch, which was as broad as the ocean and fathomless- an army joined him, sent by the dependent chiefs of the country. The fort was captured, and a Kotwal was appointed to take up his station in the fort, and all the idol temples were converted into mosques."

Delhi

"He then marched and encamped under the fort of Delhi...The city and its vicinity were freed from idols and idol-worhips, and in the sanctuaries of the images of the Gods, nosques were raised by the worshippers of one God. Kutub-d din built the Jami Masjid at Delhi and adorned it with stones and gold obtained from the temples which had been demolished by the elephants, and covered it with inscriptions in Toghra, containing the divine commands."

Varanasi (Uttar Pradesh)

"From that place (Asni) the royal armi proceeded towards Benares which is the center of the country of Hind and here they destroyed nearly 1000 temples, and raised mosques on their foundations and the knowledge of the law became promulgated, and the foundations of religion were established.."

Aligarh (Uttar Pradesh)

"There was a certain tribe in the neighbourhood of Kol which had..occasioned much trouble..Three bastions were raised as high as heaven with their heads, and their carcases became the food of beasts of prey. That tract was freed from idols and idol-worship and the foundation of infidelity were destroyed"..

Bayana (Rajasthan)

"When Kutub-d din heard of Sultan's march from Ghazna, he was much rejoiced and advanced as far as Hansi to meet him.. In the year AH 592 (AD 1196), they marched towards Thangar, and the center of idolatry and perdition became the abode of glory and splendour.."

Kalinjar (Uttar Pradesh)

"In the year AH 599 (Ad 1202), Kutub-d din proceeded to the investment Kalinjar, on which expedition he was accompanied by the Sahib-Kiran, Shamsu-d din Altmash... The temples were converted into mosques and abodes of goodness, and the ejaculations of bead counters and voices of summoners to prayer ascended to high heaven, and the very name of idolatry was annihilated.."

Sultan Shamsu'd-Din Iltutmish (AD 1210-1236)

Delhi

"The Sultan then returned from Jalor to Delhi..and after his arrival 'not a vestige or name remained of idol temples which had raised their heads on high; and the light of faith shone out from the darkness of infidelity..and the moon of religion and the state became resplendent from the heaven of prosperity and glory."

Name Of The Book: Kamilu't-Tawarikh

Name Of The Historian: Ibn Asir

About The Author: The author was born in AD 1160 in the Jazirat ibn Umar, an island on the Tigris above Mosul.

The Muslim Rulers he Wrote About:

Khalifa Al-Mahdi (AD 775-785)

Barada (Gujrat)

"In the year 159 (AD 776) Al Mahdi sent an army by sea under Abdul Malik bin Shahabu'l Musamma'i to India..They proceeded on their way and at length disembarked at Barada. When they reached the place they laid siege on it..The town was reduced to extremities and God prevailed over it in the same year. The people were forbidden to worship the Budd, which the Muhammadans burned."

Name Of The Book: Tarikh-i-Jahan-Kusha

Name Of The Historian: Alaud-Din Malik ibn Bahaud-Din Muhammed Juwaini

About The Author: The author was born a native of Juwain in Khurasan near Nishapur. He was the Halaku during the Mongol campaign against the Ismai'lians and was later appointed the governor of Baghdad. He fell from grace and was imprisoned at Hamadan.

The Muslim Rulers he Wrote About:

Sultan Jalalud-Din Mankbarni (AD 1222-1231)

Debal (Sindh)

"The Sultan then went towards Dewal and darbela and Jaisi... The Sultan raised Masjid at Dewal, on the spot where an idol temple stood."

Name Of The Book: Mifathu'l-Futuh

Name Of The Historian: Amir Khusru

About The Author: The author, Amir Khusru was born at Delhi in 1253. His father occupied high positions in the reigns of Sultan Shamsu'd Din Iltutmish (AD 1210-1236) and his successors. Reputed to be the dearest disciple of Shykh Nizamuddin Auliya, he became the lick-spittle of whoever came out victorious in the contest for the throne at Delhi. He became the court poet of Balban's successor, Sultan Kaiqbad.

The Muslim Rulers he wrote About:

Sultan Jajalu'd-Din Khalji (AD 1290-1296)

Jhain (Rajasthan)

"The Sultan reached Jhain in the afternoon of the third day and stayed in the palace of the Raya..he greatly enjoyed his stay for some time. Coming out, ho took a round of gardens and temples. The idols he saw amazed him .. Next day he got those idols of gold smashed with stones. The pillars of wood were burnt down by his order... A cry rose from the temples as if a second Mahmud has taken birth. Two idols were made of brass, one of which weighed nearly thousand "mans".He got both of them broken, and the pieces were distributed among his people so that they may throw them at the door of Masjid on their return to Delhi."

Sultan Alaud-Din Khilji (AD 1296-1316)

Vidisha (Madhya Pradesh)

"When he advanced from the capital of Karra, the Hindus, in alarm, descended into the earth like ants. He departed towards the garden of Behar to dye that soil with blood as red as tulip. He cleared the road road to Ujjain of vile wretches, and created consternation in Bhilsan. When he affected his conquests in that country, hew drew out of the river the idols which had been conceled in it.

Devagiri (Maharshtra)

"But see the mercy with which he regarded the broken-hearted, for, after seizing the rai, he set him free again. He destroyed the temples of the idolaters, and erected pulpits and arches for mosques. "

1. On the accusation of promoting ethnic cleansing:

I do not support ethnic cleansing in any way or form and I am not an anti-semite. I do oppose Sunnism and Wahabism as an ideology for certain. I do also oppose Zionism and the political existence of a state for Jews by Jews only which is presently called Israel and I am in favour, like the orthodox rabbis of Satmar, Neturei Karta and other Hassidic families, of a secular state in Palestine with equal representation for Jews, Christians and Muslims and other groups. As for Sikhism I have no problem with those following the teaching of Hazrat Baba Nanak Shah (ra) be they Nanakshahi Muslims or Indic followers of his teaching who have chosen to conserve the age old Indic traditions except for idol worship. I respect them as much as I respect the Brahmo Samaj of Sri Devendranath Tagore and Rabindranath Tagore. As for others I have no problem with them as long they do not encourage seperatism and hatred of other communites which is unfortunately not the case. Shi'ism forbids offensive jihad and allows only defensive jihad, in line of course with the teachings of the Quran and Ahl ul Bayt (as). This would in any way exclude ethnic cleansing which is not permissible both legally and ethically.

Ethnic cleansing has been supported by tonyhp32:

The Catholics in Spain achieved what many countries which had been invaded by Muslims could not. That is, they managed to wrest back their country and were able to expel the Muslims from their midst.

The reconquista was achieved by forceful conversion of Muslims, Jews and Mozarab Christians to Catholicism and by expulsion or execution of those unwilling to comply. Tonyhp32 is clearly supporting this sort of actions.

2. As for the mong series of examples of idol-breaking actions, I have never said that Islamic rulers have not done this sort of actions. As I said earlier the court poets of these rulers did praise such actions as Islamic. Whether they were is a totally different question and is a matter of jurisprudence. The case of Mahmud Ghaznavi (a known alcoholic and homosexual) looted the temple of Somnath. The source you mentioned surely considers his action as Islamic BUT there are problems with it.

First of all you come up with outdated scholarship. From an academic point of view your source is interesting for analysis itself because of the underlying ideology behind it. If you were so keen to present scholarly works on the issue of idol breaking and temple destruction by Muslim rulers, I wonder why you haven't even mentioned Romila Thapar's famous book on the subject which analyzes ALL sources on the subject including the one you have presented. Romila Thapar is to date one of the best Indian historians, a serious academic acclaimed both in India and abroad. She wrote a book on the issue you mentioned. I can clearly remember how she was warmly welcomed when she visited our research team in Paris at the Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes (Sorbonne, Paris) and how she amazed a plethora of the best Indological scholar from Europe and abroad with her article on Mahmud Ghazanavi where she has clearly shown how the looting of Somnath was only later on given an Islamic justification whereas the real motive was clearly looting.

Here is her book: http://www.amazon.co.uk/Somanatha-Voices-H...5021&sr=8-7

Just in case you haven't read it yet.

I am not denying that other rulers may have done it for religious reasons as is the case of Aurangzeb. But I fail to see how this has got anything to do with the spread of Islam. Indic traditions do not need temples as people most often have their personal altars at home. Mandirs came quite late in Indian history. What I mean is that even if temples were destroyed, people continued their puja at home.

I also don't see any of you quoting academic authorities on South Asian Islam such as Annemarie Schimmel, Denis Matringer, Cristopher Shackle or Irfan Habib, who are whether you like it or not leading authorities in the field. Either you are not familiar with their work, which leads me to question your ability to discuss the spread of Islam in South Asia, or you have read them and are intellectually dishonest, unwilling to present serious scholarship that would shatter your propaganda about the evil spread of Islam.

The problem is not idol breaking as such, as it a holy acts performed by prophets like Ibrahim (as), David (as) and Mohammad (pbuh). The problem is the circumstances, intentions and aim. To destroy idols as a result of a looting raid has nothing to do with Islam and its praise by court poets is a poor fig leaf covering the shame of greed at best.

Last but not least your sources. It would have been nice if you mentionned your source from which you copy and pasted your "scholarly reply".

http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate/temple1.html

Which is a part of:

http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate/index.html

a Hindu website that says:

"Islam imposes a threat to the whole world which is far worse than deforestation, nuclear destruction or AIDS. It is an insidious, devilish disease creeping into the veins of the world. Every individual must realise the destructive and evil nature of this religion, for it eats away at the very foundation of humanity which is an individual's ability to think individually and act accordingly. The following articles logically analyse different aspects of this so called religion and bring forth the true nature of Islam."

Somehow this seems to contradict your earlier statement that you have nothing "against Mohammad Sahib or Islam".

The website is sponsored by "Jai Maharaj", a vedic astrologer whose academic credentials are:

"American Federation of Astrologers

Association For Astrological Networking

National Council for Geocosmic Research

International Society for Astrological Research

International Society of Business Astrologers

Planetary Gemologists Association

Internet Engineering Task Force

International Vegetarian Union

Vegetarian Union of North America

Association of Investigative Journalists

South Asian Journalists Association

Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and

Numbers

ActressActor.com"

3. I am puzzled by a Sikh's use of these incidents in Indian history when his own 10th master writes to Aurangzeb saying in his Zafarnameh:

manam kushteh am kohian but parast /

keh u but parastand va man but shikast /

I have destroyed the idol worshiping hill people

because they are idolaters and I am an idol breaker.

Your 10th master himself admits to waging war on the hill rajas for religious reasons namely the fact that they are "but parast" , idol worshipers and that he is a "but shikast", a breaker of idols.

Prophets, Imams and holy mean inspired by God have always opposed idol worship as it is an abomination. Your own 10th master confirmed it. Maybe you should have added this passage to your long list of examples.

Fact remains: Mahâdîn is not Mohammad (pbuh).

Khoda Negahdar e Shoma

islameden.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you took a closer look (I am sure you did, but your biased eyes didn't register) at the authentic historical facts recorded by Muslims, you would have seen they refer to a little more than Idol destruction i.e. destroying places of worship (Buddism, Jainism, other Indic... as well as genocide, looting, forceful conversion etc.

Re so called Idol destruction, if you are such a keen fan, perhaps consider joining your Sunni brothers the Taliban.

I did not say Islam was not also spread by peaceful (as well as decieptful) means i.e. by various Sufi movements, but fact remains - the spread of many Islamic kingdoms over existing Empires and faiths was done by force and tyranny

"I do not support ethnic cleansing in any way or form"

I'll leave you to dig out the many references you have made to wanting see Jews, Sikhs, Hindus, Sunnis dead. Stop playing innocent. Just because your new found civilised friends are now watching, stop pretending you never had such opinions, if need be, they can be found.

"I have destroyed the idol worshiping hill people

because they are idolaters and I am an idol breaker."

Stop taking such a literal Talibanic view of the Guru's writings - you know very well Maharaj is refering to the destruction of ignorance, rather than the rape and destruction of culture, religion and people as per the many contemporary examples listed above.

"Fact remains: Mahâdîn is not Mohammad (pbuh)."

In your not so humble opinion. You have no authority to preach that your intepretation of the intention of the writer is a 'fact', in any shape or form.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bahadur Jee,

You have very conveniently sidelined and ignored historical primary records of the destruction of Indian temples at the hand of Islamic hordes from the North West simply because this does not fit into your pre disposition of Islamic history. This is denying historical truth. This is no different from how the Iranian government is trying to deny the Jewish holocaust even happened, or how Sunni Muslims try to say that 9/11 was a Bush/Zionist conspiracy and could not have been done by Muslims.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Be nam-e Khoda

Shaheediyan wrote:

If you took a closer look (I am sure you did, but your biased eyes didn't register) at the authentic historical facts recorded by Muslims, you would have seen they refer to a little more than Idol destruction i.e. destroying places of worship (Buddism, Jainism, other Indic... as well as genocide, looting, forceful conversion etc.

Re so called Idol destruction, if you are such a keen fan, perhaps consider joining your Sunni brothers the Taliban.

I did not say Islam was not also spread by peaceful (as well as decieptful) means i.e. by various Sufi movements, but fact remains - the spread of many Islamic kingdoms over existing Empires and faiths was done by force and tyranny

"I do not support ethnic cleansing in any way or form"

I'll leave you to dig out the many references you have made to wanting see Jews, Sikhs, Hindus, Sunnis dead. Stop playing innocent. Just because your new found civilised friends are now watching, stop pretending you never had such opinions, if need be, they can be found.

"I have destroyed the idol worshiping hill people

because they are idolaters and I am an idol breaker."

Stop taking such a literal Talibanic view of the Guru's writings - you know very well Maharaj is refering to the destruction of ignorance, rather than the rape and destruction of culture, religion and people as per the many contemporary examples listed above.

"Fact remains: Mahâdîn is not Mohammad (pbuh)."

In your not so humble opinion. You have no authority to preach that your intepretation of the intention of the writer is a 'fact', in any shape or form.

1. I never denied the facts you presented. They have indeed taken place.

2. The Sunni Talibans are not my brothers. I have nothing against statues as long as they are not said to contain God. The taliban destruction of Buddhist art is in my view a crime.

3. The spread of any empire is done by force as was the case of the Sikh kingdom of Maharaja Ranjit Singh. Whether this political expansion equals the spreading of a faith is questionable.

4. Your master employs the Persian verb "manam kushteh am" which means "I have destroyed" and the object here is clearly referred to as "kohian", the "mountain people". The word "keh" implies cause: he waged war on them BECAUSE they were "but parast". Waging war does not necessarily imply the destruction of civilian property or rape. I doubt your master would have done such things as I believe he (unlike his modern followers) was a man of honour. In any case this verse doesn't refer to some esoteric reality.

5. Again I do not pretend to know the intention of the author. What I am saying is that the Mahâdîn does not correspond to the Prophet (pbuh). If the author's intention is to:

- insult the Prophet (pbuh) by mutilating his name and ascribe to him actions he did not do

or

- refer in allegorical fashion to excesses of Islamic rulers

is a question I leave open. The majority of Sikhs have opted for the first blasphemous interpretation. You on the other hand seem to go for the second. It is an interpretation that I did favour but which does have its problems too.

I am not here to decide which one is correct. All I am doing is stating the facts proving the fallacy of a literal interpretation of Mahâdîn being Mohammad (pbuh).

Mithr wrote:

Bahadur Jee,

You have very conveniently sidelined and ignored historical primary records of the destruction of Indian temples at the hand of Islamic hordes from the North West simply because this does not fit into your pre disposition of Islamic history. This is denying historical truth. This is no different from how the Iranian government is trying to deny the Jewish holocaust even happened, or how Sunni Muslims try to say that 9/11 was a Bush/Zionist conspiracy and could not have been done by Muslims.

I have not sidelined the issue. If you read my post you would have read that I make reference to the work of serious scholars in the field of Indian Islam. There is no doubt that some rulers committed excesses as did Hindus and Sikhs. Whether those are to be qualified as "Islamic" is another question.

As to the credibility of some of the so-called exploits you have passages such as:

"'he purged by his sword the land of Hind from the filth of infidelity and vice, and freed it from the thorn of God-plurality, and the impurity of idol-worship"

"'left not one temple standing'"

It isn't the first time in history pays his court poets to exaggerate his military exploits. No temple standing left in India? But of course...

The Iranian government doesn't have an official position on the Holocaust. The head of the Islamic Republic of Iran, Imam Khamenei has never made a public statement denying the Holocaust.

Khoda Negahdar e Shoma

hat8_b.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"3. The spread of any empire is done by force as was the case of the Sikh kingdom of Maharaja Ranjit Singh. Whether this political expansion equals the spreading of a faith is questionable."

Considering the fact that numerous non-sikh followers of the raja held high positions in government and in the army, it clearly is not spreading of faith by force.

"4. Your master employs the Persian verb "manam kushteh am" which means "I have destroyed" and the object here is clearly referred to as "kohian", the "mountain people". The word "keh" implies cause: he waged war on them BECAUSE they were "but parast". Waging war does not necessarily imply the destruction of civilian property or rape. I doubt your master would have done such things as I believe he (unlike his modern followers) was a man of honour. In any case this verse doesn't refer to some esoteric reality."

It's historical fact that the hill rajas attacked the Guru without cause, he defended himself, simple as that. The idol worshippers probably feared the effect of the (metaphorical) idol breakers teachings just as much as they feared his military strength.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bahadur Ali Jee,

There is no denying the holocaust of the people of India had to undergo at the hands of the Muslims. Primary sources (mostly Muslim ones) themselves are witness to the destruction of Indian temples, massacres of Hindus and Sikhs. Of course over exaggeration can be used as an argument for some sources, but you brush aside all primary sources as being over exaggeration is really too much and is nothing short of intellectual dishonesty. For us Indians it is a very serious matter just as the Jewish holocaust is the Jews, or Armenian genocide is to the Armenians.

Romila Thapper and Irfan Habib are leftist historians with a leftist agenda. They are the same historians who expound on the Aryan invasion myth, or how ‘enlightened’ Islamic rule was over India, or how the independence movement of the Marathas, Jats, and Sikhs were really marauders out for loot. They are the same leftist historians whose comments about Guru Tegh Bahadur Jee in a text book were deleted because it greatly offended the Sikhs.

It’s amazing how you can deny primary sources written by Muslims themselves as mere imagination or over exaggeration, yet quote leftist historians as being the only source of truth.

The Iranian Government’s views about the holocaust are supported by most Shias. Ahmadinajad would not dare hold conferences in Iran denying the holocaust attended by known anti-Semites, neo-Nazis, and white supremacists if the Ayatollah was not backing him.

What is done is done. Hindus, Christians, Sikhs don’t deny when they have committed atrocities. They accept it and mostly even regret it. But Muslims try to literally change, deny historical facts. This revisionism is intellectual dishonesty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mithr, this thread is about Bachitar Natak.

On the kingship of Mohammed (from www.iranchamber.com):

....This idea appears in a lengthy report regarding Heraclius (seventh century AD), the king of Byzantium. The account is mentioned by both Bukhari a Sunni authority of hadith and Majlesi, the prominent Shiite authority. Heraclius a competent astrologer studied and read the stars at night. Staring into the skies one evening, he read of the arrival of "the king of the circumcised." Interested in discovering identity of this king, Heraclius consulted his advisers regarding any circumcised peoples under his control.

He was informed there are no circumcised nations except for the Jews, and they are too insignificant to worry the king. While they were engaged in conversation, an envoy from the king of Ghassan arrived to inform the king of the rise of Muhammad. When the messenger finished speaking, Heraclius, suspected a possible connection between the horoscope and the report of the messenger. He ordered his men to check the foreskin status of the envoy. They checked and reported that the man was indeed circumcised.

Heraclius then questioned the man about this practice among the Arabs. He confirmed that they indeed practiced circumcision. Realizing that Muhammad must be the leader of the circumcised people whom the stars foretold, Heraclius declared, "This is the king and this is the nation which appeared to me" (Bihar al-anwar; al-Bukhari, Bad al-wahy).

Bear in mind that Maharaj Ji called this Bani a 'Natak' which means it has to be approached as an allegory. It is full of imagery that requires a good understanding of Sikhi and Gurbani in general to understand properly. Many Kathakars and even Mahapursh, while on stage, provide a simplistic interpretation. Deeper, antreev, meanings are ususally revealed to those who will understand them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Be nam-e Khoda

Mithr worte:

Bahadur Ali Jee,

There is no denying the holocaust of the people of India had to undergo at the hands of the Muslims. Primary sources (mostly Muslim ones) themselves are witness to the destruction of Indian temples, massacres of Hindus and Sikhs. Of course over exaggeration can be used as an argument for some sources, but you brush aside all primary sources as being over exaggeration is really too much and is nothing short of intellectual dishonesty. For us Indians it is a very serious matter just as the Jewish holocaust is the Jews, or Armenian genocide is to the Armenians.

Romila Thapper and Irfan Habib are leftist historians with a leftist agenda. They are the same historians who expound on the Aryan invasion myth, or how ‘enlightened’ Islamic rule was over India, or how the independence movement of the Marathas, Jats, and Sikhs were really marauders out for loot. They are the same leftist historians whose comments about Guru Tegh Bahadur Jee in a text book were deleted because it greatly offended the Sikhs.

It’s amazing how you can deny primary sources written by Muslims themselves as mere imagination or over exaggeration, yet quote leftist historians as being the only source of truth.

The Iranian Government’s views about the holocaust are supported by most Shias. Ahmadinajad would not dare hold conferences in Iran denying the holocaust attended by known anti-Semites, neo-Nazis, and white supremacists if the Ayatollah was not backing him.

What is done is done. Hindus, Christians, Sikhs don’t deny when they have committed atrocities. They accept it and mostly even regret it. But Muslims try to literally change, deny historical facts. This revisionism is intellectual dishonesty.

1. Holocaust of India?

There has never been any such thing as a scientifically planned extermination of any group in India, whether by Hindus, Sikhs, Jain, Buddhists or Muslims.

2. Do you imply that the majority of Indian Muslims are not really Indian? From your post it seems to me that you don't accept them as your fellow Indians.

3. As I said the head of the Islamic republic of Iran, Imam Khamenei, has never denied the holocaust. There are Jewish representatives in the Iranian parliament. The conference that you have mentioned gather people from all kinds of way of thinking even Jews. I have to admit that inviting ex-KKKmembers wasn't the smartest thing but at least there were Jewish delegates there too.

As you see your attempts to portray the Rahbar as an anti-semite are just plain ridiculous.

4. I never said massacres by Muslim rulers didn't take place in India and I didn't brush these accounts aside as fantasy. They are like all primary sources to be taken with care and analyzed. The issue at hand is to determine whether these action are Islamic or not. And the reply is that they clearly weren't.

5. Romila Thapar and Irfan Habib are not the only scholars I mentioned. So your broad denial of serious scholarship as being leftist is in and of itself a right wing biased statement.

The topic at hand wasn't Iran but the issue about Mahâdîn. It seems you have not much to contribute to the discussion at hand.

Anti-Zionism does not equal anti-Semitism

Khoda Negahdar

holocaust.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mithr, this thread is about Bachitar Natak.

On the kingship of Mohammed (from www.iranchamber.com):

Does it say 'king' in the Majlesi hadith? Which word is used exactly?

Even if Heraclius did report seeing this message in the stars at night, does this mean that Heraclius is to be taken as an authority on the 'kingship' of the Prophet (pbuh)?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bahadur Ali Jee,

Where did I say that most Indian Muslims are not Indians? They are as Indian as I am. Amongst Indians of the Sub continent, no more than 10% are actual descendents of central Asians. Most are descendents of converts. Islamic sources are full of horrific accounts of how Indians were forced, intimidated through Sharia policies like Jazia tax, pilgrimage tax to convert to Islam. Not all rulers were as enlightened as Batshah Akbar.

The term "Holocaust" is just a term I am using to describe what happened to my people under Islamic rule. Call it holocaust, genocide, gallugara it makes no difference to me. To be fair, those atrocities were committed by Sunni Muslims. I'm not aware of Shias committing these atrocities. Shias were just as persecuted as the Hindus were. But none the less to deny that Muslims (Sunni ones) have not committed atrocities or forceful conversions in India is just a biased version. It is almost like Catholics denying that they did not spread Christianity in South America by the sword. But unlike Muslims, the Catholics don't deny it and even regret it.

Just go to Muslim sites in particular Shia sites and see how they are denying the Jewish holocaust. Ahmadinajad has some admirable qualities like great economic policies for his country, courage to face the US, but denying the Holocaust and inviting known white supremacists to give lectures against Jews has seriously damaged his credibility. The real rulers of Iran is the Ayatollah and the revolutionary guards. Nothing in Iran happens without the approval and sanction of the Ayatollah and the revolutionary guards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My final words on this topic, and in my simple opinion - Maha-deen - hybrid of Sahanskriti and Farsi translating to Great-Faith/Religion - refers to the 'nation' of Islam'.

And although it may not be refering to the Prophet, Imams, scripture.. it clearly refers to the tyrannical spread of the faith through many of it's Kings/leaders (not all), in particular and in complete relevance, those that invaded and pillaged India.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Be nam-e Khoda

Mithr wrote:

Bahadur Ali Jee,

Where did I say that most Indian Muslims are not Indians? They are as Indian as I am. Amongst Indians of the Sub continent, no more than 10% are actual descendents of central Asians. Most are descendents of converts. Islamic sources are full of horrific accounts of how Indians were forced, intimidated through Sharia policies like Jazia tax, pilgrimage tax to convert to Islam. Not all rulers were as enlightened as Batshah Akbar.

The term "Holocaust" is just a term I am using to describe what happened to my people under Islamic rule. Call it holocaust, genocide, gallugara it makes no difference to me. To be fair, those atrocities were committed by Sunni Muslims. I'm not aware of Shias committing these atrocities. Shias were just as persecuted as the Hindus were. But none the less to deny that Muslims (Sunni ones) have not committed atrocities or forceful conversions in India is just a biased version. It is almost like Catholics denying that they did not spread Christianity in South America by the sword. But unlike Muslims, the Catholics don't deny it and even regret it.

Just go to Muslim sites in particular Shia sites and see how they are denying the Jewish holocaust. Ahmadinajad has some admirable qualities like great economic policies for his country, courage to face the US, but denying the Holocaust and inviting known white supremacists to give lectures against Jews has seriously damaged his credibility. The real rulers of Iran is the Ayatollah and the revolutionary guards. Nothing in Iran happens without the approval and sanction of the Ayatollah and the revolutionary guards.

You seem to have a problem with hermeneutics when it comes to my posts. You seem to also have a problem with lying about Imam Khamenei. Neither Imam Khomeini (ra) nor Imam Khamenei have said anything against Judaism or the Jews. You also seem to ignore that the Islamic Republic of Iran has a separation of powers (judiciary, legislative, executive and the rahbar). Recently Imam Khamenei appealed for the privatization of certain public companies: his appeal was not followed by the executive power, the head of which is President Ahmadinejad. Iran has the largest community and oldest communities of Jews in Asia outside Israel and Imam Khomeini (ra) has on many occasions given strict orders for their protection. Even though the Islamic Republic of Iran opposes the concept of a Zionist state it does not propagate hatred against Jews. Jews are represented in parliament and have rights.

As for your jeremiad about the holocaust in India I find it personally scandalous to see people who have no idea of what the real holocaust was like use that term without recognizing the uniqueness of the Nazi crime.There is no doubt that an Afghan ruler coming into an Indian town to kill, rape and loot is a horrible crime, but it doesn't have the characteristics of a genocide or the holocaust. The obscene way how many Sikhs and Hindus shamelessly use the holocaust to talk about normal medieval violence is just pornographic. There is simply no common measure between the crimes of a medieval warlord be he Hindu, Sikh, Hindu or Christian and the carefully scientifically planned eradication of a race.

The reason why the Catholic Church recognized its guilt in the crimes against humanity in Latin America is due to the fact that through many bulls from the Pope it has authorized Spain and Portugal to introduce slavery on the basis that black people and Native Americans had no soul.

Sunnism doesn't have a central authority, nor does Shi'ism have. When Muslim rulers committed massacres they did so WITHOUT the approval of a central religious authority because it simply doesn't exist in Islam. Furthermore in Islam the laws about war are very clear and not open to interpretation. The killing and rape of innocent civilians is forbidden in Islam. If "Muslims" rulers did so , it was not a religious act, rather a sin. The fact that some court historians and poets embellished their deeds doesn't make them more acceptable or Islamic.

Before talking about Iran or Catholicism you might want to study these before expressing uninformed views.

Shaheediyan wrote:

My final words on this topic, and in my simple opinion - Maha-deen - hybrid of Sahanskriti and Farsi translating to Great-Faith/Religion - refers to the 'nation' of Islam'.

And although it may not be refering to the Prophet, Imams, scripture.. it clearly refers to the tyrannical spread of the faith through many of it's Kings/leaders (not all), in particular and in complete relevance, those that invaded and pillaged India.

Even though I disagree with your interpretation you have the merit to be clear about your ideas. It would of course be too much ask you to undergo a thorough and serious study of the spread of South Asian Islam beyond the usual Islamophobic distorted stereotypes but at least you have presented your views which reflect the opinions of many in your community. It lacks the complexity and hermeneutic tools of a scholarly analysis. Your views of "Islam spread by the sword" are as rubbish as the New Age Sufi views that make Aurangzeb and Mahmud Ghaznavi into saints. Historical reality is more complex but you and your brothers and sisters in faith don't realize that.

By any account both interpretation translate a profound sense of mistrust if not hatred towards either the Prophet (pbuh) if one believes Mahâdîn means Mohammad or the Muslim community in general in one believes Mahâdîn refers to Islamic history. To mutilate the Prophet's name, to lie about him by ascribing to him actions he did not do and to claim that he placed his name about God's name is by any standards an act of utter blasphemy and hatred.

What is even stranger is that the religion that was really spread through violance i.e. Christianity, with the approval of the popes and the participation of missionaries to help the white European colonizing powers does not get a single mention, not a word.Why is it that a supposedly divine texts with universal value does not have a single mention on the way how Christians spread their faith or how they deviated from Jesus' (as) teachings. Strange isn't it? The Ancient Testament has explicit passages justifying genocide but that doesn't seem to bother the author of Bachitar Natak. Instead those who think Mahâdîn is Mohammad (pbuh) love to quote the Sunni hadiths of Abu Huraira and Omar that are infested with similar justifications which we Shi'a, the true followers of Ahl e Mohammad (pbih) consider a pure lie. You are blind to the real passages of the Ancient Testament yet fully accept hadiths from known sinnders such as Omar and Abu Huraira, both ennemies of the Prophet (pbuh). Islamophobic selection at its best.

The true Islamic way of governance has been explained clearly in Najhul Balagha in a letter of Imam Ali (as) to Malik ul Ashtar, his devoted Shi'a and governor of Egypt. This letter has been referred to by Kofi Annan as a model for governance and advised Arab nations to go back to its teachings. It is a letter that teaches justice, social equity and goodness. It has an important passage that Islamophobes on this website should carefully read and ponder upon:

"Beware! Abstain from shedding blood without a valid cause. There is nothing more harmful than this which brings about one's ruin. The blood that is willfully shed shortens the life of a state. On the day of judgment it is this crime for which one will have to answer first. So, beware! Do not wish to build the strength of your state on blood; for, it is this blood which ultimately weakens the state and passes it on to other hands. Before me and my God no excuse for willful killing can be entertained."

These are the words of the lion of God, the real successor to the Prophet (pbuh)! Yet you chose to follow the hadiths of the persecutors of the Prophet's family (as) to suit your hatred of Islam and Muslims.

Behind the deceitful talk of tolerance of others those who consider Mahâdîn to mean the Prophet (pbuh) are in fact nothing but Islamophobes. And those who claim that Bhagat Ramanand (ra) has gone astray as the Bachitar Natak says have committed nindia against a bhagat whose writings are in the Adi Granth and hence considered by Hazrat Guru Arjan (ra) to be a saint. These positions not only contradict the teachings of Hazrat Baba Nanak Shah (ra) but are pure blasphemy and an insult to God and his saints. These poisonous blasphemous statements are what has the transformed the noble house of unity between Muslims and Hindus into the whorehouse of hatred and heresy that is modern Sikhism, the brother of Wahabism and Hindu fascism. I find it amazing how people who have fortified their holiest shrine in the 80's twice are surprised at the armed forces intervening, wage a campaign of terror against Panjabi Hindus, celebrate the assassination of a democratically elected prime minister (a disarmed woman...how brave) in the streets of everywhere they pretty much live (from Jalandhar to Jackson Heights and Southall), hag the pictures of their "heroes" pretty much in all gurdware in the world and then have the nerve and arrogance to claim they support tolerance, telling the West they are not terrorists. Thank God there are still some rare real disciples of Hazrat Baba Nanak Shah (ra) left of the kind that would befriend a Mian Mir (ra) or a Budhu Shah (ra).

I thank the participants for their honesty in admitting to their blasphemy against the Prophet (pbuh) and his saints. At least things are clear.

I will now leave and pray for your souls whilst you continue your cheap personal attacks for lack of real arguments.

kind regards

Bahadur Ali Shah

Jesuits_at_Akbar

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Behind the deceitful talk of tolerance of others those who consider Mahâdîn to mean the Prophet (pbuh) are in fact nothing but Islamophobes. And those who claim that Bhagat Ramanand (ra) has gone astray as the Bachitar Natak says have committed nindia against a bhagat whose writings are in the Adi Granth and hence considered by Hazrat Guru Arjan (ra) to be a saint. These positions not only contradict the teachings of Hazrat Baba Nanak Shah (ra) but are pure blasphemy and an insult to God and his saints. These poisonous blasphemous statements are what has the transformed the noble house of unity between Muslims and Hindus into the whorehouse of hatred and heresy that is modern Sikhism, the brother of Wahabism and Hindu fascism.

I thank the participants for their honesty in admitting to their blasphemy against the Prophet (pbuh) and his saints. At least things are clear.

I will now leave and pray for your souls

kind regards

Bahadur Ali Shah

Blasphemy? That’s real rich coming from someone who leaves a religion every few years. Everyone knows about you and your hypocrisy. You're the hypocrite who used to go around always condemning fellow Sikhs of blasphemy this and blasphemy that. Turning brother against brother. Inventing new terms like saying AKJ are Ram Raiyas. I don't agree with AKJ either, but I don't go around acting with a 'holier than thou' attitude passing judgment on everyone who I'm not in agreement with. It's not that a Sikh has converted to Islam, but the thing that really annoys me is to see such a judgmental hypocrite like you condemning every one of heresy and blasphemy to actually leave Sikhi and convert to another religion. Such two-facedness and hypocrisy!

Sad thing is, I remember how many fellow Sikhs would actually also support you in condemning Sikh personalities and Shaheeds of our history. Let this hypocrite be a lesson to all Sikhs here. Don’t just get impressed by someone who writes in flashy fancy words against your own brothers. We need to learn to live and accept our minor differences, and not act like the Spanish (or in this case, Portuguese) inquisition.

I have made my point, and this will me my last post on this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SHAHJI

There is no doubt that an Afghan ruler coming into an Indian town to kill, rape and loot is a horrible crime, but it doesn't have the characteristics of a genocide or the holocaust.

What do you call killing of around 90% of the population of Sikhs by the Mughals/Afghans? From many lakhs to just around 11,000 at one stage. Is that genocidal enough for you?

Behind the deceitful talk of tolerance of others those who consider Mahâdîn to mean the Prophet (pbuh) are in fact nothing but Islamophobes.

That fact is that even if the verse had used Mohammed instead of Mahdeen you would have used some other wordplay in order to defend your prophet. What you find difficult is that there are people who do not see your prophet through the rose tinted glasses that you do. Contrary to your assertion that the massacres of Muslim invaders were against the teachings of Islam, they were clearly in line with the teachings of Mohammed. If rape occurred then it was easy to find justification through Mohammed who allowed his followers to rape captured women. I can paste the relevant hadiths but no doubt you will claim that it is a sunni hadith and you do not believe in it. The fact is that just as you claim that the hadith is not reliable, millions of Muslims throughout history have trusted this hadith and acted upon it. If you want to base your view about whether Islam was spread by the sword or not on your own personal version of Islam then that is a matter for you and your conscience. The relevant thing is that the Muslims who took part in the rape and pillage believed that they were following their prophet's example. They laid their trust in hadiths that justified their actions.

The reason why the Catholic Church recognized its guilt in the crimes against humanity in Latin America is due to the fact that through many bulls from the Pope it has authorized Spain and Portugal to introduce slavery on the basis that black people and Native Americans had no soul.

Sunnism doesn't have a central authority, nor does Shi'ism have. When Muslim rulers committed massacres they did so WITHOUT the approval of a central religious authority because it simply doesn't exist in Islam. Furthermore in Islam the laws about war are very clear and not open to interpretation. The killing and rape of innocent civilians is forbidden in Islam. If "Muslims" rulers did so , it was not a religious act, rather a sin. The fact that some court historians and poets embellished their deeds doesn't make them more acceptable or Islamic.

The justification is there in the hadiths. The need for the papal bull was because the new testament contained the opposite of what the papal bull espoused. The fact that the bulls were needed clearly shows that these bulls were needed to convince the people who were to go and enslave the peoples of the Americas that their actions had been justified by the representative of God on Earth. In Islam there was no need for such bulls because anyone who had studied the Quran and Hadiths knew that it was justified to enslave non-Muslims. If millions were enslaved and taken to the Muslim lands so much so that the mountains in Afghanistan are called the Hindu Kush (killer of the Hindus), then the justification is there through Mohammed having allowed his followers to take slaves. You can write all you want and present Mohammed as some kind of Buddha figure spreading love and peace but the facts paint a different picture.

Your presentation of the spread of Islam by these invaders as only some kind of looting expedition shows just how little you know about your new found religion. Part of the attraction of Islam to the first Muslims was the prospect of loot in this life and a orgiastic life in heaven should they die in the pursuit of that loot. The attraction of loot and the bandit mentality is clear to see in all the hadiths that relate to Mohammed's life in Medina. Even after his death it was the fact that his daughter Fatima could not get a part of Mohammed's loot in the form of land from one of the Caliphs that led to the schism in Islam. The invasions of the Arabs, Turks and Afghans were just a continuation of the career of Mohammed in attacking non-Muslims lands in order to take loot, slaves and commit rape.

Whereas the Catholic church could easily accept guilt because in these enlightened times they understand that the bulls were totally out of line with the teachings of Jesus, the Islamic world cannot condemn the actions of the Ghaznis, Ghoris and Abdalis because that would mean they would also have to condemn the actions of Mohammed as well.

Maybe this thread should be split as the arguments for Mahdeen being allogorical have been exhausted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will now leave and pray for your souls whilst you continue your cheap personal attacks for lack of real arguments.

kind regards

Bahadur Ali Shah

There is no need for you to pray for our souls; you need to pray for your kith and kin that obviously as a vast majority are alien to your “lost world of Atlantis†dreams. :wink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting that Mahadeen gets another mention, this time in "Brahma Avtar": (line 140)

ਭਾਗ

भाग

CHAUPAI

ਅਥ ਰਘੁ ਰਾਜਾ ਕੋ ਰਾਜੁ ਕਥਨੰ ॥

अथ रघु राजा को राजु कथनं ॥

Now begins the description of he rule of the king Raghu

ਚੌਪਈ ॥

चौपई ॥

CHAUPAI

ਬਹੁਰ ਜੋਤ ਸੋ ਜੋਤ ਮਿਲਾਨੀ ॥ ਸਭ ਜਗ ਐਸ ਕ੍ਰਿਆ ਪਹਿਚਾਨੀ ॥ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਰਘੁਰਾਜ ਰਾਜੁ ਜਗ ਕੀਨਾ ॥ ਅਤ੍ਰ ਪਤ੍ਰ ਸਿਰ ਢਾਰ ਨਵੀਨਾ ॥੧੩੫॥

बहुर जोत सो जोत मिलानी ॥ सभ जग ऐस क्रिआ पहिचानी ॥ स्री रघुराज राजु जग कीना ॥ अत्र पत्र सिर ढार नवीना ॥१३५॥

The light of everyone merged in supreme light; and this activity continued in the world; the king Rahghu ruled over the world and wore new arms, weapons and canopies.135.

ਬਹੁ ਭਾਂਤ ਕਰਿ ਜੱਗਿ ਪ੍ਰਕਾਰਾ ॥ ਦੇਸ ਦੇਸ ਮਹਿ ਧਰਮ ਬਿਥਾਰਾ ॥ ਪਾਪੀ ਕੋਈ ਨਿਕਟਿ ਨ ਰਾਖਾ ॥ ਝੂਠ ਬੈਨ ਕਹੂ ਭੂਲ ਨ ਭਾਖਾ ॥੧੩੬॥

बहु भांत करि ज्गि प्रकारा ॥ देस देस महि धरम बिथारा ॥ पापी कोई निकटि न राखा ॥ झूठ बैन कहू भूल न भाखा ॥१३६॥

He performed several types of Yajnas and spread the religion in all the countires; he did not allow any sinner to stay with him and never uttered falsehood, even through oversight.136.

ਨਿਸਾ ਤਾਸ ਨਿਸਨਾਥ ਪਛਾਨਾ ॥ ਦਿਨਕਰ ਤਾਹਿ ਦਿਵਸ ਅਨਮਾਨਾ ॥ ਬੇਦਨ ਤਾਹਿ ਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਕਰਿ ਲੇਖਾ ॥ ਦੇਵਨ ਇੰਦ੍ਰ ਰੂਪ ਅਵਰੇਖਾ ॥੧੩੭॥

निसा तास निसनाथ पछाना ॥ दिनकर ताहि दिवस अनमाना ॥ बेदन ताहि ब्रहम करि लेखा ॥ देवन इंद्र रूप अवरेखा ॥१३७॥

The nigh considered him as moon and the day as sun; the Vedas considered him as "Brahm" and the gods visualized him as Indra.137.

ਬਿੱਪਨ ਸਭਨ ਬ੍ਰਹਸਪਤ ਦੇਖਯੋ ॥ ਦੈਤਨ ਗੁਰੂ ਸ਼ੁਕ੍ਰ ਕਰਿ ਪੇਖਯੋ ॥ ਰੋਗਨ ਤਾਹਿ ਅਉਖਧੀ ਮਾਨਾ ॥ ਜੋਗਨ ਪਰਮ ਤੱਤੁ ਪਹਿਚਾਨਾ ॥੧੩੮॥

बि्पन सभन ब्रहसपत देखयो ॥ दैतन गुरू शुक्र करि पेखयो ॥ रोगन ताहि अउखधी माना ॥ जोगन परम त्तु पहिचाना ॥१३८॥

All the Brahmins saw in him the god Brihaspati and the demons as Shukracharya; the ailments looked at him as medicine and the Yogis visulised in him the supreme essence.138.

ਬਾਲਨ ਬਾਲ ਰੂਪ ਅਵਰੇਖਯੋ ॥ ਜੋਗਨ ਮਹਾਂ ਜੋਗ ਕਰਿ ਦੇਖਯੋ ॥ ਦਾਤਨ ਮਹਾਂ ਦਾਨ ਕਰਿ ਮਾਨਯੋ ॥ ਭੋਗਨ ਭੋਗ ਰੂਪ ਪਹਚਾਨਯੋ ॥੧੩੯॥

बालन बाल रूप अवरेखयो ॥ जोगन महां जोग करि देखयो ॥ दातन महां दान करि मानयो ॥ भोगन भोग रूप पहचानयो ॥१३९॥

The children saw him as a child and the Yogis as the supreme Yogi; the donors saw in him the supreme Donor and the pleasure seeking persons considered him as a Supreme Yogi.139.

ਸੰਨਿਆਸਨ ਦੱਤ ਰੂਪ ਕਰਿ ਜਾਨਯੋ ॥ ਜੋਗਨ ਗੁਰ ਗੋਰਖ ਕਰਿ ਮਾਨਯੋ ॥ਰਾਮਾਨੰਦ ਬੈਰਾਗਨ ਜਾਨਾ ॥ ਮਹਾ ਦੀਨ ਤੁਰਕਨ ਪਹਚਾਨਾ ॥੧੪੦॥

संनिआसन द्त रूप करि जानयो ॥ जोगन गुर गोरख करि मानयो ॥रामानंद बैरागन जाना ॥ महा दीन तुरकन पहचाना ॥१४०॥

The Sannyasis considered him as Dattatreya and the Yogis as Guru Gorakhnath; the Bairagis considered him as Ramanand and the Muslims as Muhammad.140

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Be nam-e Khoda

Matheen wrote:

nteresting that Mahadeen gets another mention, this time in "Brahma Avtar": (line 140)

ਭਾਗ

भाग

CHAUPAI

ਅਥ ਰਘੁ ਰਾਜਾ ਕੋ ਰਾਜੁ ਕਥਨੰ ॥

अथ रघु राजा को राजु कथनं ॥

Now begins the description of he rule of the king Raghu

ਚੌਪਈ ॥

चौपई ॥

CHAUPAI

ਬਹੁਰ ਜੋਤ ਸੋ ਜੋਤ ਮਿਲਾਨੀ ॥ ਸਭ ਜਗ ਐਸ ਕ੍ਰਿਆ ਪਹਿਚਾਨੀ ॥ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਰਘੁਰਾਜ ਰਾਜੁ ਜਗ ਕੀਨਾ ॥ ਅਤ੍ਰ ਪਤ੍ਰ ਸਿਰ ਢਾਰ ਨਵੀਨਾ ॥੧੩੫॥

बहुर जोत सो जोत मिलानी ॥ सभ जग ऐस क्रिआ पहिचानी ॥ स्री रघुराज राजु जग कीना ॥ अत्र पत्र सिर ढार नवीना ॥१३५॥

The light of everyone merged in supreme light; and this activity continued in the world; the king Rahghu ruled over the world and wore new arms, weapons and canopies.135.

ਬਹੁ ਭਾਂਤ ਕਰਿ ਜੱਗਿ ਪ੍ਰਕਾਰਾ ॥ ਦੇਸ ਦੇਸ ਮਹਿ ਧਰਮ ਬਿਥਾਰਾ ॥ ਪਾਪੀ ਕੋਈ ਨਿਕਟਿ ਨ ਰਾਖਾ ॥ ਝੂਠ ਬੈਨ ਕਹੂ ਭੂਲ ਨ ਭਾਖਾ ॥੧੩੬॥

बहु भांत करि ज्गि प्रकारा ॥ देस देस महि धरम बिथारा ॥ पापी कोई निकटि न राखा ॥ झूठ बैन कहू भूल न भाखा ॥१३६॥

He performed several types of Yajnas and spread the religion in all the countires; he did not allow any sinner to stay with him and never uttered falsehood, even through oversight.136.

ਨਿਸਾ ਤਾਸ ਨਿਸਨਾਥ ਪਛਾਨਾ ॥ ਦਿਨਕਰ ਤਾਹਿ ਦਿਵਸ ਅਨਮਾਨਾ ॥ ਬੇਦਨ ਤਾਹਿ ਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਕਰਿ ਲੇਖਾ ॥ ਦੇਵਨ ਇੰਦ੍ਰ ਰੂਪ ਅਵਰੇਖਾ ॥੧੩੭॥

निसा तास निसनाथ पछाना ॥ दिनकर ताहि दिवस अनमाना ॥ बेदन ताहि ब्रहम करि लेखा ॥ देवन इंद्र रूप अवरेखा ॥१३७॥

The nigh considered him as moon and the day as sun; the Vedas considered him as "Brahm" and the gods visualized him as Indra.137.

ਬਿੱਪਨ ਸਭਨ ਬ੍ਰਹਸਪਤ ਦੇਖਯੋ ॥ ਦੈਤਨ ਗੁਰੂ ਸ਼ੁਕ੍ਰ ਕਰਿ ਪੇਖਯੋ ॥ ਰੋਗਨ ਤਾਹਿ ਅਉਖਧੀ ਮਾਨਾ ॥ ਜੋਗਨ ਪਰਮ ਤੱਤੁ ਪਹਿਚਾਨਾ ॥੧੩੮॥

बि्पन सभन ब्रहसपत देखयो ॥ दैतन गुरू शुक्र करि पेखयो ॥ रोगन ताहि अउखधी माना ॥ जोगन परम त्तु पहिचाना ॥१३८॥

All the Brahmins saw in him the god Brihaspati and the demons as Shukracharya; the ailments looked at him as medicine and the Yogis visulised in him the supreme essence.138.

ਬਾਲਨ ਬਾਲ ਰੂਪ ਅਵਰੇਖਯੋ ॥ ਜੋਗਨ ਮਹਾਂ ਜੋਗ ਕਰਿ ਦੇਖਯੋ ॥ ਦਾਤਨ ਮਹਾਂ ਦਾਨ ਕਰਿ ਮਾਨਯੋ ॥ ਭੋਗਨ ਭੋਗ ਰੂਪ ਪਹਚਾਨਯੋ ॥੧੩੯॥

बालन बाल रूप अवरेखयो ॥ जोगन महां जोग करि देखयो ॥ दातन महां दान करि मानयो ॥ भोगन भोग रूप पहचानयो ॥१३९॥

The children saw him as a child and the Yogis as the supreme Yogi; the donors saw in him the supreme Donor and the pleasure seeking persons considered him as a Supreme Yogi.139.

ਸੰਨਿਆਸਨ ਦੱਤ ਰੂਪ ਕਰਿ ਜਾਨਯੋ ॥ ਜੋਗਨ ਗੁਰ ਗੋਰਖ ਕਰਿ ਮਾਨਯੋ ॥ਰਾਮਾਨੰਦ ਬੈਰਾਗਨ ਜਾਨਾ ॥ ਮਹਾ ਦੀਨ ਤੁਰਕਨ ਪਹਚਾਨਾ ॥੧੪੦॥

संनिआसन द्त रूप करि जानयो ॥ जोगन गुर गोरख करि मानयो ॥रामानंद बैरागन जाना ॥ महा दीन तुरकन पहचाना ॥१४०॥

The Sannyasis considered him as Dattatreya and the Yogis as Guru Gorakhnath; the Bairagis considered him as Ramanand and the Muslims as Muhammad.140

Thank you Matheen for bringing this up. The "mahâdîn turkan pahcânâ" is quite amazing. The text is saying that "Turks" recognized king Raghu, the founder of the Raghuvmashya clan, as "Mahâdîn".

Given the fact that:

- the hypothetical king Raghu lived several centuries before the Prophet (pbuh)

- that Turks didn't even exist as a nation back then

- that here Raghu-Maâdpin is praised for spreading dharma yet in Bachitar Natak is accused of the same old Islamophobic stereotypes

I beg to find any consistence in line with the claim of divine revelation.

(Don't try the age old "contradictions and abrogation in Quran" trick, it works with Sunnis only)

What did I learn from this thread?

a. That the majority of Sikhs are Islamophobes

b. That shaheediyan and tonyhp32 know Portuguese and Spanish history better than the Portuguese and Spanish academics themselves without knowing a word of Portuguese, Spanish, Arabic or Latin. It doesn't matter because as Xylitol told us...

c. "brahmgianis know all languages", which of course enables them to decide that

d. Abu Huraira's hadiths are authentic even though he was one of the main ennemies of the Prophet (pbuh) and persecuted Ahl ul Bayt (as).

e. I also learned that words such as holocaust can be twisted to mean anything when used by Indians

f. It's ok to attack a person using outdated personal information when one doesn't have arguments. Very honourable indeed!

I thank you for the precious pearls of wisdom from Atlantis and leave this topic for good.

kind regards

Bahadur Ali Shah

Ya Saheb e Zaman (ajf)

YA_MAHDI.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Matheen for bringing this up. The "mahâdîn turkan pahcânâ" is quite amazing. The text is saying that "Turks" recognized king Raghu, the founder of the Raghuvmashya clan, as "Mahâdîn".

No, it isn't. It's clear enough for an unpar like myself to understand, surely a PhD should have no problem......

I see you didn't reply to my earlier post where I showed that Mohammed was, in fact, consdered a king. The cold must be getting to you, brother.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, I know I had said I had finished here, but:

I have to say that BAS takes the term unscrupulous to new heights.

The Brahma Avatar quote is referring to how various schools/sects see the divine in their said founder/leader, what the hell has chronology got to do with that!

So, BAS’s summery:

1 – He finds that the majority of 23m odd Sikhs are Islamaphobic based on his discussion with what is probably the least viewed and probably most unpopular Sikh website, and the obvious Islamaphobic comments of ‘one’ poster. Excellent statistal analysis.

2 – He thinks one needs to know the language of a country which has committed heinous crimes, in order to truly understand facts which have been recorded and translated in every language world over. In particular, a Sikh needs to know Persian/Arabic to understand the atrocities that ‘some†evil Islamic based rulers committed on his ancestors.

3 – That Sikhs twist words which have evolved from their original root, meaning to ‘burn many people’ to what most people (inc educated) today consider to mean the destruction of a large populace, and denying the fact that the 2 great recorded holocausts nearly wiped out the entire Sikh population, were nothing more than our imagination.

Bravo and good riddance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SHAHJI

You're becoming a caricature. Just as we can know of Spanish and Portuguese history which being able to speak Spanish or Portuguese so can you know Sikh history without knowing much Punjabi.

The fact that your minority branch of Islam doesn't trust Abu Huraira is not relevant to the discussion. It was the Sunni branch that spread Islam with the sword in India so their view of the reliability of Abu Huraira is what is important and not the Shia view. If he persecuted the ahl u bayt it doesn't mean that he was unreliable, the majority of Mohammed's companions supported the Sunni version of the succession. Maybe in your version of Islam, Abu Huraira may be viewed as an enemy of Mohammed but the Sunnis don't see it that way. Therefore a majority of the Muslims view him as reliable. Your views are perhaps coloured by his subsequent non-support of the Shias.

Killing 90% of a people is holocaust no matter how lightly you take it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...