Reading the posts of the Indian muslims in this board I feel really sad. Let us face truth as it is. Aurangzeb, Ghazni,Bin Laden all these kind of people stem from one problem i.e fundamental Islam ,WHICH IS EXTREMELY BARBARIC. Mohammed was preaching to a set of different type of people who lived in a different age , with different conditions, very poor ,living in a desert . In all respect to Mohammed, he might be right in what he is preaching to those people. But to carry on those teachings to a diferent age is idiotic. If Islam fails to see this fact, we have a problem. We will end up producing more monsters like this. Indian muslims should pick their ideals in sufi mystics who were born in india and their preaching more appropriate for this land.
RE:RE:Jai Bharat
by saif kashmiri on Feb 17, 2007 09:21 PM Permalink
i do not know who is this benerji but history says aurangzeb was tyrannt and was imposing sharia laws on non muslims.regarding jizza ,its a tax of humilation imposed by muslims on non muslims.go through verse 9:29 to understand meaning of jizzya inislamic terminology
Of all the Muslim rulers who ruled vast territories of India from 712 to 1857 CE, probably no one has received as much condemnation from Western and Hindu writers as Aurangzeb. He has been castigated as a religious Muslim who was anti-Hindu, who taxed them, who tried to convert them, who discriminated against them in awarding high administrative positions, and who interfered in their religious matters. This view has been heavily promoted in the government approved textbooks in schools and colleges across post-partition India (i.e., after 1947). These are fabrications against one of the best rulers of India who was pious, scholarly, saintly, un-biased, liberal, magnanimous, tolerant, competent, and far-sighted.
Fortunately, in recent years quite a few Hindu historians have come out in the open disputing those allegations. For example, historian Babu Nagendranath Banerjee rejected the accusation of forced conversion of Hindus by Muslim rulers by stating that if that was their intention then in India today there would not be nearly four times as many Hindus compared to Muslims, despite the fact that Muslims had ruled for nearly a thousand years. Banerjee challenged the Hindu hypothesis that Aurangzeb was anti-Hindu by reasoning that if the latter were truly guilty of such bigotry, how could he appoint a Hindu as his military commander-in-chief? Surely, he could have afforded to appoint a competent Muslim general in that position. Banerjee further stated: "No one should accuse Aurangzeb of being communal minded. In his administration, the state policy was formulated by Hindus. Two Hindus held the highest position in the State Treasury. Some prejudiced Muslims even questioned the merit of his decision to appoint non-Muslims to such high offices. The Emperor refuted that by stating that he had been following the dictates of the Shariah (Islamic Law) which demands appointing right persons in right positions." During Aurangzeb's long reign of fifty years, many Hindus, notably Jaswant Singh, Raja Rajrup, Kabir Singh, Arghanath Singh, Prem Dev Singh, Dilip Roy, and Rasik Lal Crory, held very high administrative positions. Two of the highest ranked generals in Aurangzeb's administration, Jaswant Singh and Jaya Singh, were Hindus. Other notable Hindu generals who commanded a garrison of two to five thousand soldiers were Raja Vim Singh of Udaypur, Indra Singh, Achalaji and Arjuji. One wonders if Aurangzeb was hostile to Hindus, why would he position all these Hindus to high positions of authority, especially in the military, who could have mutinied against him and removed him from his throne?
Most Hindus like Akbar over Aurangzeb for his multi-ethnic court where Hindus were favored. Historian Shri Sharma states that while Emperor Akbar had fourteen Hindu Mansabdars (high officials) in his court, Aurangzeb actually had 148 Hindu high officials in his court. (Ref: Mughal Government) But this fact is somewhat less k
RE:RE:Rewriting History-
by amit garg on Feb 17, 2007 07:29 PM Permalink
why did your ancestors choosed to live in india after partition,why didnt they move into muslim majority pakistan.BECAUSE they felt they are more safer and happy in india where majority are hindus.You know you Dared not to say these things against ISLAM there..that is beauty of Hinduism
RE:RE:RE:Rewriting History-
by vishal kundnani on Feb 17, 2007 07:38 PM Permalink
You can never live in a Muslim country without being a muslim.
My uncle stays in the UAE, he used to be repeatedly approached by a muslim man and told to convert. After listening patiently for a few months, he told him that he was ready to convert. The muslim man got excited to no end, after all he was going to heaven after death. But my uncle put down a pre-condition, that the muslim man has to become a Hindu first. The man got infuriated to no end.
RE:Rewriting History-
by aravinda bhat on Feb 17, 2007 09:57 PM Permalink
I think this person trying t promote Aurangzeb on some facts,but not TRUTHS.
Lets take 1-by-1.You said,
"For example, historian Babu Nagendranath Banerjee rejected the accusation of forced conversion of Hindus by Muslim rulers by stating that if that was their intention then in India today there would not be nearly four times as many Hindus compared to Muslims, despite the fact that Muslims had ruled for nearly a thousand years"
What logic is this ? Can any ruler can competely go agaisnt the whole society for ALL the time ? If any rulers does so,he will be killed by a mutiny. Also,look at this logic,probably you have heard of this sellign through AMWAY.In that you seel a product to 2 people and that 2 will sell to 2 others,in total 4.So this 4 will sell to 2 more,so total of 8.If this is increasing in powers of 2,just in few minutes it will cross 6 billion and all the people in this world will be covered.If i say so,people ill laugh at my logic.Same over here,the strongness of Hinduism,didnt let happen the conversion in a string manner.If not,given sufficient amount of TIME and long life,Aurangzeb would have converted all Hindus.
And one more,look at the person who said that.Some Banerjee,that means a Bengali, a high chance of he being a COMMUNIST(No harm to BEngali's i mean here).Show me ONE DIFFERENCE between a MUSLIM AND A COMMUNIST.All communist have written FALSE history Glorified Muslims and ruined teh brains of Indians,and see what we are doing....fighting each other.
You also named few HINDUS who were there in his court.Any ruler who attacks another country will take hel of few people,who are called as TRAITORS(I am no talking of artists who depend on king for living,im talking people who help the ruler to gain more region).If you are quoting these trators as heroes of hinduism,you are biggest fool on the world.
Rajay Jaya Singh tricked SHIVAJI(The greatest Hindu,whom you will definetely hate),and was FORCED by Aurangzeb to CONVERT.But everybody knows how SHIVAJI escaped under Aurangzeb's nose and gave him a bitter expereince.
You said, "A stone inscription in the historic Balaji or Vishnu Temple, located north of Chitrakut Balaghat, still shows that it was commissioned by the Emperor himself. The proof of Aurangzeb's land grant for famous Hindu religious sites in Kasi, Varanasi can easily be verified from the deed records extant at those sites. The same textbook reads: "During the fifty year reign of Aurangzeb, not a single Hindu was forced to embrace Islam. He did not interfere with any Hindu religious activities." (p. 138) "
Note the word here,"EMPEROR HIMSELF".Do you think that,he would written scripts like,i converted so many hindus,destryoed so many temples ? Aurangzeb was a gorrible person,but NEVER a FOOL.NO fool will write somethign agaisnt himself.
Please make a note of this.YOu know this being a muslim,still i say this.Quran clearly says, All Kafirs(Those who dont follow ISLAM) should be either converted or KILLED.DOnt dare me say,i am wrong.I will give you the exact verse,where it is said.Dont try to fool,always others.
One last but not least point.When a person can kill his own FATHER and BROTHER for the sake of kingdom,he can goto any extent of CUNNINGNESS to save his kingdom.Dont ever think he admired HINDUS.He wanted some support of traitors,never hindus.No fool can consider that as good-will for other religion.He was always a Horrible person alive in this word and wil lremain so,as long as TRUTH persists.
And one more thing,Muslims are basically Parasite Viruses,who will eat up its OWN HOST.Read HISTORY,you will know,BUT you wont accept it,coz you are one amogst them.
Once again this article & this writer has shown how easy it is to divide these two communities. There are millions of people in this beautiful world & everyone of them has different opinion & different paradigm. If everyone has a single motive of life, that is to live peacefully, then certainly such articles or speeches from some politicians should not make any difference to wise people. I request you all to see this world with eyes wide open & be wise to understand the motive of life. Even this world is beautiful enough to explore & enjoy, whole of your life rather than wasting it behind some wicked motives of some people.
This life is the only & last opportunity for all of us to enjoy itself. So don't waste it in fighting; go grab it and ENJOY!..............
RE:How easily we break !
by kaiser ansari on Feb 17, 2007 07:01 PM Permalink
Abhijit comment about above article is commendable...Let see future rather than go past and get divided!!
RE:RE:How easily we break !
by on Feb 17, 2007 07:12 PM Permalink
Absolutely agree.
1.Lets also see further and not harp or fight about Babri Masjid. I think a grand temple should be build there so that no future generations ever know that a mosque existed and therefore can never fight about it and even if they wanted thay cant go in thhe past and will be always forced to look only in thhe future. 2. And lets also move forward on gujarat. That recent movie was a very bad attempt to make us see past and prevent us from moving into future. I wholeheartedly support all the gujarati cinema owners in their earlier decision to not screen it. I actually hate the guy who produced that movie. He is again takking us back to past and dividing us, which is exactly what we dont want.
RE:RE:Tolerance! A non-existant word in Islam
by vishal kundnani on Feb 17, 2007 07:01 PM Permalink
Why do you condemn me, if you all are true followers of Allah and respect other religions, let me see you condemn these people.
AND READ THIS -
Kazakhstan Update
Dear All,
Please accept my humble obeisances. All Glories to Srila Prabhupada.
Hare Krishna!!
I am sorry for the lack of info that has been reported on the Kazakhstan
issue this last week.
In Delhi it was a slow week. We were trying to meet politicians prior to
thier running off to parliament.Despite the fact that many people are aware
of the issue, the Indian Government has not issued an official statement.
This is primarily due to the composition of the political alliances in the
present government.
In Kazakhstan representatives from the US, UK, and Dutch government met
with the Kazakh Ministry of Foreign Affairs to discuss our issue. Still,
the Kazakh Government is remaining intransient in it's position.
The Kazakh MFA reported that it has received the request of the OSCE, but
state that,"we have been unfortunately too busy to comply."
The devotees are bravely going out on sankirtan for the marathon.
In a letter from a devotee received yesterday it was said:
"Please do not worry about us. We live as before. Everyone is busy
doing his or her service, there is no time to become distracted. Nobody
even notice the ruins any longer. Whatever may come to us in our lives,
Krishna, the spiritual master, Srila Prabhupada, and devotees remain with
us, as they were before and will always be in the future."
Thus, the situation has not improved. We are in need of your prayers and
RE:Mughal Era (Doom for India)
by T a s i n on Feb 17, 2007 07:03 PM Permalink
hey K r- dont spread bullshit allover this place.. go read some good books cleanse ur mind from all the crap
Thx for sharing your views. aap logo ne apne apne dimag se achi achi feki. Dhanyavad. Chalo ab nikal lo apne apne ghar. and Enjoy. Francois Gautier "Aurangjeb Wale"
RE:Aurangzeb: The Most Benevolent of all Mughal Rulers
by T a s i n on Feb 17, 2007 06:43 PM Permalink
I have also read history and am a very open minded person. Aurangzeb was definitley not the kind of ruler which this Mr Fracois 'whatever' is describing. Leave aside history this person's (historian by any chance..huh) choice of words and phrases itself convey that he is more interested in something else but history..
RE:RE:Aurangzeb: The Most Benevolent of all Mughal Rulers
by Dilsy Manoj on Feb 17, 2007 07:35 PM Permalink
Taseen Khe aulad, jane do history kho, kyu hai 99% terrorist muslims???
