RE:URGENT NEWS: Government of Kazakhstan demolishes cottages in Hindu community
by nadeem ahmed on Feb 17, 2007 01:35 PM Permalink
u r only reacting too immature to understand the truth behind the article . Ur intention is to only degrade islam and its pious teaching. Read the book it will make u regret all ur knowledge abt the religion and u will surrender 2 it.
RE:RE:RE:URGENT NEWS: Government of Kazakhstan demolishes cottages in Hindu community
by NAFASAT KHAN on Feb 17, 2007 02:46 PM Permalink
We should be reconciliatry.If there is something objectionable in any religious book,it should be re-interprated.no religion should be allowed to spread hate.all humanbeings are brothers n sisters.Religion should be limited to moral ethics.rest is superstition.
this is the warning to rediff if they do not stop this message board and people abusing the religions and prophet we will not baer and we will file casr against this.
RE:stop this message board immediately
by Praveen Kumar on Feb 17, 2007 01:33 PM Permalink
Hi,
Dont cry , the facts are slowly trickling in. It is history and nothing but the truth. "Aurangazeb" was a monster and are Pakis are his followers and they need Kashmir to be the same.
RE:stop this message board immediately
by Mahesh on Feb 17, 2007 01:32 PM Permalink
y Don't u give explanation to the above article Mr.Syed? B4 getting angry, think the truth behind the article. What abt kashmiri pandit's position?
RE:stop this message board immediately
by saket sharma on Feb 17, 2007 01:26 PM Permalink
i rarely write abt anything posted on rediff before,the reason being most of the time the discussion leads to dirty talks n what not.I mean how cld people be so hateful to each othe r n still want to live together,i feel shameful when i read these msgs posted here,what do ppl think they are some kind of advocate of justice n truth...i mean i have seen ppl calling names to each other,shouting obscenities on their religion n what now....HOW MANY OF YOU HAVE BEEN MISTREATED BY A MUSLIM PERSON..dont go blind becuase of what some fools tell you,believe what u have experienced urself.we all should be ashamed talking abt hindus n muslims here,i thought eduaction brings the best in the ppl,but yeah...it really ruined a lot many minds here. I do agree ,that the tone of this article is surely not right...i mean i am a hindu too,n most of all i am an indian,n knowing abt our rich history is one thing but bringing out stupid conclusions from them is idiotic.I mean like one of the persons wrote we all have to accept that india is as much a land of hindus as muslims n sikhs. What aurangzeb did, y he did,we wld never know.N who dosent leave a stamp of his rule,forget history,i mean most of our bulidings n places in our country do get named after our politicians.let ppl find they resons to learn themselve....do try this,next time when you do feel hatred for one another,just find the most beloved person for you from the other religion,n imagine him being killed out of the same kind of hatred that you have...mite help you feel a lil differnet then...i dont preach,i plead...
RE:RE:stop this message board immediately
by nadeem ahmed on Feb 17, 2007 01:38 PM Permalink
it is people like u who make this country stand united ...i am with u
RE:RE:stop this message board immediately
by Sameer Akotkar on Feb 17, 2007 01:39 PM Permalink
Mr. Sharma ...What you are writing...its so confusing! Please don't away from history.Hatred lies inside man. It depends how you take the incident. Kindly note all hindustani (the name Indian is given by Britishers when we were slaves)including you me and mr. Syed are Hindu by Dharma..may be you are praying any god (i.e religon). Take the comment of syed as thought and go to root cause why muslims don't like to face the facts. All historical writeups (and which are written by mainly muslims and Christans) proves that all major temples are destroyed by muslim rulers and christan rulers.....don't get offended think that how we can reestablish the love between our hindu brothers by reconsturcting monuments...also we can appoint a muslim priest in a temple and a hindu mullaha in a mosque to flourish love
RE:RE:RE:stop this message board immediately
by saket sharma on Feb 17, 2007 01:50 PM Permalink
sameer its all good,n i do appreciate that u wrote ur views preety calmly.Now my only question to you is,y do u want to call them hindus,when they want to be as much a muslim as much as u want to be a hindu. Maybe his family wasnt converted,his ancestors were always a muslim...being indian dosent make us hindu,being indian makes us tolerant...like u said,we mite be brothers,but y shld we be called hindu brothers or muslim brothers...not every hindu was converted...not every hindu was forced,thats y u r a hindu,i am a hindu...their is aslight possibility that some ppl found Islam more appealing at that time ...n i know lots of cruel things happened in past,i mean y talk just abt temples,i mean its like saying you want to fight for the crimes done a 1000 yrs back,a women mite have been raped then,a person wld have been killed then,someone mite have been kidnapped...dont base your views on what happened.....believe me,accept him as muslim....n he wld accept you as a brother....again i still dont preach but plead
RE:RE:RE:RE:stop this message board immediately
by prashant sharma on Feb 17, 2007 02:04 PM Permalink
Saket sharma, are u really a sharma? I really doubt it. secondly your cowardly attitude is shocking and degrading. It is ebacuse of this cowardice only that we remained slaves for centuries. lastly you will realise what *$@* secularism is when muslim mobs will butcher your loved ones one day in a communal riot. And dont think that a civil war is far away, it is very near...just let them reach around 30% to 35% of population. then u wont be found on this website eruditing your 'liberal' views, you would be running for your life!
RE:RE:RE:RE:RE:stop this message board immediately
by saket sharma on Feb 17, 2007 02:15 PM Permalink
yeah prashant,i really am a sharma,as much as you are....you are right ,i mite have degraded n polluted your point of view,but i dont apologise for that....bacause i stand by my views.thanks for noticing that,what a coward I am....but if a mob attacks my family,i wont run,i wld rather try to save them....n prashant,i really hope you some day find a friend who's a muslim...thats all.i really thought a lot before posting here today,that i dont stand a chance when the hatred is so deep down the hearts of people...you are right ,i shld not talk abt my liberal views,because seeing your reply,i really dont stand a chance here....i am sure you have more love to give then i ever will have. Peace n have a great day prashant, saket
RE:stop this message board immediately
by Sameer Akotkar on Feb 17, 2007 01:30 PM Permalink
Namaskara my dear Brother (Hindustani Muslim) Syed.Why you are getting so angry to see the truth. Aurangazeb was a cruel (and no one can raise doubt about it) I am not a politician to hide the truth to get muslim votes. Please note that you are also a hindu (your forfather was hindu by dharma) only you are practicing Islam. So accept the fact that aurangzeb may have forcefully converted your forfather into other religon (i.e Islam) so don't shout accept the fact that you are also a hindu by religon although you are praying 'Allaha'
RE:RE:stop this message board immediately
by Duraisamy mahendran on Feb 17, 2007 01:35 PM Permalink
Really great to see a person accepting a truth, not only eh opposes a muslim. But he speaking practically. I salute u friend.
"ISLAM is the religion of equality, freedom, and peace. "
We all know that this statement should be put infact the straight opposite way and this perhaps is the Worlds'd most abused statement today. How can we even call a cult or bullying machine as a religion in the first place.
I have a question for the organiser of this exhibition. Why is the organiser pointing out the destruction of temples of the then times? If so, why not showing off the faces of millions of hindu who destructed the BABRI Masjid openly. Why not organise something to show who exactly did it? It was done so openly and even supreme court is not able to take the decision. Why the heck is the organiser blaming aurangzeb for destruction of temples of that time. Who know who did it that time, but today we all know who destructed the babri masjid. Why arent they accusing those people then? I need the answer of it. No offenses pls.
RE:why point destruction
by NegiA1 on Feb 17, 2007 01:34 PM Permalink
A wrong deed is a wrong deed, whether in the present or past, u cant close ur eyes to the wrongs done in the past, the destruction of temples and forceful conversions . The organizer is not blaming but getting facts known to people like you who are ignorant.
RE:RE:why point destruction
by nadeem ahmed on Feb 17, 2007 01:54 PM Permalink
It so sad that we indiands are ready to cut each other down by one article from a foreigner which was posted abd written with only one intention and it has come true. WHEN WE WILL WAKE UP TO SUCH PRAPOGANDA. wE ARE voicing our opinion without ourself looking and reading history..READ SIR JADUNATH SARKARS HISTORY OF AURANZEB
RE:why point destruction
by anur ram on Feb 17, 2007 01:24 PM Permalink
The babri masjid was built by destroying hindu temple.Can you point out an instance of destroying any other mosque built on a nuetral site.You feel so bad about one mosque being destroyed, How will a hindu feel when tens of thousnads of his temples at holy sites where ransacked and destroyed by barbarian muslim rulers and invaders.comment on this
RE:Francois Gautier
by NegiA1 on Feb 17, 2007 01:35 PM Permalink
I wonder why we have named the road as "Aurangzeb Road" -- is it again vote bank politics?
RE:RE:Francois Gautier
by nadeem ahmed on Feb 17, 2007 02:20 PM Permalink
Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb: Bad Ruler or Bad History?
By Dr. Habib Siddiqui Posted: 9 Jamad-ul-awwal 1427, 5 June 2006
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 known.
Some of the Hindu historians have accused Aurangzeb of demolishing Hindu Temples. How factual is this accusation against a man, who has been known to be a saintly man, a strict adherent of Islam? The Qur'an prohibits any Muslim to impose his will on a non-Muslim by stating that "There is no compulsion in religion." (surah al-Baqarah 2:256). The surah al-Kafirun clearly states: "To you is your religion and to me is mine." It would be totally unbecoming of a learned scholar of Islam of his caliber, as Aurangzeb was known to be, to do things that are contrary to the dictates of the Qur'an.
Interestingly, the 1946 edition of the history textbook Etihash Parichaya (Introduction to History) used in Bengal for the 5th and 6th graders states: "If Aurangzeb had the intention of demolishing temples to make way for mosques, there would not have been a single temple standing erect in India. On the contrary, Aurangzeb donated huge estates for use as Temple sites and support thereof in Benares, Kashmir and elsewhere. The official documentations for these land grants are still extant."
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) Alexander Hamilton, a British historian, toured India towards the end of Aurangzeb's fifty year reign and observed that every one was free to serve and worship God in his own way.
Now let us deal with Aurangzeb's imposition ofthe jizya tax which had drawn severe criticism from many Hindu historians. It is true that jizya was lifted during the reign of Akbar and Jahangir and that Aurangzeb later reinstated this. Before I delve into the subject of Aurangzeb's jizya tax, or taxing the non-Muslims, it is worthwhile to point out that jizya is nothing more than a war tax which was collected only from able-bodied young non-Muslim male citizens living in a Muslim country who did not want to volunteer for the defense of the country. That is, no such tax was collected from non-Muslims who volunteered to defend the country. This tax was not collected from women, and neither from immature males nor from disabled or old male citizens. For payment of such taxes, it became incumbent upon the Muslim government to protect the life, property and wealth of its non-Muslim citizens. If for any reason the government failed to protect its citizens, especially during a war, the taxable amount was returned.
It should be pointed out here that zakat (2.5% of savings) and %u2018ushr (10% of agricultural products) were collected from all Muslims, who owned some wealth (beyond a certain minimum, called nisab). They also paid sadaqah, fitrah, and khums. None of these were collected from any non-Muslim. As a matter of fact, the per capita collection from Muslims was several fold that of non-Muslims. Further to Auranzeb's credit is his abolition of a lot of taxes, although this fact is not usually mentioned. In his book Mughal Administration, Sir Jadunath Sarkar, foremost historian on the Mughal dynasty, mentions that during Aurangzeb's reign in power, nearly sixty-five types of taxes were abolished, which resulted in a yearly revenue loss of fifty million rupees from the state treasury.
While some Hindu historians are retracting the lies, the textbooks and historic accounts in Western countries have yet to admit their error and set the record straight.
Albalagh Home General Articles Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb: Bad Ruler or Bad History?
No Copyright Notice. All the material appearing on this web site can be freely distributed for non-commercial purposes. Acknowledgement will be appreciated. The audio files may be copied to tapes, etc. for your listening convenience.
RE:RE:RE:Francois Gautier
by on Feb 17, 2007 03:42 PM Permalink
In the first Instance why they invaded India-to serve Hindus? It is clearly mentioned it was a muslim rule-so it was not a benovelent governence-but rule as per your muslim laws! British ruled us with our own people-so can we say they were good-they were dooing good for Hindus-what a flawed conclusion! It is not everybody will change heart if forced by others to change religion-there ere lots of opposition to forced conversions from Hindus and Aurangazeb always had problems in keeping his terretories in tact!So the conclusion that he could have forcefully converted most of Hindus is flawed-only some persons changed colours for personal gains!
RE:A Brief History of the cult
by shaikh yahya ismail on Feb 17, 2007 01:38 PM Permalink
I have a question for the organiser of this exhibition. Why is the organiser pointing out the destruction of temples of the then times? If so, why not showing off the faces of millions of hindu who destructed the BABRI Masjid openly. Why not organise something to show who exactly did it? It was done so openly and even supreme court is not able to take the decision. Why the heck is the organiser blaming aurangzeb for destruction of temples of that time. Who know who did it that time, but today we all know who destructed the babri masjid. Why arent they accusing those people then? I need the answer of it. No offenses pls.
RE:A Brief History of the cult
by Mohammed Zubair on Feb 17, 2007 01:49 PM Permalink
It seems to me that Mr. Narayan has read some article and is not fully equiped with the background. As a matter of fact if you read anything with pre-concieved mind the outcome will be the likes of what Mr Narayan has written about. I really feel sorry for such minds. I pray for enlightment of his mind. Accumulating books and reading books are one thing and understanding it is another.
I have read many books for instance Bhagwat Geeta, Ramayan, Veda etc... although apparently when I read those books I found many flaws in it however I feel I am accessing the same in today's contexts which may not be true/correct. I shall never beat the drums like you.
RE:RE:A Brief History of the cult
by manvendra saxena on Feb 17, 2007 01:55 PM Permalink
wats the basis of all Geeta, Ramayan, and Vedas Mr Mohammed Zubair. tat will tell us all how much you know
History is History. History should not be read with a prejudice in mind. This is an article worthy of reading by Every Muslim and Hindu of this country. The insipid, Spineless Hindus would atleast get a reason for not being so time and again. And the muslims will get a reason to bend their heads low in shame and realize what they did to hindus instead of raising hypocratic voices against the atrocities (mythical) against them.
well its great conservational thing, to discuss which is bad religion which one is good religion, i don%u2019t know about past, what were the realities.. but today%u2019s reality is we ( innocent folks ) are nothing but the puppet of ugly, nasty and selfish politicians. by the way about ISLAM i want to say only one thing. There is only ONE GOD, and every human being is equal. About terrorism, i don%u2019t think so they are fighting for Islam or religion. they are fighting against injustice, what had happened on there people. Nothing but the reaction of actions against them, for eg. Afghanistan, Palestine etc.. and we can not avoid the facts that, in today%u2019s world every day lakhs of non Muslims are converting to Islam obliviously not by force but by their own will.. What do we get from this fact... ISLAM is the religion of equality, freedom, and peace.
want to comment write to me directly : sohailfx@rediffmail.com
RE:truth about aurangazeb
by venkatakrishna reddy on Feb 17, 2007 01:29 PM Permalink
ISLAM is the religion of equality, freedom, and peace! What a stunning statement! Where there is Islam, know the fact that is no peace.
Every day lakhs of non Muslims are converting to Islam! If there is an iota of truth in this, by this time there would have been no other religion.
Sohail exposed his ignorance and possessiveness in particular and Muslims in general. I think he is a student from madrasa. Even his English confirms that fact
RE:truth about aurangazeb
by on Feb 17, 2007 03:59 PM Permalink
The concept of One God itself is Questionable-I am asking 'ONE IS AFTERALL HALF OF TWO', SO IF ONE OGD IS ACCEPTABLE WHY NOT HALF GOD?gOD IS OMNIPOTENT AND OMNIPRESENT - SO WHY DO YOU WANT CONFINE HIM TO ONE.AGAIN WHICH ONE YOU ARE REFERRING-THERE IS ONE TABLE AND ONE CHAIR -BUT ARE THESE NE ARE EQUAL.ONLY FOOLS WILL GO ON PARROTING ONE GOD,ONE GOD.... THINK TANGENTIALLY AND CHANGE YOUR VIEWS. aLSO ISLAM HAS NOT BROUGHT EQUALITY AMONG ALL-IT TREATS WOMEN AS SECONDARY-MIND THEY CONSTITUTE 50% OF POPULATION!AGAIN JEWS AND PEOPLE OF OTHER FAITH ARE NOT HUMANS IN YOUR RELIGION!MAXIMUM SLAVERY IS PRACTICED ONLY IN ISLAMIC COUNTRIES! i PRAY YOUR GOD SAVE YOU ALL ISLAMISTS!!
RE:truth about aurangazeb
by venkatakrishna reddy on Feb 17, 2007 01:32 PM Permalink
ISLAM is the religion of equality, freedom, and peace! What a stunning statement! Where there is Islam, know the fact there is no peace.
Every day lakhs of non Muslims are converting to Islam! If there is an iota of truth in this, by this time there would have been no other religion.
Sohail exposed his ignorance and possessiveness in particular and Muslims in general. I think he is a student from madrasa. Even his English confirms that fact
RE:RE:truth about aurangazeb
by abdul jabbar khan on Feb 17, 2007 02:22 PM Permalink
what do we want now??? should all the muslims be thrown out or slaughtered?? i dont understand it all?!! Alas! Mr. Francois Gautier should name the faith of the person who crucified Jesus? britishers and all the selfish rulers have done enough harm by already dividing the Indians? it's all the conspiracy we need to unfold and be careful of such articles??? Shame for those who discriminate between the tears rolling down the eyes of mourning and screeming mothers and children of jews, muslims, christians and hindus!!! o my people! turn, you, to the peace, love and compassion! because in it lies the better and prosperous future! Jai Hind!
RE:Truth about Islam
by hindustani on Feb 17, 2007 01:37 PM Permalink
Mr Narayan I agree thet u have immense Knowledge about Islamic Conversions but to be honest u need to authenticate Your so called Knowledge. If u have pain for Humanity of past civilizations u can sympthaize to the fact that we have left u as Infidel at Allah's Mercy who is wandering, shouting and crying to prove himself as a slave of 33 crore Gods :)
