What Francois Gautier has written is perhaps true - perhaps not. I don't know. But what I do know is that such articles can provoke passions amongst certain sections of society which are best left untouched. Or worse, vested interests can use such articles and exhibitions, to arouse support or opposition just to further their vested interests- with often violent consequences.
Does that mean we should never talk about these issues. Ofcourse we should. But do it in manner which makes your point without arousing such passions. If the same exhibition also had an equal area devoted to Akbar and his attempts at secularism, or if the same exhibition also showed how the ties between India and Persia helped develop Indian science and maths - perhaps your motives would not be questioned and perhaps your assertions about Aurangzeb would be more convincing as they would not have to pass through the "check-his-motives" filter.
As they say about justice - not only does it need to be fair, it also should appear to be fair.
RE:But why?
by bala sreenivasan on Feb 16, 2007 03:01 PM Permalink
Yours is a typical elitistic response. It reflects the popular mindset nurtured by vote-bank politics. a review of Indian history should be undertaken only after the Muslims give their stamp of approval! wonderful! Here is some vocabularyu currently in currency in India Obscene depiction of Hindu gods through paintings and films- is creative freedom! Fatwas against Salman Rushdie or Tasleema- secular reactions of a devout religious group! Being terrorist friendly- is human right offered by democracy! Godhra-communal frenzy Kashmir-is freedom struggle! Narender Modi-is a communal demon! Afzal Guru-an innocent man found guilty by the judiciary Keep it up, Anuj!
RE:But why?
by Saurav Basu on Feb 16, 2007 03:16 PM Permalink
The arabs copied Indian numericals and zero; and you have the audacity to claim that Indians developed their math through persian sources....Shame on you!
