# Why Mahmud of Ghazni attacked Somnath?



## Ali.009

*Why Mahmud of Ghazni attacked Somnath?​*
*THE RAJPUT ERA ENDS*

The end of the Rajput era created the beginning of the Muslim era in India. Dr. Smith says that this became so prominent that the centuries from the death of Harsha to the Mohammedan conquest of Hindustan, extending in round numbers from the middle of the seventh century to the close of the twelfth century, was the Rajput era . This is 500 years of Hindu rule. This is one of the few periods of history when Hindus ruled India.

On the eve of the Arab invasion of Sind (712 A.D: Quaid-e-Azam said that this is the day the Pakistan movement began in India), Chandrapida, the grandson of Durlabhavardhan was the ruler of the Korkot (Kashmir ) kingdom The most powerful king was Muktipida Lalitadya, brother and successor of Chandrapida. He was a great conqueror, and is said to have conquered Punjab, Dardistan and Kabul.

​
Mahmud of Ghazni made two attempts between 1015-1021 to conquer Kashmir, but was unsuccessful. Mahmud of Ghazni attacked temples in the subcontinent because the temples were the seats of political power. The Brahaman priests kept all knowledge to themselves. They kept all knowledge away from the population, locked up in temples (including the knowledge to build the temple). To destroy the political and military power of the city, the temple had to be destroyed. Since the high priest controlled the populations, they had to be defeated. The temples also contained all knowledge of the area. Mohammed Ghauri was the founder of the Muslim empire in India (1173 A.D). The slave dynasty lasted from 1206-1290. The Khilji dynasty lasted from 1290-1320. The Tughlaq dynasty lasted from (1320-1412). In 1304 Ibin-e-Batuta visited visited China through Kashmir. The Syed and Lodhi dynasty lasted from 1413-1526. During the reign of the sultans of Delhi the Khokars had established themselves between Lahore and Ghazni on the Southern border of Kashmir.



> The most irksome and fearsome thing, that the Hindu can conjure, in his mind is a repeat of the fall of &#8221;Somanath&#8221; which happened a thousand years ago at the hands of Mahmud of Ghazni.
> 
> Somanath was a religious city, in the heartland of the new faith called, Brahmanism, in the lands of the naghar&#8217; Brahmans. The Brahmans were the creators of the Devanagri script though modified from our Indus script, taken from our universities of Taxila. The city of bahman nih,
> mis called, Brahmanabad was located in the Kathiwar peninsula near the sea shore. The Hindu Brahmans lived off its bounty. The shrine was endowed with the income of ten thousand villages. This income wealth was not enough for them, so they had convinced the poor, pagan, and primitive people of the lands of Hindh that the idol of Somanath had the power to transmigrate their souls when they died, in a better, and richer, person, when they were re born. So everyone in his or her lifetime had to contribute way beyond their meansto please the idol with gold and jewels which the idol loved the best.
> 
> The edifice was built, and stood on 56 pillars of teak wood in a huge compound, with the entrance gates made of solid sandal wood. The teak wood was inlaid with lead. The inner hall of the dome was massive. It was dark inside to create the required aura and awe in the minds of the primitive . For light effect bejewelled chandeliers hung in the right places and gave it the right look.





> Near the idol was a chain of solid gold weighing (as per the Brahmans 200 maunds) which was connected with the bells. The chain was pulled at times to awake the sleeping Brahmans to come to duty a thousand at a time.
> During the ongoing and continuous show 500 of the most beautiful damsels well versed in all manner of things danced in shifts. The number of 500 female dancers remained constant who danced to the musicians around the clock. All this was done to please the idol made out of stone and hung in space with a magnetic field all around it. This was the ultimate magic.
> All this pomp and show ended when Sultan Mahmud came and took away the gates as well as the idol with him. Though the idol was broken in four pieces. The first piece was sent to Mecca to be placed under the entrance door of the Kaaba. The second piece was placed under the entrance to the prophets mosque in Medina. The third at the entrance of the great mosque of Ghuzznih, and the last piece at the entrance of the royal palace in Ghuzznih (Ghazni).
> According to &#8216;Romila Thapar, an Indian historianin her book, &#8220;the history of India; vol i, on pages 232-233, she writes:
> &#8220;the effects of destruction of somanath are etched in the generations of all Hindu Brahmanic, mindset. They shudder from the day when the a revival of Islam takes place. All efforts for the Hindu is focused on this endevour. The bud whenever it grows must be
> crushed before it blossoms into a flower and the aroma leads the Muslim on a new &#8221;jihad&#8217;
> 
> *The most irksome and fearsome thing, that the Hindu can conjure, in his mind is a repeat of the fall of the idol worshipers so any trick or treachery is not unlawful for them, as long as the end is justified. The eventual fate of the Brahman idol worshipper rests with Allah. Do what they may &#8216;Time&#8217; is an infinity before &#8221;&#8217;ALLAH&#8221;, a fact which the limited mind of the Brahman fails to
> perceive.*


----------



## Flintlock

Erm....you got the location of Somnath wrong - its in Gujarat, not Andhra. 

The Somnath in Andhra is different.

BTW - what's with your love for "rupeenews"?


----------



## daredevil

Flintlock said:


> Erm....you got the location of Somnath wrong - its in Gujarat, *not Andhra*.
> 
> The Somnath in Andhra is different.
> 
> BTW - what's with your love for "rupeenews"?



The map shows Somanth in Karnataka .

This tells us about the quality of news from 'rupeenews', complete propaganda BS site. Looks like some body took the job on behalf of 'rupeenews' to spread it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Always Neutral

Ali.009 said:


> *Why Mahmud of Ghazni attacked Somnath?​*
> 
> ​



WHY DOES IT LIE WITH ALLAH ? WHY NOT WITH JESUS OR CHARLIE CHAPLIN ?

REGARDS


----------



## Flintlock

daredevil said:


> The map shows Somanth in Karnataka .
> 
> This tells us about the quality of news from 'rupeenews', complete propaganda BS site. Looks like some body took the job on behalf of 'rupeenews' to spread it.



Oops...I meant Karnatak....dunno why my fingers typed andhra 

Rupeenews is a trash site...


----------



## Vinod2070

I think the Afghans and Arabs are paying a small fraction of the grave sins committed against humanity. 

No sin can go unpunished. They and their supporters are bound to get the favour returned.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Vinod2070

daredevil said:


> The map shows Somanth in Karnataka .
> 
> This tells us about the quality of news from 'rupeenews', complete propaganda BS site. Looks like some body took the job on behalf of 'rupeenews' to spread it.



A trash site for trash minds.


----------



## Vinod2070

> WASHINGTON (CNN) &#8212; *Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo's campaign stood by his assertion that bombing holy Muslim sites would serve as a good "deterrent" to prevent Islamic fundamentalists from attacking the United States, his spokeswoman said Friday.
> 
> "This shows that we mean business," said Bay Buchanan, a senior Tancredo adviser. "There's no more effective deterrent than that. But he is open-minded and willing to embrace other options. This is just a means to deter them from attacking us."*
> 
> On Tuesday, Tancredo warned a group of Iowans that another terrorist attack would "cause a worldwide economic collapse." IowaPolitics.com recorded his comments.
> 
> *"If it is up to me, we are going to explain that an attack on this homeland of that nature would be followed by an attack on the holy sites in Mecca and Medina," *Tancredo said. "That is the only thing I can think of that might deter somebody from doing what they would otherwise do. If I am wrong, fine, tell me, and I would be happy to do something else. But you had better find a deterrent, or you will find an attack."
> 
> Tom Casey, a deputy spokesman for the State Department, told CNN's Elise Labott that the congressman&#8217;s comments were "reprehensible" and "absolutely crazy." Tancredo was widely criticized in 2005 for making a similar suggestion.
> 
> &#8211;CNN Associate Producer Lauren Kornreich



CNN Political Ticker: All politics, all the time Blog Archive - Tancredo: Threaten to bomb Muslim holy sites in retaliation - Blogs from CNN.com

There are extremists in every religion. Only followers of one religion seem to idolize them. What they don't realize is they are bringing a bad name to their faith by such actions. All claims of peaceful and tolerance sound so hollow when some people support such evil.

Most Americans denounced what Tom Tancredo said. Most Muslims idolize the evil Ghazni. They are the reasons for the perceptions of Islam the world over.

No need to get surprised by why so many people associate Muslims with terror. The reason is people like these!


----------



## Ali.009

Flintlock said:


> BTW - what's with your love for "rupeenews"?




Whats you'r love for BBC? CNN? 

And for all crying souls, map might be faulty, but the history is not. Stop crying about a stupid map.

-Regards


----------



## Flintlock

Ali.009 said:


> Whats you'r love for BBC? CNN?
> 
> And for all crying souls, map might be faulty, but the history is not. Stop crying about a stupid map.
> 
> -Regards



Well, if they got something as simple as a map wrong - which means that they cannot tell Gujarat from Karnataka - what's the guarantee that the rest of the article has anything worth reading in it? 

Oh, and we are comparing "rupeenews" to BBC are we?


----------



## Goodperson

Earth is rotating and revolving hence perhaps Somnath Temple must have been shifted to Nicobar by now.


----------



## shrivatsa

wow Somanath is near my house!! I dint know that


----------



## genmirajborgza786

Always Neutral said:


> WHY DOES IT LIE WITH ALLAH ? WHY NOT WITH JESUS OR CHARLIE CHAPLIN ?
> 
> REGARDS


 

It has nothing to do with islam but it might be a mind set of a particular group of Muslims. As a Canadian muslim i can assure you that Islam & Hinduism are two great religions. We
(the majority of the muslims of the world, at large) respect it. We also believe that Islam and Hinduism can co-exist side by side. I grew up in jeddah a city very close to Makkah in Saudi Arabia and there I along with many of my Saudi/arab friends had many Hindu friends. Some are even our best friends. See in India it is Indian nationalism and in Pakistan it is Pakistani nationalism (with due respect to both these great countries) do not represent Islam in anyway what so ever.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## daredevil

genmirajborgza786 said:


> It has nothing to do with islam but it might be a mind set of a particular group of Muslims. As a Canadian muslim i can assure you that Islam & Hinduism are two great religions. We ( the majority of the muslims of the world, at large) respect it. We also believe that Islam and Hinduim can co-exist side by side. I grew up in jeddah a city very close to Makkah in Saudi Arabia and there I along with many of my Saudi friends had many Hindu friends. Some are even our best friends.See in India it is Indian nationalism and in Pakistan it is Pakistani nationalism (with due respect to both these great countries) do not represent Islam in anyway what so ever.



Well, I have nothing against Islam/Muslims. I come from a place (Hyderabad, India), where almost 40% of them are muslims. So, I have a lot of muslim friends and I can understand and distinguish between a fanatic and a normal person.
Anyways, nice to know you and your views. Cheers.


----------



## Flintlock

Well, the destruction of Somnath was indeed a very traumatic event, especially for Gujaratis. 

Its one of the reasons for the continuing communal strife in that state for many centuries.


----------



## third eye

Ali.009 said:


> Whats you'r love for BBC? CNN?
> 
> And for all crying souls, map might be faulty, but the history is not. Stop crying about a stupid map.
> 
> -Regards



It is posible that there may have been an error as far as the map is concerned, but what was the aim of starting a thread like this ?

To educate us on history ( thank you we already know it & are suffering its consequences) , to show pseudo superiority ( this too does not exist), to stoke a fire whose embers don't seem to die ( we don't need it) , to live or glorify the past ( a reality check is needed & we need to move on) , ' time pass" or to update viewers on skills / results of internet surfing ?

Is it necessary to re open old wounds ? If so , to what avail ? Would you like to view pictures of Niazi surrendering in Dhaka or Pak troops collecting their dead from Kargil believe me there will be no errors in the maps ?

Move on .. there is more to life.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Ali.009

third eye said:


> It is posible that there may have been an error as far as the map is concerned, but what was the aim of starting a thread like this ?
> 
> To educate us on history ( thank you we already know it & are suffering its consequences) , to show pseudo superiority ( this too does not exist), to stoke a fire whose embers don't seem to die ( we don't need it) , to live or glorify the past ( a reality check is needed & we need to move on) , ' time pass" or to update viewers on skills / results of internet surfing ?
> 
> Is it necessary to re open old wounds ? If so , to what avail ? Would you like to view pictures of Niazi surrendering in Dhaka or Pak troops collecting their dead from Kargil believe me there will be no errors in the maps ?
> 
> Move on .. there is more to life.



India - a country investing heavily arming rebels inside pakistan, some of them just confessed lately. A country who has war with all of its neighbours, a country, whose foreign policy is to achieve 'akhand bharat'.

History is for learning, and india should learn what happened in the past, n if shes not going to change the hostile attitude, history can repeat itself. Muslims, a minority, rule'd over hinuds for 1000 years, this was only because they are superior to them.


----------



## Flintlock

Ali.009 said:


> India - a country investing heavily arming rebels inside pakistan, some of them just confessed lately. A country who has war with all of its neighbours, a country, whose foreign policy is to achieve 'akhand bharat'.
> 
> History is for learning, and india should learn what happened in the past, n if shes not going to change the hostile attitude, history can repeat itself. Muslims, a minority, rule'd over hinuds for 1000 years, this was only because they are superior to them.



Come and Get it ! 

I hear that the Somnath Temple has been rebuilt. Wanna have go at it?

Here's a pic so you can recognize it when you get there:

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## third eye

Ali.009 said:


> India - a country investing heavily arming rebels inside pakistan, some of them just confessed lately. A country who has war with all of its neighbours, a country, whose foreign policy is to achieve 'akhand bharat'.
> 
> History is for learning, and india should learn what happened in the past, n if shes not going to change the hostile attitude, history can repeat itself. Muslims, a minority, rule'd over hinuds for 1000 years, *this was only because they are superior to them.*




You are educating Indians on Indian history ! 

It would be a lot better to learn from your own mistakes ( EP, Kargil, Coups, instability, bankruptcy,poor foreign policy.. to name a few, the world is even worryin about a " failed state" !).

Which country in our region does not have probs with its land neighbours ? Pak - with India & afghans, BD - with India & Burma. Afghans even opposed Pak entry in the UN back in the late 40's. No one wants a " akhand Bharat", its only Pol rehetoric..thank God for the partition ( only it was done ham handedly), can you imagine the taliban knocking on the gates of Delhi ? You are welcome to them & the results of all what was sown. Dispel this thought..

The portion highlighted above is the stupidest line I have read on this forum, speaks of the maturity level ...less said the beter.

After surrendering 93,000 POWs & lost half your country it is amazing how anyone can think this way !! Relax.."that" part of hisory will & can never repeat itself.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Vinod2070

> Muslims, a minority, rule'd over hinuds for 1000 years, this was only because they are superior to them.



If it is so, why did the Europeans rule over all the Muslim world? Why are the Israelis running roughshod over Arabs who enjoy 50-100 times numerical superiority over them?

Various civilizations have risen and fallen over the history. Muslims had nothing superior about themselves, it was just a cycle of history and that has passed.

Anyway people like you were victims of Arab terror and brutality. If you are not an Arab, you were a victim. If you are, then you are a Zaalim.

Just by converting you don't become an Arab. Go to Arab countries to find out why they treat Non-Arab Muslims as second class.

Because they know more than you that it was imperialism and nothing else. Every imperialist needs a cloak to hide the real reasons, for Europeans it was the 'White Man's burden' and the spread of their "superior culture" or "rule of law" for the people "without law", for Arabs it was done in the name of Islam.

There was no difference between the two and the perpetrators know it, even if the victims don't!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## EagleEyes

> Anyway people like you were victims of Arab terror and brutality. If you are not an Arab, you were a victim. If you are, then you are a Zaalim.



Is there something that Arabs have done to you or your past generations. I just can't stop laughing with all the posts you made in this thread.


----------



## Vinod2070

WebMaster said:


> Is there something that Arabs have done to you or your past generations. I just can't stop laughing with all the posts you made in this thread.



Well, the topic of the thread gives a hint!

You may laugh and I feel good if my posts at least served the purpose of entertaining someone. 

On a serious note, you may like to see the contents of that entire post and give a more thorough response than that. Would be good to know what you find wrong in my assertion that the spread of Islam was a ruse for Arab imperialism like the spread of rule of law or their culture was for Europeans.


----------



## Flintlock

Vinod2070 said:


> Well, the topic of the thread gives a hint!
> 
> You may laugh and I feel good if my posts at least served the purpose of entertaining someone.
> 
> On a serious note, you may like to see the contents of that entire post and give a more thorough response than that. Would be good to know what you find wrong in my assertion that the spread of Islam was a ruse for Arab imperialism like the spread of rule of law or their culture was for Europeans.



That's actually an interesting interpretation, but it would naturally not find many takers among muslims. 

The rise of Islam may be considered as Arab imperialism while it still expanding outside Arabia.
Once it had established itself in neighbouring regions and overpowered the native cultures, like Iran, North Africa, through Afghanistan into Central Asia and east into Hindustan, Arabs were no longer the standard bearers of the new religion.
Increasingly the Turks, Mongols, Afghans and other Central-Asian tribes who adopted Islam were responsible for its rapid expansion. 

Considering that it has changed very little in the 1400 years of its existence, Islam remains true to its Arabic origins. All muslims pay homage to Mecca, they must learn Arabic, wear the typically Arab garb (the all-covering garments originally meant to protect against the heat and sandstorms of the desert).

However, a large portion of the development of Islamic culture occured in Iran. The Iranians were master builders and craftsmen, and unless I'm badly mistaken, the typical design of the mosque was developed in Iran. The Iranians built domes like no other people on earth, and its safe to assume that the Islamic dome was first conceived in Iran.

Also, the fact that Islam has supplanted the indigenous cultures in non-Arab lands, means that the muslims in these parts consider the arrival of Islam as the beginning of their way of life (i.e. a positive thing). They have forgotten obviously, the destruction which had to necessarily take place in order to create the new order. History, as we know now, is usually written by the victors. 

In places like India, Spain etc., where the Islamic conquerors did not manage to convert the majority to their faith, these conquerors are portrayed negatively as destructive fundamentalists who tried to wipe out their way of life. 

Both viewpoints are correct, obviously. Whether Mehmud of Ghazni was a villain or a hero depends on what your identity is.

The reality is that he was a conquerer, motivated partly by his greed for wealth and power, and partly by his zeal to establish his worldview(i.e. religion) as far and wide as he possibly could.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Vinod2070

Flintlock said:


> That's actually an interesting interpretation, but it would naturally not find many takers among muslims.
> 
> The rise of Islam may be considered as Arab imperialism while it still expanding outside Arabia.
> Once it had established itself in neighbouring regions and overpowered the native cultures, like Iran, North Africa, through Afghanistan into Central Asia and east into Hindustan, Arabs were no longer the standard bearers of the new religion.
> Increasingly the Turks, Mongols, Afghans and other Central-Asian tribes who adopted Islam were responsible for its rapid expansion.
> 
> Considering that it has changed very little in the 1400 years of its existence, Islam remains true to its Arabic origins. All muslims pay homage to Mecca, they must learn Arabic, wear the typically Arab garb (the all-covering garments originally meant to protect against the heat and sandstorms of the desert).
> 
> However, a large portion of the development of Islamic culture occured in Iran. The Iranians were master builders and craftsmen, and unless I'm badly mistaken, the typical design of the mosque was developed in Iran. The Iranians built domes like no other people on earth, and its safe to assume that the Islamic dome was first conceived in Iran.
> 
> Also, the fact that Islam has supplanted the indigenous cultures in non-Arab lands, means that the muslims in these parts consider the arrival of Islam as the beginning of their way of life (i.e. a positive thing). They have forgotten obviously, the destruction which had to necessarily take place in order to create the new order. History, as we know now, is usually written by the victors.
> 
> In places like India, Spain etc., where the Islamic conquerors did not manage to convert the majority to their faith, these conquerors are portrayed negatively as destructive fundamentalists who tried to wipe out their way of life.
> 
> Both viewpoints are correct, obviously. *Whether Mehmud of Ghazni was a villain or a hero depends on what your identity is.*
> 
> The reality is that he was a conquerer, motivated partly by his greed for wealth and power, and partly by his zeal to establish his worldview(i.e. religion) as far and wide as he possibly could.



Agreed mostly. The "Islamic" architecture is mostly the Persian one and the Iranians do pride themselves immensely on being culturally superior than the Arabs and the resentment against the Arabs remains strong.

In fact the birth of the Shia sect is considered by many Sunni Muslims to be an expression of the same resentment. Some go so far as to claim that it was a conspiracy to weaken Islam from within and my understanding is that such views still have many takers.

Well, even Hitler was a hero to many in his time. Once people saw the reality, even Germans accepted him for what he was, a bloodthirsty dictator who caused much grief all over Europe and the world. Now there are few Germans who consider him hero and the Germans have been successful to a large degree in getting rid of the stigma.

Sadly it has not happened in the case of Ghazani and so many others like him. As long as people like him represent the faith and remain heroes of the religion, I don't see much chances of reconciliation and peace. It is not that a religion had such people, it is the fact that such people are considered the standard bearers of the faith that promotes the hatreds and suspicions that we see all around.


----------



## Flintlock

Vinod2070 said:


> Agreed mostly. The "Islamic" architecture is mostly the Persian one and the Iranians do pride themselves immensely on being culturally superior than the Arabs and the resentment against the Arabs remains strong.



Perhaps the Shia-Sunni rivalry could be considered, to some extent, an expression of the hostility between the Arabs and the Persians, but the fundamental theological differences remain nonetheless. 

A large section of the Iranian "elite" or "westernized" population do resent the imposition of Islam, and they consider the earlier Zoroastrian culture as the "true" Iranian culture. 
However, the fact is that the vast majority of Iranians do remain very orthodox in their views. 



> In fact the birth of the Shia sect is considered by many Sunni Muslims to be an expression of the same resentment. Some go so far as to claim that it was a conspiracy to weaken Islam from within and my understanding is that such views still have many takers.



Well, I feel that the main reason for the resentment is theology, since Muslims consider the precise details of their religion to be exact and unchangeable, and any contradiction in these matters is seen as a blow to the very foundation of this infallibility.



> Well, even Hitler was a hero to many in his time. Once people saw the reality, even Germans accepted him for what he was, a bloodthirsty dictator who caused much grief all over Europe and the world. Now there are few Germans who consider him hero and the Germans have been successful to a large degree in getting rid of the stigma.



The difference here is that Hitler lost, and the Allied forces were able to push through their worldview in the end. 

If Hitler had won, however, like Mehmud of Ghazni won, then it is quite probable that we would all regard him as a great hero today. 




> Sadly it has not happened in the case of Ghazani and so many others like him. As long as people like him represent the faith and remain heroes of the religion, I don't see much chances of reconciliation and peace. It is not that a religion had such people, it is the fact that such people are considered the standard bearers of the faith that promotes the hatreds and suspicions that we see all around.



As I said, the victors write history, but it is indeed sad (and at the same time, inevitable) that ruthless conquerers like Ghazni have been declared as role models in the Islamic world. 
It is not only true for Islam. In most countries, and most cultures, the great conquerors are celebrated as heroes. Alexander the Great, Napoleon the Great, William the Conquerer, etc. etc are all celebrated heroes in their native lands. It is another matter however, that they may well be reviled in the lands that they conquered.

The notable exception being India, of course, where people who embraced peace and tolerance like Mahavira, Buddha, Ashoka and Gandhi are usually given the highest pedestal.


----------



## must7

*Gandhi are usually given the highest pedestal*

Flintlock .. Ghanhiji was involved in so many scams that one cannot even fathom writing but still he is praised & talked about in India .. his own land ! I will not even go into the subject of Ashoka as he is dear to you religiously (I suppose so).

Hence, I would request people living in glass houses not to throw stones at others !


----------



## GunMan

Ali.009 said:


> India - a country investing heavily arming rebels inside pakistan, some of them just confessed lately. A country who has war with all of its neighbours, a country, whose foreign policy is to achieve 'akhand bharat'.
> 
> History is for learning, and india should learn what happened in the past, n if shes not going to change the hostile attitude, history can repeat itself. Muslims, a minority, rule'd over hinuds for 1000 years, this was only because they are superior to them.



yes,muslims ruled in India for 1000yrs.
But why should any pakistani feel so proud about it??
None of them were of pakistani origin.
Let me ask you, how many of those muslim rulers were of punjabi origin or sindhi origin?? The answer is none.

Starting from Mahmud of Ghazni and Mohammed Ghauri to Sher shah suri were all of Afgan origin .

Then came the Moghuls with Babur who was a direct descendant of Timur through his father, and a descendant also of Genghis Khan through his mother.Alas,this time also the the fellow wasnt a pakistani,but of central asian origin, whose dynasty ruled major part of india till rise of maratha and followed by the Britishers..

If remove ur religious blinkers and start reading history again u would know,its todays pakistani punjababi and sindhi populous who become first victims of the Afgan/Arab invaders who not only enslaved them for centuries to come but also destroyed their religion and culture for ever.They turned them to different kind of ppl.

Takshashila Taxila)who was once an important Vedic Hindu and Buddhis centre of learning for centuries is now Rawalpindi , HQ pakistan Army,defender of pakistan aganist a hindu India.

So what about this crap ...feeling real proud that "we muslim ruled u for 1000yr"...rubbish.

Did the Bengali muslim of East pakistan,now now known as Banladesh let u rule,let alone feel proud in name of muslim ummah??NO,not even in a democractic set up.

Will the Arab or Afgans consider muslims of pakistan as their own kind,when in ur opinion, together with them you ruled us for 1000yrs???
No the real fact is that pakistani didnt rule ,but were ruled just like rest of india by the OTHERS. 

My intention isnt to offend any one ,but to express my opinion and understandings.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## must7

*Let me ask you, how many of those muslim rulers were of punjabi origin or sindhi origin?? The answer is none.*
*Starting from Mahmud of Ghazni and Mohammed Ghauri to Sher shah suri were all of Afgan origin .*

Gunman & the Indian clan (for thanking his post), being such a huge history specialist, I would like to ask you why is Pakistani only made up of Punjabi & Sindhi Origins ?

Why you seem to very happily forget the Pushtoon, Balochi & the Muslim immigrants who left everything in India to join Pakistan.

When you talk about Mahmud Ghaznavi / Ghauri & Babur .. well they were all Pushtoon .. Pushtoon's are divided due to the Durand line otherwise Afghan or Pakistani it is the same tribe / race.

So what's the case ? Pakistan consists of Pushtoon .. than why should we not be proud of ourselves to be called the last light of Islamic rule over the sub-continent. When Bhadur Shah Zafar was buried in Burma (now Myanmar) he still stayed Bhadur Shah Zafar .. he did not become a Burmese !

*If remove ur religious blinkers and start reading history again u would know,its todays pakistani punjababi and sindhi populous who become first victims of the Afgan/Arab invaders who not only enslaved them for centuries to come but also destroyed their religion and culture for ever.They turned them to different kind of ppl.*

Victims ! hahaha ..what a word ... I am sure you must have read this terminolgy on a Hinduvta website which again would not even allow open view of it's posters ! If they were victims than surely all these people would have changed their names & religion long before in the time of the British who use to give preference to people converting to Christianity .. No all these people stood against Congress & the British Raj to fight for a seperate Muslim country aka Pakistan.

*Did the Bengali muslim of East pakistan,now now known as Banladesh let u rule,let alone feel proud in name of muslim ummah??NO,not even in a democractic set up.*

Why have you forgotten .. we did rule up to 1971 ! why is it no enough ? i.e; nearly 24 years .. After that we had the Indian proxy war against the reputation of PA and it ended up in a major fiasco due to political games manship of Bhutto & Mujib ... but here it had nothing to do with Islam. Here the english have a very good saying which applies to you ... "you are comparing bananas with bringles" !

*Will the Arab or Afgans consider muslims of pakistan as their own kind,when in ur opinion, together with them you ruled us for 1000yrs???
No the real fact is that pakistani didnt rule ,but were ruled just like rest of india by the OTHERS. 

My intention isnt to offend any one ,but to express my opinion and understandings. *

Wrong my dear .. in govt. employment in the GCC states (let alone Saudi Arabia) preference is given on the following basis for professional jobs :-

1. Locals
1. Western.
2. Arabs or Muslims.
3. Christians (followers of the book).
4. Hindus.

I was quite bemused at your last sentence, and would refrain from commenting on the hollow substance on which it is based on !


----------



## GunMan

must7 said:


> *Let me ask you, how many of those muslim rulers were of punjabi origin or sindhi origin?? The answer is none.*
> *Starting from Mahmud of Ghazni and Mohammed Ghauri to Sher shah suri were all of Afgan origin .*
> 
> Gunman & the Indian clan (for thanking his post), being such a huge history specialist, I would like to ask you why is Pakistani only made up of Punjabi & Sindhi Origins ?
> 
> Why you seem to very happily forget the Pushtoon, Balochi & the Muslim immigrants who left everything in India to join Pakistan.
> 
> When you talk about Mahmud Ghaznavi / Ghauri & Babur .. well they were all Pushtoon .. Pushtoon's are divided due to the Durand line otherwise Afghan or Pakistani it is the same tribe / race.
> 
> So what's the case ? Pakistan consists of Pushtoon .. than why should we not be proud of ourselves to be called the last light of Islamic rule over the sub-continent. When Bhadur Shah Zafar was buried in Burma (now Myanmar) he still stayed Bhadur Shah Zafar .. he did not become a Burmese !
> 
> *If remove ur religious blinkers and start reading history again u would know,its todays pakistani punjababi and sindhi populous who become first victims of the Afgan/Arab invaders who not only enslaved them for centuries to come but also destroyed their religion and culture for ever.They turned them to different kind of ppl.*
> 
> Victims ! hahaha ..what a word ... I am sure you must have read this terminolgy on a Hinduvta website which again would not even allow open view of it's posters ! If they were victims than surely all these people would have changed their names & religion long before in the time of the British who use to give preference to people converting to Christianity .. No all these people stood against Congress & the British Raj to fight for a seperate Muslim country aka Pakistan.
> 
> *Did the Bengali muslim of East pakistan,now now known as Banladesh let u rule,let alone feel proud in name of muslim ummah??NO,not even in a democractic set up.*
> 
> Why have you forgotten .. we did rule up to 1971 ! why is it no enough ? i.e; nearly 24 years .. After that we had the Indian proxy war against the reputation of PA and it ended up in a major fiasco due to political games manship of Bhutto & Mujib ... but here it had nothing to do with Islam. Here the english have a very good saying which applies to you ... "you are comparing bananas with bringles" !
> 
> *Will the Arab or Afgans consider muslims of pakistan as their own kind,when in ur opinion, together with them you ruled us for 1000yrs???
> No the real fact is that pakistani didnt rule ,but were ruled just like rest of india by the OTHERS.
> 
> My intention isnt to offend any one ,but to express my opinion and understandings. *
> 
> Wrong my dear .. in govt. employment in the GCC states (let alone Saudi Arabia) preference is given on the following basis for professional jobs :-
> 
> 1. Locals
> 1. Western.
> 2. Arabs or Muslims.
> 3. Christians (followers of the book).
> 4. Hindus.
> 
> I was quite bemused at your last sentence, and would refrain from commenting on the hollow substance on which it is based on !



I'm no specialist in history.Infact its never among the subjects i studied in college.

But u seem to like rewriting history where Babur becomes a pashtun.yes,ofcourse rest of moughall emperors everyone up to Bhadur Shah Zafar too become pashtuns now.


I am wonder why!!
Is it because u have some pastun populatin,but no significant Uzbek or Tajik population who Moghuls actully were, to denominate them as pakistani too??


Coming Afgan/pashtuns,the whole world knows what Afgan people think of Durand line and Balochistan.

In pakistan, there are Pushtoon, Balochi who live along with Punjabi & Sindhi population.

Like pakistan,some pashtuns live in Indid(the khans) too because there are the desendants of the Afgan invaders who ruled parts indian subcontinet.

Now tell me how many ppl of punjabi & sindhi origin live in todays Afganistan???

Answer to ur article lies in above question about who ruled who.

Also u should read about some real ppl of ancient punjabi & sindhi origin(The ROMA ppl) who are now found in many parts of Europe.


----------



## anand

must7 said:


> ....................When you talk about Mahmud Ghaznavi / Ghauri & *Babur* .. well they were all *Pushtoon* .. Pushtoon's are divided due to the Durand line otherwise Afghan or Pakistani it is the same tribe / race.......................



When did Babur change his nationality, I believe he was a direct descendant of Timur through his father, and a descendant also of Genghis Khan through his mother.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Vinod2070

Even Mahmud Ghaznavi was not a Pushtun. He was of Turkish origin.



> *Lineage*
> 
> *Mahmud belonged to the Yamini tribe, a Turco-Persian clan residing in the Nakhistan district of Turkestan*. The Yamini tribe were the descendants of the last prince of Persia, Yazdgard i Shahryar, whose family fled to Turkestan after his death.[3]



Good for the Pushtuns!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## must7

*I am wonder why!!
Is it because u have some pastun populatin,but no significant Uzbek or Tajik population who Moghuls actully were, to denominate them as pakistani too??


Coming Afgan/pashtuns,the whole world knows what Afgan people think of Durand line and Balochistan.*

& What do you think of the Pushtoon people ethnic, What ? They are a mix of old Romans, Uzbek, Mongols (why Genghis khan did not loose his son in the area of Bamiyan while conquering it !) & Turk (Bukhara & Samarkand, present day Uzbekistan & Turkmenistan) ..

The the present day Pushtoon are the mix of the above .. hence, I am quite surprised that you even try to not accept that !

Coming to your second part of the thing .. Why would the Afghan people think anything about Balochistan ? Can you advise me their link with Balochistan ?

*Like pakistan,some pashtuns live in Indid(the khans) too because there are the desendants of the Afgan invaders who ruled parts indian subcontinet.*

In India there are two types of Khans / Pathans .. :-

1. Dissendents.
2. Khan / Pathan was also a title of bravery which was given by the Mughal courts. Just like the title of Malik which was actually given by the British.


----------



## Cheeta

The tale of Somnath had a different grossly image also. Mahmud of Ghazni had some divination to assault the temple which was on a long journey to him. He had called up all his force and they all prayed and fasted before the resolute journey to be made. There was going on a vulgar practice in the temple which had changed into a great centre of enforced joymaking in the name of religion. Many well known heads or chiefs of clans had their daughters living in the temple to serve the priests. It is told that many Hindus who were forced to carry on the custom and did possess honour had approached the Mahmud of Ghazna. At last the time was ripe and he got on his way to the task. 
There is no doubt about that Mahmud did love wealth and treasure and had collected a lot from different places but in this case he was offered with immense wealth by the joint priests of Somnath which he denied and making the distruction of the temple made the evil practices vanish. This was all not just to break the idol of Hindus but breaking that did break all the evil institution attached to that.


----------



## donrahul

^^ A link would do good to the interesting angle of that news!


----------



## third eye

Cheeta said:


> The tale of Somnath had a different grossly image also. *Mahmud of Ghazni had some divination *to assault the temple which was on a long journey to him. He had called up all his force and they all prayed and fasted before the resolute journey to be made. There was going on a vulgar practice in the temple which had changed into a great centre of enforced joymaking in the name of religion. Many well known heads or chiefs of clans had their daughters living in the temple to serve the priests. It is told that many Hindus who were forced to carry on the custom and did possess honour had approached the Mahmud of Ghazna. At last the time was ripe and he got on his way to the task.
> There is no doubt about that Mahmud did love wealth and treasure and had collected a lot from different places but in this case he was offered with immense wealth by the joint priests of Somnath which he denied and making the distruction of the temple made the evil practices vanish. This was all not just to break the idol of Hindus but breaking that did break all the evil institution attached to that.



My word.. amazing !!

Going by this acceptance & anology, would the demolition of Babri Masjid be ok ? Or.. are there some other rules for that ?

Whats the source of this gyan ?

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Smooth Operator

In 1000 AD Mahmud defeated Raja Jaipal, a scion of the Hindu Shahiya dynasty of Kabul. This dynasty had been for long the doorkeeper of India in the Northwest. Mahmud collected 250,000 dinars as indemnity. That perhaps was normal business of an empire builder. But in 1004 AD he stormed Bhatiya and plundered the place. He stayed there for some time to convert the Hindus to Islam with the help of mullahs he had brought with him.

In 1008 AD he captured Nagarkot (Kangra). The loot amounted to 70,000,000 dirhams in coins and 700,400 mans of gold and silver, besides plenty of precious stones and embroidered cloths. In 1011 AD he plundered Thanesar which was undefended, destroyed many temples, and broke a large number of idols. The chief idol, that of Chakraswamin, was taken to Ghazni and thrown into the public square for defilement under the feet of the faithful. According to Tarikh-i-Yamini of Utbi, Mahmud's secretary,

"The blood of the infidels flowed so copiously [at Thanesar] that the stream was discolored, notwithstanding its purity, and people were unable to drink it. The Sultan returned with plunder which is impossible to count. Praise he to Allah for the honor he bestows on Islam and Muslims."

In 1013 AD Mahmud advanced against Nandana where the Shahiya king, Anandapal, had established his new capital. The Hindus fought very hard but lost. Again, the temples were destroyed, and innocent citizens slaughtered. Utbi provides an account of the plunder and the prisoners of war:

"The Sultan returned in the rear of immense booty, and slaves were so plentiful that they became very cheap and men of respectability in their native land were degraded by becoming slaves of common shopkeepers. But this is the goodness of Allah, who bestows honor on his own religion and degrades infidelity."

The road was now clear for an assault on the heartland of Hindustan. In December 1018 AD Mahmud crossed the Yamuna, collected 1,000,000 dirhams from Baran (Bulandshahar), and marched to Mahaban in Mathura district. Utbi records:

"The infidels...deserted the fort and tried to cross the foaming river...but many of them were slain, taken or drowned... Nearly fifty thousand men were killed."

Mathura was the next victim. Mahmud seized five gold idols weighing 89,300 missals and 200 silver idols. According to Utbi, "The Sultan gave orders that all the temples should be burnt with naptha and fire, and levelled with the ground." The pillage of the city continued for 20 days. Mahmud now turned towards Kanauj which had been the seat of several Hindu dynasties. Utbi continues: "In Kanauj there were nearly ten thousand temples... Many of the inhabitants of the place fled in consequence of witnessing the fate of their deaf and dumb idols. Those who did not fly were put to death. The Sultan gave his soldiers leave to plunder and take prisoners."

The Brahmins of Munj, which was attacked next, fought to the last man after throwing their wives and children into fire. The fate of Asi was sealed when its ruler took fright and fled. According to Utbi, ".... the Sultan ordered that his five forts should be demolished from their foundations, the inhabitants buried in their ruins, and the soldiers of the garrison plundered, slain and captured".

Shrawa, the next important place to be invaded, met the same fate. Utbi concludes:

"The Muslims paid no regard to the booty till they had satiated themselves with the slaughter of the infidels and worshipers of sun and fire. The friends of Allah searched the bodies of the slain for three days in order to obtain booty...The booty amounted in gold and silver, rubies and pearls nearly to three hundred thousand dirhams, and the number of prisoners may be conceived from the fact that each was sold for two to ten dirhams. These were afterwards taken to Ghazni and merchants came from distant cities to purchase them, so that the countries of Mawaraun-Nahr, Iraq and Khurasan were filled with them, and the fair and the dark, the rich and the poor, were commingled in one common slavery."

Mahmud's sack of Somnath is too well-known to be retold here. What needs emphasizing is that the fragments of the famous Sivalinga were carried to Ghazni. Some of them were turned into steps of the Jama Masjid in that city. The rest were sent to Mecca, Medina, and Baghdad to be desecrated in the same manner.

Mahmud's son Masud tried to follow in the footsteps of his father. In 1037 AD he succeeded in sacking the fort of Hansi which was defended very bravely by the Hindus. The Tarikh-us-Subuktigin records: "The Brahmins and other high ranking men were slain, and their women and children were carried away captive, and all the treasure which was found was distributed among the army."

Masud could not repeat the performance due to his preoccupations elsewhere. 


*Looks like a common thief to me,reminds of some scenes from the Schindler's list.*

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Flintlock

^As disgusting as these descriptions are, they were written by the conquerors themselves.


----------



## Vinod2070

Flintlock said:


> ^As disgusting as these descriptions are, they were written by the conquerors themselves.



The tragedy is that such people are the ones that are considered to be the examples to follow and holy men by far too many.

This is the kind if person that our neighboring country names it's missiles after! The person who is revered as "but shikan par excellence"!

When the same people then talk of peace and tolerance, it becomes a bit difficult to swallow!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cheeta

third eye said:


> My word.. amazing !!
> 
> Going by this acceptance & anology, would the demolition of Babri Masjid be ok ? Or.. are there some other rules for that ?
> 
> Whats the source of this gyan ?



Ofcourse if there is carried out some in-humane task in a mosque I shall assist you to demolish. Indian monks demolished Babri Mosque which is one of the greatest mistakes done in history. Aurangzeb Alamgir is heard of demolishing some temples which were also unwisely and cost the empire a slavery but not is the case of Mahmud of Ghazna. Study Hindu History and conclude yourself.


----------



## Cheeta

must7 said:


> *I am wonder why!!
> & What do you think of the Pushtoon people ethnic, What ? They are a mix of old Romans, Uzbek, Mongols (why Genghis khan did not loose his son in the area of Bamiyan while conquering it !) & Turk (Bukhara & Samarkand, present day Uzbekistan & Turkmenistan) ..
> 
> The the present day Pushtoon are the mix of the above .. hence, I am quite surprised that you even try to not accept that !
> 
> Coming to your second part of the thing .. Why would the Afghan people think anything about Balochistan ? Can you advise me their link with Balochistan ?
> 
> Like pakistan,some pashtuns live in India
> 
> 
> 
> Iranians are Aryans and this part of the country including Kabul is the province 'Khurasan' of old Persia. These Pushtuns are not Pushtuns as a race but it is just according to the language they speak and is not a proper name. The proper name is Afghan. These live in the hilly and plateau area between Kabul and River Indus. Afghans and Tajiks are basically Iranians and Tajik is given name to those Iranians who live on the Border area with Turks and to defend the country against Turks. Similarly Baluchis are also Persian people who have a slightly different language than Persian. Linguistically Tajiks, Baluch and Pushtun or Afghans are all from the Iranian group. Iranians are told to be Aryans with all these branches of Baluch, Afghan, Tajik and Kurds which are not here. All these branches of Iranians are cut off with the change in the borders of empires and diversity of religion. Afghans preferred the orthodox Islam and naturally got cut off from the western part and remained all about attached to India just like Baluchistan.
> In Pakistan there is some population of Tajiks, Uzbeks, Qirghiz, Turkomans, Hazara and Uighur-Turks but that is scattered and has no considerable geographical area of own. Turkomans, Qirghiz and Uighur are Turks while Hazaras and Uzbeks are Mughals but in greater clan these are also in Turkish group. Hazaras have adopted Persian as their prime language but is mixed with Mogholi words. Uzbek, Turkomans, Uighur and Qirghiz speak their Turkic languages. These are known bigger clans of Turks while there are more Turkic tribes in Afghanistan.
> Changhiz Khan had lost his son in Bamyan province of Afghanistan where there was a battle fought between Sultan Jalaluddin and his son Shegi kutuku. The Mongol army was defeated by the allied force of Turks, Persians and Afghans. When there was the booty being divided, the Iranian chief was hit with a whip by the Turkish commander in the quarrel to own the nice horse of the slain Mongol chief. Then on becoming angry the Iranians broke away from the alliance and then Afghans and having only accompanied by few hundred Turks the Sultan rushed to India where on the bank of Indus the Turks fought to death the mighty force of Changhis and Sultan plunged into the water and got through tht swimming alongwith his horse. Changhiz Khan seeing this turned to his sons and said to them. " Look at him! A father needs a son like him. How will one sleep in peace while an enemy like him lives on the face of earth'.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> *


----------



## JOHN_ab

what do u see in u r friend china


----------



## JOHN_ab

everyone see ghazni as a thief, all of u know how to deal with thief.


----------



## third eye

Cheeta said:


> Ofcourse if there is carried out some in-humane task in a mosque I shall assist you to demolish. *Indian monks demolished Babri Mosque* which is one of the greatest mistakes done in history. Aurangzeb Alamgir is heard of demolishing some temples which were also unwisely and cost the empire a slavery but not is the case of Mahmud of Ghazna. Study Hindu History and conclude yourself.



I have heard the BJP called by many names.. ' Monks' is a new one. I am sure they'll like this one.


----------



## JOHN_ab

oh yes MONKS is a good name. monk is a person who belives in GOD


----------



## JOHN_ab

Hey ,

Y'll why don't u live like good neighbours like US and Canada.
Imagine US and Canada start fighting with each other over piece of land..
will they..never.

live like good neighnbours


----------



## JOHN_ab

No webmaster,

he is just reminding u of Isreal..


----------



## third eye

JOHN_ab said:


> Hey ,
> 
> Y'll why don't u live like good neighbours like US and Canada.
> Imagine US and Canada start fighting with each other over piece of land..
> will they..never.
> 
> live like good neighnbours




Thanx for ur advice.

US & Canada were not born of the same country torn apart like the brits did to Ind / Pak.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Cheeta

There are many answers to your points. 
1--- The Hindu pandits are monks of own religion, if the name is not upto the mark I beg your pardon and rename that again. There is the concept of God in Hinduism also with the name of Param Ishvar and Bhagvan which is the same God Almighty with the name of Allah and Khuda. The difference of religion is in the lesser gods like Vishnu, Durga, Lakshmi and Ram. We credit them also as heroes and heroines but not God.
2--- We have some differences of division and relation with neighbours and fight each other then you give the example of America that has killed almost two million Iraqi civilians other than the warriors. Similar activity is carried on in both Iraq and Afghanistan by the forcibly declining of U.N to the aims of United States. If you have no enmity with your neighbour then you have the free hand to kill people far away nations. 
Do you have the account of many deserted American soldiers who had been nominated to Afghanistan and Iraq fled to Canada considering the mission unjustified. Do you know that.


----------



## must7

donrahul said:


> ^^ A link would do good to the interesting angle of that news!



The Era of internet has only come now and many books are not online available including important biographies.

& at the same time we all know how much neutral Indian history has been. Including the changes which BJP govt. had brought during their time of power.

Here ... you can observe how differences are existing inbetween the Hindu's over coverage of Indian history !

http://www.humanrights-geneva.info/Ideology-clashing-with-history,3922

Ideology clashing with history
UNESCO 

Romila Thapar 15 December 08 - SPECIAL 60th - Early in the decade, a woman raised her voice against Hindu fundamentalism asserting Aryan superiority. And she was heard. Her name: Romila Thapar. The famous Indian historian explains here how spurious identities founded on pseudo-historical arguments affect human rights. Interview. 

Shiraz Sidhva: You have strongly opposed the attempt to use history in support of an ideology of religious nationalism by the right-wing Hindu Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), which was in power from 1998 to 2004. There was an attempt at the time to rewrite Indian textbooks. How does the rewriting of history to endorse recent political ideology affect human rights?

Romila Thapar : Let me clarify here that my fight was against the BJP- led government and the Hindutva view of Indian history, and not against other governments in India. The Hindutva lobby that insisted on the changes in Indian textbooks endorses a Hindu right-wing ultra-nationalism &#8211; often described as Hindu fundamentalism &#8211; and is trying to propagate a revisionist history in classrooms and political discourse. The parent organization in India, known as the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), has a distinctly religious fundamentalist political agenda. The RSS and its political arm, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), gained power defeating moderate secular Indians by exploiting Hindu nationalist sentiments. The RSS has been involved in several high-profile incidents of religiously motivated violence over the last twenty years.

The controversy on my work involved some textbooks I had written for middle schools, where I had talked about the lives of Aryans as we knew it from the Vedic texts. I had mentioned, for instance, that the early Indians ate beef &#8211; the references in the Vedas are clear, and there is archaeological evidence for this. The Hindu right wing extolled the Aryans as the great model society for ancient India, and were opposed to any criticism of them. When they objected to this and other statements of mine, I provided evidence from the texts as proof. But they insisted that children should not be told that beef was eaten in early times. My reaction was that it was historically more correct to explain to school children why in early times beef was eaten, and why later a prohibition was introduced.

Though the attack on me was vicious, I was not the only historian attacked. There were about six of us, who had authored the earlier textbooks, and others who spoke up against the changes in school curriculum and textbooks by the (then) government, made without consulting educational bodies that would normally have been consulted. The government then described us as being anti-Hindu, and therefore anti-Indian, and therefore anti-patriotic, and therefore, traitors.

The deletion of passages from our books and the ban on any discussion of the deleted passages raised a number of issues of various kinds pertaining to the rights of individuals and the ethics of government institutions.

There was also a virulent protest by some Indians living in the United States when the US Library of Congress appointed you as the first Kluge Chair in Countries and Cultures of the South in 2004. What became of these protests and were textbooks revised when the Congress government replaced the Bharatiya Janata Party in New Delhi?

The Library of Congress rejected without any hesitation the demand from the Hindutva lobby, particularly Indians living in the United States, to reverse my appointment, therefore the demand was slowly silenced. The abuse online and through e-mails continued unabated.

When the Congress reclaimed power in 2004, it decided to do away with all the previous textbooks, written by us as far back as the 1960s and 70s, as well as those produced by the BJP government just prior to its fall. A new set of books was commissioned, which are now in use. They are different from the ones we wrote and reflect some of the new interests in history as a discipline, and do not push a Hindutva hard line.

The worrying thing is, what will happen if the Bharatiya Janata Party returns to power in the next election, which will be held within 12 months? Will they change the textbooks again? I worry for the school children who have to be examined in the subject and depend on textbooks.

Once we accept one religious group&#8217;s agenda and beliefs to be taught in the public schools, it opens the door for every other group to do the same thing. As educators, we have to make a distinction between history on the one hand, which involves questioning existing knowledge about the past where necessary, and faith on the other hand, where even myths are acceptable. The two have to be kept separate. The first is the domain of the historian and the second that of the priest.

On a wider international level, many human rights atrocities in recent years have sought to draw legitimacy from history, using the pretext of setting right the wrongs of the past. How can this be avoided?

Political parties today draw heavily on ideology and also on history, because a lot of the current politics is determined by imagined identities &#8211; either imagined racial identities, or imagined religious identities, or whatever the identities may be, there is a construction of identities. They are projected back into the past, but in effect really arise out of concerns of the present. And these imagined identities that go into the making of political ideologies are very likely to grapple with history. The grappling also takes the form of creating the notion of what is believed to be a national culture, THE national culture. This is never questioned, because if you question it, you become a traitor to the nation. And it is usually a single, carefully selected strand from the broader culture which is drawn out and exaggerated, and this facilitates the potential exclusion of some citizens on the basis of either religion or race or language or whatever identity is conveniently within reach. This is very harmful to issues of human rights, because it gives priority to certain groups and their cultures over others.

But isn&#8217;t it a dangerous notion, for those in power to believe they can set right the wrongs of the past?

This is a commonly made claim. We have an example, in the Indian case, where a Hindu political faction led by BJP leaders destroyed the (16th century) Babri Masjid at Ayodhya (in Northern India) in 1992, and claimed that they were avenging Mahmud of Ghazni&#8217;s attack on Somnath (a Hindu temple) and thereby setting right this wrong of the past.

First of all, did it have to take a thousand years before this act (of Ghazni) was avenged if indeed the idea was to avenge it? More important, how did it set right the wrongs of the past? What was the result of the destruction of the Babri Masjid? It made not the slightest difference to our reading of the past. What it did was that it resulted in a massacre of Muslims in (the Western Indian state of) Gujarat, and since then, a continued series of bomb explosions in the major cities of the country. So what is argued as setting right the wrongs of the past cannot be set right in this fashion. And in any case, it&#8217;s a rather silly argument, because the past is that which has happened. It cannot be changed, and therefore, it&#8217;s much more important to set right the wrongs of the present, rather than harping on what might have been the wrongs of the past.

To mark the 60th anniversary of the universal declaration of human rights, the Human Rights Tribune will publish in the month of December a special series of articles linked to the founding text.

Shiraz Sidhva, Indian journalist, The UNESCO Courier, number 9/2008


----------



## donrahul

I see that you have responded with an article, completely irrelevant to the topic at hand. Let me commit the same sin here and point out the greatest irony which is that you had to quote 

"Shiraz Sidhva, *Indian journalist*, The UNESCO Courier, number 9/2008"

An Indian journalist is good enough for this. But not good enough for Mumbai carnage


----------



## must7

donrahul said:


> I see that you have responded with an article, completely irrelevant to the topic at hand. Let me commit the same sin here and point out the greatest irony which is that you had to quote
> 
> "Shiraz Sidhva, *Indian journalist*, The UNESCO Courier, number 9/2008"
> 
> An Indian journalist is good enough for this. But not good enough for Mumbai carnage



I love the way Indians or rather specifically Hindus twist & turn events. I have posted the above link only to show the vast differences which exist over coverage of history of India of Hinduism itself.

So just imagine the vast differences which exists of coverage of Muslims events in India.

I am not saying if the Lady Shiraz Sidhva is right or wrong, it is the difference which I am pointing out.

It is the same difference which we have pointed out including myself over the coverge of Mumbai blast in the following thread .. & if you need to talk about the Mumbai blast .. that it is here you should be writing & not in this thread my Dear :-

http://www.defence.pk/forums/war-terror/18783-who-killed-hemant-karkare-indian-headache.html


----------



## donrahul

I asked for a single solitary source and you had to turn this into something else!!! and givin me homilies on where to post! Uhh.. Regarding homilies, add this one too.. that a link is required when posting a news in forums !


----------



## must7

donrahul said:


> I asked for a single solitary source and you had to turn this into something else!!! and givin me homilies on where to post! Uhh.. Regarding homilies, add this one too.. that a link is required when posting a news in forums !



More twist ! Which section of my posting from other website is lacking a link ? Please elaborate.


----------



## donrahul

read post 49! and this is bloody exasperating.. I am outta this.. Let Mahmud Ghazni be the saviour of the hindu's as you would like to think so. To each his own!


----------



## must7

donrahul said:


> read post 49! and this is bloody exasperating.. I am outta this.. Let Mahmud Ghazni be the saviour of the hindu's as you would like to think so. To each his own!



Stay around .. we have just started the fun ... We are all ears .. here & at the other link which I have provided for your reply on Mumbai attack discripency !

I think you missed out on the link as I have posted it .. & here below is again the link :-
*
http://www.humanrights-geneva.info/I...h-history,3922*


----------



## ahmeddsid

Temples/Churches or Mosques are Not to be Demolished, and should be respected. Remember u are bound to get what you give. Muslim rulers have razed temples, maybe this was why history repeated and mosques are being destroyed worldwide, the latest being the mosque destroyed in the air strike in Palestine. Islam teaches Tolerance not Revenge. Allah Loves those who dont transgress the Boundaries set, it is clearly mentioned in the Quran. Read it sometimes!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## must7

ahmeddsid said:


> Temples/Churches or Mosques are Not to be Demolished, and should be respected. Remember u are bound to get what you give. Muslim rulers have razed temples, maybe this was why history repeated and mosques are being destroyed worldwide, the latest being the mosque destroyed in the air strike in Palestine. Islam teaches Tolerance not Revenge. Allah Loves those who dont transgress the Boundaries set, it is clearly mentioned in the Quran. Read it sometimes!



Well we do know that we are facing the Crusade against our beliefs .. but than we are building many more than the ones which get destroyed by the enemies.

However, what we have seen is that in the past due to our good deeds & just rulers like Ghaznavi, Ghauris, Mughals .. many converted to Islam, no wonder we have such a large population of the world which is Muslim.

In the end we did quite well for a religion which has started spreading just 1,400+ years back !


----------



## ahmeddsid

must7 said:


> Well we do know that we are facing the Crusade against our beliefs .. but than we are building many more than the ones which get destroyed by the enemies.
> 
> However, what we have seen is that in the past due to our good deeds & just rulers like Ghaznavi, Ghauris, Mughals .. many converted to Islam, no wonder we have such a large population of the world which is Muslim.
> 
> In the end we did quite well for a religion which has started spreading just 1,400+ years back !



Yes Islam has spread far and wide and many are still converting by choice and not just because we are offering them food or cash. Thats a Proud achievement. 

My family were Brahmins and we converted some 150 years back. In my state the Hindu rulers were very supportive of Islam and even One ruler Left his Kingdom and set out to Arabia to accept Islam but he died on the way back in Oman. There is a shrine for him in Oman I guess. He was from my state Kerala. Not only that the Oldest mosque in India, was built in My state, By a Hindu Ruler for the Muslims! Isnt that awesome? I wish we all could Live like that again, Indians, Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, all for Peace. No Terrorism, No Wars! What a Life it would be! Insha Allah, will come true one day!

Its not building mosques that matter I feel, its Building FAITH that matters. Islam is on a decline I feel, and all Because of Self Proclaimed Jihadis!!! May God Save us All.


----------



## must7

*He was from my state Kerala. Not only that the Oldest mosque in India, was built in My state, By a Hindu Ruler for the Muslims! Isnt that awesome? I wish we all could Live like that again, Indians, Pakistanis, Bangladeshis, all for Peace. No Terrorism, No Wars! What a Life it would be! Insha Allah, will come true one day!

Its not building mosques that matter I feel, its Building FAITH that matters. Islam is on a decline I feel, and all Because of Self Proclaimed Jihadis!!! May God Save us All.*

Ahmed : Sugam !!

Yes on my last visit to Salalah I missed out on visiting his shrine. I know about this guy, I was given the understanding that he was the first Muslim in the Malabar states. All the Muslim Malyali's would like to pay their homeage this person in Salalah.

Regarding your last para .. Yes I agree 100% with you, but the problem is that they were used by the West to take out the mighty USSR. For other's it is another problem, but just imagine for us Pakistani we have a much bigger problem them you, we have to live with these with Jehadi's and it is not easy!


----------



## rubyjackass

I wonder why I missed this thread. 
Read this too... A report on Pakistan's told history.
Pages 14, 18, 19, 27, 35, 36, 37, 38, 50, 69, 75, 76, 77, 78, 81-88, 89-93, 97-101, 135 first para
from
http://www.sdpi.org/whats_new/report...&TextBooks.pdf






Ali.009 said:


> *Why Mahmud of Ghazni attacked Somnath?​*
> *THE RAJPUT ERA ENDS*
> 
> The end of the Rajput era created the beginning of the Muslim era in India. Dr. Smith says that this became so prominent that the centuries from the death of Harsha to the Mohammedan conquest of Hindustan, extending in round numbers from the middle of the seventh century to the close of the twelfth century, was the Rajput era . This is 500 years of Hindu rule. This is one of the few periods of history when Hindus ruled India.
> 
> On the eve of the Arab invasion of Sind (712 A.D: Quaid-e-Azam said that this is the day the Pakistan movement began in India), Chandrapida, the grandson of Durlabhavardhan was the ruler of the Korkot (Kashmir ) kingdom The most powerful king was Muktipida Lalitadya, brother and successor of Chandrapida. He was a great conqueror, and is said to have conquered Punjab, Dardistan and Kabul.
> 
> ​
> Mahmud of Ghazni made two attempts between 1015-1021 to conquer Kashmir, but was unsuccessful. Mahmud of Ghazni attacked temples in the subcontinent because the temples were the seats of political power. The Brahaman priests kept all knowledge to themselves. They kept all knowledge away from the population, locked up in temples (including the knowledge to build the temple). To destroy the political and military power of the city, the temple had to be destroyed. Since the high priest controlled the populations, they had to be defeated. The temples also contained all knowledge of the area. Mohammed Ghauri was the founder of the Muslim empire in India (1173 A.D). The slave dynasty lasted from 1206-1290. The Khilji dynasty lasted from 1290-1320. The Tughlaq dynasty lasted from (1320-1412). In 1304 Ibin-e-Batuta visited visited China through Kashmir. The Syed and Lodhi dynasty lasted from 1413-1526. During the reign of the sultans of Delhi the Khokars had established themselves between Lahore and Ghazni on the Southern border of Kashmir.



I have some observations and questions...
Somnath is in Gujarath.
By either Sanskrit, Telugu and I guess Bengali also.
The names chandrapida means 'lunar haunt'. Chandra is 'lunar'. 'Pida' is a negative word. Samewith muktipida. means '
Durlabhavardhan certainly means 'useless gift'. Why would a king have that name? So I doubt this version.
And the name dardistan, what does it mean? dard means pain?


----------



## BelligerentPacifist

Maybe its derived from 'dardic', the people around Kashmir, Pakistani and Afghanistani NA and generally along the foot of the Hymalayas.


----------

