kobiraaz
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2010
- Messages
- 9,831
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
For those, who dont know him - He was a military general of Qutb ud Din Aybak. He conquered North Bengal in 1203 by defeating Laxman Sen, then died while trying to conquer Tibbet. He is credited with introducing Muslim rule in Bengal.
Generally he is considered a hero for us Bangladeshis. His story of defeating Nadiya with only 17 horsemen has become a part of legend. Famous Bengali Poem by Al Mahmud
না, এখনও সে শিশু। মা তাকে ছেলে ভোলানো ছড়া শোনায়।
বলে, বালিশে মাথা রাখো তো বেটা। শোনো
বখতিয়ারের ঘোড়া আসছে।
আসছে আমাদের সতেরো সোয়ারি
হাতে নাংগা তলোয়ার।
But in recent days his activities are being questioned by secular , non muslim or atheist writers. Though they are limited in numbers, They have significant influence in Bangla blogosphere. They have already established among the sub-conscious mind of online lurkers that Bakhtiyar was a bloodthirsty muslim foreigner who forcefully converted Bengal by spilling blood, murdering innocents and expelling native kings. "He destroyed famous Nalanda university" They took it as an example of his negative persona and creates anti Bakhtiyar thus Anti Islam atmosphere to alienate Islam from our Bengali identity.
Was he really a Villain who disrupted the peaceful Bengal??The only source of destoying Nalanda is from the Tabakat I Nasiri and strangely it doesnt Name Nalanda at all.
Yes, it is true that he destroyed a Bihar and also killed many buddhist monks, but it was done mistakenly. Sri Ramesh Chandra Majumder , in his book " History of Bangladesh" Published from Kolkata wrote that After Sacking of the Bihar the attackers came to know that it was not a Killa but a Bihar. But it is also mentioned that the bihar was another one, not Nalanda.
Khilji mistook bihar as a fort because it looked like a fort. Bihars in the region took shape of forts to ptotect themselves from raids.
Hiuen Tsang wrote in 7th century -
" Moreover, the whole establishment is surrounded by a brick wall, which encloses the entire convent from without. One gate opens into the great college, from which are separated eight other halls standing in the middle (of the Sangharama). The richly adorned towers, and the fairy-like turrets, like pointed hill-tops are congregated together. The observatories seem to be lost in the vapours (of the morning), and the upper rooms tower above the clouds. "
When Hiuen Tsang travelled the length and breadth of India in the 7th century, he observed that his religion was in slow decay and even had ominous premonitions of Nalanda's forthcoming demise.
Moreover, Buddhism was in sharp decline before the arrival of muslims due to Shivaik hostility. According to the historian S. R. Goyal, the decline of Buddhism in India is the result of the hostility of Brahmins. Ruler Shashanka of Gauda destroyed the Buddhist images and Bodhi tree. Nalanda was destroyed twice before Muslims, the university fell upon hard times when it was overrun by the Huns under Mihirakula during the reign of Skandgupta (455-467 AD). But it was restored by his successors. The university was destroyed again by the Gaudas in the early 7th century but was restored again by king Harshvardhana (606-648 AD).
Hiuen Tsang wrote "Sasanka-raja,being a believer in heresy, slandered the religion of Buddha and through envy destroyed the convents and cut down the Bodhi tree (at Buddha Gaya), digging it up to the very springs of the earth; but yet be did not get to the bottom of the roots. Then he burnt it with fire and sprinkled it with the juice of sugar-cane, desiring to destroy them entirely, and not leave a trace of it behind. Such was Sasanka's hatred towards Buddhism."
In obvious fact, the historical evidence proves that much before invasion of Bakhtiyar Khilji, Nalanda University had already fallen to ruins because of the rivalry of Hinayana (simple Mahayana) and Mahayana influenced with the ideas of Brahminism. Indeed, there was another Mahavihara in Odantapuri (modern Bihar Sharif in Nalanda District) inside the fort of the local king which was partially affected in the course of battle between the forces of Bakhtiyar Khilji and the local king in 1197 or 1198 AD. The chronicle, Tabaqat-i-Nasiri of Minhaj-i –Siraj, which is usually referred to be historical record of the time, apparently refers to this place and does not even mention the name of Nalanda. Presumably, Nalanda was then a desolate place.
The fortified monastery which Bakhtiyar captured was, “known as Audand-Bihar or Odandapura-vihara” (Odantapuri in Biharsharif then known simply as Bihar). Minhaj does not refer to Nalanda at all. He merely speaks of the ransacking of the “fortress of Bihar” (Hisar-i-Bihar). This is the view of many historians and, most importantly, of Jadunath Sarkar, whose credibility is honoured even by right wing historians. (History of Bengal, vol. 2, pp.3-4).
Historical evidence also suggests that Bakhtiyar Khilji did not go to Nalanda at all. It ‘escaped the main fury of the Muslim conquest because it lay not on the main route from Delhi to Bengal but needed a separate expedition’. (A S Altekar in Introduction to Roerich’s Biography of Dharmasvamin). Also, a few years after Bakhtiyar’s sack of Odantapuri, when the Tibetan monk Dharmasvamin visited Nalanda in 1234, he “found some buildings unscathed” in which some pandits and monks resided and received instruction from Mahapandita Rahulshribhadra. In fact, Bakhtiyar seems to have proceeded from Biharsharif to Nadia in Bengal through the hills and jungles of the region of Jharkhand, which, incidentally, finds first mention in an inscription of 1295 AD (Comprehensive History of India, vol. IV, pt. I, p.601).
KP Jaiswal Research institute, Patna was established in 1951 by the Government of Bihar with the object, inter alia, to promote historical research, archaeological excavations and investigations and publication of works of permanent value to scholars. The research work titled ‘The Antiquarian Remains in Bihar’ by DR Patil, published as a ‘Historical Research Series’, by the Institute in 1963 reveals that: ‘…no Mohammedan Makhdum, Pir or saint of great repute happened to grace the tops of the Nalanda mounds with their tombs or mosques. This is a feature, which, it should be noted, is commonly to be observed all over Bihar at sites of celebrated and important sanctuaries. At Bihar Sharif itself many of such Muslim monuments still exist; but their absence at Nalanda, hardly six or seven miles away, is rather surprising. Had Nalanda been a living institute of great repute or importance at the time of the invasion of Bakhtiar Khilji in 1197 or 1198 AD, we should expect the Muslim Chronicles of the event to have known and mentioned the name of Nalanda. The place, said to have been destroyed by the invader, is described to be a great city and a place of study then known as Bihar, which would more appropriately be a reference to the modern Bihar Sharif, which also had a monastery, and not to Nalanda, near which there existed no big city worth the name. As is known, one of the Pala rulers had established a monastery at Odantapuri or Bihar Sharif itself which may have affected adversely. All these would indicate that, quite before Bakhtiar Khilji’s invasion, Nalanda had perhaps fallen to decay or ruins already; but how and when actually this happened is still a mystery to be unravelled’. (Page 304). The research further indicates that‘….there is, therefore, reason to believe that Nalanda had met its final end sometime in the 11th century i.e. more than hundred years before Bakhtiar Khilji invaded Bihar in 1197A.D’.(Page 325). This historical research series was published under the patronage of the Government of Bihar in 1963.
Furthermore, DN Jha, former Professor, Department of History, University of Delhi, in the article ‘Grist to the reactionary mill’(Indian Express, July 9, 2014), on destruction of Nalanda University, quotes that: ‘Tibetan monk and scholar, Taranatha, writes inHistory of Buddhism in India’ : ‘During the consecration of the temple built by Kakutsiddha at Nalendra [Nalanda] “the young naughty sramanas threw slops at the two tirthika beggars and kept them pressed inside door panels and set ferocious dogs on them”. Angered by this, one of them went on arranging for their livelihood and the other sat in a deep pit and “engaged himself in surya sadhana” [solar worship] , first for nine years and then for three more years and having thus “acquired mantrasiddhi” he “performed a sacrifice and scattered the charmed ashes all around” which “immediately resulted in a miraculously produced fire”, consuming all the eighty four temples and the scriptures some of which, however, were saved by water flowing from an upper floor of the nine storey Ratnodadhi temple’. (History of Buddhism in India,written in the 17th century, English tr. Lama Chimpa & Alka Chattopadhyaya, summary of page 141-42).This should mean, he continues, that ‘the idea of Brahminical hostility to the religion of the Buddha traveled to Tibet fairly early and became part of its Buddhist tradition, and found expression in the 17th-18th century Tibetan writings’.
A number of other Indian scholars like R K Mookerji (Education in Ancient India), Sukumar Dutt (Buddhist Monks and Monasteries of India), Buddha Prakash (Aspects of Indian History and Civilization), and S C Vidyabhushana who interpreted the text, viewed that it refers to an actual “scuffle between the Buddhist and Brahmanical mendicants and the latter, being infuriated, propitiated the Sun god for twelve years, performed a fire- sacrifice and threw the living embers and ashes from the sacrificial pit into the Buddhist temples which eventually destroyed the great library at Nalanda called Ratnodadhi’ (History of Indian Logic, page 516 as cited by D R Patil,The Antiquarian Remains in Bihar, page 327). Scholars named above were all polymaths of unimpeachable academic honesty and integrity.
Laksman Sen was not a popular king among local Buddists. Sen dynasty was not from Bengal actually. They were from Karnataka, Southern India. They worked under Bengali Palas and then overthrew them. Sen dynasty was follower of orthodox hinduism and introduced caste based society in Bengal which was not so popular in Buddhism enlightened Bengal unlike its neighbour Mithila.
This is evident by concurrent literature works. For example - Pandit Ramai Ramai Pandit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia in 11th century created Shunya Purana. In the poem Niranjan Rushma, he described how the buddhists are being persecuted by Brahmins and how he preferred Muslim rule over Brahmins.
' Shek Subhodaya or Pride of Sheikh' was another book written during Khilji's conquest of Bengal by Holayud Misra, Court poet of Laksman Sen glorifying Islamic Saints and rituals.
Umapati Dhar another write of Holayudh's time wrote -
“সাধু ম্লেচ্ছনরেন্দ্র সাধু মাতৈব বীরপ্রসুর
নীচেনাপি ভবদবিধেন বসুধা সুক্ষত্রিয়া বর্ততে।“
এর অর্থ হচ্ছে “সাধু ম্লেচ্ছরাজ সাধু! আপনার মাতাই যথার্থ বীর প্রসবিনী। পতিত হলেও আপনার মতো লোকের জন্য পৃথিবী সুক্ষত্রিয়া রয়েছে।“
In this poem Umapati congratulated Khilji for his bravery.
While attacking Nadiya Khilji avoided the regular route of Rajmahal and took his army through the forest of Jharkkhand. He divided his army into small groups to move fast through the forest. Khilji was leading one of such group with 17 horsemen. He was so fast that all other groups were left behind in the jungle when he reached Laksman's palace in Nadiya.
"There was a popular myth in Bengal that the persecuted people would be saved by kalki Avatar saviour riding white horse. When khilji arrived riding a white horse, people of Nadiya took him as the Avatar". - Sukumar Sen in "Bangabhumika"
Khilji wasted little time in Bengal, infact he couldnt go the heart of present day Bangladesh. Instread of converting Bengal into Islam, he was more interested in central asia being a turk. He invaded tibbet immedietly in order to make his way to cental asia but was defeated and died later.
Subsequent Sultans of Bengal who came to power after Khilji were very much secular in nature. They started patronizing Bangla unlike previous hindu rulers who used sanskrit. Rukanuddin patronized Maladhar Basu to write Sri Kishna Vijay. Vijaypandit translated Mahavarat under Ilias Shah, Vijaygupta wrote Padmapuran during Husen Shah's reign and Kabindra Parameshwar translated Mahavarat under patronization of Paragal khan.
Dr. Dinesh Chandra Sen wrote in his " History of Bengali Language and Literature" :
"This elevation of Bengali to a literary status was brought about by several influences, of which the Mahammadan conquest was undoubtedly one of the foremost. If the Hindu Kings had continued to enjoy independence, Bengali would scarcely have got an opportunity to find its way to the courts of Kings."
Pramath Chowdhury wrote " Bengali literature was born in Mahommaden Age.”
So as secular if we consider Islam is alien to our BENGALI identity and propagate it as a foreign and unnecessary element, we are wrong.
Generally he is considered a hero for us Bangladeshis. His story of defeating Nadiya with only 17 horsemen has become a part of legend. Famous Bengali Poem by Al Mahmud
না, এখনও সে শিশু। মা তাকে ছেলে ভোলানো ছড়া শোনায়।
বলে, বালিশে মাথা রাখো তো বেটা। শোনো
বখতিয়ারের ঘোড়া আসছে।
আসছে আমাদের সতেরো সোয়ারি
হাতে নাংগা তলোয়ার।
But in recent days his activities are being questioned by secular , non muslim or atheist writers. Though they are limited in numbers, They have significant influence in Bangla blogosphere. They have already established among the sub-conscious mind of online lurkers that Bakhtiyar was a bloodthirsty muslim foreigner who forcefully converted Bengal by spilling blood, murdering innocents and expelling native kings. "He destroyed famous Nalanda university" They took it as an example of his negative persona and creates anti Bakhtiyar thus Anti Islam atmosphere to alienate Islam from our Bengali identity.
Was he really a Villain who disrupted the peaceful Bengal??The only source of destoying Nalanda is from the Tabakat I Nasiri and strangely it doesnt Name Nalanda at all.
Yes, it is true that he destroyed a Bihar and also killed many buddhist monks, but it was done mistakenly. Sri Ramesh Chandra Majumder , in his book " History of Bangladesh" Published from Kolkata wrote that After Sacking of the Bihar the attackers came to know that it was not a Killa but a Bihar. But it is also mentioned that the bihar was another one, not Nalanda.
Khilji mistook bihar as a fort because it looked like a fort. Bihars in the region took shape of forts to ptotect themselves from raids.
Hiuen Tsang wrote in 7th century -
" Moreover, the whole establishment is surrounded by a brick wall, which encloses the entire convent from without. One gate opens into the great college, from which are separated eight other halls standing in the middle (of the Sangharama). The richly adorned towers, and the fairy-like turrets, like pointed hill-tops are congregated together. The observatories seem to be lost in the vapours (of the morning), and the upper rooms tower above the clouds. "
When Hiuen Tsang travelled the length and breadth of India in the 7th century, he observed that his religion was in slow decay and even had ominous premonitions of Nalanda's forthcoming demise.
Moreover, Buddhism was in sharp decline before the arrival of muslims due to Shivaik hostility. According to the historian S. R. Goyal, the decline of Buddhism in India is the result of the hostility of Brahmins. Ruler Shashanka of Gauda destroyed the Buddhist images and Bodhi tree. Nalanda was destroyed twice before Muslims, the university fell upon hard times when it was overrun by the Huns under Mihirakula during the reign of Skandgupta (455-467 AD). But it was restored by his successors. The university was destroyed again by the Gaudas in the early 7th century but was restored again by king Harshvardhana (606-648 AD).
Hiuen Tsang wrote "Sasanka-raja,being a believer in heresy, slandered the religion of Buddha and through envy destroyed the convents and cut down the Bodhi tree (at Buddha Gaya), digging it up to the very springs of the earth; but yet be did not get to the bottom of the roots. Then he burnt it with fire and sprinkled it with the juice of sugar-cane, desiring to destroy them entirely, and not leave a trace of it behind. Such was Sasanka's hatred towards Buddhism."
In obvious fact, the historical evidence proves that much before invasion of Bakhtiyar Khilji, Nalanda University had already fallen to ruins because of the rivalry of Hinayana (simple Mahayana) and Mahayana influenced with the ideas of Brahminism. Indeed, there was another Mahavihara in Odantapuri (modern Bihar Sharif in Nalanda District) inside the fort of the local king which was partially affected in the course of battle between the forces of Bakhtiyar Khilji and the local king in 1197 or 1198 AD. The chronicle, Tabaqat-i-Nasiri of Minhaj-i –Siraj, which is usually referred to be historical record of the time, apparently refers to this place and does not even mention the name of Nalanda. Presumably, Nalanda was then a desolate place.
The fortified monastery which Bakhtiyar captured was, “known as Audand-Bihar or Odandapura-vihara” (Odantapuri in Biharsharif then known simply as Bihar). Minhaj does not refer to Nalanda at all. He merely speaks of the ransacking of the “fortress of Bihar” (Hisar-i-Bihar). This is the view of many historians and, most importantly, of Jadunath Sarkar, whose credibility is honoured even by right wing historians. (History of Bengal, vol. 2, pp.3-4).
Historical evidence also suggests that Bakhtiyar Khilji did not go to Nalanda at all. It ‘escaped the main fury of the Muslim conquest because it lay not on the main route from Delhi to Bengal but needed a separate expedition’. (A S Altekar in Introduction to Roerich’s Biography of Dharmasvamin). Also, a few years after Bakhtiyar’s sack of Odantapuri, when the Tibetan monk Dharmasvamin visited Nalanda in 1234, he “found some buildings unscathed” in which some pandits and monks resided and received instruction from Mahapandita Rahulshribhadra. In fact, Bakhtiyar seems to have proceeded from Biharsharif to Nadia in Bengal through the hills and jungles of the region of Jharkhand, which, incidentally, finds first mention in an inscription of 1295 AD (Comprehensive History of India, vol. IV, pt. I, p.601).
KP Jaiswal Research institute, Patna was established in 1951 by the Government of Bihar with the object, inter alia, to promote historical research, archaeological excavations and investigations and publication of works of permanent value to scholars. The research work titled ‘The Antiquarian Remains in Bihar’ by DR Patil, published as a ‘Historical Research Series’, by the Institute in 1963 reveals that: ‘…no Mohammedan Makhdum, Pir or saint of great repute happened to grace the tops of the Nalanda mounds with their tombs or mosques. This is a feature, which, it should be noted, is commonly to be observed all over Bihar at sites of celebrated and important sanctuaries. At Bihar Sharif itself many of such Muslim monuments still exist; but their absence at Nalanda, hardly six or seven miles away, is rather surprising. Had Nalanda been a living institute of great repute or importance at the time of the invasion of Bakhtiar Khilji in 1197 or 1198 AD, we should expect the Muslim Chronicles of the event to have known and mentioned the name of Nalanda. The place, said to have been destroyed by the invader, is described to be a great city and a place of study then known as Bihar, which would more appropriately be a reference to the modern Bihar Sharif, which also had a monastery, and not to Nalanda, near which there existed no big city worth the name. As is known, one of the Pala rulers had established a monastery at Odantapuri or Bihar Sharif itself which may have affected adversely. All these would indicate that, quite before Bakhtiar Khilji’s invasion, Nalanda had perhaps fallen to decay or ruins already; but how and when actually this happened is still a mystery to be unravelled’. (Page 304). The research further indicates that‘….there is, therefore, reason to believe that Nalanda had met its final end sometime in the 11th century i.e. more than hundred years before Bakhtiar Khilji invaded Bihar in 1197A.D’.(Page 325). This historical research series was published under the patronage of the Government of Bihar in 1963.
Furthermore, DN Jha, former Professor, Department of History, University of Delhi, in the article ‘Grist to the reactionary mill’(Indian Express, July 9, 2014), on destruction of Nalanda University, quotes that: ‘Tibetan monk and scholar, Taranatha, writes inHistory of Buddhism in India’ : ‘During the consecration of the temple built by Kakutsiddha at Nalendra [Nalanda] “the young naughty sramanas threw slops at the two tirthika beggars and kept them pressed inside door panels and set ferocious dogs on them”. Angered by this, one of them went on arranging for their livelihood and the other sat in a deep pit and “engaged himself in surya sadhana” [solar worship] , first for nine years and then for three more years and having thus “acquired mantrasiddhi” he “performed a sacrifice and scattered the charmed ashes all around” which “immediately resulted in a miraculously produced fire”, consuming all the eighty four temples and the scriptures some of which, however, were saved by water flowing from an upper floor of the nine storey Ratnodadhi temple’. (History of Buddhism in India,written in the 17th century, English tr. Lama Chimpa & Alka Chattopadhyaya, summary of page 141-42).This should mean, he continues, that ‘the idea of Brahminical hostility to the religion of the Buddha traveled to Tibet fairly early and became part of its Buddhist tradition, and found expression in the 17th-18th century Tibetan writings’.
A number of other Indian scholars like R K Mookerji (Education in Ancient India), Sukumar Dutt (Buddhist Monks and Monasteries of India), Buddha Prakash (Aspects of Indian History and Civilization), and S C Vidyabhushana who interpreted the text, viewed that it refers to an actual “scuffle between the Buddhist and Brahmanical mendicants and the latter, being infuriated, propitiated the Sun god for twelve years, performed a fire- sacrifice and threw the living embers and ashes from the sacrificial pit into the Buddhist temples which eventually destroyed the great library at Nalanda called Ratnodadhi’ (History of Indian Logic, page 516 as cited by D R Patil,The Antiquarian Remains in Bihar, page 327). Scholars named above were all polymaths of unimpeachable academic honesty and integrity.
Laksman Sen was not a popular king among local Buddists. Sen dynasty was not from Bengal actually. They were from Karnataka, Southern India. They worked under Bengali Palas and then overthrew them. Sen dynasty was follower of orthodox hinduism and introduced caste based society in Bengal which was not so popular in Buddhism enlightened Bengal unlike its neighbour Mithila.
This is evident by concurrent literature works. For example - Pandit Ramai Ramai Pandit - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia in 11th century created Shunya Purana. In the poem Niranjan Rushma, he described how the buddhists are being persecuted by Brahmins and how he preferred Muslim rule over Brahmins.
' Shek Subhodaya or Pride of Sheikh' was another book written during Khilji's conquest of Bengal by Holayud Misra, Court poet of Laksman Sen glorifying Islamic Saints and rituals.
Umapati Dhar another write of Holayudh's time wrote -
“সাধু ম্লেচ্ছনরেন্দ্র সাধু মাতৈব বীরপ্রসুর
নীচেনাপি ভবদবিধেন বসুধা সুক্ষত্রিয়া বর্ততে।“
এর অর্থ হচ্ছে “সাধু ম্লেচ্ছরাজ সাধু! আপনার মাতাই যথার্থ বীর প্রসবিনী। পতিত হলেও আপনার মতো লোকের জন্য পৃথিবী সুক্ষত্রিয়া রয়েছে।“
In this poem Umapati congratulated Khilji for his bravery.
While attacking Nadiya Khilji avoided the regular route of Rajmahal and took his army through the forest of Jharkkhand. He divided his army into small groups to move fast through the forest. Khilji was leading one of such group with 17 horsemen. He was so fast that all other groups were left behind in the jungle when he reached Laksman's palace in Nadiya.
"There was a popular myth in Bengal that the persecuted people would be saved by kalki Avatar saviour riding white horse. When khilji arrived riding a white horse, people of Nadiya took him as the Avatar". - Sukumar Sen in "Bangabhumika"
Khilji wasted little time in Bengal, infact he couldnt go the heart of present day Bangladesh. Instread of converting Bengal into Islam, he was more interested in central asia being a turk. He invaded tibbet immedietly in order to make his way to cental asia but was defeated and died later.
Subsequent Sultans of Bengal who came to power after Khilji were very much secular in nature. They started patronizing Bangla unlike previous hindu rulers who used sanskrit. Rukanuddin patronized Maladhar Basu to write Sri Kishna Vijay. Vijaypandit translated Mahavarat under Ilias Shah, Vijaygupta wrote Padmapuran during Husen Shah's reign and Kabindra Parameshwar translated Mahavarat under patronization of Paragal khan.
Dr. Dinesh Chandra Sen wrote in his " History of Bengali Language and Literature" :
"This elevation of Bengali to a literary status was brought about by several influences, of which the Mahammadan conquest was undoubtedly one of the foremost. If the Hindu Kings had continued to enjoy independence, Bengali would scarcely have got an opportunity to find its way to the courts of Kings."
Pramath Chowdhury wrote " Bengali literature was born in Mahommaden Age.”
So as secular if we consider Islam is alien to our BENGALI identity and propagate it as a foreign and unnecessary element, we are wrong.
Maybe he also brings those from different people, good chain effect 
