Yogi Adityanath’s anti-Mughal stand has reasons. Akbar identified himself as a ghazi

[Nityam]

Shows your history bas jo aya chappi jao... it was built as Mehal and not a kabra...

If it was built as a Mahal and not as a Kabra then it is clear that the Hindus built it since it was on Raja Jai singh's land.

Mixing truth with lies is worst kind of propaganda..

Feel free to PROVE me wrong.

Indian media is all about radical Hindus these days.

What is "radical" Hindu ?

 

[Black.Mamba]

What is "radical" Hindu ?

This can be a good start for you
The term ‘Hindu radicalism’ first surfaced in the 1980s and later gained prominence in the 2000s when a series of attacks by Hindu groups were carried out against members of Christian and Muslim communities in India. Hindu radicalism is, in a sense, unique because it is connected to Indian nationalism. Most of those considered to be Hindu radicals — people who have lynched non-Hindus on the grounds of religion, for instance — harbour no desire for Hindu expansion or theocracy in the world. They seek, instead, to reclaim India for Hindus, and stress India’s Hindu character or establish a Hindu state in India. Their ideology is neither rooted nor based on religion but, instead, on virulent revanchist communalism.

The Rise of Hindu Radicalism

Aditi Bhaduri The term ‘Hindu radicalism’ first surfaced in the 1980s and later gained prominence in the 2000s when

eeradicalization.com

 

[Nityam]

Only cow slaughter and tax are Islamic. The rest, including slavery (caste) are hardcore Hindu culture.

I want your gov to ban Mughal food, clothing, architecture etc. that you Hindus appropriated.

LOL.... What Mughal food" ?

You think Biryai is "Mughal" ? Mughal's came from a place where RICE did not even grow Mughal's ate Indian food.

What Mughal Clothing ? Mughal's wore INDIAN clothes.

What architecture ? What buildings exist OUTSIDE India ? It was INDIAN architecture stripped of the ornamentation.

What "hindu slavery" ?

THIS is what Megasthenes the Greek write in Indica when he lived in India.

Because of its large size, India is inhabited by many diverse races, all of which are indigenous. India has no foreign colony, and Indians have not established any colonies outside India. The Indians are of above average stature, because of abundant food, fine water and pure air. They are well-skilled in art.

A law, prescribed by ancient Indian philosophers, bans slavery. The law treats everyone equally, but allows the property to be unevenly distributed.

Hindu radicalism is, in a sense, unique because it is connected to Indian nationalism.

Hindu radicals — people who have lynched non-Hindus on the grounds of religion, for instance — harbour no desire for Hindu expansion or theocracy in the world. They seek, instead, to reclaim India for Hindus, and stress India’s Hindu character or establish a Hindu state in India. Their ideology is neither rooted nor based on religion but, instead, on virulent revanchist communalism.

The Rise of Hindu Radicalism

Aditi Bhaduri The term ‘Hindu radicalism’ first surfaced in the 1980s and later gained prominence in the 2000s when

eeradicalization.com

SO basically,

1. Hindu radicalism = Indian nationalism.
2. Has NO desire for Hindu expansion or theocracy in the world.
3. Wants to reclaim (meaning end discrimination ) India for Hindus
4. Stress India’s Hindu character
5. Establish a Hindu state in India NOT based on religion.

I honestly fail to see the problem.

 

[Vapnope]

No country can claim that it follows the ancient rituals or culture and has no newer/foreign element to it. There is a history written by Mughals, there is a history which is being rewritten by far right Hindus and there is something in between.
If Mughals indeed abolished some customs/Rituals that were tenets of honduism, then they surely be condemned by the Hindus.

 

[hunter_hunted]

Everything related to Mughals need to be destroyed . barbarians will live as long their symbol and structures remain standing.

 

[Jugger]

Change the name of taj mehal to ram mehal.
Even destroy it and make a tample out of it.
After all a mughal made this building.

And throw away 150 million USD that it brings in every year...?
Nop sorry...!

 

[jamahir]

but the history and identity of ‘Prayagraj’ is older than 24,000 years ago.

I stopped reading when I came across that rubbish.

THIS is what Megasthenes the Greek write in Indica when he lived in India.

The Indians are of above average stature, because of abundant food, fine water and pure air.

Yet people in modern India die of hunger, they lived beside dead rivers ( Ganga and Yamuna ) and many of India's cities are among the world's cities with the most polluted air.

 

[Sharma Ji]

If Indians have any little self respect left; they should destroy all signs of the Mughal empire, destroy all buildings of that era, they have a significant experience in demolishing (Read: Babri Mosque), the same should be done to everything else. And oh please start with Taj Mahal.

No, we'll keep whatever desirable aspects we see fit, food and some architecture is ok, as is some poetry and the urdu language.

The religious ideology is largely rejected by all Indians, not just right wing Hindus btw.. sikhs, xtians, parsis etc... people view Islam suspiciously because

@Nityam .. yaar architecture and food vagaira to rakh saktein hain, I have no problem visiting the muslim quarters in any city and go for the kebabs etc. They are also skilled artisans in many specialty crafts.

Just wish they were not so closed off and hateful toward this so called "idol worship" (biggest sin ever etc )..
pretty amazing the muslims and kafirs have been existing together in relative harmony all this while post partition in our pagan and idol worshiping culture in India.

 

[hussain0216]

pretty amazing the muslims and kafirs have been existing together in relative harmony all this while post partition in our pagan and idol worshiping culture in India

Relative harmony???

What India ????


It's a hatefilled communal shithole

 

[Nityam]

And throw away 150 million USD that it brings in every year...?
Nop sorry...!

Are you Demented ?

Total annual average revenue generated from the monument in the last three years is approximately 61.4 crores INR.

That translates to 8.2 Million USD, NOT 150 million USD.

The total money spent per year on UPKEEP of the Taj Mahal is around 13.3 Crore INR i.e 1.7 Million USD.

SO the Net profit of Taj Mahal located on 42 Acre LAND of prime land next to the river is 6.5 Million USD.

To put that in perspective,

A average grade Mall built on on 4.5 Acre generates a Revenue of 9,000 INR per sq foot. I.e. a 200,000 sq foot Mall will generate 1,800 Crores INR Annually or 241.5 MILLION USD.

Now Calculate out what a Mall built on Taj Mahal 42 acre Land will generate for India.

I stopped reading when I came across that rubbish.

Not interested in your limitations.

Yet people in modern India die of hunger, they lived beside dead rivers ( Ganga and Yamuna ) and many of India's cities are among the world's cities with the most polluted air.

Tho mei kya karu ? job chod du ?

@Nityam .. yaar architecture and food vagaira to rakh saktein hain, I have no problem visiting the muslim quarters in any city and go for the kebabs etc. They are also skilled artisans in many specialty crafts.

Just wish they were not so closed off and hateful toward this so called "idol worship" (biggest sin ever etc )..
pretty amazing the muslims and kafirs have been existing together in relative harmony all this while post partition in our pagan and idol worshiping culture in India.

By that logic, since I like chinese food, let us allow China to take over half of Delhi so that I can enjoy Fried rice and Peking duck.

And since the British built Railways for us, let us let them take over the rest of Delhi.

And since US will teach us "human rights", let us allow them to take over kashmir.

 

[Black.Mamba]

And throw away 150 million USD that it brings in every year...?
Nop sorry...!

So basically you admit that India is a hypocritical nation

 

[Lincoln]

Yogi Adityanath’s anti-Mughal stand has reasons. Akbar identified himself as a ghazi

Yogi Adityanath’s decision to name a proposed Mughal museum after Shivaji is a step to ensure that the tale of hunt is also written by those who were hunted.

File image of Uttar Pradesh CM Yogi Adityanath | PTI
https://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=https://theprint.in/opinion/yogi-adityanaths-anti-mughal-stand-has-reasons-akbar-identified-himself-as-a-ghazi/509246/
https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Yogi+Adityanath’s+anti-Mughal+stand+has+reasons.+Akbar+identified+himself+as+a+ghazi&url=https://theprint.in/opinion/yogi-adityanaths-anti-mughal-stand-has-reasons-akbar-identified-himself-as-a-ghazi/509246/&via=ThePrintIndia
https://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?mini=true&url=https://theprint.in/opinion/yogi-adityanaths-anti-mughal-stand-has-reasons-akbar-identified-himself-as-a-ghazi/509246/&title=Yogi+Adityanath’s+anti-Mughal+stand+has+reasons.+Akbar+identified+himself+as+a+ghazi

Icame across an interesting article by Zainab Sikander in these columns wherein she argued that Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath’s anti-Mughal stand is merely an expression to reinforce anti-Muslim sentiments, and has nothing to do with history. However, my experience suggests that most of the Muslim intellectuals try to vilify the truth of history. This act embeds the belief among the masses that discussing issues like the ‘tyranny of Mughals’ is an attack on the minority community. It must be understood that history owes to none, but truth and time.

In Zainab Sikander’s opinion, renaming cities such as Prayagraj is an attempt to wipe out the Mughal identity that she considers to be an imperative part of India’s civilisation. I agree that the Mughals are part of our civilisational discourse, but not like the way she thinks they are — her argument is shallow because Prayagraj existed with its name since several millennia before its name was changed and primogenital evidence of this comes from the Rig Veda. The Mughals ruled only for three centuries, but the history and identity of ‘Prayagraj’ is older than 24,000 years ago. The antiquity of Prayagraj and its importance to the Indian civilisation is immense. However, we must investigate the events and circumstances around the period when the most powerful Mughal ruler in India, Akbar — who in 1578 ensured that he was addressed as Ghazi — chose to construct the fort Illahabas that later came to be called Allahabad.

“Emperor of Islam, Emir of the Faithful, Shadow of God on earth, Abul Fath Jalal-ud-din Muhammad Akbar Badshah Ghazi, is a most just, most wise, and a most God-fearing ruler.” — Abd al-Qadir Badauni, Muntakhab al-Tavarikh-II, 279–80.

From Prayagraj to Illahabas to Allahabad

In 1574, Akbar decided to build a fort and name the place ‘Illahabas’. According to most accounts, the fort was complete by 1584. Portuguese Jesuit, Father Monserrate, Italian Jesuit missionary and priest Rodolfo Aquaviva and Francisco Henriques arrived at Akbar’s court in early 1580s. Monserrate writes in his travelogue: “religious zeal of the Musalmans has destroyed all the idol temples.” According to him, “in place of the Hindu temples, countless tombs and little shrines of Musalmans (had) been erected.” Just two years after deciding to build Illahabas, Akbar had rewarded Badauni, the Mughal historian, with gold coins for his gesture of declaration to soak his beard with infidel Hindu blood.

Those who live with the belief that Illahabas was founded by Akbar for some secular cause and Illah does not come from illahi of kalima, perhaps, are not aware of Akbar’s acts, which strongly identify him as a Jihadi. A Ghazi, in his own words, is not a secular soul. It is tough to deny that a king who was so excited about someone soaking his beard in Hindu blood won’t have changed the name from Prayagraj to Illahabas as an attack on Hindu faith.

Zainab Sikander, in her article, says renaming cities are also about removing “Muslim sounding names”. But Yogi Adityanath has just brought back the name that existed for millennia till it was changed in the Mughal period. Name changing is not at all about Hindu or Muslim, nor is it about politics. It is all about the truth of the land. Irrespective of where the Kaaba sits, the sun rays would always enter from the east.

Older identities are important too

Zainab Sikander also objects to the scrapping of an under-construction Mughal museum and the UP government’s plan to turn it into a museum dedicated to Chhatrapati Shivaji. She considers the great escape that Shivaji made from the captivity of mighty Aurangzeb in 1666 from Agra as a non-significant occurrence. Even Aurangzeb considered it to be one of the biggest failures of his life. Agra being the Mughal capital for 90 years is a very short time period when you consider that the state houses one of the oldest Republics of the world — Kashi — standing tall, holding the flag of an oldest living civilization of the world.

No one is trying to blame the Muslims. But keeping 90 years of Agra as the Mughal capital above the millennium-old identity of the place and the heroics of Shivaji, suggests having a myopic vision of India’s history. The truth of Mughal tyranny is horrendous and potent enough to scare any democratic and civilised person of the day. Akbar, considered the most secular of all Mughals, had shown the religious bigotry — the emperor allowed the slaying of ten scores of cows and showered their blood onto the walls of temples (Sir Henry Miers Elliot, The History of India, as Told by Its Own Historians: The Muhammadan Period, Volume 5, page 464).

Mughals: ‘Symbol of slavery mentality’

Adityanath’s assertion that Mughals were “the symbol of slavery mentality” is not wrong either. Even if I pick the most liberal Mughal rulers, only distress would come to the Mughal Fan Club. Akbar killed innocent Hindus and cows, organised Meena Bazar to get concubines for his Harem, and used to send abundant money to Mecca on various occasions. According to James Todd, Akbar had measured the “killed ones” by weighing their janeu. Even if I just count the atrocities at the hands of Akbar, it will be a challenge to keep an account of them all. Those interested in knowing the ugly facts on Akbar the great, must read primary sources such as Akbarnama.

Zainab Sikander goes on to compare the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) politicians with the Mughals, stating that while the former breaks mosque today, the latter broke temples in the past. This is one of the weakest assertions in her article. More than 40,000 temples were destroyed during the Islamic rule in India (Hindu Temples – What Happened to Them). Before making such claims, the author must present statistics to show how many mosques have been broken by the BJP politicians. Such unsubstantiated claims only lead to polarisation.

The Jizya truth

The article also tries to justify Jizya by citing the differentiation on its application to different strata, based on Aurangzeb’s Fatawa ‘Alamgiri. But what one must also enquire is the percentage of wealth Aurangzeb was making out of this tax. According to Jagjivan Das (quoted by Irfan Habib in The Agrarian System of Mughal India, 1556-1707), Jizya formed 15 per cent of the Mughal Empire’s total revenue between 1708 and 1709. This seems to suggest a huge economic problem because GDP per capita growth was negative during this period, according to economic historian Angus Maddison (Contours of the World Economy 1-2030 AD).

Thomas Rolt, the president of English factory at Surat, said in 1679 that Jizya was charged by enforcing heavy suppression and was also a tool to convert poor Hindus to Islam (The English Factories in India, New Series, Volume 3). Italian traveller Niccolao Manucci, too, had a similar opinion which he expressed a quarter century after (1679) Rolt. Borrowing references from Fatawa ‘Alamgiri to project Mughal history should be the last thing anyone should do, for the book had nothing more than contempt for the “kafirs”. The book supported slavery and addressed it under following points:

• If two or more Muslims, or persons subject to Muslims, who enter a non-Muslim controlled territory for the purpose of pillage without the permission of the Imam, and thus seize some property of the inhabitants there, and bring it back into the Muslim territory, that property would be legally theirs.
• The right of Muslims to purchase and own slaves
• A Muslim man’s right to have sex with a captive slave girl he owns
• No inheritance rights for slaves
• The testimony of all slaves was inadmissible in a court of law
• Slaves require permission of the master before they can marry
• An unmarried Muslim may marry a slave girl owned by another but a Muslim married to a Muslim woman may not marry a slave girl
• Conditions under which the slaves may be emancipated partially or fully

Aurangzeb had sent presents worth around Rs 6,66,000 to Mecca and Rs 70,00,000 to foreign Muslim countries and its rulers. All this was happening when India’s GDP per capita growth rate was negative. It clearly speaks of the character Aurangzeb was.

Taj Mahal

Now, to the Taj Mahal. The ‘monument of love’ was built at a cost of 4.18 Silver Rupees at a time when millions starved in great Deccan Famine. The Taj came into existence upon the blood of those who starved to death in the famine, Indian artisans’ efforts and a Hindu ruler Jai Singh’s land. The Cambridge Economic History of India — a book edited by Tapan Raychaudhuri and Irfan Habib — documents the extortionist traits of the Mughals. While India’s GDP share percentage in world economy did not diminish (though it was highest before Islamic Invasions), the GDP per capita growth remained negative throughout the Mughal period (Angus Maddison, Contours of the World Economy 1-2030 AD).

It is tough to understand why the Mughals must be given credit for creating a structure when nothing except the order to commission was run by them. India was always home to fabulous architecture like the Kailasha temple. What must be asked is why the Mughals could never build anything so marvellous, like the Taj, back in their homeland?

History by the ‘hunted’

Yogi Adityanath’s decision to name the museum after Shivaji is a step towards ensuring that the tale of hunt is also written by those who were hunted. No king or warrior had ever given as bloody a blow to the Mughals as Shivaji and the Maratha Empire had. Shivaji was the first leader to speak about “Swaraj” and he must be celebrated in the land where he made a tyrant Aurangzeb to eat a humble pie.

Being “anti-Mughal” is not being “anti-Islam”. It is simply saying the truth out loud. The more one sides with tyrant Mughals holding the edge of faith, the more damage they bring for the Islam.

Yogi Adityanath’s anti-Mughal stand has reasons. Akbar identified himself as a ghazi

Yogi Adityanath’s decision to name a proposed Mughal museum after Shivaji is a step to ensure that the tale of hunt is also written by those who were hunted.

theprint.in

Bless the Mughal Empire and Delhi Sultanate. Despite the wrong they did in their times, literally like every other empire... they left an Islamic footprint of Indo-Aryanic people as well.

Its NOT a "Mahal" (palace) , its a KABRA (grave).

So a name change IS in order.

Also there is no direct evidence Mughal made this building. There is only evidence of the queen being BURIED in this building. Possible after it was already built by someone else for some other purpose.

Lmao, this is the dumbest thing I have read in a while... both the name change, and the builder.

 

[masterchief_mirza]

You mean stuff like slavery, famine, jazia , cow slaughter, no education and kidnapping and pillaging. ALL of which is already Banned and ILLEGAL in India.

Put your money where your mouth is. Demolish Taj Mahal and build a temple in its place. Or are you afraid white people may object? Prof Whitey McWhiteface of Whitechester University will condemn such an act, because whiteys understand that it doesn't matter wtf Akbar or Aurangzeb did centuries ago. Pillaging was all fun and games back then. Whites aren't hung up over it.

But Hindus are, right? Even though Hindus slaughtered Hindus, buddhists and other dharmics/abrahamics when necessary, and Aryans enslaved lower castes/darker Hindus as necessary, and railed venomously against Indus Valley Hindus, modern "secular loving" Hindus cannot get over the specific historical crimes of akbar and aurangzeb. The PTSD is perpetual with you people.

Only cow slaughter and tax are Islamic. The rest, including slavery (caste) are hardcore Hindu culture.

I want your gov to ban Mughal food, clothing, architecture etc. that you Hindus appropriated.

Cowardly white-worshippers like Yogi and @Nityam wouldn't dare do such things, even in Hindustan.

 

[Titanium100]

If Indians have any little self respect left; they should destroy all signs of the Mughal empire, destroy all buildings of that era, they have a significant experience in demolishing (Read: Babri Mosque), the same should be done to everything else. And oh please start with Taj Mahal.

What?

 

[Sulman Badshah]

Akbar was an only non muslim king of India in mughals ..He excluded himself from islam by announcing new religion which is extinct now