:?
Anywayz, Glad to see that hte title has changed and now we can start talking about the Mogul Invasions and not some outta whack theories! :P
Printable View
:?
Anywayz, Glad to see that hte title has changed and now we can start talking about the Mogul Invasions and not some outta whack theories! :P
I do not understand the culture of changing the title of a topic after the discussion was started.Quote:
Originally Posted by Surya
I am not a veteran hubber. Is it a norm for the hubbers to do so ?
Can the moderators answer me ?
Anyway I do not mind the change. It actually exposes the Hindu fanatics who throb all over the net praising Hindu tolerance
Great that you don't Mind Pizza! Appreciate It! :thumbsup:
Anywho.... :roll:
For Starters:
Map Of Mogul Empire.
Are you trying to club the "settlers/invaders" 4000 years ago with the people of today into a single "they" ?Quote:
Originally Posted by pizzalot
I don't think that can be attributed to any lack of receptivity. If a thread discussing these aspects starts I am sure it will find a lot of patronage here. But if those aspects are introduced in the discussion of this thread, far being a balancing factor, it starts sounding like they (oops!) had it coming. I don't think that's what you are trying to say.Quote:
Originally Posted by pizzalot
Hindi ??!! I get your argument that the people should read and understand the Vedas so it should be in "their" language. Good argument, 95% of the people (for example yours truly) don't have even the basic reading of any of the Sanskrit texts.Quote:
call the Indian Government to issue orders to ban the recitement of the vedas unless a Hindi copy is provided to the devotees who come to the temples.
That was avoidable. The problem with any historical discussion (particularly in the Hub) is that one is eager to draw parallels from past to present and jump to conclusions. Even two generations up we can view the people are so removed from the present scenario that no "us" "them" classification is meaningful. When we are talking of millenia apart, supposing any sort of continuity or group-homogeneity is meaningless. I guess we can get back on track now.Quote:
Originally Posted by kannannn
Islamic way to destroy Hindus and all their signs and symbol
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COPY PATED FROM Memorial of Mistakes CONVERTED KASHMIR
by Narender Sehgal
EXTRACT FROM Chapter 14
www.jammu-kashmir.org/KIN...er14.html
Total destruction of Hindu Temples
(Islamic way to destroy Hindus and all their signs and symbols)
A Bitter Saga of Religious Conversion
These very places of their deities were source of their inspiration.
The demonic gaze of cruel and in human Sultan Sikander fell on sacred spiritual centres of Hindus. Syed Mohd. Hamdani had made Sikander to understand that so long the idols in the temples of idol worshipping infidels were not destroyed, there would be no purpose of conversion. These very places of their deities were source of their inspiration. These very centres may inspire them, in future, to give up Islam. Thus destruction of these places was necessary for delinking fresh converts from their national roots and mainstream. If such places of deities were allowed to survive, inspiration for Indianness will survive. The Sultan accepted as dignified the political idea of Syed Mohd. Hamdani, and became ready to destroy the greatest work of human history and in doing so there was not an iota of civilisation, humanity and wisdom.
Historian Hassan has written that there were many temples during the time of Hindu kings which were just like wonders of the world. Their design and art were so fine and delicate that a viewer would get spellbound. Filled with jealousy and hatred Sikander destroyed these temples. From the material of the temples mosques and shrines were built. First of all he focussed his attention towards Martand temple built by Ramdev.
It took one year to fully damage and destroy this Martand temple. Aflter having failed to demolish the temple totally this enemy of art, culture and godly beauty, stuffed the temple with wooden slippers and set it ablaze. Seeing the matchless beauty of the fold studded domes of the temple getting destroyed Sikander kept on laughing and went on giving instructions for the complete destruction of the temple by treating it as God's order. Stones from the temple's foundation were not spared. It was total plunder and destruction of the temple and the people living around the temple were directed to adopt Islam. Those who did not accept this direction were butchered alongwith their family members. This way people from one village to another were converted into Islam. Even today one gets surprised over art and skill of the builders of this world famous Martand temple by looking at its ruins.
Similarly under the instructions of Sikander one famous temple at Bijbehara, Vijeshwar temple, and 300 other temples around it were destroyed and demolished. Historian Hassan has written that a mosque was built with the idols and stones of Vijeshwar temple and in this area a quarry was built which is called Vijeshwar quarry.
In these state level atrocities and forcible mass conversions Muslim preachers, especially Syeds, had played a pivotal role. The plot for this blood curdling story was prepared by those who were converted to Islam, failing which it would not have been possible for a handful of foreigners and those outsiders who had different religion, to establish their foothold in Kashmir. The result of cowardice and shortsightedness of the Hindus had set ablaze Kashmir usually called a forest of bliss and beatitude. The iconoclast king was of the opinion that if there was any danger to Kashmir in future it could be from these very Hindus. Thus to give a full Islamic shape to Kashmir it was both a "state duty" and "God's order" to destroy Hindus and all their signs and symbols.
Yes. If the muslims could be distinguished among us, each of us could be distinguished even more.Quote:
Originally Posted by Prabhu Ram
Sharukh Khan is accepted as Prem in Bollywood but not Rajnikant. If you find this example as crude, then check the DNA studies yourself to see the differences among caste Hindus and others. But beware, the results of some unconducted DNA studies are out on the net.
Even though I can read Sanskrit (it was my third language), I read the verses in English on net. Until then I was told that they were very very sacred and contained everything in the world. It was hard for a "normal" human like me to understand it. If understanding was the only problem I wondered why the Sudras were banned from reading those verses. They could not have followed the theme anyways.
If we are obsessed with these vedas or our religion, what we, really need is Psych-therapy. A Salman Rushdie or De Vinci type of treatment will not be enough to help us out.
If it was not for Lord William Bentinck, we still will be burning Women in pyres with all the rituals and ceremonies with the in-laws, parents and son/daughter witnessing the scene of screaming and suffering.
Sati continues even today in the form of women getting burnt in "accidents" in kitchen. It is always a painful death for the women.
Eelavar raised a point on divorce rate in India being less than the West. My answer: If you counted the number of widows a 200 years back, the number will be a tiny fraction of what you saw in West. Simply the women cannot have a life of their own after divorce, man ! That is the Hindu culture. It is not the dhoti or saree that it is.
I am not opposed to the way an individual worships God. Let them do abhisheks or artis but I am opposed to how they collectively think to dig graves for themselves.
Much of the world is changed to what it is today because of Koran and Bible. If not for these religions, we will have never known a Sati was wrong. So as religion I find they have given this world enough for man kind. Do not even compare them with the vedas, for you will drown in an eternal guilt.
Tell me how am I off the track and I will tell you how I am not.
I am right on track on this thread. If unity among hindus is what this thread is calling for, my point is "why ?". I wish Hinduism was dead the day it was created by Manu.
I am a Anglicized-Hindu and that is what I am. And so would you be too only that you do not accept that fact. Having converted to Anglo-Hinduism you claim that Hinduism is a tolerant religion, where-in in reality, all you are doing is following the teachings of Bible or Koran or Buddhism clubbing with some Hindu rituals convienient for you.
If I show you the real Hindus, you will say they are not Hindus.
I usually refrain from any self-identification in the Hub. But I find the term "anglicized Hindu" quite interesting and I would like to see if I hapen to fit the hat.
I am one of those who is not sure if a Godless universe is actually as scary as it is made out to be. I know next to nothing about "sacred texts" of any sort, attributable largely to a near complete lack of spiritual craving. So I am not in any position to refute or agree with your denouncement of the Vedas. I have read Dravidar-Kazhaga pamphlets quoting schmuck from the Vedas. I have also been to several beautiful discourses by temple-priests quoting left-right and centre from the Vedas. As both parties in question have very strong motives to present parts favourable to them, I am reluctant to make an all-is-good or all-is-bad conclusion about it. Just like everything else I assumed it was a mixed bag.
I had the same experience upon a cursory reading of the Gita. I was really impressed with had some parts which I felt spoke a lot to me. I had some personal doubts about the extent of "equality" in it (very nebulously worded) and I was not completely sold on the concept of karma or salvation. But as I said, it was just a cursory reading.
But it did not shake my very existence that the Vedas or the Gita could be anything but immaculate. Because, as a Hindu I am in no compulsion whatsoever to accept anything.
I can use expressions like "really impressed" when talking about the Gita, I can take what I want and leave the rest. There is absolutely nothing that I have to believe in, or have to do are to me the what being a Hindu is , anglicized or not. There is no the book or the word that would have to be accepted as an error- free immaculate oracle. Every single thing is contestable. Most importantly the fact that I do not have to regard with infinite pity the practictioners of other faiths. To quote the only thing I know in Sanskrit: ""Aano bhadra kratavo yantu vishvatah" ("Let noble thoughts come from all sides" and I think that is from Rg Veda) is perhaps the nifty motto I would condense my religion into.
So do I need to use, or do I qualify for, the prefix Anglicized ?
And as for the DNA stuff, I am rather skeptical of any possibility to "racial purity" even after several centuries of living together. But what I was trying to say is, a man is not his great-great grandfather (even assmuming any racial continuity) so equating them doesn't seem to be very strong.
We can go on and about the nuances of who is a Hindu, true Hindu and so on. Beyond all that we basically do understand that this thread intends to talk about the details Mughal invasions. This does not mean that the invaded folks were a homogenous peaceful bunch where-all-was-well-and-milk-and-honey-flowed-till-the-invasions happened (as is the usual drift in presenting the story of any invasion). Correct me if I am wrong , but it is this supposed line of drift that you sought to prove wrong. That is what I called off-track. Or atleast, jumping the gun.Quote:
Originally Posted by pizzalot
No pizzalot, i didn't say that. I said there is only one Truth, so one Reality, BUT it does not mean that there is only one religion one race and one soul, i don't understand how you made this conclusion... Sorry but please don't twist my statement..Quote:
Somehow Eelavar seems to understood that there is Only One Truth, One Reality, One Religion, One Race, One Soul and so on.
:roll:
It sound for me very logical..Quote:
In several places you said the alleged genocide by the muslims is the greatest ever. How did you arrive at that ?
North India was (and is always with Kashmir) very vulnerable due to the fact that Islamic people lived in North of India..
Most of those invasions came from this area.
Nothing wrong with that no ??
For every one,
For me the real Hindu is the Hindu who pray Christ, Krishna, Allah, Buddha, etc.. Every god is worshipped by a Hindu..
Their Gods are too our Gods..
We reconize the divinity of every avatars..
Now if you don't agree i cannot nothing for you, it is my way of understanding Truth..
God is One but in the diversity...
Hinduism is a Monotheism different of the others..