07-05-2009, 02:25 AM
(This post was last modified: 07-05-2009, 02:27 AM by Bharatvarsh.)
Great post by Bodhi in another group:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><<<When you were faced with Muslim invasion, the word "ideological attack" makes
no sense because people's minds were not the targets of the enemy.>>>
It just shows how shallow your understanding of Hindu History is!!!
The fundamental, and the ONLY root cause of the invasion of ISLAM and
CHRISTIANISM against India is ideology, and nothing but ideology, and the target
was, and is, nothing but the PEOPLE's MINDS -- war and conquest being only the
means to reach there!
Repeat -- in the Islamic wordview, military conquest is only a means for the
spread of Islam, not an end in itself!
Do read Sir Syed Ahmed Khan as well as Mawlana Abul Kalam Azad -- many of their
writings are available freely over Internet -- just read to understand how a
moslem thinks, and behind the Islamic wars was and remains nothing but the need
to conquer the kAfir and converts. -- THE MINDS.
Let me just cite the example of Shambhaji, when he was captured and tortured to
death by awrangzib. The moghal tyrant made a simple proposal -- convert and I
shall return the entire deccan, along with not only marahaTTA domain, but the
whole of Ahmednagar and Bijapur and Golkonda! Just convert. My war is not with
you, but your religion. (Of course Shambhaji died after bravely suffering the
torchures for two weeks -- but gave birth to the even mightier hindu nation
after him!)
And you say "ideological attack" makes no sense!!
It does not make sense to you because your grasp on history is as shallow as you
show in the above statement!!
It does not make sense to you because you have not made an attempt to learn
about Islam, its history and its philosophy, like the ancestors of yours and
mine did not.
Please read some books, and leave aside for now all those purANa-s. Start with
Jadunath Sarkar and Sardesai.
"ideological attack" makes no sense to you? Consider this:
Al-Biruni, the companion of Mahmood Gaznavi in 11th century wrote one whole book
about the Hindus, and covered besides other things, a very detailed
understanding on Hindus religion, culture and philosophy.
Moraccan Moslem Ibn-batuta in the mid 1300s produced Rihla, in which too he gave
prominent coverage to the religion and ideology of the Hindus.
Amir Khusrow the sUfI, in the same period, produced several persian works in
which he produced detailed understanding on Hindus.
Abul Fazl in the 16th century, dedicates one whole A'in in in A'in-i-Akbari, one
of the Longest A'in too, in detailing out nine schools of philosophy of the
Hindus -- 6 for the ShaDdarshana, plus jaina, bauddha, and chArvAkan lokAyata
school. (He considers the last 3 nastikas as part of Hindus) -- a very detailed
study he made of the religion of Hindus.
Quasim Hindushah Ferishta, living in deccan in early 17th century, wrote
tArIkh-i-ferishtA wherein he too detailed out besides other things, a rather
good account on what he understood to be the religion of the Hindus, especially
the thought process of the brAhmaNa-s, and Veda-s etc.
Persian Chronicle Dabistan-i-Mazahab written at the same time detailes out every
single nuance about Hinduism.
Now you tell me how many Hindus tried to figure out what Islam was all about???
They did not!! Period.
And in it is their failure.
Indeed in the period when Al-Biruni was learning about Hindus, and post
push-back of Gaznavi by bhojadeva and the chandella-s, there was a peaceful
period of over a century for the Hindus, but did the brAhmaNa-s care to produce
ANY understanding on Islam (besides the 12th chapter in bhaviShya purANa where a
minister of bhojadeva the pramAra slays mohammed by means of tantra
deployment!!)
All those who defend this moronic attitude are also of the same class, living in
the imaginary world awaiting satayuga, ignoring the imminent danger. If you
want to immitate your forefathers, you will fare no better than they did.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin--><<<When you were faced with Muslim invasion, the word "ideological attack" makes
no sense because people's minds were not the targets of the enemy.>>>
It just shows how shallow your understanding of Hindu History is!!!
The fundamental, and the ONLY root cause of the invasion of ISLAM and
CHRISTIANISM against India is ideology, and nothing but ideology, and the target
was, and is, nothing but the PEOPLE's MINDS -- war and conquest being only the
means to reach there!
Repeat -- in the Islamic wordview, military conquest is only a means for the
spread of Islam, not an end in itself!
Do read Sir Syed Ahmed Khan as well as Mawlana Abul Kalam Azad -- many of their
writings are available freely over Internet -- just read to understand how a
moslem thinks, and behind the Islamic wars was and remains nothing but the need
to conquer the kAfir and converts. -- THE MINDS.
Let me just cite the example of Shambhaji, when he was captured and tortured to
death by awrangzib. The moghal tyrant made a simple proposal -- convert and I
shall return the entire deccan, along with not only marahaTTA domain, but the
whole of Ahmednagar and Bijapur and Golkonda! Just convert. My war is not with
you, but your religion. (Of course Shambhaji died after bravely suffering the
torchures for two weeks -- but gave birth to the even mightier hindu nation
after him!)
And you say "ideological attack" makes no sense!!
It does not make sense to you because your grasp on history is as shallow as you
show in the above statement!!
It does not make sense to you because you have not made an attempt to learn
about Islam, its history and its philosophy, like the ancestors of yours and
mine did not.
Please read some books, and leave aside for now all those purANa-s. Start with
Jadunath Sarkar and Sardesai.
"ideological attack" makes no sense to you? Consider this:
Al-Biruni, the companion of Mahmood Gaznavi in 11th century wrote one whole book
about the Hindus, and covered besides other things, a very detailed
understanding on Hindus religion, culture and philosophy.
Moraccan Moslem Ibn-batuta in the mid 1300s produced Rihla, in which too he gave
prominent coverage to the religion and ideology of the Hindus.
Amir Khusrow the sUfI, in the same period, produced several persian works in
which he produced detailed understanding on Hindus.
Abul Fazl in the 16th century, dedicates one whole A'in in in A'in-i-Akbari, one
of the Longest A'in too, in detailing out nine schools of philosophy of the
Hindus -- 6 for the ShaDdarshana, plus jaina, bauddha, and chArvAkan lokAyata
school. (He considers the last 3 nastikas as part of Hindus) -- a very detailed
study he made of the religion of Hindus.
Quasim Hindushah Ferishta, living in deccan in early 17th century, wrote
tArIkh-i-ferishtA wherein he too detailed out besides other things, a rather
good account on what he understood to be the religion of the Hindus, especially
the thought process of the brAhmaNa-s, and Veda-s etc.
Persian Chronicle Dabistan-i-Mazahab written at the same time detailes out every
single nuance about Hinduism.
Now you tell me how many Hindus tried to figure out what Islam was all about???
They did not!! Period.
And in it is their failure.
Indeed in the period when Al-Biruni was learning about Hindus, and post
push-back of Gaznavi by bhojadeva and the chandella-s, there was a peaceful
period of over a century for the Hindus, but did the brAhmaNa-s care to produce
ANY understanding on Islam (besides the 12th chapter in bhaviShya purANa where a
minister of bhojadeva the pramAra slays mohammed by means of tantra
deployment!!)
All those who defend this moronic attitude are also of the same class, living in
the imaginary world awaiting satayuga, ignoring the imminent danger. If you
want to immitate your forefathers, you will fare no better than they did.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->