1857- Jihad Against Christianity Commence

[scorpionx]

Can you justify your charges against Aurangzeb?

Can you justify your sympathy in favor of Aurangzeb? My job is easier as any history book on medieval history of India will answer your query.

 

[flamer84]

Yes they were. Today 99% of Christians in India and Pakistan were converted from mostly low caste Hindus and some poor Muslim families.

Interesting,thanks.I didn't know that,i always thought they were just after the resources and wealth of the land and not very focused in agressive missionarism.

 

[INDIC]

Question,as i am unimformed on this issue.Were the British agressive missionaires in India ?

British were less into it, their main motive was making money out of India but the main cause of 1857 rebellion was the use of pig and beef fats in cartridges of gunpowder which hurt the sentiments of Hindu and Muslim soldiers of British Indian leading to a soldier revolt starting from Barrakpore in Calcutta, many Indian states who were annoyed by British dominance soon joined it. But Portuguese were very aggressive missionaries who extended their Inquisition in India against Hindus and Catholics(following their former Hindu customs) leading to widespread persecution and in Kerala they led to religious tensions with Orthodox Christianity.

 

[Jaanbaz]

Interesting,thanks.I didn't know that,i always thought they were just after the resources and wealth of the land and not very focused in agressive missionarism.

Brits are clever folks. They didn't send too many missionaries in areas that were known to be home to aggressive tribes. Like in the Frontier with Afghanistan. The missionaries were more strong in large cities of India and were also quite strong in Punjab province.

Not all missions were supported by the British crown. There were many independent missions, some were Germans and some were British. Although that said the British did allow people to follow their own religions peacefully most of the times. Some zealous missionaries got out of hand and started printing abusive books against the Prophet Mohammad and that created a serious backlash. Those were interesting times for Muslims of India. Some thought they would fight and do Jihad against British, while others thought it was time to educate the Muslim youth and answer Christian missionaries by writing books.

 

[flamer84]

Brits are clever folks. They didn't send too many missionaries in areas that were known to be home to aggressive tribes. Like in the Frontier with Afghanistan. The missionaries were more strong in large cities of India and were also quite strong in Punjab province.
Not all missions were supported by the British crown. There were many independent missions, some were Germans and some were British. Although that said the British did allow people to follow their own religions peacefully most of the times. Some zealous missionaries got out of hand and started printing abusive books against the Prophet Mohammad and that created a serious backlash. Those were interesting times for Muslims of India. Some thought they would fight and do Jihad against British, while others thought it was time to educate the Muslim youth and answer Christian missionaries by writing

British were less into it, their main motive was making money out of India but the main cause of 1857 rebellion was the use of pig and beef fats in cartridges of gunpowder which hurt the sentiments of Hindu and Muslim soldiers of British Indian leading to a soldier revolt starting from Barrakpore in Calcutta, many Indian states who were annoyed by British dominance soon joined it. But Portuguese were very aggressive missionaries who extended their Inquisition in India against Hindus and Catholics(following their former Hindu customs) leading to widespread persecution and in Kerala they led to religious tensions with Orthodox Christianity.

Much obliged for the usefull new info gents.

 

[Umair Nawaz]

The interesting point to note here is that the Jihad against WCC (Western Christian Civilization) was begun by Sayed Ahmed Shaheed (1786–1831). Of Rae Bareli, his power base was the Bengal Presidency. The Sepoys of 1857 were greatly inspired by his teachings. The Sepoys - both Muslim and Hindu,had considered the 1857 Uprising as Jihad. Their war cry, "Khalqe Khoda, Takhte Padshah, Hukumate Sepahee" was yelled by both Hindu and Muslim Sepoys and population.

WOO Woo slow down. In 1857's war of freedom we fought collectively for liberation of our united india not against christianity or something. It was against tyrants and colonial occupiers it was the last comprehensive unity of indian union with even hindus and the local christians also fought side by side.

. This fact is accepted by experts of entire SA and even british. Lets not fall in the propaganda.

This documentary got a lot of their facts wrong about Syad Ahmad Barelvi. He carried out his Jihad against the Sikhs not the British. The British were hoping his Jihad against the Sikhs would be a long drawn out war weakening both sides so the British would take advantage and annex the territory of Punjab.

Drawing the parallels between Syed Ahmad Bareilvi and Talibans

actually thats not true either. His militias were to fight only british but the sikhs under ranjeet singh were sided with british. Even do u know syed ahmed shaheed offered his daughter's hand to ranjeet singh if they side with them or atleast let them across his territory towards east to attack british. But he remained stubborn and chose to fight against his own indians and killed him in balakot. Thats one of main reasons why muslims dislike ranjeet singh. Lets not believe in the propaganda of british and to be exact this is not the only one. It was because of him and the hard word of Khangah Raipur that the entire ethnic and religious groups got united and that was the last time that we were comprehensively united.

 

[Jaggu]

actually thats not true either. His militias were to fight only british but the sikhs under ranjeet singh were sided with british. Even do u know syed ahmed shaheed offered his daughter's hand to ranjeet singh if they side with them or atleast let them across his territory towards east to attack british. But he remained stubborn and chose to fight against his own indians and killed him in balakot. Thats one of main reasons why muslims dislike ranjeet singh. Lets not believe in the propaganda of british and to be exact this is not the only one. It was because of him and the hard word of Khangah Raipur that the entire ethnic and religious groups got united and that was the last time that we were comprehensively were united.

Ranjeet Singh was bound with treaties with the British because of which he could not allow anyone to launch attacks on the British. There was even a Sikh named Akali Phula Singh who wanted to launch attacks against the British so all of Punjab could be united(since Malwa region was still under the British). But Ranjeet Singh did not allow this.

The British had kept their eye on Syad Barelvi while he was in Hindustan preaching and gaining followers. Yes he wanted to fight the British, but the British were too big a fish for him. So he thought first he will deal with the Sikhs. He first went to Afghanistan hoping to gain support from the Barakzais but they did not take him too seriously. So he then went to the NW frontier in the territory of the Yusafzais. The Pathans were impressed by his religiosity and gave him their support. The plan of Syad Ahmad Barelvi was to first take the NW Frontier, then Kashmir and then ultimately all of Punjab. Once the territory of Lahore Durbar would be under him, he then would use that and it's resources as a launching pad to attack British India and take all of Hindustan under his rule. (seems like maybe the concept of Ghazwa Hind may have been in his mind way back then)

He was a very strict Muslim of the Wahabi/Salafist persuasion. Under his rule he imposed strict Sharia Law much like the Taliban of today. His biggest mistake was to demand the Pasthuns to provide brides for his Hindustani followers. This is the point which led to his downfall and he ended up losing Peshawar without the Sikhs firing a single shot. Balakot was his last battle.

Khota Qabar & the story of a lost battle | Wonders of Pakistan

 

[Umair Nawaz]

Ranjeet Singh was bound was treaties with the British because of which he could not allow anyone to launch attacks on the British. There was even a Sikh named Akali Phula Singh who wanted to launch attacks against the British so all of Punjab could be united(since Malwa region was still under the British). But Ranjeet Singh did not allow this.

The British had kept their eye on Syad Barelvi while he was in Hindustan preaching and gaining followers. Yes he wanted to fight the British, but the British were too big a fish for him. So he thought first he will deal with the Sikhs. He first went to Afghanistan hoping to gain support from the Barakzais but they did not take him too seriously. So he then went to the NW frontier in the territory of the Yusafzais. The Pathans were impressed by his religiosity and gave him their support. The plan of Syad Ahmad Barelvi was to first take the NW Frontier, then Kashmir and then ultimately all of Punjab. Once the territory of Lahore Durbar would be under him, he then would use that and it's resources as a launching pad to attack British India and take all of Hindustan under his rule. (seems like maybe the concept of Ghazwa Hind may have been in his mind way back then)

He was a very strict Muslim of the Wahabi/Salafist persuasion. Under his rule he imposed strict Sharia Law much like the Taliban of today. His biggest mistake was to demand the Pasthuns to provide brides for his Hindustani followers. This is the point which led to his downfall and he ended up losing Peshawar without the Sikhs firing a single shot. Balakot was his last battle.

Khota Qabar & the story of a lost battle | Wonders of Pakistan

Like i said there have been a lot of misconceptions abt him and his fight. But if this mentioned above was true then he and his comrades wouldnt be a hero today. BTW he wasnt any salafi/wahabi etc. These sects came way after and were set up by british to divide.

Anyways thats all i had to share if u believe yr welcome and if u dont then yr welcome too.

 

[Jaggu]

Like i said there have been a lot of misconceptions abt him and his fight. But if this mentioned above was true then he and his wouldnt be a hero today. BTW he wasnt any salafi/wahabi etc. These sects came way after and were set up by british to divide.

Anyways thats all i had to share if u believe yr welcome and if u dont then yr welcome too.

He is regarded as a Wahabi because when he went on a pilgrimage to the Arabian peninsula he came into contact with the Wahabis who had just started not too long ago. Although he wasn't a Wahabi in the strictest sense but he was greatly influenced by their ideas. That is why he is considered Wahabi like with minor differences. He didn't out right reject spiritual ideas of the Sufis.

The following link gives a detailed account of Syad Ahmad Barelvi's link with Wahabism, forward to page 14 and read onwards on his movement:

http://www.tribalanalysiscenter.com/PDF-TAC/Hindustani Fanatics-Deobandism.pdf

 

[Umair Nawaz]

He is regarded as a Wahabi because when he went on a pilgrimage to the Arabian peninsula he came into contact with the Wahabis who had just started not too long ago. Although he wasn't a Wahabi in the strictest sense but he was greatly influenced by their ideas. That is why he is considered Wahabi like with minor differences. He didn't out right reject spiritual ideas of the Sufis.

The following link gives a detailed account of Syad Ahmad Barelvi's link with Wahabism, forward to page 14 and read onwards on his movement:

http://www.tribalanalysiscenter.com/PDF-TAC/Hindustani Fanatics-Deobandism.pdf

Rubbish conspiracy theories from some wannabe analysts. These may work for those who r less knowledgeable but wont to those who have comprehensively studied history. Anyways i reject that.

But like i said thats all i had to share if u believe yr welcome and if u dont then yr welcome too. Now dont quote me further.

 

[asad71]

Can you justify your sympathy in favor of Aurangzeb? My job is easier as any history book on medieval history of India will answer your query.

All sourced from material commissioned by WCC. Late Palestinian writer,Eduard Saeed, had opened our eyes to this.

 

[asad71]

WOO Woo slow down. In 1857's war of freedom we fought collectively for liberation of our united india not against christianity or something. It was against tyrants and colonial occupiers it was the last comprehensive unity of indian union with even hindus and the local christians also fought side by side.

. This fact is accepted by experts of entire SA and even british. Lets not fall in the propaganda.


actually thats not true either. His militias were to fight only british but the sikhs under ranjeet singh were sided with british. Even do u know syed ahmed shaheed offered his daughter's hand to ranjeet singh if they side with them or atleast let them across his territory towards east to attack british. But he remained stubborn and chose to fight against his own indians and killed him in balakot. Thats one of main reasons why muslims dislike ranjeet singh. Lets not believe in the propaganda of british and to be exact this is not the only one. It was because of him and the hard word of Khangah Raipur that the entire ethnic and religious groups got united and that was the last time that we were comprehensively were united.

1.Mangal Pandey's bullet was fired to save his religion from pollution by Christians. Remember the alleged use of cow and pig fat?

2. 1857 is not too far back. Our great grand-fathers were alive. There were news papers in Hindustani as well as English. Telegraphy was in use.Emperor Bahadur Shah was transported from Kanpur to Calcutta by train. And then onto Rangoon by a steam-ship. A huge lot of records are available to any researcher. Just after Partition Maulana Azad was commissioned by GOI to write about the uprising. The book is published as The 1857.William Darylimp has written another book covering the life and society at that time. The core objective of missionary work by the colonial English/British is quite clearly brought out.

 

[Umair Nawaz]

1.Mangal Pandey's bullet was fired to save his religion from pollution by Christians. Remember the alleged use of cow and pig fat?

2. 1857 is not too far back. Our great grand-fathers were alive. There were news papers in Hindustani as well as English. Telegraphy was in use.Emperor Bahadur Shah was transported from Kanpur to Calcutta by train. And then onto Rangoon by a steam-ship. A huge lot of records are available to any researcher. Just after Partition Maulana Azad was commissioned by GOI to write about the uprising. The book is published as The 1857.William Darylimp has written another book covering the life and society at that time. The core objective of missionary work by the colonial English/British is quite clearly brought out.

do u know who this william darylimp really is? these goras and others like him have written many books to spread wrong info.

 

[asad71]

do u know who this william darylimp really is? these goras and others like him have written many books to spread wrong info.

He has written several books - all novels,based on life and society during the Raj. Other accounts corroborate his line of views. I thought this gora was an okay guy.

 

[INDIC]

Brits are clever folks. They didn't send too many missionaries in areas that were known to be home to aggressive tribes.

@flamer84 The spread of Christianity was almost negligible in North India except the tribes although missionaries had big presence. In South India a large amount of population converted to Christianity.