Akbar's fort symbol of subjugation of Hindus,want the imposing structure to be replaced : VHP

[INDIAPOSITIVE]

Kicking up a controversy, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad on Saturday said the fort built by Mughal emperor Akbar on the banks of the river Yamuna is a "symbol of subjugation of Hindus" and wanted the imposing structure to be replaced with a night shelter for poor pilgrims visiting to have a dip in the holy Sangam.

"During Muslim rule in India, countless temples were pulled down and replaced with mosques. These mosques were erected as symbols of subjugation of Hindus. The VHP had sought to remove only three of such symbols - at Ayodhya, Kashi and Mathura. The Fort situated nearby is another such symbol," VHP patron Ashok Singhal said.

Singhal was speaking at a 'Virat Hindu Sammelan' organised at Parade Ground in the vicinity of the Sangam and the fort, to mark the golden jubilee of the establishment of the Sangh Parivar outfit.

"Why should there be a fort so close to the confluence of Ganga, Yamuna and mythical river Saraswati, where Hindus come from across the country every year to take a holy dip on festivals and where millions converge whenever the Kumbh Mela is organized?" the VHP patriarch asked.

"Everybody knows that this fort was built to commemorate a Mughal emperor's victory over Hindus," Singhal said, alluding to the Second Battle of Panipat in which Akbar had defeated Hemu, a Hindu king, thereby establishing the hegemony of the Mughal Empire across north India.

He alleged that the "Akshayvat" - a banyan tree which is held sacred by Hindus - was "made inaccessible to devotees through the imposing structure".

"Even today, people are being fooled in the name of allowing worship at the Akshayavat as the original sacred tree is situated in deep, inaccessible corners of the fort. Why should not the structure be replaced with a 'rain basera' (night shelter) for poor pilgrims who sleep in the open in cold weather to have a holy dip at the crack of dawn on bathing festivals," Singhal added.

VHP wants Akbar's fort in Allahabad to be replaced with night shelters | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis

 

[TamilRise]

Tamils are only Hindus to never bow to Muslims. Let us lead the Indians but first you must start funding the LTTE again.

 

[Moon]

Tamils are only Hindus to never bow to Muslims. Let us lead the Indians but first you must start funding the LTTE again.

Says the "mighty Tamilian" living in Canada... So I request you, for the sanity of all members on this forum to:

(P.S your post has been reported for the support of a Terrorist organization. Enjoy)

 

[asq]

Kicking up a controversy, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad on Saturday said the fort built by Mughal emperor Akbar on the banks of the river Yamuna is a "symbol of subjugation of Hindus" and wanted the imposing structure to be replaced with a night shelter for poor pilgrims visiting to have a dip in the holy Sangam.

"During Muslim rule in India, countless temples were pulled down and replaced with mosques. These mosques were erected as symbols of subjugation of Hindus. The VHP had sought to remove only three of such symbols - at Ayodhya, Kashi and Mathura. The Fort situated nearby is another such symbol," VHP patron Ashok Singhal said.

Singhal was speaking at a 'Virat Hindu Sammelan' organised at Parade Ground in the vicinity of the Sangam and the fort, to mark the golden jubilee of the establishment of the Sangh Parivar outfit.

"Why should there be a fort so close to the confluence of Ganga, Yamuna and mythical river Saraswati, where Hindus come from across the country every year to take a holy dip on festivals and where millions converge whenever the Kumbh Mela is organized?" the VHP patriarch asked.

"Everybody knows that this fort was built to commemorate a Mughal emperor's victory over Hindus," Singhal said, alluding to the Second Battle of Panipat in which Akbar had defeated Hemu, a Hindu king, thereby establishing the hegemony of the Mughal Empire across north India.

He alleged that the "Akshayvat" - a banyan tree which is held sacred by Hindus - was "made inaccessible to devotees through the imposing structure".uwhy forindians, history starts when these Aryans invaded India,

"Even today, people are being fooled in the name of allowing worship at the Akshayavat as the original sacred tree is situated in deep, inaccessible corners of the fort. Why should not the structure be replaced with a 'rain basera' (night shelter) for poor pilgrims who sleep in the open in cold weather to have a holy dip at the crack of dawn on bathing festivals," Singhal added.

VHP wants Akbar's fort in Allahabad to be replaced with night shelters | Latest News & Updates at Daily News & Analysis

why for these Aryana's history of Indua starts when they invaded India. Very strange.

 

[SelfServeFive]

Tamils are only Hindus to never bow to Muslims. Let us lead the Indians but first you must start funding the LTTE again.

LOL Indians were enslaved from Timur to Mountbatten. India's most famous building is a monument to Islam's subjugation of Mahabharata.

 

[Sugarcane]

VHP's objections are legitimate, fort should be converted to day/night shelter for pilgrims ASAP

 

[Prajapati]

This is the fort in question,

Let it remain as a Symbol that Hindus won back India ........... at least half of it.

 

[Menace2Society]

Its a piece of history, just leave it.

 

[Prajapati]

.... or is the VHP talking about his fort ? ....... confused

 

[syedali73]

What about the buildings erected in colonial Victorian era? Are they not viewed as the symbols of subjugation?

 

[Luca1]

LOL Indians were enslaved from Timur to Mountbatten. India's most famous building is a monument to Islam's subjugation of Mahabharata.

But India owe its existence to the Brits. Prio to that, India subcontinent consists of various kingdoms that came and go. Invaders such as Timur are just one of many. Without the British creation of India, India would not exist today as a nation.

 

[Prajapati]

It already seems to be used for something. Maybe it should be conerted into a hotel and earn some revenues to the State.

What about the buildings erected in colonial Victorian era? Are they not viewed as the symbols of subjugation?

They are symbols of subjugation to capitalism and modernity, not christianity. We continue to be Capitalist and sadly modernity continues to be defined in western parlance.

 

[Luca1]

What about the buildings erected in colonial Victorian era? Are they not views as symbols of subjugation?

The existence of India as a nation is a symbol of British subjugation. English language, government is an example of British conquest isf India. For India to recover from its colonial past, it need to revert ack to its former kingdoms and states.

 

[syedali73]

They are symbols of subjugation to capitalism and modernity, not christianity. We continue to be Capitalist and sadly modernity continues to be defined in western parlance.

And Akbar was a Muslim ruler? A ruler who invented his own religion called 'Deen Ilahi'? Except, and to some extent, Aurangzeb, all the other Mughal rulers were as far away from Islam as at this point of time, myself and you. And who says English colonialism had nothing to do with Christianity? Who patronized the Christian missionaries? Who erected monasteries, Cathedrals and Churches? You got any idea how many Indians were converted to Christians during British colonial rule?

Can you recognize the following structure and in which Indian city it is?

 

[Guynextdoor2]

But India owe its existence to the Brits. Prio to that, India subcontinent consists of various kingdoms that came and go. Invaders such as Timur are just one of many. Without the British creation of India, India would not exist today as a nation.

Robin Lawley is fat and ugly

And Akbar was a Muslim ruler? A ruler who invented his own religion called 'Deen Ilahi'? Except, and to some extent, Aurangzeb, all the other Mughal rulers were as far away from Islam as at this point of time, myself and you. And who says English colonialism had nothing to do with Christianity? Who patronized the Christian missionaries? Who erected monasteries, Cathedrals and Churches? You got any idea how many Indians were converted to Christians during British colonial rule?

Can you recognize the following structure and in which Indian city it is?

View attachment 191182

These jokers are not concerned with History.

 

[Prajapati]

And Akbar was a Muslim ruler? A ruler who invented his own religion called 'Deen Ilahi'? Except, and to some extent, Aurangzeb, all the other Mughal rulers were as far away from Islam as at this point of time, myself and you. And who says English colonialism had nothing to do with Christianity? Who patronized the Christian missionaries? Who erected monasteries, Cathedrals and Churches? You got any idea how many Indians were converted to Christians during British colonial rule?

Akbar mellowed down after being exposed to Hinduism, before that he was just another fanatic Islamic invader.

Do you know what is Jauhar ?............ that's women and children killing themselves by jumping into a fire to prevent being captured by Islamic invades. Choosing death over slavery.

Now read up on Battle of Chittor Garh, the capital of Mewar.

After the battle Akbar "the great" ordered Massacre of all its civilian population "to teach a lesson" to the Hindus.

30,000 - 40,000 Men, women and children were Killed. Many Women and Children captured and pressed into Slavery.

300 women, including nine ranis (Including Rani Padmini) and five princesses, and an unknown number of children committed Jauhar and perished in three houses that served as fiery furnaces.

Thousands of women escaped slavery by pretending to be part of Akbar's entourage and before they were discovered melted away into the night.

The British were more interested in exploiting India's Riches than harvesting our souls. Still the damage was significant, only the MacCulays children who dominated history dept. in India did not permit this truth to come out.