Churches burnt in India

[Vinod2070]

This is muddled. Refer to the history section. I think it's been renamed. There's lots of posts answering this there.

Why refer to people as invaders and not migrators anyway? The Rig Vedic civilization, Gandhara and some others were all Pakistani civilizations. Need I quote Witzel again?

I saw that section and some threads there. Didn't see a lot of facts other than the same muscular, fair Pakistani stuff and some pictures of a Delhi slum!

Were the people like Timur lame, Nadir Shah, Gazani, Gauri, Abdali peace loving migrants or violent, barbaric and vicious mass murderers, looters and worse? You know how many slaves the likes of Gazani took from the parts now called Pakistan and also parts of North India?

There is no doubt that the Rig vedic civilization was practiced in Pakistan at some time along with a large part of modern India. It was destroyed by the invading hordes there and the people there have foresaken it. They don't consider it their own and a very large part don't even consider themselves as the original inhabitants of that land.

India still takes pride in that civilization and a very large population has suffered for a thousand years to preserve and continue that civilization. We are the true inheritors of that civilization, even if it may have originated in the parts now called Pakistan.

Anyway let's get back to the topic. We seem to be moving in circles with no facts coming to take things forward, just some rhetoric.

 

[Goodperson]

I am diverting from the thread topic since the trhead has drifted to bangladesh discussion.


Have you read Hamoodur Rahman Commission Report ? After report was forced to be made available in Pakistan ? It was published first in "INDIA TODAY" in India. Then there was a great hue and cry in Pakistan among their political parties.

The Bangladesh Liberation War Museum's e-book

 

[Proud to be Pakistani]

Just some names that will prove that this is not correct.

Timure Lame
Nadir Shah
Mahmud Gazhani
Mohammed Gauri
Bahamanis
Akbar murdering 30000 Rajput civilians
Aurangjeb indulging in mass conversions and murdering the Sixth Sikh Guru when he opposed this. This of course after murdering his own brother and presenting his head to his own father whom he had imprisioned.

Last but not the least the Bangladeshi claim itself of 3 million murders and countless rapes by Pakistani troops.

The intention here is not to ridicule anyone but to say that facts are different from commonly held beliefs.

Care to read the post vinod !

I mentioned Islamic Empire not the Mughal Empire ...

Islamic Empire in the time of caliphs.

Be considerate in your responses!

Others shall be the same with you!

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

There is no doubt that the Rig vedic civilization was practiced in Pakistan at some time along with a large part of modern India. It was destroyed by the invading hordes there and the people there have foresaken it. They don't consider it their own and a very large part don't even consider themselves as the original inhabitants of that land.

I am proud of the Islamic phase of India's history.

It is our heritage and it would be stupid to pretend that it was never there!

Only those who have serious insecurity are those who reinvent history to suit their agenda!

Imagine if Indian history started with India's Independence!

The glorious and the infamous parts that made us what we are would be lost!

And we would be living in a Fools' Paradise!

Thank Heavens, we are not fools!

 

[Vinod2070]

Sir, the discussion here was about the Pre-Islamic Indian civilization and whether it can be claimed exclusively by Pakistan (which BTW is done by a very few people just on the internet). I say it is a shared legacy.

The Islamic phase is a part of Indian heritage and is looked at differently by different people. Even that is a shared legacy of both India and Pakistan.

 

[Flintlock]

I am proud of the Islamic phase of India's history.

It is our heritage and it would be stupid to pretend that it was never there!

The Mughal Empire was a time of glory, but only for the Mughals and their allies.

You must understand that the Mughals didn't give a damn about the common man, because they were foreigners at heart.

Only a man of the soil will care about the welfare of his people. The Mughals did nothing to uplift or educate the common person. They built not one institution in their entire reign.

Yes, we must be proud of the grand mughal buildings that were left behind, because they were mostly built by Indians. We must also be proud of the culture that was created. the dance, the music, the drama, the language.

But we must never be proud of Mughal rule. It was a period of decline for the vast majority of the country.

It was also a period of great massacre. For civilization to flourish, it needs a critical mass of talented people and leaders. When a foreigner invades an alien land, the first thing he does is wipe out the brightest/most influential/richest people of the conquered territory and make the local population a headless chicken. Only then can he successfully maintain his rule.
The Entire Indo-Gangetic plain, Bihar, Orissa, Central India was devastated because of this, and even 200 years after it all ended, it is still just beginning to recover.

Salim, think of Afghanistan. Afghanistan was one of the first nations to suffer the Islamic onslaught. Gandhara was a flourishing centre of trade, commerce, craftsmanship and culture.
Look what Islamic rule has turned it into. It is a living hell.

On the other hand, look at South India, where Islamic conquerers could never reach. Most of India's talent today, comes from South India. What are the reasons for that? Are North Indians inferior to South Indians? of course not....a look at history will show that North India had some great civilizations in the past. The reason is that traditional society in the north was destroyed in order to create the new Mughal society.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Vinod,

True.

But to believe that it was what is being propagated indicates a blinkered approach.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

The Mughal Empire was a time of glory, but only for the Mughals and their allies.

True, but it is a part of our history.

Can we run away from it?

Unlike the British who did not stay, these Moghals stayed and embraced India as their home, for good or for worse!

You must understand that the Mughals didn't give a damn about the common man, because they were foreigners at heart.

But the successors, they had to look after their Empire as their own!

Only a man of the soil will care about the welfare of his people. The Mughals did nothing to uplift or educate the common person. They built not one institution in their entire reign.

In those days, they were all marauders and invaders. One cannot apply modern day ethics for those times.

Yes, we must be proud of the grand mughal buildings that were left behind, because they were mostly built by Indians. We must also be proud of the culture that was created. the dance, the music, the drama, the language.

We must.

But we must never be proud of Mughal rule. It was a period of decline for the vast majority of the country.

Debatable.

It was also a period of great massacre. For civilization to flourish, it needs a critical mass of talented people and leaders. When a foreigner invades an alien land, the first thing he does is wipe out the brightest/most influential/richest people of the conquered territory and make the local population a headless chicken. Only then can he successfully maintain his rule.
The Entire Indo-Gangetic plain, Bihar, Orissa, Central India was devastated because of this, and even 200 years after it all ended, it is still just beginning to recover.

Apply the norms of those times.

Today's ethics can be immoral tomorrow!

 

[Flintlock]

True, but it is a part of our history.

Can we run away from it?

Unlike the British who did not stay, these Moghals stayed and embraced India as their home, for good or for worse!

The Mughals never integrated with the local population. They created their own world and lived in it, as foreigners.

The objective is not to deny that Mughals were here, or to denigrate their contributions. Of course they made several contributions to Indian culture. There is no doubt about that.

But the successors, they had to look after their Empire as their own!

Hardly. You must realize that most Indians were Hindus, who did not identify with Mughal culture.
While the Mughal culture flourished, the traditional cultures were in steep decline.
On top of that, in order to prevent revolts in their land, the Mughals had to ensure that the Hindus could never rise to a powerful enough position to challenge them.
I challenge you to find a single large Hindu temple in North India, which wasn't defaced/demolished during the Islamic onslaught.
The complete absence of Hindu monuments from North India itself is proof of the trauma that the locals underwent during this period.

Try visiting the city of Vijayanagar in Karnataka. It was one of the greatest cultural achievements in human history. The Mughals destroyed and depopulated the entire area. So devastating was the effect, that no human has ever lived in that area till very recently.

In those days, they were all marauders and invaders. One cannot apply modern day ethics for those times.

Remember, community feeling was always strong. The Maurading and Invading was always against foreigners. If a Hindu king attacked another, he did not devastate the entire region before establishing his rule.

Modern ethics ask us to respect other tribes, but respect for ones' own tribe was always present in ancient times.

Apply the norms of those times.

Today's ethics can be immoral tomorrow!

the question is not of ethics, but of the consequences of those ethics.

It might have been the norm to massacre in those days, but the effects of those norms can be clearly seen today.
If Bihar and UP are uncivilized, it is not because they are incapable of it. It is because their civilization was crushed by foreigners. Indians must understand this, because if they don't, they will continue to believe that Indians have always been a poor, wretched people.

Obviously, the muslims of today's India are not at fault for what foreigners did to the country. But simply in order to please the pseudo-secularists, we must not glorify the islamic rule. It was a disaster, whichever way you look at it.

 

[Vinod2070]

I agree with Stealth and feel that the Mughal period was not a great period for India. Not for the common people, Hindu and Muslim alike.

May be some grand buildings were made then, but what else? Except for some achievements by a very small elite at the top, I don't know of any of their achievements in terms of how the life of common people improved. May be a great (as in size) empire but one that could not endear itself to a large majority of it's people.

And at the end of that period, the places which were most heavily influenced by their rule bore a desert like look. Hardly any ancient buildings/temples survived. The difference between Southern parts of India where we can still see great ancient architectural wonders and the North-Western India which are almost barren of any ancient culture tells a tale in itself.

 

[Vinod2070]

And even if we accept that the Muslim invaders behaved as badly as others of the time (which I am not sure), at least their being Muslim did not improve their behaviour as is generally claimed!

The alleged timeless nature of their teachings should have made them more humane irresepective of the period they operated in.

Again, I don't know of many invaders as barbaric and vicious as some I mentioned in earlier posts.

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

You are entitled to your views as I am entitled to mine.

Evolution of a race is dependant on all input, good and bad.

No one is bad. They are all shades of grey and one should be able to accept that fact of life.

 

[rrs]

I think you being an educated person and civilized too so for the first time i wish to see you praise Islam for this i highlighted the parts of your post quoting Quran
My dear Sir Ray it clearly Shows that Islam Does not order any Punishment in this world for those who convert from Islam to any other religion rather it says i would again quote your own reference here "Koran repeatedly stresses that enduring everlasting fire and severe punishment in the afterworld"


So by as per Quran Allah says they will be punished in the afterworld by Allah and not by any Human.
Hence no such law in any Islamic Country that mention any punishment for the same.


So my dear Islam does not orders any violence against thos who converts to other religion
Islam Zaindabad indeed.

.......................................................................................................



WASHINGTON (CNN) -- In the days of the Taliban, those promoting Christianity in Afghanistan could be arrested and those converting from Islam could be tortured and publicly executed.

That was supposed to change after U.S.-led forces ousted the oppressive, fundamentalist regime, but the case of 41-year-old Abdul Rahman has many Western nations wondering if Afghanistan is regressing.

Rahman, a father of two, was arrested last week and is now awaiting trial for rejecting Islam. He told local police, whom he approached on an unrelated matter, that he had converted to Christianity. Reports say he was carrying a Bible at the time.

"They want to sentence me to death, and I accept it," Rahman told reporters last week, "but I am not a deserter and not an infidel."

The Afghan constitution, which is based on Sharia, or Islamic law, says that apostates can receive the death penalty



Afghan Man Faces Execution After Converting to Christianity
By Benjamin Sand
Kabul
18 March 2006



An Afghan man who recently admitted he converted to Christianity faces the death penalty under the country's strict Islamic legal system. The trial is a critical test of Afghanistan's new constitution and democratic government.

The case is attracting widespread attention in Afghanistan, where local media are closely monitoring the landmark proceedings.

Abdul Rahman, 40, was arrested last month, accused of converting to Christianity.

Under Afghanistan's new constitution, minority religious rights are protected but Muslims are still subject to strict Islamic laws.

And so, officially, Muslim-born Rahman is charged with rejecting Islam and not for practicing Christianity.

Appearing in court earlier this week Rahman insisted he should not be considered an infidel, but admitted he is a Christian.

He says he still believes in the almighty Allah, but cannot say for sure who God really is. "I am," he says, "a Christian and I believe in Jesus Christ."

Rahman reportedly converted more than 16 years ago after spending time working in Germany.

Officials say his family, who remain observant Muslims, turned him over to the authorities.

On Thursday the prosecution told the court Rahman has rejected numerous offers to embrace Islam.

Prosecuting attorney Abdul Wasi told the judge that the punishment should fit the crime.

He says Rahman is a traitor to Islam and is like a cancer inside Afghanistan. Under Islamic law and under the Afghan constitution, he says, the defendant should be executed.
The court has ordered a delay in the proceedings to give Rahman time to hire an attorney.

Under Afghan law, once a verdict is given, the case can be appealed twice to higher courts.

This is the first case in which the defendant has admitted to converting and is refusing to back down, even while facing the death penalty.

If convicted, the case could ultimately force President Hamid Karzai's direct intervention.

The president would have to sign the papers authorizing Rahman's execution, a move that could jeopardize Mr. Karzai's standing with human rights groups and Western governments.

So far, President Karzai has not commented on the case.

But political analysts here in Kabul say he will be under significant pressure from the country's hard-line religious groups to make an example of Rahman.


Are you sure Jana?

 

[Tiki Tam Tam]

Jana has rigid views.

Address this to Agnostic and Mastan.

You will get a pragmatic answer beyond the irrationality of the mind and sentiment.

Jana has not agreed on this very issue, though I will concede, I asked her obliquely so as to not hurt the Moslem sentiments!

 

[Flintlock]

You are entitled to your views as I am entitled to mine.

Evolution of a race is dependant on all input, good and bad.

No one is bad. They are all shades of grey and one should be able to accept that fact of life.

I urge you to change your perspective.
Try to analyze this as a clash of civilizations. Think of the year 700 AD. Islam is a new religion, and the entire region from Central Asia to S/E Asia is under hindu/buddhist culture.
When Islamic conquerers entered the region, they wiped out the indegenous traditions of Afghanistan and Central Asia, and most of Pakistan.
Then, they created this new Islamic state, which was totally at odds with the earlier one.

Now, for a variety of reasons, none of which were the magnamity of the foreigners, they were unable to convert the whole of the Indian population. Perhaps partly because of the sheer number of people, and partly because of the fragmented nature of Hindu society.

So Hinduism in North India withdrew into a shell, devoid of political power and patronage, while Islamic culture flourished.

Obviously, the Islamic rulers brought with them some new ideas, in the field of architecture for example.

But the indegenous people could do nothing to benefit from this, because in order to join this new culture, they would have to completely give up their own.

On top of that, Islamic conquerers are well known for their bloodthristy nature. It is not without reason that Islam spread like wildfire to most of Asia, within just 300 years!!

Look, I am not saying that only the Muslims were cruel. The Spanish conquests of south america could definitely compete with the Muslims. But one must note an important similarity between the spanish and the muslims....the monotheist nature of their religion. The Spanish conquests too were of a religious nature.