My Authors
Read all threads
1/n #sadarPranam to Ishvara within you @SmitaMukerji Ji.

I don't know what actually makes one belive at times that, to abuse others is the "given right" considering that few have celebrated their knowledge and wisdom enough.

Seriously, what triggered you SO MUCH?
2/n It would have been so gracious, had you tried to explain your legitimate point without colorful words.

"History owes to none. Not to you Smita Ji, not to Akbar, not to me... but only to the time & fact."

And "no one can be authority except the history itself".
3/n Anyways, fair enough @SmitaMukerji ji.

I stand there to respect you and respectfully put my submission too.

The background is not as plain as you pen it down. Even Baduadi whom you cite has a different opinion. Read on from ur own source.
4/n The background actually goes back to 1575-76 during the initial days of Ibadatkhana, where Akbar had tussle about the Islamic Laws relating to Marriage. Akbar was trying to find justification for his innumerable marriage.

Source:Muntakhab At Tawarikh English Vol. 2 Image
5/n Vol 3, has a mention of the fact of 4/n being one of the major trigger points.

I wonder what makes our great Historians debate upon it?

Source:Muntakhab At Tawarikh English Vol. 3

@SmitaMukerji don't respond until tweet number reads n/n. This is not 2-bit subject. Image
6/n @SmitaMukerji ji, now let us look at the Brahmin incidence of 1977 put across by Badauni critically and step by step.

It is proven that the Brahmin has said foul words against Muhammad & such offense deserves execution as per Ulemas.
7/n This means that a word against Islam always had a consequence of death until the first 21 years of Akbar (at least). Similar executions never occurred though many derided Hindu Dharma at Akbar's court too on multiple occasions. Hence Secular Akbar is a hoax.
8/n @SmitaMukerji now let us again go back to the incidence of 1577 through Muntakhabu-T-Tawarikh, Eng Trans, Vol 3.

The Shaikh still required Emperor's Sanction for the execution of the Brahmin. Shaikh's words were not final. Image
9/n When Shaikh comes for a decision, Akbar says: "Punishments for offences against the Holy Law are in hands of you, the 'Ulama', what do you require of me"?

What does this imply: It implies, Ulama wanted Akbar to give a decision, though Akbar grants him freehand. Image
10/n What does this imply?

'It implies that though Ulama still needed Akbar's decision for severe punishments like "Executions" but Akbar trusted Ulemas for it".

It really does not makes sense that Ulema's Power against Hindus bothered Akbar at all.
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh.

Keep Current with Aabhas Maldahiyar 🇮🇳

Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

Twitter may remove this content at anytime, convert it as a PDF, save and print for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video

1) Follow Thread Reader App on Twitter so you can easily mention us!

2) Go to a Twitter thread (series of Tweets by the same owner) and mention us with a keyword "unroll" @threadreaderapp unroll

You can practice here first or read more on our help page!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3.00/month or $30.00/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!