Paper I: Idea of Bharat. The paper sets the base for an Indic view of Indian history. It talks about the knowledge, art, culture, philosophy and science of India. Something that is the very essence of our existence. Such a refreshing approach.
The first two units in this paper were long overdue. Calling the IVC by its more representative name, Indus Saraswati civilization is much needed to present it's true geographic expanse.
Calling the AIT a myth will go a long way in educating the future generations.
For the first time, I think, we are stating that the ISC did not vanish but survived. A huge step in establishing cultural continuity of our civilisational nation.
Another wonderful paper. Talks about all regions with equal space. You would read names like maukharies & Gahadwals which hardly found a mention earlier.
Most importantly there is a chapter on 'impact of Muslim rule on India'.
The impact of Arab/later Islamic invasions on India was phenomenal. This needs to be discussed and debated.
A very balanced paper on Medieval Indian history, which is not consumed by Mughals. Finally Vijayanagar has a full section. Awesome!!
Another well balanced paper that covers entire country.
Inclusion of Indic historians like R C Majumdar and C V Vaidya is a much needed addition.
One must have read how the police in many areas has to restrict the Hindu religious processions to a fixed route. One might also think that this is a recent phenomenon.
Today I will tell you about a restriction that was put in place in 1910, in the city of Peshawar & what happened next.
Holi was to be celebrated between 22 - 25 March (yes, Holi was celebrated over four days). The Mu sl !m mourning event of Bara Wafat (also celebrated as Eid i Milad al Nabi now) coincided with Holi.
Being Muslim majority, the Muslim leaders of the city were upset with the Holi plans of the Hindus.
on 22 Feb, 1910, a month before Holi, the district administration called leaders of both communities and asked Hindus to celebrate Holi only in 'Hindu areas'.
They were allotted a fixed route for Holi procession, from Andar Shahar (old city) to Karimpura. Only one procession each from these places were allowed.
The Navasari plate inscription of the year 490 of the Kalachuri Era or 739 CE, memorialises the grand victory of the Chalukyas over the Arab Army, led by Hakam.
The labours of Pulakeshiraja resulted in a wholesome defeat of the Arabs and subsequent recapture of territories in modern Gujarat and Rajasthan.
The inscription gives us a lot more information than that.
The inscription starts with salutation to the Varaha avatar or Vishnu. It is interesting to note that the inscription begins with invoking the Varaharoopam and praises a Shaivite Pulakesiraja and the Chalukyas themselves were known to patronize both Buddhism and Jainism. This is yet another counter to the Marxist narrative of wars and bloodshed against the Jainism and Buddhism by the Hindu kings or of the battles between the Shavites and Vaishnavites.
The inscription also attests to the fact that inscriptions were in fact legal documents, with legal language.
The inscription also gives a detailed account of how the Arabs were decimated.
This is an excerpt from my book 'The Cusp Years: Five Hundred Years of Hindu Resistance'. Available on Amazon: tinyurl.com/IndicBooks
The Marxist historians make clever use of language to discredit Indic history. Take for instance the word 'cult'.
Let us see what does the word mean and how it has been used to demean Hindu practices.
#Thread
#WordsMatter
Many Indian historians have used the word, cult, when they describe Hindu religious practices. Phrases like, 'the cult of Shiva', 'the cult of Vasudeva', 'cult of Kali', etc. are fairly common.
These phrases were first used by the Christian historians of the west to separate Christianity & Abrahamic religions from Hinduism.
Later on Indian historians started using the word cult. The Marxist historians took a liking for the word because it suited their agenda of discrediting everything Hindu.
How did the Islamic invaders/Turks managed to defeat the Indian kingdoms & establish Islamic rule in early 13th century?
#Thread
The image shows the extent of raids & control of the Mamluk dynasty 1206 - 1290 CE.
To put things in context, it is important to note that the establishment of Delhi Sultanate/Mamluk dynasty was a result of more than 500 years of Islamic invasion of India. It was not an over night project where the invaders defeated the Hindu kings & established a Sultanate.
Some historians say that the victory of the Turks in early medieval wars with Hindu kings, was a result of superior cavalry. While the Hindu kings relied heavily on elephants, the Turks arrived on swift horses, making it easy for them to win. This however is only part of the answer.
The closer we get to 22 Jan, more stupid the detractors get. The latest is Patrick Olivelle, Professor Emeritus of Asian Studies, The University of Texas at Austin. He suggests temples & Vedic rituals are incompatible.
Let's examine.
#Thread
Prof Olivelle is what we know as BOWI. Brown Outside White Inside. A Sri Lankan, educated at Oxford, he likely self identifies as a white, liberal, atheist.
The essence of his opinion is that Vedas & temples are incompatible & hence the Ram Mandir is an anti Vedic project.
He begins by telling us there was no Sanskrit word for temple in ancient India & only after 3rd BCE we get terms like devalaya, devayatana, devagriha, & sometimes devakula & kostha. He says that the Hindu temples were essentially copy cats of Buddhist temples.
The excuse this time is the Yogmaya temple at Mehrauli. The story written by Vidheesha Kuntamalla of IE starts with projecting the Yogmaya temple as a 'Mughal sponsored' temple. Before we go ahead, let us understand what this term means.
Ideally something sponsored by an emperor would be grand. The Jama Masjid for example. The Yogmaya temple is anything but grand, as mentioned in the article. Now let us come to Emperor Akbar II, who is alleged to have sponsored the temple.