Interestingly, author Jha, claims in the article that Kathak & Khayal Gayaki were born in period of Amir Khusraw.
What a joke.
The roots of Kathak is found in "Natya Shastra". Even the conservative Marxist historians place this text 3-4 centuries before so called birth of Jesus
Dear @thewire_in we find, Kathak in Bharhut stupa. Again the conservative dating places it two centuries before the so called Jesus was born.
Tell your author, Shri Jha to not make such claims that Kathak was born in period of Amir Khusraw.
The Mudras found are "Pataka Hasta" as shown in the quoted tweet.
I really feel sorry for people for @sardesairajdeep etc who get fooled by these eminent historians.
The term "Kathakas" as the "reciters of sacred lore" is found in "Adi Parva ".
"कथकाश्चापरे राजञ्श्रमणाश्च वनौकसः |"
And the term Kathaka actually comes from "Katha" itself.
The author of @thewire_in talks about "Architecture."
Does he even know what he is trying to talk about?
The amazing trait of Kailasha Mandir can out do any architecture like Taj. We dealt with fractals ages ago.
If they were so great then why no Taj in Samarkand?
And since they are talking about Architecture, how are they going to deny the documented 40K+ Mandirs which were destroyed by the Islamic Invaders?
The structures that you build by demolishing traditions can't be called "Architecture". The are symbol of tyranny.
I don't know for how long are they going to drag this lie that Khilji saved India from Mongol invasion?
Khalji identified himself as a Muslim Turk & the so called Mongols fought on Turkic mercenaries.
That apart they all were Trurco-Mongols in reality.
In terms of brutality, Allauddin Khilji was no different than any Turk who were prepared to attack India on the side of Mongols.
And one of the major reason for failure of Mongol Invasion was the series of plagues. This paper may clear it a bit carnegiescience.edu/news/war-plagu…
This argument is one of the most laughable.
So just because some Rajputs were given place in courts, it would wash off the massacres of Garha, Chittor and so on and on.
They themselves have penned their intention to destroy Kafirs clearly.
Again a nonsensical statement.
Though I can cite thousands of primary sources, I cite one to refute it.
"... he (Mahmud) issued orders that in the places conquered, mosques be raised and Hindus be converted to Islam." - Zayn al-akbar
And then comes this useless claim about Islam being anti-case and hence voluntary conversion.
Who can be better person to quote than Dr Ambedkar who goes on to say that Islam is no alien from caste & it was cause for slavery too in India (image 2, 3).
Dear @thewire_in evidences for Ambedkar showing caste-system in Islam is contained in this thread. This thread also has part of Ambedkar's book where he says that Slavery existed in India only because of support by Islam.
"The Arya Samaj was the first Hindu movement to take up a bold stand in this context. Maharshi Dayanand himself had showed up Muhammad for the sort of man he was."
in his book, "Freedom of expression: Secular theocracy versus liberal democracy."
SR Goel writes, "He (Dayanand) made a positive contribution when he pointed out that India had inherited a spirituality and a culture which were not only indigenous but also intrinsically superior to the imported creeds and cultures...
...He encouraged and enabled his people to reawaken to their own inner sources of strength, and hold their heads high in the face of foreign invaders. He was the first to use the terms Swadeshi and Swarajya.
There was a period, when every Hindu Organisations including Ramkrishna Mission, Hindu Mahasabha, Arya Samaj spoke of Shuddhi (re-converting to Hindu Fold) & wanted Hindus to give away shackles of caste for same.
Instead of blaming them as reformist & Christian stooges+
One need to understand Politics, situation of that period.
Why all were on same page?
Recently we came across a case where a BJP’s MLA’s mother converted to Christianity.+
A thing was observed that a child deemed to be Shudra by birth ran into the Mandir & heavy fine was imposed (₹25,000).
3)Post Crusades (after 7 centuries), Church brought logic in play & declared that metaphysical Mathematics began with Euclid, although they couldn't notice that it was actually dealing with empirical proofs.
4)It became an error for metaphysics of church
but went on being unnoticed till 19th century.
5) It was admitted that other empirical proofs (such as the proof of Proposition 4 or the side-angle-side theorem) are essential to the proof of the “Pythagorean” theorem in the Elements.