While historians like Yusuf Ansari keep normalising Muslim Invasions Primary sources keep reminding us of atrocities.
Let’s check a few.
Qazi Mughisuddin's reply to Sultan Alauddin Khalji when he asks how to treat Hindus?
2/n Alauddin: "How are Hindus designated in the law, as payers of tributes or givers of tribute?
Qazi Mughisuddin: “They are called payers of tribute, & when the revenue officer demands silver from them, they should tender gold.
3/n If the officer throws dirt into their mouths, they must without reluctance open their mouths to receive it. By doing so they show their respect for the officer. The due subordination of the zimmi is exhibited in this humble payment & by this throwing of dirt in their mouths.
4/n The glorification of Islam is a duty, and contempt of the Religion is vain. God holds them in contempt, for he says, ‘keep them under in subjection.’ To keep the Hindus in abasement is especially a religious duty, because they are the most inveterate enemies of the Prophet,
5/n and because the Prophet has commanded us to slay them, plunder them, & make them captive, saying, 'Convert them to Islam or kill them, enslave them & spoil their wealth & property.'
6/n No doctor but the great doctor (Hanifa), to whose school we belong, has assented to the imposition of the jizya (poll tax) on Hindus. Doctors of other schools allow no other alternative but 'Death or Islam.’”
Source: Tarikh-i Firoz Shahi, of Ziauddin Barani (snippet in 2/n)
7/n So indeed as the Islamic Law as they (including Alauddin ) knew,Hindus were to be dominated, killed if not converted or made to pay Jizya.
There was absolute contempt for Hindus & they saw it as religious duty as dictated by the Prophet Md (pbuh).
snippet of 2/n again.
8/n He is so clear that Hanafi School is so generous that it lets Hindus escape death by paying Jizya.
Disgusting Muslim Invaders. I remember, once even @Javedakhtarjadu was praising this Khalji during debate with @TarekFatah
9/n Lets look further into the conversation between Qazi and Alauddin which goes more interesting.
I have put snippet from same source.
Here Khalji makes it clear that Hindus can't be dominated until they are made poor and his all attempts lies in doing so.
10/n Khalji:"(...)be assured then that the Hindus will never become submissive & obedient till they are reduced to poverty. I have(..)given orders that just sufficient shall be left to them(...)they shall not be allowed to accumulate hoards & property."
Full part in snippet above
11/n And the likes of Yusuf Ahmad Ansari would say that Khalji was a great economic reformer because of whom even Hindus grew bounds and leaps.
It is so disgusting that they are leading the academic realms.
12/n Ahmad al-Fārūqī al-Sirhindī, the Hanafi jurist from Naqshbandī #Sufi order wrote a letter Shaikh Farid
(he was opposed to Akbar’s religious policy, & supported Jahangir’s accession after latter promised that Islam will be upheld in the new reign).
Letter's content:
13/n "(...)The abolition of jizya in Hindustan is a result of friendship which (Hindus)have acquired with the rulers of this land(…)What right have the rulers to stop exacting jizya?Allah himself has commanded imposition of jizyah for their (infidels) humiliation & degradation.
What is required is their disgrace, and the prestige and power of Muslims. The slaughter of non-Muslims means gain for Islam(...)"
Source: Maktubat-i-Imam Rabbani, Volume I
14/n Let us see some more of words of great Hanafi Jurist and Sufi Ahmad al-Fārūqī al-Sirhindī.
Mind you, Lokesh Jindal keep crying that Hanafi school is not like what @ARanganathan72 portrays the "Deen" to be.
15/n "Fighting the unbelievers and treating them harshly is one of the requirements of religion.”
Whenever a Jew is killed it is to the benefit of Islam.”
“The honor of Islam is in the degradation of unbelief and the people of unbelief.”
16/n “The original aim of taking the jizya from (unbelievers)is for their degradation and this degradation (ought to be)to the extent that they cannot wear nice clothing for fear of the jizya(...)& that they are always fearful and trembling (...)”
17/n In the book mentioned above Harry S Neale has cited the primary sources.
Now look at this other excerpt from a letter written by Ahmad Sirhindi to Murtaza Khan on the execution of Guru Arjan.
Source: Maktubat-i Imam-i Rabbani, letter No. 193
18/n "These days the accursed infidel of Gobindwal was very fortunately killed. It is a cause of great defeat for the reprobate Hindus. With whatever intention and purpose they are killed – the humiliation of infidels is for Muslims, life itself.
19/n Before this Kafir (Infidel) was killed, I had seen in a dream that the Emperor of the day had destroyed the crown of the head of Shirk or infidelity. It is true that this infidel (Guru Arjun) was the chief of the infidels and a leader of the Kafirs.
20/n The object of levying Jizya on them is to humiliate and insult the Kafirs, and Jihad against them and hostility towards them are the necessities of the Mohammedan faith."
The historian Yusuf Ansari is losing all that should make him historian & more a troll.
@feludamitter said it for “those who accuse Pushyamitra” not that it makes accusations true.
Even Prof Thapar disagrees on accusations against Pushyamitra.
There is a reason @yusufpore that why no one could take up challenge of SR Goel put decades back to prove Hindus destroyed Buddhist Places.
I give this challenge to you again. Prove it using “Contemporary Primary Source”.
There is a reason why Prof Thapar too disagrees.
And as a matter of caution I must show you that how foolish it is to claim that Pushyamitra destroyed Buddhist places. This is the thread. As start Historian Yusuf should begin by refuting it as part-1 of challenge given by SR Goel.
3/n Now, before I get into Huns etc, let us set the term for "Invasion" right.
Snippets of Cambridge & Oxford.
The three types are:
a)Using force to take control of another country
b)large no of people get in an unpleasant way
c)an action that affects someone's life unwanted way
1) Shambhaji was executed for slaying and imprisoning "Muslims" & plundering "cities of Islam". No where it talks about conspiracy against Rajaram(attached the primary source from Aurangzeb's side)
2) Who were those "Muslims" & what is "Muslim Cities."?
In fact Aurangzeb had been drawing money through Jizya & had sabotaged the Hindu tradition practices.
The truth of the matter is that Shivaji never proposed Sahambhaji to not take the throne. It was Annaji who conspired with Soyarabai to make 10 yr old Rajaram take the throne.
The sack of Burhanpur was more like bringing back the looted Hindu funds back to Haindavi Swarajya.
Anyone who has read the primary sources would know that in the rule of Aurangzeb, life of Hindus had become hellish (economically too). Read the accounts of Manucci.
1/n Undoubtedly #Vasudeva#Krishna was a historic figure worshiped by many across geographies.
Here is a thread on his historicity which goes many years before claimed birth of Christ.
2/n Gavin Flood in his book “An Introduction of Hinduism” traces back the worship of #Vasudeva as god hero of the tribe of Vrishnis from 6th century BCE and beyond.
For this he sources the works of Pāṇini & epigraphy with the Heliodorus pillar.
Some relevant excerpts!
3/n Pāṇini does talks about Vrishnis in Ashtadayani. The Arthashastra described the Vrishnis as a sangha. The Drona Parva of Mahabharata (141.15) has Vrishnis and the Andhakas mentioned as Vratyas.
Check this snippets from HC Raychaudhuri’s “Political History of Ancient India.”
Many try to whitewash it but here lies the truth. Go through the thread with “primary sources.”
2/n “Submit to Islam & be safe. Or agree to the payment of the Jizya (tax),& you & your people will be under our protection, else you will have only yourself to blame for the consequences, for I bring the men who desire death as ardently as you desire life.”
3/ n Above (1/n) is an excerpt of the letter written by Khalid ibn al-Walid (592 – 642) known as the Sword of Allah, to the Persian Emperor Yazdegerd-III before invading it.