#SadarPranam to Ishvara within you @quizzicalguy ji.

Yet again, in your over excited state to demean “Bharat” you have critiqued #G20Bharat2023 booklet with so many non-factual points.

In this thread I point them out and you may respond should you have enough substance.

1) Manimugdha ji, you say, ‘This document opens with PM Modi’s statement in which he says that the country has “the distinction of being named as ‘Mother of Democracy’”. Who named it so? The current regime. Nobody else calls India the “mother of democracy”. If at all there is one, then it is ancient Greece.’

Truth—

It was in 1930 that the great American Historian, Will Durant writes as below in “The Case For India” (1930):

“India was the motherland of our race, and Sanskrit the mother of Europe's languages: she was the mother of our philosophy; mother, through the Arabs, of much of our mathematics; mother, through the Buddha, of the ideals embodied in Christianity; mother, through the village community, of self-government and #democracy. Mother India is in many ways the mother of us all.” (Refer page-4).

So irrespective of historical substance behind the claim it was spoken around 9 decades ago by a non-Indian of way larger scholarly stratus than you and me.

Which means your claim is wrong that no one said so in earlier times.

Then you call Ancient Greece to be “mother of Democracy” but refuge to see Bharat as one even though the historical analysis shows that you are wrong. Read on 👇🏾

—————————————————-

As per popular narrative, Greek (more precisely, Athenian Democracy) was the first form of direct democracy.

The latest available records say that it came under Cleisthenes around 2.528 kya (thousand years ago) in Athens.

People refer to him as “the father of Athenian democracy.”

Let’s look at it. Btw have you ever read Aristotle, @quizzicalguy ?

If I refer to Aristotle’s book VI, it is found that the Athenian Democracy had the feature to randomly select ordinary citizens to fill the few existing government administrative and judicial offices. The legislative assembly consisting of all Athenian citizens too existed. We are also told that all the eligible citizens were allowed to speak and vote in the assembly that had the role to set laws of the city-state.

But there lies a problem. Let’s see it.

You know @quizzicalguy , It is important to clarify exactly who were the “Athenian citizens”?

The citizenship didn’t include women, slaves, foreigners, and youths below the age of military service. While all the brackets are perfect but their leaving away women and slaves gives an absolute notion of how the “democracy” of Athens insured non-democratic nature of itself.

Athenian men believed that women were less intelligent than men and therefore, similar to barbarians and slaves of the time. They were seen incapable of effectively participating and contributing to public discourse on political issues and affairs.

Perhaps that was the reason that when Greeks came in contact with Indians they were surprised to see the non-discriminatory form of democracy in and around the period of Alexander.

Arrian writes in Indika about India in the period of Alexander that:

“The Indians do not even use aliens as slaves, much less a countryman of their own.”

Diodorus who is said to have visited India, around two centuries after Alexander talks that a high-level democracy of Indians existed which was peculiar to the Greeks. He too saw the difference of non-existent slavery.
And of course, women had a very respectable position in society in that period and earlier. The literature proves this case quite aptly.

The 37th sarg of Ayodhya Kand (Ramayan), tells us that Sita was asked to sit on the throne by Vashistha in absence of Shri Ram. Even if one wants to reject this as mythology (although it is considered as Itihasa for Bhartiya Civilisation), the case is clear that for all practical purposes women saw a respectable position in the society.

https://twitter.com/quizzicalguy/status/1702388451621085604

In the same period when Athenian Democracy saw females as barbarians, Queen Mṛgāvatī of the Vatsa Mahajanapada ( oligarchic republics) ruled as proxy while her son Udayana was held captive by a rival king. And she was very well respected in society.

While there were sanctions against the participation of women in the Athenian Democracy & deprivation of rights, Āpastamba Sutra (probably conceived in the same period) in Bharat says the following for females:

“A man is not allowed to abandon his wife (A 1.28.19).”

“He permits daughters to inherit (A 2.14.4).”

“There can be no division of property between a husband and a wife because they are linked inextricably together and have joint custody of the property (A 2.29.3).”

“Thus, a wife may make gifts and use the family wealth on her own when her husband is away (A 2.12.16–20).”

“Women are upholders of traditional lore, and Āpastamba tells his audience that they should learn some customs from women (A 2.15.9; 2.29.11).”

It becomes clear from the above argument that not only democracy (Diodorus 2.39) existed in India in the period of the Athenian Democracy, but women had a very respectable position (unlike Athens where they were not considered even Athenian) and slavery remained an alien concept.

Now before dwelling deep into the Indic idea of democracy, let us first see what the latest researches have to say about proto-democracies.

Proto-Democracies
————————
We have pieces of evidence of “governing by assembly” in ancient Phoenicians. One such piece of evidence is the story of an Egyptian trader who travelled north to the Phoenician around 3.1 kya. The trader had got stuck in some problem and the king had got matter settled by hearing in an assembly.

According to Thorkild Jacobsen, a form of “Primitive Democracy” existed in pre-Babylonian Mesopotamia.

But many scholars have denied recognising it as democracy. They see the case of Mesopotamia as a struggle where common men appear more like pawns than sovereign authority.

One such scholar is Bailkey who says that the period of Gilgamesh etc, reflects a power struggle between primitive monarchy and noblemen.

Then we find the important case of Sparta. It rose around 2.7 kya which showed the trait of the oligarchy but still, slavery existed and slaves were not part of democracy. Unlike Athens, women enjoyed a respectable position in society and one can say that this was the only place in the west around that era that had no discriminatory acts against females. We also have the case of Rome. A form of democracy existed here too around 2.52 kya. But again citizenship and hence legislative rights were only limited to the free Romans. Slaves were considered as a commodity and after being free, the rights did not come to them.

Let’s see further to see the case of India as the first land to see “democracy”

“THOU, mighty Agni, gatherest up all that is precious for thy friend.
Bring us all treasures as thou art enkindled in libation's place
Assemble, speak together: let your minds be all of one accord,
As ancient Gods unanimous sit down to their appointed share.
The place is common, common the assembly, common the mind, so be their thought united.
A common purpose do I lay before you, and worship with your general oblation.
One and the same bt your resolve, and be your minds of one accord.
United be the thoughts of all that all may happily agree.”

—Rig Veda (10.191.1-4)

It was sung at beginning of the Republican Assembly in ancient India).

This is also the evidence for accepting vaidik traditions & accepting non-Vaidik gods in the pantheon. It was now like an agreement of accepting Vaidik traditions pan India as common thread or the bond of civilisational glue.

#SadarPranam to Ishvara within you @Udhaystalin !

It is indeed a lack of understanding, influence of non-educated that you go overboard to call Sanstan Dharm as “Malaria”.

In this thread I show how Sanatan Dharm is root of Tamil identity, and likes of EVR were actually anti-Dalit, anti-women.

Prove me wrong should you have enough substance.

To begin with let’s talk of you, as in the “Stalin” clan. Where do you get this name from?

Your father was named after “Joseph Stalin” because he was born just four days after former died in 1953.

What an irony? Do you know why I say so? Because you are a proud Christian by your own assertion, but truth remains Jose h Stalin was one of the biggest persecutor of Christians.

Let’s look at a few details. Stalin led the state which had “State Atheism” as policy. How can we forget the emergence of “Militant Atheism” which targeted the Churches and converted them to Museums. According to Stalin’s policy one couldn’t support church or say a word against Atheism.

Dear Mr Stalin, isn’t it interesting that you are a proud Christian who has a name coming from his father named after one of the greatest persecutor of Christians.

As one of the many examples I attack image (image-1) of Demolition of the “Cathedral of Christ the Saviour in Moscow” on the orders of Joseph Stalin, December 5, 1931.

Joseph Stalin had begun to held office in November of 1917. Remember it’s same year and month when the Russian Civil War had begun and continued till 1923. The civil war led to killing of 322 bishops & priests. Analytical scholars though state that the estimate of 332 clergy and monastics killed by 1921 may have been an underestimate, due to the fact that 579 monasteries/convents had been liquidated during this period and there were widespread mass executions of monks/nuns during these liquidations.

Source: 1)“Lenin: A Revolutionary Life” by Christopher Read

2) A History of Soviet Atheism in Theory, and Practice, and the Believer, vol 2: Soviet Antireligious Campaigns and Persecutions” by Dimitry V. Pospielovsky, page 15

Let’s hear more about Christian Persecution in age of Stalin.

When the terror of Red Army was high, you in know @Udhaystalin what church in Russia said? It said as below:

“It is better to shed one's blood and to be awarded martyr's crown than to let the enemies desecrate Orthodox faith.”

Source:, “Freedom of Conscience in the USSR” by A Barmenkov

And our dear Udhay, holds a name Stalin against whom churches urged to shed blood. And the churches were continually being destroyed.

What gets very interesting is; for this purpose atheistic work was centrally consolidated underneath the Agitation and Propaganda Department of the CP Central Committee (Agitprop) in 1920 using the guidelines of article 13 of the Russian Communist Party (RCP) adopted by the 8th party congress.

Article 13 read as below:

“As far as religion is concerned, the RCP will not be satisfied by the decreed separation of Church and State... The Party aims at the complete destruction of links between the exploiting classes and... religious propaganda, while assisting the actual liberation of the working masses from religious prejudices and organizing the broadest possible education-enlightening and anti-religious propaganda. At the same time it is necessary carefully to avoid any insult to the believers' feelings, which would lead to the hardening of religious fanaticism.”

Source: A History of Soviet Atheism in Theory, and Practice, and the Believer, vol 2: Soviet Antireligious Campaigns and Persecutions” by Dimitry V. Pospielovsky, page 28

In this case Christianity was specifically the target. Joseph Stalin wanted to erase “Christianity” while “Udhay Stalin” wants to destroy Sanatan Dharm and be a proud Christian. What an irony?

But was this all? Read on!

https://twitter.com/udhaystalin/status/1698012167994589221

When the leaders of church demanded “freedom of religion” under the constitution, the Bolsheviks didn’t shy off to act. They executed 28 bishops and 6,775 priests.

Source:

Between 1917–1935, 130,000 Russian Orthodox priests were arrested; our of which 95,000 were put to death through execution by the firing squad.

Source: “Church Schism & Corruption” by Lulu. com

By 1930s Joseph Stalin was already very powerful & that’s when churches began to suffer the most. Many of the Orthodox Church members were killed or sent to labor camps. Amid 1927—1940, the number of Orthodox churches in the Russian Republic reduced from 29,584 to a bit lesser than 500.

In year 1929, Soviet brought a new legislation in place which had provisions for the harsh anti-religious persecution which would become prominent in 1930s.

With intent to weaken church further the USSR government conducted a massive purge of Christian intellectuals. Most of them ended up dying in either camps or in prison.

Stalin’s USSR ensured that many religious tracts would be circulated as illegal literature or samizdat.

Stalin took numerous other measures with intent to weaken the church. He would effectively made illegal to have religious activities of any sort outside of liturgical services within the walls of the few churches that would remain open. But even they weren’t alien from any harassment.

Source: Father Arseny 1893-1973 Priest, Prisoner, Spiritual Father. Introduction page. vi - 1

Let’s see ahead @Udhaystalin , what Joseph Stalin did to Christianity which you are so proud of (in show off at least).

The League of the Militant Godless (LMG), which worked under Yemelyan Yaroslavsky, was the main instrument of the anti-religious (read Christian) campaign.

Post 1929 and through the 1930s, there was sudden significant rise in the closing of churches, mass arrests of the clergy and persecution of people for attending church.

Source: A History of Soviet Atheism in Theory, and Practice, and the Believer, vol 2: Soviet Antireligious Campaigns and Persecutions” by Dimitry V. Pospielovsky, page 41

The LMG deployed various terror tactics against Christians in the guise of protecting the state or prosecuting law-breakers. Stalin got the clergies declared as foreign spies. He initiated the trials of bishops in which their clergy & the lay adherents too were dragged in who were reported as “subversive terroristic gangs”.

Source: A History of Soviet Atheism in Theory, and Practice, and the Believer, vol 2: Soviet Antireligious Campaigns and Persecutions” by Dimitry V. Pospielovsky, page 66

The official propaganda under Stalin was completely anti-Christian and seemed it’s complete banishment. Stalin’s persecutions of clergies, bishops had clear intent to assist the goal of eliminating religion.

Between 1932 to 1937, Joseph Stalin had a “five-year plans of atheism” wherein the LMG was entirely responsible for eliminating all religious expression in the country especially Christianity.

Sources: 1)

2) Letters of Metropolitan Sergii of Vilnius

Came the 1934 and the persecution of the Renovationist sect (once had support of Stalin) began to become as normal as the persecution of the old Orthodox Church.

Source: Levitin-Krasnov, Likhie gody (Paris: YMCA Press, 1977) page 256

Is it @Udhaystalin not perturbed that on whom he is named did worse during the purges of 1937 and 1938. According to the church records around 168,300 Russian Orthodox clergy were arrested & 106,300 among them were shot.

Hope Stalin duo of father and so have heard of “new martyrs and confessors of Russia”.

Source: (2002). “A Century of Violence in Soviet Russia” by Alexander N. Yakovlev , page 165.web.archive.org/web/2012031318…

#SadarPranam to Ishvara within you @MujtabaAasif .

Well it is open challenge to you to prove that Hindus destroyed #Buddhist Stupas with primary sources.

But before you do so, and repeat same mistake as any other Hindu hater, read this instance of exchanges between SR Goel (SRG) and Prof Romila Thapar (RT) where he explains as below in response to likes of RT when they showed concern for the book “Hindu Temples: What happened to them , vol-1”—

“We have cited from eighty histories written by Muslims over a period of more than one thousand years.

We have also cited several Islamic inscriptions which confirm what the historians say. The citations show how Hindu temples continued to be destroyed over a vast area and for a long time. We have added no editorial comments and given no communal twist to the events that took place. All along, we have kept to the actual language used by the Muslim historians. We wonder if the professors will dismiss as a mere listing of dates the evidence we have presented. What we expect from the professors is that they will come forward with historical analysis and
interpretations so that the destruction of Hindu temples mentioned in the Muslim narratives gets explained in terms of economic or political or any other non-religious motives.

We stick to our position, namely, that it is the theology of Islam which offers the only straight-forward and satisfactory explanation of why Muslim conquerors and rulers did what they did to Hindu places of worship. We have provided full facts about that theology, as also about the history of how it took its final shape. It would be most welcome if the professors come out with their comments on the character and meaning of this theology. In fact, we look forward to a Marxist explanation of it.

What were the concrete material conditions and objective historical forces which gave rise to this theology in Arabia at that time?

Next, we refer to the second point which the professors had made in their letter to The Times of India. They had said that acts of intolerance have been committed by followers of all religions. A subsequent
sentence clarified what they meant; they had in mind the Buddhist and Jain monuments and animist shrines destroyed by Hindus. As we have said, we do not share their philosophy of separating the
Buddhists, the Jains and the Animists from the Hindus. But we agree to use their terms for the time being and request them to produce

1. A list of epigraphs which record the destruction of Buddhist and Jain monuments and Animist shrines by any Hindu, at any time;

2. Citations from Hindu literary sources describing destruction of Buddhist and Jain monuments and Animist shrines by any Hindu, at any time;

3. The Hindu theology which says or even suggests that non-Hindu places of worship should be destroyed or desecrated or plundered, or which hails such acts as pious or meritorious;

4. A list of Hindu kings or commanders whom Hindus have hailed as heroes for desecrating or destroying or converting into Hindu places of worship any Buddhist or Jain monuments or Animist shrines;

5. A list of Buddhist and Jain monuments and Animist shrines which have been desecrated or destroyed or converted into Hindu places of worship in the remote or the recent past;

6. The names and places of Hindu monuments which stand on the sites occupied earlier by Buddhist or Jain monuments or Animist shrines, or which have materials from the latter embedded in their masonry;

7. Names of Buddhist, Jain and Animist leaders or organizations who have claimed that such and such Hindu monuments are usurpations, and demanded their restoration to the original occupants;

8. Names of Hindu leaders and organizations who have resisted any demand made by Buddhists or Jains or Animists for restoration of the latters’ places of worship, or called for legislation which will maintain the
status quo, or cried Hinduism in danger, or staged street riots in support of their usurpations. Asking those questions, @MujtabaAasif , SRG further writes:

“We think that this sort of concrete evidence alone cane decide the question of the limits to the logic of
restoration of religious sites. There seems to be no other way. Sweeping generalizations based on slender or dubious evidence are no substitute for hard facts.

We hope that the professors will not resort to the hackneyed swear-words such as Hindu communalism, reactionary revivalism, and the rest. Swear-words offer no solutions.

In any case, the time when swear-words carried weight has passed. It is no use inviting the other side to hit back in a similar manner.”

Note @MujtabaAasif what he says:

“If the professors fail to come out with answers to questions posed by us, and to present the evidence in support of their statements, we shall be forced to conclude that far from being serious academicians, they are cynical politicians hawking ad hoc or plausible explanations in the service of a party line. In fact, we shall be justified in saying that they are not Marxists but Stalinists. Marxism is a serious system of thought which offers consistent explanations. Stalinism, on the other hand, is an exercise in suppressio veri suggestio falsi in pursuit of a particular end.

Hindu scholars, leaders and organizations have so far ignored the loud and large-scale talk in the mass media, academia, and political circles about Hindu intolerance towards the Buddhists and the Jains
and the Animists. Much damage has already been done to the image of Hinduism, and much more damage is likely to result if this talk is not challenged and stopped. How loose and irresponsible this talk can be is illustrated by the following instance.

I attended a seminar on the Mandal Commission Report held in the Gandhi Peace Foundation in October, 1990. One of the participants who spoke in support of the Report was Shri Hukam Dev Narain Singh Yadav, an MP of the Janata Dal at that time and a Minister in the Chandra Shekhar Government some time later.

Speaking of Brahminical tyranny, he referred to the time when rivers of the blood of Buddhist monks were made to flow in the Buddhist monasteries (jab bauddha vihãroñ mêñ bauddha bhikSuoñ kê rakta kî nadiyãñ bahãî gayî thîñ).

The following dialogue took place between myself and the speaker at
the end of the latter’s talk:

I: Could you kindly name the Buddhist monasteries where it happened, and also the time when it happened?

Speaker: I will not pretend that I know. I must have heard it from someone, or read it somewhere.

I: I give you six months for finding a single instance of Hindus murdering Buddhist monks. I am demanding only one instance, not two.

Speaker: I will try.

The speaker looked to me to be one of the finest men I had ever met. His voice had a ring of sincerity in whatever he said. His humility in presenting his point of view was more than exemplary. I expected him to remember my question and provide an answer. But two and a half years have passed and there is no word from the eminent politician occupying a high position in the public life of this country.

I know that the evidence demanded by me does not exist. It is a Big Lie being spread by Hindu-baiters. Hindus have never done what they are being
accused of. My only point in mentioning the incident is that even honest people can become victims of hostile propaganda which is not countered in good time.

Because #Mewat is in news for bad reasons, I thought some historical perspective should be discussed.

Here I chose perspective around the Meo agitations of 1932-33 in Alwar and Bharatpur.

Alwar, the North Eastern part of Rajasthan, & its surroundings regions were predominantly… https://t.co/bb0Ue95kPvtwitter.com/i/web/status/1…
Interestingly although the step of Maharaja was pro Meos, none except that of Alwar cooperated with the commission.

This non-cooperative temperament of Meos came because of the resolution passed by All India Alwar conference on December 3, 1932 which was held at Firozpur Jhirka… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

#SadarPranam to ishvara within you @Profdilipmandal & let’s tell you a true incidence.

October 1990, Gandhi Peace Foundation. A seminar on the Mandal Commission Report was held which SR Goel attended.

Hukam Dev Singh, then the MP of Janata Dal, as speaker spoke in favour of… https://t.co/gmSUTM6szNtwitter.com/i/web/status/1…

https://twitter.com/profdilipmandal/status/1684822905451163648

When the first edition of “Hindu Temples: What happened to them? Vol-2” came, SR Goel sent a copy of book with letter to Prof Romila Thapar on June 27, 1991, where the above mentioned questions were directed.

Prof Thapar replied and said:

“Your letter of 27 June was awaiting… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

On account of Battle of Khanwa, Babur invoked sentiment of Jihad against Kafirs very clearly & even spoke about his god battle as being same one to protect Kaba from demons.

Here is the account taken from Letter-of-victory (Fatḥ-nāma) written by Shaikh Zain (appended in… twitter.com/i/web/status/1… Infidel standards dominated some 200 towns in the territories of Islām; in them mosques and shrines fell into ruin; from them the wives and children of the Faithful were carried away captive. So greatly had his forces grown that, according to the Hindū calculation by which one… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

#SadarPranam to Ishvara within you @MichaelACT123. Seems you have no clue of history and method to study history.

For you, I’m pointing “India” through Al-Beruni’s sketch of world map which was drawn around 1100 YBP originally.

This “map reconstruction” is based on Al-Beruni’s… twitter.com/i/web/status/1… Here @MichaelACT123 are actual versions of Al-Beruni’s map showing India (Hind)

1) Image 1: Sketch map of the Distribution of Land and Sea, dated 1238 (oriented with South at the top), kept in British Library (MS.Or.8349, fol. 58a).

2)Image 2: Re-oriented with North at the top… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

1/n A thread on Kerala, ISIS & Tipu Sultan. Please read, & circulate as much as possible.

There is a reason why Kerala always had a connect with ISIS. Matter has a historic significance which largely is about fulfilment of Tipu’s dream. When I say dream, I mean it in all… twitter.com/i/web/status/1… 2/n In the above tweet, we have already established that largely Tipu’s policies were highly motivated by works & mission of Shāh Walīullāh Dehlavi (Deoband School of thought follows him too which is followed by Taliban) who was firm advocate for Ibn Taymiyya, and one of the… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…

A thread on a few words of #TipuSultan:

“It directed (all military detachments) that every being in the district, without distinction, should he honored with Islam, that the houses of such as fled to avoid that honor should be burned, that they should be traced to their lurking places, and that all means of truth and falsehood, fraud or force, should be employed to effect their universal conversion.”

— In a Circular sent to various army contingents by Tipu (found among the records from Palghat Fort, 1790)

I’m so proud of @HarshitShastry , my colleague who recently joined us as fresh architect.
His B.Arch thesis around Hampi & ended up winning CoA. National Awards for Excellence in Architectural Thesis & JK Best Architecture Student of the Year Award, 2022.
Pl follow him in mass. Many won’t get what is so exciting for me.

Being a student of architecture, I know how tough it is to put through “Hindu idea centric” B.Arch thesis. I had never imagined that such a thesis would end up winning best architecture thesis award.

1/n 🧵 It is a conscious & personal realisation, that the kernel of being nationalist goes back to the architecture of Sanatan Dharm.

Today, when most of the faith system recognise themselves first as follower of their religion, Hindus have way more nuanced idea to offer. 2/n Now one may say that if you set Nation above faith, you in a way submit to the faith systems of west & Middle East.

One may argue that it may lead to decay of idea to uphold the -ism of Hindus.

But as I stated in opening lines, we have much more nuanced case to offer.

The Khalistanis had defiled the Harimandir by worst possible ways.

When you talk of Khalistanis & their deeds who can be better to refer than their biggest nightmare KPS Gill.

This thread is based on 4th chapter of his book Punjab, the Knights of Falsehood.

RT & read. In the name of their faith, Khalistanis all possible evils. They murdered innocents. Tortured and raped many. Extortion & desecration of temples was their trend & Gill says the list of other crimes was way above all these.

Kali maa on the sword of Guru Hargobind Sahib (source on Alt text)

Khalistanis can try hardest but primary sources would only keep crying loud that Sikhi is just one form of Hindu Dharma. But is this all? In fact idol worship became prohibited only with the coming of Singh Sabha. The Murtis were removed from the Harimandir (what we call golden temple today) only in 1905.

Source: Historical Dictionary of Sikhism
by Louis E. Fenech & W. H. McLeod

According to Savarkar you can start integrating all by breaking six shackles & it needs him to point out Ambedkar how his community discriminates against those lower as deemed.

Savarkar worked on ground & Ratnagiri was a pilot project but Ambedkar never came to stand with him.

https://twitter.com/lokeshbag67/status/1638136596171223040

Ambedkar spent his time only abusing Hindu Shastras, setting wrong precedent by burning Manusmriti, while Savarkar could bring real change by his project of braking seven shackles & bringing all together.

Shastras aren’t only about caste. There are way more things.

How many of you are aware that Marx & Engels along with other followers were homophobic?

Yes, you are reading it right. They were also anti-science. In this thread I through something light of homophobia of marxists.

Please read, and share. You may begin by looking at this website neue-einheit.com/english/homoen… . This section is specially meant for homosexuality.

This page Neue Einheit, a German communist puts across communist thoughts.

That’s what you call utter foolish idea of history.

BNR was appointed the Constitutional Adviser to the Constituent Assembly in formulating the Indian Constitution in 1936. He traveled to the US, Canada, Ireland, and the UK in 1946 for research on constitutional law.

https://twitter.com/Tomb_Raider__/status/1635009542760325123

Dr Ambedkar came to picture only in August 1947 as chairman of Drafting committee.

Do you know @Tomb_Raider__ what was purpose of this committee ?

It was as under:
“Scrutinise the Draft of the text of the Constitution prepared by the Constitutional Adviser,

This is misconception that Jaaliw were contribution of Islam.

Here are Jaalis in Hindu Mandirs way before Islam was born.

1) Parvati Mandir, Nachna Complex, 5th century

https://twitter.com/salmanmohdkhan/status/1634009702052007937

2) Chaumukhnath Mandir from same complex, 5th Century.

साजि चतुरंग वीर रंग में तुरंग चढ़ि,
सरजा सिवाजी जंग जीतन चलत हैं 
‘भूषण’ भनत नाद विहद नगारन के,
नदी नद मद गैबरन के रलत है II

ऐल फैल खैल-भैल खलक में गैल गैल,
गजन की ठैल पैल सैल उसलत हैं ।
तारा सो तरनि धूरि धारा में लगत जिमि,
थारा पर पारा पारावार यों हलत हैं II बाने फहराने घहराने घण्टा गजन के,
नाहीं ठहराने राव राने देस देस के ।
नग भहराने ग्रामनगर पराने सुनि,
बाजत निसाने सिवराज जू नरेस के II

हाथिन के हौदा उकसाने कुंभ कुंजर के,
भौन को भजाने अलि छूटे लट केस के ।
दल के दरारे हुते कमठ करारे फूटे,
केरा के से पात बिगराने फन सेस के II

You have no clue of what happened in that period.

The battle of Satara had changed things completely. Aurangzeb had began to run out of money & both time as he had invested much with desire to conquer Deccan completely.

https://twitter.com/khanzadah_/status/1632441743747497986

While Aurangzeb conquered Maratha Capital Satara in west the Marathas had began to expand into Hyderabad.

Aurangzeb was busy warring continually in Deccan for more than two decades. But no result came in his favour. He would lose 20% of his army.

Last night, I was driving back home. I had parked my car at airport only as it was one day trip to Delhi for a lecture for a book launch.

& an incidence had almost sunk my heart.

Dear @blrcitytraffic , this truck “KA36B8701” was almost on verge to crushing my car fully. The incidence happened around Sankey Road. I have represented the set up in this image.

One car (blue) had broken down & everyone was trying to come in last lane to pass through. Suddenly the truck (red/ number mentioned above) began to drift towards my car.

“The idols he saw amazed him (…) Next day he got those idols of gold smashed with stones. The pillars of wood were burnt down by his order (…) A cry rose from the temples as if a second Mahmud had taken birth.”

Khusrow in Miftahu'l-Futuh about Jalalu’d -Din Khalji in Jhain “Many strong temples which would have remained unshaken even by the trumpet blown on the Day of Judgment, were levelled with the ground when swept by the wind of Islam.”

Reports Amir Khusrau about ‘Alau’d-Din Khalji’s conquests in Jhain