War is between rulers, not religions
War is between rulers, not religions
**********************************
**********************************
1. Tipu Sultan vs The Marathas
During Maratha-Mysore conflict of the 1700s, the British had recruited the Maratha army to take on Tipu Sultan.
After the ‘Hindu’ Maratha army ransacked the Sringeri monastery in Mysore, Tipu Sultan offered his resources for the consecration of the Goddess. He also sent along his token gifts for the idol. A Hindu army destroyed a temple, and a Muslim ruler sent money and resources to rebuild it.
So it was not a war between two religions but between two rulers for power.
So it was not a war between two religions but between two rulers for power.
2. Shivaji vs Afzal Khan
While Chhatrapati Shivaji has been glorified as a great ‘Hindu’ leader, few speak about how he was mindful and respectful of other faiths. When he sent his army to plunder the treasures of erstwhile Surat, he had asked them to follow a few simple orders. That they would not allow any harm to be inflicted upon the Hajrat Baba ki Masjid, or Father Andros Pinto’s Ashram – he asked that they make offering on his behalf at both sites instead. He also instructed them to immediately return any treasures of someone belonging to another faith.
Shivaji’s mighty defeat of the giant pathan Afzal Khan is interesting . Shivaji was going to meet Khan without any weapons, but his bodyguard persuaded him to carry the famous ‘iron claws’ which came in handy when Khan attacked. The bodyguard in question? Rustam Zawan – a Muslim man. Shivaji killed Khan, the latter’s assistant, Krishnaji Bhaskar Kulkarni, a Hindu, tried to kill Shivaji to avenge his masters death.
So “yeh larai dharm ki hai ya satta ki”. Or simply put, was it a fight between two religions ? No it was not. It was a fight between two rulers for power.
"Some Hindus had erected a new idol-temple in the village of Kohana, and the idolaters used to assemble there and perform their idolatrous rites. These people were seized and brought before me. I ordered that the perverse conduct of this wickedness be publicly proclaimed and they should be put to death before the gate of the palace. I also ordered that the infidel books, the idols, and the vessels used in their worship should all be publicly burnt. The others were restrained by threats and punishments, as a warning to all men, that no zimmi could follow such wicked practices in a Musulman country." - Firuz Shah Tughluq, Futuhat-i Firoz Shahi
ReplyDeleteSOURCE : Elliot, Henry Miers; Dowson, John (1871). The History of India, as Told by Its Own Historians: The Muhammadan Period. Vol. III (Page 381 - 382)
Encouraged by Islamic theologian, Muhammad Hamadani, Sikandar Butshikan also destroyed ancient Hindu and Buddhist books and banned followers of dharmic religions from prayers, dance, music, consumption of wine and observation of their religious festivals. To escape the religious violence during his reign, many Hindus converted to Islam and many left Kashmir. Many were also killed.
ReplyDeleteSOURCE : Lawrence, Walter Roper (1895). The Valley of Kashmir. London: H. Frowde. pp. 190–191
Link : https://archive.org/stream/valleyofkashmir00lawruoft#page/190
In 1499, a Brahmin of Bengal was arrested and later killed by Sikandar Lodhi because he had attracted a large following among both Muslims and Hindus with the following teaching: "the Mohammedan and Hindu religions were both true, and were but different paths by which God might be approached."
ReplyDeleteSo Mohammedan invaders were not only against Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism and Sikhism, but even the core philosophical ideas which promote unity and equality.
SOURCE : The Cambridge History Of India Volume III by Wolseley Haig (page 240)
LINK : https://archive.org/details/cambridgehistory035492mbp/page/n279
These are merely three out of the millions of accounts of 800 years of religious persecution and genocide of Hindus, denial of which is akin to holocaust denial.
ReplyDelete