We hate Congress

Sunday, 22 January 2012

The sad story about Bharath's riches :-(

The Hope Diamond
This is the famous Hope diamond. The most famous blue diamond in the world. It is of unique steel blue color and weights 45.52 carats. This blue diamond is also known as "cursed diamond" as it always brought only bad luck to its owners: King Louis XIV of France, consort of King Louis XVI, Marie Antoinette, Evelyn Walsh McLean, an American aristocrat, and Lord Francis Hope - the owner after whom the diamond took its name.

This gem was stolen from the statue of Sita in India. For long time the Hope was called the "Tavernier Blue" after the name of its first customer Jean Baptiste Tavernie, who brought crudely cut triangular diamond from India to Europe and described it as "beautiful violet". Since that time The Hope has had a lot of owners and currently is on display in Washington D.C. at the Smithsonian Institute. This blue diamond is valued between $200,000 (an approximate price it was sold for last time) and $250,000,000.

From now I would like to address our country as "Bharath" rather "India" It suits best. This is about Bharath's gems and jewells which has been looted by various rulers who came here. It is to be noted foor your kind information of all the readers that whoever came to this country never came here to bring any peace or make this a better planet on earth. They came here to loot. They looted the golds, diamonds, jewels, woman, food, water, our cows and everything possible. They looted the authenticity of our rich culture and knowledge we had. Yet we are the strongest. Our culture and traditions still prevails among major part of our society even though there are mass conversions going on in many parts of our country which needs to be taken care. I'm very confident about we will regain the strength and hounour in the coming years. Let's hope for the best.

Provided below is an information about the wealth we had. Not a complete information. This just about a very small portion of the loot made by the looters.

Before the British came, India was a rich country and the fame of its wealth attracted both travelers and invaders. Minerals and Metals in Pre-Modern India by A.K. Biswas (2001) does give us a dazzling glimpse of this wealth, especially of the gemstones. The riches of India were mind-boggling indeed and Biswas tries to give a fair idea of its wealth. The British claimed that they came to 'civilise' India, but the reality was that they came to plunder its fabulous wealth and resources. The wealth of nations in the past, in the absence of the modern day convertible currency, was generally evaluated in terms of the minerals and metals a kingdom controlled. The stories of the richness of India in the past had reached far and wide and were so alluring that as soon as explorer expeditions were undertaken in the medieval times, their main aim was to discover a route to India. The fantastic stories about the wealth of India in the past are so mystifying that ancient India was often referred to as the Golden Bird. Arun Kumar Biswas who had earlier done the book on Minerals and Metals in Ancient India, here takes a look at the gem-minerals in the pre-modern India. Gems are precious stones occurring along with other minerals below the surface of the earth.
Biswas looks into the gems in the pre-modern India mainly under the following heads:
(a) travelers' accounts of Indian gems;
(b) the gem treasury of the Moguls;
(c) some specific gem minerals such as pearl, coral, ruby and sapphire, etc.;
(d) and the Indian diamond mines in the pre-modern era.

Travelers' Accounts of Indian Gems
At the outset we are informed that India's traditions in ancient and medieval gems are authenticated not so much by archaeological evidence as by the travelers' accounts. There are numerous and rich accounts in this regard, some of which Biswas says were collected by Valentine Ball. As far back as AD 77, we are told, Pliny in his Historis Naturalis had given extraordinary information regarding precious stones and metals around the world, a large proportion of them being of Indian origin. He referred to Indian adamas (diamond), smaragdus (emerald), beryl, opal, etc. In AD 140-60 Ptolemy too referred to diamond mining on the Adamas River. Besides others, the account of Hazrat Amir Khusrau, the famed poet who accompanied Malik Naib, Alauddin Khalji's army general in AD 1310-1312 military expedition to south India, describes the colossal treasure of gold, emerald and other gems which had been collected during the earlier' periods of ancient India. Khusrau, after the capture of the fort of Warangal says,  The boxes carried by the elephants were full of valuables and gems, the excellence of which drove the onlookers mad. Every emerald (zabarzad) sparkled in the light of the sun. . . . The corundum/sapphire (yaqat) dazzled the eye in the sun. The cat's eye (ainul hirrat) and the cock's eye (ainul dzk) were so brilliant. The lustre of the rubies illuminated the darkness of the night. The emeralds had a fineness of water that could eclipse the lawn of paradise. The diamonds (ilmas) would have penetrated into an iron heart like an arrow of steel. The other stones were such that the sun blushed to look at them. As for the pearls, you would not find the like of them, even if you kept diving into the sea through all eternity. The gold was like the full moon of the twelfth night; it seemed that in order to ripen it, the alchemist sun, had lighted its fire, and the morning had blown its breath, for years. . . . The Ariz-Mumalik (gemmologist) divided the jewels into 'genus' and 'species', 'class' after 'class', and had everything written down. . . . Among them was a jewel (Koh-i-Nur ?), unparalleled in the whole world.
The sack of the golden temple of Barmatpur was similarly described by Khusrau. He wrote:
Its roofs and walls were inlaid with sparkling rubies and emeralds, and after gazing at them, red and yellow spots came before the spectator's eye. . . . The heads of the idol-worshippers came dancing from their necks. The golden bricks rolled down and brought with them the plaster of sandalwood; the yellow gold became red with blood, and the white sandal turned scarlet. The foundations of the temple, which were mines of gold, were dug up, and its jeweled walls, which were mines of precious stones, pulled down. . . . There were five hundred mans of precious stones.
Malik Naib reached Delhi in AD 1312 with 612 elephants, 20,000 horses, 96,000 mans of gold (the figure seems absurd though), many chests of jewels and pearls. The old men of Delhi declared:
"No one remembers such treasures and spoils brought ever to Delhi."
Marco Polo, the famous Venetian traveller of the thirteenth century, reported diamond trade going on through the ports of the Guntur district, the big stones going to the Indian kings and the great Khan, and 'the refuse of the finer stones to Europe'. These treasures in their turn were plundered by the various Muslim invaders from northern India. Muhammad Bin Tughlak loaded hundreds of elephants with the precious spoils of Hindu temples. Ibn Battuta, Ferishta, the Venetian Nicolo Conti and others have all described the great wealth possessed by the kings of south India in the form of precious stones.

The Gem Treasury of the Moghuls
As we know the Moghul dynasty is of greatest importance in the Indian history for the duration of its reign and for the stability it brought. The dazzling wealth of the Moghuls was so enormous that it is alluded to as one of the richest in the wold in its time. The Moghuls largely consolidated the gem treasures of their predecessors. Biswas says Erskine and King have identified Babar's diamond, weighing according to Ferishta 186 English carats, to be identical with the famous Koh-I-Nur now in the British vaults. Valentine Ball however refuted this identification,and suggested that Babar's diamond has to be identified with the Daryti-i-Nur now in the Shah's treasury in Teheran.
Akbar was the first Moghul who organised a 'treasury for precious stones' as described by Abul Fazl. Rubies, diamonds, emeralds, red and blue yaquts were categorised under 12 classes and pearls into 16 classes. Jehangir was a great lover of gems, particularly diamonds and jades. By the time of Shah Jahan, the treasury had a huge stock of diamond, emerald, lapis lazuli, ruby (some inscribed), sapphire and also rosary, necklace and ornaments studded with them.
Aurangzeb was the proud possessor of all the gold and jewels worth 4 million pounds (of those times!) owned by Dara Shikoh and a larger amount of treasure possessed by his father. In addition, he had seven magnificent thrones, one wholly covered with diamonds, the others with rubies, emeralds or pearls. Biswas tells us that Tavernier was allowed to examine Aurangzeb's jewels for the first time on the 2nd November 1665. Being a jeweler and gemologist himself his account is of great importance. The first piece that he was allowed to examine in his hands was the 'Great Moghul' later known as the Koh-i-Nur diamond, a round rose, very high at one side weighing 268 English carats. He described and drew the shapes of this 'Great Moghul' and seven other pieces. Tavernier also saw a jewel set with 12 diamonds, the central one being 'a heart-shaped rose of good water'. There was another jewel set with 17 diamonds. Aurangzeb had a large collection of pearls, the largest being a pear-shaped one, a little flattened on both sides, weighing approximately 60 carats. Tavernier also described the 158 carat oriental topaz (actually yellow sapphire) of octagonal shape which Aurangzeb wore on his cap during coronation, several cabuchons (polished but not cleaved) of ruby and balas ruby, etc. There was a ruby square shaped with two inches sides, bearing the name of Jehangir which was taken to Persia and later ended up in Ranjit Singh's collection.
The Peacock Throne
In the Peacock Throne, the four bars which supported the base of the throne were inlaid with gold and enriched with numerous diamonds, rubies and emeralds. The middle of each bar was decorated with ornamental square cross constituted of either one central ruby with four emeralds round it, or one central emerald with four rubies on four sides. The intervals between rubies and emeralds were covered with diamonds. There were similar decorations all around the throne. Tavernier counted 108 rubies, all cabuchons, weighing 100 to 200 carats each and 110 emeralds weighing 30-60 carats each on the great throne. In this connection Tavernier wrote:
" The underside of the canopy is covered with diamonds and pearls, with a fringe of pearl all round, and above the canopy, which is a quadrangular shaped dome, there is a peacock with elevated tail made of blue sapphires and other colored stones. The body of the peacock is made of gold inlaid with precious stones, having a large ruby in front of the breast, whence hangs a pear-shaped pearl of 50 carats or thereabouts, and of a somewhat yellow water. On both sides of the peacock there is a large bouquet of the same height as the bird, consisting of many kinds of flowers, made of gold inlaid with precious stones. . . ."
The cost of the famous throne has been variously estimated, at the value of rupees at that time, as Rs. 4 crore (Bernier) to Rs. 10 crore (Tavernier). The throne was taken to Persia by Nadir Shah. Nadir Shah also took away in 1739, the entire (70-80 million pounds worth) gem treasure at Delhi, including the celebrated piece Koh-i-Nur. The huge collections of gems and jewellery, looted from India, adorn the museums of London and Teheran. The chests 'filled with gold, silver, diamonds, pearls and emeralds from the Moghul treasury' are now in the Teheran Museum. This has been characterized by a Curator of the Smithsonian Institution as 'perhaps the greatest jewel treasury of all times'.

Pearl and Coral
The pearl fisheries in India flourished in the ancient period. In seventeenth century, Tavernier reported about the trade going on in the Gulf of Persia as well as in the gulf separating Sri Lanka and south India. The pearl-fishing in the Manar used to take place twice a year during March-April and then August-September and the sale lasted from June to November. Tavernier, comparing the pearl fishers of Manar and the Gulf of Bahrein wrote: The people of Manar are better fishers, and remain for a longer time under water than those of Bahrein; they do not place any clips on their noses nor cotton in their ears to keep the water from entering, as is done in the Persian Gulf.
A small town named Lantegree in Maharashtra was a great centre of coral polishing in the early seventeenth century. The preference of the Indians and other Asians for coral was manifest even during the ancient period, and the reason for this preference has been subject of many dissertations. The real reason could be religious. The reddish yellow coral is known as rudrakhsha, the eye of the Siva and a symbol of renunciation and spirituality. It must have gained popularity during the Tantric period of. Hinduism and (Mahayana) Buddhism. The 'ornament for the neck' used by the common people was a rosary of coral beads, which were counted during prayers.

The Rock Crystal
The Indian tradition of jewelry made of rock crystal such as agate, carnelian and quartz is very ancient but not well-documented. There was widespread use of chalcedonic and crystalline quartz in ancient India. Ball reported that the lapidaries at Vellum, a town in south India, had skilled workers in different varieties of rock crystal, such as the ordinary pellucid quartz, smoky quartz, cairngorm and amethyst. The ornaments made were chiefly of broach stones cut in the brilliant, rose and other patterns. Godavari district, Hyderabad state and Sambalpur district of the Central Provinces also provided brilliant rock crystals. Aurangpur of the Gurgaon district, 15 miles south of Delhi, had Aravali quartzite from which quartz crystals were extracted. Biswas conjectures that these might have been used for making vases and ornaments. Tavernier saw Aurangzeb drink from a large cup of rock crystal placed on a golden saucer, enriched with diamond, rubies and emeralds. After the 1857 War of Independence, the Delhi Palace was looted and found to contain many drinking vessels, vases and pitchers made of rock crystal, which were later described by Valentine Ball. The best known deposits are found in the Rajpipla hills at Ratanpur, on the lower Narmada River. Deposits of carnelian were mined and processed also near the Mahi River, north of Baroda. Biswas here refers to the mining and working of the stones at Ratanpur, vividly described in 1878 by J.M. Campbell (Bombay Gazetteer, Vol. VI, p. 205) and reproduced by Valentine Ball. Ratanpur has been the centre of the more than 2000 years old international trade on articles made of agate and carnelian.

Corundum, Ruby and Sapphire
It is generally accepted that the use of white corundum started in India. Even the name is derived from the Sanskrit word kuruvinda. The British travellers of the early nineteenth century reported indigenous mining works on corundum in India. Captain Newbold, for example, found in the 1840s widespread corundum mining in the Salem district: at Caranel, Anpore, Mallapollaye and at various localities up the river Kaveri. Newbold also described the mines at Golhushully and Kulkairi in Mysore (Journal of Royal Asiatic Society, Vol. VII). In his papers (Records Geological Survey of India, Vol. V, 1872 and Vol. VI, 1873), F.R. Mallet published accounts of his visit to a mine situated on a hill between Pipra and Kadopani. Several yards (at places 30 yards) thick reddish grey bed of corundum rested between quartz schist and porphyritic gneiss with hornblende rock. Traceable up to about half a mile, the deposit appeared to Mallet to be 'practically inexhaustible'. To him considerable amount of pre-modern mining must have taken place before 1814, and it was still going on in 1871. W. Hoey made a comprehensive report in 1880 on the trade and manufacture of gemstones including rubies and sapphires. Holland described the Indian lapidary (begri) using different kinds of discs (san) for cutting precious stones. Rubies were reported in the Salem district and the Mahanadi river between Cuttack and Sambalpur, but most materials came from upper Myanmar from places like Kyatpyen, 70 miles north-east of Mandalay. Many of the famous rubies known in Europe can be recognized to be of Indian origin on account of the way in which they are pierced through the middle. One such huge specimen acquired in 1867 now adorns the crown of the British queen.
Similarly, one Indian sapphire weighing 225 carats was brought to England in 1856. Sri Lanka provided most of the sapphires. The 563 carat 'Star Sapphire of India' is displayed in the American Museum of Natural History, New York. The Smithsonian Institution in Washington possesses 'Star of Bombay' corundum, 'Bismarck Sapphire' of Sri Lanka and the Roser Reeves Collection of ruby gems.
Writing sometime in the middle of the seventeenth century, Nicols mentioned about zircon gems being found in Cannanor and Cambay in India. The alluvium at Ellora contained large obtuse octahedron crystals of zircon along with corundum and these (Sanskrit, gomed, red ones known as hyacinth) must have been utilised by jewellers of Cambay.
Garnet jewels were also popular in India. Voysey, Newbold and others reported recovery of garnets from the Mahanadi bed in Orissa, Kondapilli (lat. 16°38' N, long. 80°36' E) in the Godavari district, Gharibpeth, 8 miles south of Paloncha in Hyderabad, etc. There were extensive mines of garnet in the Kisengarh State of Rajputana near Sarwar (lat 26° 4' N, long, 75° 4'30" N) from which gems of large size and good colour were obtained, and the Raja derived large revenue. There are also reports of the mining and widespread trade of beryl in India, ever since the days of Patanjali.

Diamond Mines
Amongst the gemstones, diamond is considered to be the most precious of all. Biswas reports that Kautilya's Arthasastra of the late fourth century BC was probably the first text to describe the Indian diamond or vajra and the mode and area of its occurrence (2.11. 37-41). The mine and stream deposits were listed as their sources. It is hard to identify precise locations of place names mentioned in Arthasastra, Brhat-samhita, Ratnapariksa, Agastimata, or other texts describing gems, regarding diamond fields, but we may guess the following locations: Wairagadh (ancient Vajragrha) eighty miles south-east of Nagpur on the Bath river, a tributary of Weinganga (Vena Ganga of the Brhat-samhita); the Kosala region of Akaravanti around the famous Panna in Madhya Pradesh; the region around the Golkonda mines, formerly known as Matanga; the Paunda or the Chota-Nagpur area around Soumelpur; the Kalinga alluvial resources from the Mahanadi valley, the Sambalpur district, the Koel river Hirakund, etc. Diamond-washing has been traditionally done by the tribes of Savara of Sambalpur area, Kols of Chota Nagpur, Gonds of Madhya Pradesh, etc. Howard enumerated 23 mines in the kingdom of Golkonda and 15 in the kingdom of Bijapur.

C. Ritter in his Erdkunde von Asien (Vol. IV, part 2, p. 343,1836) collected various scattered reports on Indian diamonds. Valentine Ball provided a more exhaustive account of diamond works in pre-modern India. C. Ritter arranged Indian diamond mines known to him in five groups, from south to north:
1. The Cuddapah Group on the Penner river including ancient mines of Condapetta, Munimadagu, Wajra Karur, etc.
2. The Nandial Group between the Penner and the Krishna River including the mines of Banaganapalli, Ramulkota, etc.
3. The Ellore or Golkunda Group on the Krishna River. This includes famous mines of Kollur, Partial, Muleli or Malavilly.
4. The Sambalpur Group on the Mahanadi River. In this group Tavernier's Sumelpur or Semah/Semul on the North Koel River as well as Wairagarh of the Central Provinces' was included.
5. The Panna Group in Bundelkhand.
Tavernier has described the diamond-processing operations at Kollur. He also described diamond-cutting on the site by steel-wheel, aided by water, oil and diamond dust. He observed:  The Indians are unable to give the stones such a lively polish as we give them in Europe: this, I believe, is due to the fact that their wheels do not run so smoothly as ours. But the business around the mines was 'conducted with freedom and fidelity'. Even children of age 10 to 16 were proficient diamond-testers handling big and defective specimens and polished diamond but not cut with equal ease. The ancient diamond mines in the Bhima-Tungabhadra-Krsna-Godavari valleys in the Andhra Pradesh region have been specially studied and reported by Voysey (1833), King (1872), Munn (1929), Dutt (1953) and Rao (1969). Dutt has drawn attention to the occurrence of diamond in the Andhra Pradesh region in three forms: (1) in river gravels, (2) sedimentary rocks or detritals, and (3) in the Archaean crystallites. In his writings on the 'Diamond mines of (greater) Bengal', Valentine Ball drew attention to the three distinct localities in the Bengal-Bihar-Orissa region, which produced diamond in the pre-modern period.

Decline of Diamond Trade
Valentine Ball asserts that there was no real exhaustion of the localities where diamond mining was possible. On the contrary, the diamond beds were extended far more than the ancient miners ever knew. Ball hoped that scientific guidance would improve diamond production in India. Dutt attributed various reasons to the decline of Indian diamond industry: exhaustion of diamond-bearing rocks, water trouble in the excavations, oppressive nature of the mining and political administration, absence of systematic prospecting operations, superstitions amongst the workers and the discovery of diamond fields in other parts of the world. India lost its monopoly in diamond trade in 1728 when Brazilian mines were first exploited. In 1870 the South African mines monopolized the global market in this precious gem.
Mining and processing of gem minerals were to be done for the affluent section of the Indian society and the outside world. The reasons for the low quantum of output were a very large number of poor people who worked under appalling conditions. Technological levels were primitive and almost no attempt was made to upgrade them. Interactions between workers of different trade guilds, and between workers and intellectuals were negligible. The scholars of the Ratnasastras and the Muslim gemmological texts hardly show any progress in their knowledge on the subject. Even under an apathetic atmosphere, the ill-paid and ill-fed Indian workers toiled in the mines and produced exquisite art-jewellery for the whole world to marvel at.
I remember once reading the autobiography of Mccolay. In his book he has written that while he was travelling the villages of India, he found that the people were so innocent. Once when he was tired he was invited as guest to one of the mud houses and he saw a pot full of gold coin left open at the corner of that room. So was India centuries back. I feel extremely bad about the present situation of our country. Now one should really think about these facts.

Main Source:
Biswas, Arun Kumar. 2001. Minerals and Metals in Pre-Modern India. New Delhi: D.K Printworld (P) Ltd.

Select References

Ansari, S.M.R. 1975. On the Physical Researches of Al-Biruni, Indian Journal of History of Science, Vol. 10, No.2, November 1975,pp. 198-217.
Biswas, A.K. 1991. Minerals and Metals in Ancient India, Indian National Science Academy, New Delhi.
Ball, Valentine. 1879-80. A Geologist's Contribution to the History of Ancient India, Presidential Address to the Royal Geological Society of Ireland, Journal of the Royal Geological Society of Ireland, Vol. V, Part III (New series), 1879-80, pp. 215-63.
Ball, Valentine. 1881. A Manual of the Geology of India, Part III, Economic Geology, Geological Survey of India, Calcutta, 1881.
Ball, Valentine. 1989. Travels in India by Jean-Baptiste Tavernier - edited translation of the original French edition of 1676 in 2 volumes, 1889, Reprint by Oriental Books Reprint Corporation, New Delhi.
Begley, W.E. and Z.A. Desai, 1990. The Shah Jahan Nama of Inayat Khan. Oxford University Press, New Delhi, 1990.
Blochmann, H.1977. The Ain-i-Akbari of Abul Fazl (edited translation, revised by D.C. Phillott), Oriental Books Reprint Corporation, New Delhi, Volume I, 1977, pp. 15-16.
Habib, Muhammad 1937. The Campaigns of Alauddin Khilji: Khazainul Futuh or Treasures of Victory - of Hazrat Amir Khusrau - translated and ed. by Muhammad Habib, D.B. Taraporevala and Sons, Bombay, 1937.
King, W. 1872. On the Kadapah and Karnul Formations in the Madras Presidency, Memoirs Geological Survey of India, 8, 1, 1872.
Munn, Leonard . 1929. The Golkonda Diamond Mines, The Journal Hyderabad Geological Society 1, 1, 1929, pp. 21-62.

Monday, 2 January 2012

Shri Krishna and the 16000 wives !!!

Well, I think most of us accept the fact that He did have 16,000 wives and henceforth the question "Polygamy in Indian Culture(Hinduism)".

I recently came across a you tube video where a woman asks Mr. Zakir Naik, why Islam encourages polygamy for which he explains that Quran is the only book that supports one woman man for which I do not have a contradict. Good if it says so. But then he also says that there is nothing in wrong in having more than one wives and gives so many stupid examples which I will bring in the later part of this article.

The question was raised by a Hindu woman. He has to convince her that only Islam is right and there he takes the example of Lord Shri Krishna for which the woman had nothing to say further.

To talk about Dr. Zakir Naik, I would say that he is unlike the normal muslims in India and he is among those who's existence is a threat to the entire world and to the Islam itself for his goal is to convert and not follow. He need numbers, he want to change the names. He proclaims himself as an encyclopedia of Vedic texts and claims that Vedas has been interpreted and the corrected form is the Quran. He already have so many haters in Islam. I had only one question for him, if I were ready to join Islam, out of the 72 sects which sect should I be joining for all have a vast difference in the beliefs. And any person should be given the right to believe and not he should forced to be believed. Mr Zakir Naik and company does the later.

I'm not religious. I'm spiritual. And being spiritual is the ultimate goal of the so called Hinduism though the Hindu word does not make any sense to me.

My focus is to explain to the woman and to those like her about the Shri Krishna his 16000 wives.

Lord Shri Krishna was wedded to none except Rukmini. The myth of 16000 wives came from a story where he liberated 16000 captive girls from Narkasur. The story itself is questionable. Further the story never states that Krishna married 16000 girls. It says he protected them, which is true if story is correct. had Krishna married 16000 of them, it would have taken him more than 10 years even at rate of 4 marriages a day as per the prevailing rituals!

Krishna was so strictly disciplined that he observed complete Brahmacharya for 12 years before planning to be a father. That is why Krishna is such a role model for entire society. The narrator of Geeta had no time for anything except nation-building in those testing periods.

Krishna never had any love-games with any Gopi. These are figments of imaginations which got popular during dark age of foreign rule when rulers of small states indulged in wasteful enjoyments after accepting supremacy of foreign rulers. Further the whole story of Radha is a figment of imagination. It exists only in Brahma Vaivart Puran which is another unscrupulous book like Bhavishya Puran that insults legends like Krishna and Ram. The concept of Radha grew popular only in very recent times during dark age of India when rulers of princely states were busy only in considering themselves Krishna incarnate and indulging into lustful activities by demeaning just a legendary Brahmachari character! Mahabharat does not contain these.

Please read this excellent article by Dr Satya Pal Singh, Police Commissioner of Police, Pune: Lord Krishna – Lord Krishna – an enlightening personality.


While polygamy was practiced by certain rulers at various points in time, it was restricted only to ruling class and never became a mainstream in larger population. That is why Hindus had no discomfort or objection to formal introduction of monogamy as a law after independence.

All the great legends of Hinduism, whom many consider to be near God, were purely monogamous or brahmachari- Vishnu, Shankar, Ram, Lakshman, Bharat, Shatrughna, Hanuman and Krishna.

Thus it is a gross myth that Hinduism accepts Polygamy.

On contrary, Vedas are unambiguous over recommendation of monogamy alone. The same has been the trend for general population and our role models.
If there is any philosophy that condemns polygamy and specifically demands monogamy, it is the Hindu Dharma based on noble precepts of Vedas.

Now my contradicts to Dr Zakir Naik's explanation to justify polygamy:

Dr. Zakir Naik says – Average life span of women is more than that of men.
By this logic, polyandry (one wife- multiple husband) should be allowed. Because, on average, one wife would require more than 1 husband to cover her entire life!

Dr. Zakir Naik says – World female population is more than world male population.
This contradicts previous point. If one looks at 2008 data of World Population as published by UN Statistics Division, there are 2% more males than females in the world! The same is also true for marriageable age discarding children and elders. Does he recommend Polyandry now?

Before we get further, let us also look at the countries with worst gender ratio. You can view the list at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_sex_ratio
The table has facility to sort by fields. What we observe is that the top 9 countries with more men than women are all Muslim countries. Stricter the Islamic Law, more adverse the gender ratio. There are 2.74 times more men in UAE and 2.46 times in Qatar. India and Pakistan are also is not far off with their significant Muslim population!

Dr. Zakir Naik says – Muslim women in due faith could bear a small personal loss to prevent a greater loss of letting other Muslim sisters becoming "public properties".
We just saw the data above. Does Dr Naik recommend the inverse now?

In civilized societies like Vedic Dharma, each women apart from one' s wife is viewed as mother, by default. The basic rule is “Matrivat Paradaareshu – All except wife are like my mother”. That is why the question of someone becoming public property does not arise. In wars, legends like Shivaji would bow to imprisoned women and call them mother! And in a society that respects women, the question of adverse gender ratio does not arise as is happening in conservative Muslim countries.

What is important is use of word “property” for women. Dr Naik recommends that polygamy enables women to be private property rather than “public property” at small personal loss. This small loss is a great insult to entire womanhood. If sharing of husbands is haram, why is sharing of wife merely a small personal loss? Vedas do not discriminate at all between men and women and provide them equal rights and privileges in all matters including marriage.

Next he lists 4 reasons why polygamy is permitted but polyandry is not permitted:

a. This will help identify father of the child!
(But now we have DNA testing available!)

b. Man by nature is more polygamous!
(What is the proof for this except that polyandry is stoned to death? Is this not a ploy to insult entire womanhood by justifying polygamy?)

c. It is biologically difficult for women to be polyandrous and rear children!
(This is again another shameless reason to justify keeping multiple wives and concubines, in name of religion and social service!)

d. High chance of acquiring sexual disease!
(On contrary, medical science proves that it is women who are more susceptible to contract such diseases from polygamous men than vice versa. Being a medical student sometime, Dr Naik should have verified at least this much before publication. Or perhaps he never got a chance to practice or get back to medical books!)

And finally you know what he says; this is what made me pissed off. He says :-
> Woman cannot stay virgin.
> Woman will be raped, someday or the other.
> A woman will never die virgin.
> And later she will become a prostitute.

What make me pissed of is not about what this idiot speaks. It is the appreciation that he gets for these comments makes me feel ugly about these people. Are they so idiots? The problem with these men is that most of them are SADISTS. And thats the truth.

Wise can decide themselves the mentality of this admirer of Osama bin Laden. And I have heard him lot many times praising Osama bin Laden.

In summary, Polygamy is a malpractice, quite aptly condemned by the Vedas. Hinduism guided by Vedas and its role models has always emphasized on monogamy and self-control as the only way for humans.

Efforts to justify polygamy, through whatever reasons, is an insult to entire womanhood.

May such deviant minds introspect and come into the shade of Vedas. May they inculcate feeling of respect for entire Matru-Shakti.

The Authenticity of Vedas

How Vedas remain unchanged even after millions of years?

On how Vedas have been preserved in pristine state, here are some analytical, unbiased and objective pointers. As true soldiers of vedas, let us accept truth and reject false after thorough and rigorously scientific analysis and not out of mere conjectures. I provide here some details on how Vedas have been preserved so purely and how its not possible to alter even a single syllable. No other text in the world can claim to have such fail-safe method of preservation. So while one can doubt purity of other texts, same is not true in case of Vedas. Our forefathers devised a number of methods to preserve the unwritten Vedas in their original form, to safeguard their tonal and verbal purity.

They laid down rules to make sure that not a syllable was changed in chanting, not a svara was altered. In this way they ensured that the full benefits were derived from intoning the mantras. They fixed the time taken to enunciate each syllable of a word and called this unit of time or time interval "matra*"uot; . how we must regulate our breathing to produce the desired vibration in a particular part of our body so that the sound of the syllable enunciated is produced in its pure form: even this is determined in the Vedanga called Siksa. The similarities and differences between the svaras of music and of the Vedas are dealt with. So those differences between the sounds voiced by birds and animals on the one hand and the Vedic svaras on the other. With all this the right way is shown for the intonation of Vedic mantras.

A remarkable method was devised to make sure that words and syllables are not altered. According to this the words of a mantra are strung together in different patterns like "vakya", "pada", "karma", "jata", "mala", "sikha", "rekha", "dhvaja", "danda", "ratha", "ghana".

We call some Vedic scholars "ghanapathins", don't we? It means they have learnt the chanting of the scripture up to the advanced stage called "ghana". "Pathin" means one who has learnt the "patha". When we listen to ghanapathins chant the ghana, we notice that he intones a few words of a mantra in different ways, back and forth. It is most delightful to the ear, like nectar poured into it. The sonority natural to Vedic chanting is enhanced in ghana. Similarly, in the other methods of chanting like karma, jata, sikha, mala, and so on the intonation is nothing less than stately, indeed divine. The chief purpose of such methods, as already mentioned, is to ensure that even not even a syllable of a mantra is altered to the slightest extent. The words are braided together, so to speak, and recited back and forth.

In "vakyapatha" and "samhitapatha" the mantras are chanted in the original (natural) order, with no special pattern adopted. In the vakyapatha some words of the mantras are joined together in what is called "sandhi". There is sandhi in Tamil also; but in English the words are not joined together. You have many examples of sandhi in the Tevaram, Tiruvachakam, Tirukkural, Divyaprabandham and other Tamil works. Because of the sandhi the individual words are less recognisable in Sanskrit than even in Tamil. In padapatha each word in a mantra is clearly separated from the next. It comes next to samhitapatha and after it is kramapatha. In this the first word of a mantra is joined to the second, the second to the third, the third to the fourth, and so on, until we come to the final word.

In old inscriptions in the South we find the names of some important people of the place concerned mentioned with the appellation "kramavittan" added to the names. "Kramavittan" is the Tamil form of "kramavid" in the same way as "Vedavittan" is of "Vedavid". We learn from the inscriptions that such Vedic scholars were to be met throughout the Tamil country.

In jata patha, the first word of the mantra is chanted with the second, then the order is reversed-the second is chanted with the first. Then, again, the first word is chanted with the second, then the second with the third, and so on. In this way the entire mantra is
chanted, going back and forth. In sikhapatha the pattern consists of three words of a mantra, instead of the two of jata.

Ghanapatha is more difficult than these. There are four types in this method. Here also the words of a mantra are chanted back and forth and there is a system of permutation and combination in the chanting. To explain all of it would be like conducting a class of arithmetic.

We take all kinds of precautions in the laboratory, don't we, to protect a life-saving drug? The sound of the Vedas guards the world against all ills. Our forefathers devised these methods of chanting to protect the sound of our scripture against change and distortion.

Samhitapatha and padapatha are called "prakrtipatha" (natural way of chanting) since the words are recited only once and in their natural order. The other methods belong to the "vikrtipatha" (artificial way of chanting) category. (In krama, though the words do not go in the strict natural order of one-two-three, there is no reversal of the words-the first after the second, the second after the third, and so on. So we cannot describe it fully as vikrtipatha). Leaving out krama, there are eight vikrti patterns and they are recounted in verse to be easily remembered.

Jata mala sikha rekha dhvaja dando ratho ghanah
Ityastau-vikrtayah proktah kramapurva maharsibhih

All these different methods of chanting are meant to ensure the tonal and verbal purity of the Vedas for all time. In pada the words in their natural order, in krama two words together, in jata the words going back and forth. The words tally in all these methods of chanting and there is the assurance that the original form will not be altered.

The benefits to be derived from the different ways of chanting are given in this verse.

Samhitapathamatrena yatphalam procyate budhaih
Padu tu dvigunam vidyat krame tu ca caturgunam
Varnakrame satagunam jatayantu sahasrakam

Considering that our ancestors took so much care to make sure that the sound of the Vedas did not undergo the slightest change, it is futile for modern researchers to try to establish the date of our scriptures by finding out how the sounds of its words have changed.

What more, today different schools of Vedas exist in south who memorize vedas in different means, as explained above. And if you compare the mantras memorized by different schools, you will find variation of not a single syllable. Remember we are talking lacs of syllables!! And still no variations. Thats why even Max Muller, a
bitter critic of Vedic philosophy, could also not help but state that such a foolproof method of preservation is among the greatest wonders and miracles of the world!

This page is to give a faint glimpse of how the vedas in spite of its massive content, (Rg veda and Yajur veda have 153,826 words 109,287 words respectively) have been preserved from generation to generation though it was all done only by oral transmission. All this has been preserved (till today) (at least three millenia acc. To western calculations) without ever putting them into writing. This must be considered a great lingusitic achievement of which India can be legitimately proud. The literature, which consists of diverse poetical and prose compositions were simply learnt by rote, the
training being given by the teacher saying each word or combinations of words once with the proper incantations (called svaras) and the students saying it twice. They then learnt to recite it in continuous form along with the incantations. The continuous recitation of a vedic text is called samhita pAtha. The accuracy of the text is preserved by resorting to an artifice of nine different techniques or modes of recital.

The first is the pada pATha, which simply recites each word of the text separately; pada means word; pAtha means reading.The euphonic changes that occurs from the samhita pATha to the pada pATha is itself very technical (Sanskrit grammar would be crucial here) but makes sense. In addition, there are eight other techniques of recitation,
the sole purpose of each is to preserve the original samhita text without the loss or addtion of a single syllable or svara. The svaras are a significant part of the recital of the vedas, whatever be the mode. The eight modes are called:

krama, jaTa, ghana, mAlA, ratha, SikhA, daNDa and rekhA.

In each mode the order of recital of the words is specified as a particular permutation of their original sequence. We give below a sentence from the Yajur veda, obviously without the svaras, in its original samhita pATha form, also its pada text and then the order of the words in the ghana recital. A pundit who has learnt the Ghana recital of one complete veda (he takes thirteen years of whole time work to reach that stage) is called a ghana-pAThi.

First we give the rule for the ghana mechanics of recitation: If the original order of words in a sentence is:


The ghana recital goes as follows:





5 iti 5.

Example: samhita sentence:

eshAm purushANAm-eshAm paSUnAM mA bher-mA ro-mo eshAM kincanAmamat //


Oh God! Do not frighten these our men and animals, may none of these perish or lack health.

pada text:


Note: The ninth break here and the last break are the results of a technicality which you may ignore, unless you want to specialise in this art.

Now for the ghana recital(without the svaras; with the svaras it would be a delight to hear). The recital is a non-stop recital, except for a half-pause at the place shown by / . There is no break anywhere else. The hyphens shown are for requirements of those who can decipher the grammar ; they will not be reflected in the recital.

eshAM-purushANAM-purushANAm-eshAm-eshAM purushANAm-eshAm-eshAm
purushANAm-eshAm-eshAm purushANAm-eshAM /

purushANAm-eshAm-eshAM purushANAM purushANAm-eshAM paSUnAM
paSunAm-eshAm purushANAm purushANAm-eshAM paSUnAM /

eshAM paSUnAM paSUnAm-eshAm-eshAM paSUnAm-mA mA paSUnAm-eshAm-eshAM paSUnAm-mA /

paSUnAm-mA mA paSUnAM paSUnAm-mA bher-bher-mA paSUnAM paSUnAm-mA bheH /

mA bher-bher-mAmA bher-mAmA bher-mAmA bher-mA /

bher-mAmA bher-bher-mAro aro mA bher-bhermA araH /

mA ro aro mAmA ro momo aro mA mA ro mo /

aro mo mo aro aro mo eshAm-eshAm mo aro aro mo eshAM /

mo eshAm-eshAm mo mo eshAm kim kim-eshAm-mo mo eshAm kim / mo iti mo/

eshAm kimkim-eshAmeshAM kim-cana cana kim-esham-eshaM kim-cana /

kim cana cana kim kim canAmamad-Amamat cana kim kim canAmamat /

canAmamad-Amamac-cana canAmamat /

Amamad-ityAmamat /

The significant point to note here is that in Sanskrit the order of words does not matter. If you do it with an English sentence like:

Rama vanquished Ravana

It will go like this:

Rama vanquished vanquished Rama Rama vanquished Ravana 'Ravana vanquished Rama' Rama vanquished Ravana … and so on.

You can see the absurdity now. In Sanskrit this absurdity would not arise. So a ghana recitation is supposed to be equivalent to a recitation of the veda 13 times and to that extent is multifold fruitful! The 13 is because except for two beginning and two ending
words in a sentence the others are repeated 13 tiumes. (You can check it with the word paSUnAM above).

Sunday, 1 January 2012

Manipulated Indian History (Part - 9)

The Distorted History of Fatehpur Sikri:

It has been said earlier how the authorship of the massive fortress in Agra is being falsely attributed to Akbar. In a similar manner, Akbar is being projected as the author of another fort-palace complex, a excellent example of Hindu architecture, at Fatehpur Sikri, nearly 37 Km away from the city of Agra.

The so called pseudo secular and the Marxist historians are propagating the idea that the place was originally called Sikri and it was a small village surrounded by deep forest infested with wild animals. In that village, a Sufi saint called Shaikh Salim Chisti began to live in a small hut in 1537. At that time, Akbar was mentally upset as he did not have a male child.

To narrate the situation, Nizam-ud-din Ahmad in his Tabakat-i-Akbari, writes, “The Emperor had several sons born to him, but none of them had lived. Shaikh Salim Chisti, who resided at the town of Sikri, twelve kos from Agra, had gladdened him with the promise of a son. The Emperor went to visit the Shaikh several times, and remained there ten or twenty days on each occasion. … When one of the Emperor’s wives became pregnant, he conveyed her to the dwelling of the Shaikh, and left her there. Sometimes he stayed there himself, sometimes at Agra . He gave the name of Fathpur to Sikri, and built a bazaar and baths there.” [1] “Salim, the old saint, had settled among the rocks and wild beasts as a hermit in A D 1537-8 (A H 944), and in the year following had constructed a monastery and school-house.” [2]

In this regard, historian V A Smith, in his Akbar The Great Mogul, also writes, “Akbar resolved at this time to press his scheme for converting the obscure village of Sikri into a great city. His reasons, or some of them, for doing so may be stated in the words of Abu-l Fazl: – Inasmuch as his exalted sons [Salim and Murad] had taken their birth in Sikri and the God-knowing spirit of Shaikh Salim had taken possession thereof, his holy heart desired to give outward splendour to this spot which possessed spiritual grandeur. Now that his standards had arrived at this place, his former design was passed forward, and an order was issued that the superintendents of affairs should erect lofty buildings for the use of the Shahinshah.” [3]

He further continues, “A wall of masonry was built round the town, but never completed, and dwellings of all classes were constructed, as well as schools, baths, and other public institutions, the indispensable gardens not being neglected. The Emperor, after the conquest of Gujarat , gave it the name of Fathabad (town of victory), which was soon exchanged in both popular and official use for the synonymous Fathpur..” [2] V A Smith continues, “The language of Abu-l Fazl in the above passage quoted might be understood to mean that Akbar did not begin his extensive programme of building at Fathpur-Sikri until 1571, but that is not the fact. The design had been formed in his mind and his had actually been begun in 1569.” [2]

But most of the historians believe that Akbar began the so called construction of Fatehpur Sikri in 1571, and hence the historian R C Majumdar writes, “From there (Punjab) he returned to Ajmer (corrupt of Sanskrit Ajeya Meru) by way of Hissar and on 9th August, 1571, arrived at Sikri which he now decided to make his capital as the auspicious place where his two sons Salim and Murad had been born. The resources of his expanding empire and the artistic genius of India and Persia were employed to convert the petty, quiet hamlet into a crowded proud metropolis which even in its lost glory was regarded by Fitch in 1585 as much greater than Elizabethan London.” [4] From the above statement it implies that Akbar began the so called construction of Fatehpur Sikri in 1571 and it is not clear, from the above statements, when the job was completed. Smith also says that, Akbar built the Buland Darwaza to commemorate his conquest of Gujarat in 1575-76. [5]

But many hold the view that Akbar finished the construction in 1585. So, a general notification, in this regard, reads, “Fatehpur Sikri was built during 1571 and 1585. … This town was built by the Mughal Emperor, Akbar. He had planned this city as his capital but shortage of water compelled him to abandon the city.. … Fatehpur Sikri is one of the finest examples of Mughal architectural splendour at its height.” [6] The Wikipedia Encyclopedia, in this context, says, “Fatehpur Sikri is a city and a municipal board in Agra district in the state of Uttar Pradesh, India. The historical city was constructed by Mughal emperor Akbar beginning in 1570 and served as the empire’s capital from 1571 until 1585, when it was abandoned for reasons that remain unclear.” [7]

One should notice that the statements quoted above are terribly inconsistent. According to Smith, Akbar began the construction of the city in 1571 (or 1569) and before that the place was a small village. According to R C Majumdar, in 1571, Akbar decided to use the auspicious place as the capital of his empire. But according to the Wikipedia Encyclopedia, “Akbar started to use the place as the capital of his empire from 1571 and continued to use the place as the capital up to 1585.” The question naturally arises – How many years Akbar took to convert the small village Sikri into a city? Was it possible for Akbar to shift his capital to Sikri before the completion of the said construction? The most ridiculous part of the episode is that, according to Wikipedia Encyclopedia, Akbar started to use Sikri as his capital in the same year the construction of the city had begun. So, it implies that, Akbar, in 1571, had shifted his capital from the city of Agra to a desolate village called Sikri, surrounded by jungles.

The reader might have noticed another anomaly in the above narrations. According to some authors, the construction of the city was completed in 1585, and in the same year it was abandoned due to scarcity of water. As if the so called scarcity of water fell, all on a sudden, from the sky without giving any prior hint and no body could foresee that. Most importantly, these contradictory statements lead one to conclude that Akbar the fool spoiled so much money for setting up the new city in vain.

There are other anomalies as well. It has been mentioned above that, according to V A Smith, Akbar built the Buland Darwaza as a commemoration of his conquest of Gujarat in 1575-76. While an epigraph inscribed on the Buland Darwaza says that it was built in 1601, when Akbar returned from Daccan. But it has been said above that the city of Fatehpur Sikri was abandoned in 1585. So, it becomes unacceptable because in that case it should be concluded that Akbar built the Buland Darwaza in the abandoned city of Fatehpur Sikri. So, according to another version, it is said that, Fatehpur Sikri was finally abandoned in 1604 and the Buland Darwaza was erected in 1601. [8]

However, to sum up the above narrations, Akbar began the construction of the city of Fatehpur Sikri in 1571 and the construction was completed in 1785. Or, Akbar took 14 years to complete the job. But whosoever has visited the site would refuse to believe that such a massive construction, containing the invincible fort and innumerable palaces therein with fine stone carvings, could be constructed within 14 or 15 years. To make this unbelievable story believable, the so called pseudo secular and Marxist historians of India resort to treachery and lie, and say, “The work was pushed on with such phenomenal speed that, as if by magic palaces, public buildings, mosques and tombs, gardens and baths, pavilions and water courses were called into being beneath the barren sandstone ridge of Sikri.” [8]

In this context, it should be mentioned what absurd Jahangir, son of Akbar, has written in his autobiography, regarding the construction of Fatehpur Sikri. He writes, “In course of fourteen to fifteen years, that hill full of wild beasts became a city containing all kinds of gardens and buildings, lofty edifices and pleasant places attractive to the heart.” [8]

It has been pointed out above that historians believe that Akbar built the Buland Darwaza (the Great Portal) in 1601 as a monument after the conquest of Gujarat . In this regard, our historians write, "The southern entrance to the Jam-i-Masjid at Fatehpur Sikri was considered to be suitable position, and the original entrance was replaced by the construction of a massive portal. This was known as the Buland Darwaja.” [9] It is important to note here that originally there was a gate where the Buland Darwaza stands today. Common sense tells us that the said gate was very old and hence Akbar found it suitable to demolish that worn out gate and make a new one. Had this older gate been built by Akbar, hardly 15 years ago, he would have certainly not shown any interest to demolish the same to be replaced by the new gate called Buland Darwaza.

The True History of Fatehpur Sikri:

We now may pay heed to what another group of historians, known as nationalist historians, have to say in this regard. These historians are convinced that the authorship of the fort-palace complex at Fatehpur Sikri is being falsely attributed to Akbar. According to them the city, now known as Fatehpur Sikri, was a thriving and prosperous city from very older times. Once upon a time, during the times of Babar, Akbar’s grand father, the fort-palace complex at Fatehpur, was under the occupation of Rana Sangram Singh of Mewar. In 1527, a battle was fought between Babar and Maharana Sangram Singh, known as the Battle of Khanua, in a field close to the fort of Fatehpur. In that battle Babar defeated Rana Sangram Singh and thus the occupation of the fort went to the Mughals.

There are many references to show that fort at Fatehpur (or Fathpur) was there even centuries before the times of Akbar. The Muslim chronicler Yahya bin Ahmad, in his Tarikh-i-Mubarakshahi, writes, “On the 19th Jumada-l awwal, 808 H ( 12th November, 1405 AD), a battle was fought between them (Khizr Khan and Ikbal Khan). At the first charge, Ikbal wasa defeated and fled. …(Later on) He was killed and his head was cut off and sent to Fathpur.” [10] The statement is sufficient to prove that, at least 150 years before the times of Akbar, Fatehpur Sikri was a place of political importance, not an isolated village surrounded by jungle.

Yahya bin Ahmad also writes, “Sikri, which is now known as Fathpur, was entrusted to Malik Khairu-d din Tuhfa. His Majesty (Mubarak Shah) then proceeded towards Gwalior .” [11] This statement conclusively proves that the city which is now known as Fatehpur was originally known as Sikri. It has been said earlier that the Battle of Khanua was fought between Babar and Rana Sangram Singh in a field close to Fatehpur Sikri. Babar, in his autobiography Tuzak-i-Babri, has given the description of the battle. The Tuzak-i-Babri says that Babar left Agra on 11th February, 1527 AD and advanced towards Fatehpur to meet Rana Sangram Singh. Babar writes, “After marching a kos, we found that the enemy had retreated. There being a large tank on our left, I encamped there, to have the benefit of water.” [12]

At that hour, Babar sent an advanced team of 1000 men, under the care of Abdul Aziz and Mollah Apak, to assess the situation and collect prior intelligence. To describe the situation, Babar writes, “… without taking any precautions, he (Abdul Aziz) advanced as far as Kanwahah, which is five kos from Sikri.” [13] But a troop of 4000 or 5000 Rajputs routed them and compelled them to return to their base.

It is to be noted here that, Rana Sangram Singh was the most famous Hindu warrior at that time and he carried 82 scars on his body. So, naturally, Babar’s army was visibly nervous. Just on the day, previous to the battle, Babar held meeting with his nervous generals. To comment on the result of the discussions, Babar writes, “At this time, as I have already observed, in consequence of the preceding events, a general consternation and alarm prevailed among great and small. There was not a single person who uttered a manly word, nor an individual who delivered a manly opinion.” [14]

As mentioned above, Babar camped outside the wall of Sikri, near a big tank and the Rajput camp was inside the wall. The chief Rajput generals were Rawal Udai Singh, Medini Ray, Bhamal, Varmadev and Siladitya, the caretaker of the Raisin Fort. Beside that, there were a few Afghan generals in the Rajput army and the most prominent among them were Hasan Khan and Sikandar Lodi. After being thrashed at Kanwahah, the Mughal army became extremely frightened and advised Babar to retreat.

So, from the above facts, it becomes evident that, if the Rajputs continued their attack from the incident of Kanwahah, the Mughal army would have defeated and dispersed. But Sangram Singh took time and gave the Mughal army an opportunity to re-assemble. In this context, we should note another development. Babar had initiated a dialogue with Sangram Singh through Siladitya, but later on he succeeded to bribe Siladitya to bring him to his side. This enabled Babar to gather some vital military secrets of the Rajput army.

However, on 17th (or 16th) March, 1527 AD, the battle took place at the field of Khanua, close to Sikri and 37 Km from Agra . As soon as the battle began, Siladitya changed side with his men and in addition to that, the Afghan generals Hasan Khan and Sikandar Lodi and their army preferred not to fight against the Mussalmans of Babar’s army and remained, more or less, silent spectators. The actual strength of the Rajput army was not properly recorded, but according to Col Tod, there were 80,000 horses and 500 elephants in the Rajput army. [15]

The fierce battle began in the morning and continued for ten hours. When the victory was under the control of the Rajputs, Sangram Singh suffered a severe wound and had to leave the battle field. The incident made the Rajput army disappointed and they began to disperse, and thus victory went to the hands of the Mughals. To describe the incident, Babar writes, “Having defeated the enemy, we pursued them with great slaughter. Their camp might be two kos distant from ours. On reaching it, I sent on Muhammadi and some other officers, with the order to follow them in close pursuit, slaying and cutting them off, so that they should not have the time to re-assemble.” [16]

Babar continues, “The battle was fought within the view of a small hill, near our camp. On this hillock I directed a tower of the skulls of the infidels to be constructed. … Immense numbers of the dead bodies of the pagans and apostates had fallen in their flight, all the way to Bayana, and even as far as Alwar and Mewat.” [16] After entering the fort, Babar ordered general massacre and Muhammadi and other Mughal generals cut down the civilians of the city of Sikri en masse. There are no proper records of how many Hindus were slaughtered on that day. The so called secular and Marxist historians always try to keep the figure low. It has been mentioned that there were 80,000 strong cavalry and 500 elephants in the Rajput army. Hence, many believe that, including the foot-soldiers, the Rajput army was 200,000 strong, and nearly 100,000 of them were taken prisoners and slaughtered on that day. In addition to that, about another 100,000 civilians were massacred in the city.

It has been mentioned earlier that after the mass-massacre of the Hindus in the Chittor Fort by Akbar, Rajput Kings abandoned the fort and thereafter, they used the fort at Udaipur as their residence and the seat of the government. In a similar manner, the Rajput kings had abandoned the Fort of Sikri after the mass-massacre by Babar, as mentioned above. And, as a result, the city of Fatehpur Sikri gradually turned into a desolate jungle. Later on, Akbar perhaps took an initiative to revive the city by clearing the jungle and our dishonest historians are portraying that as Akbar’s creation of the new city of Fatehpur Sikri. A study of the history of Fatehpur Sikri, it appears that, Akbar might have built a minutely small part, the Buland Darwaza, of the entire edifice and nothing else. And later on, he might have built the tomb of Shaikh Salim Chisti.

Another point of vital importance should be highlighted in this context. Anyone, whosoever has visited the Fort-Palace complex at Fatehpur Sikri, it must not have escaped his notice that all the palaces and buildings reveal overwhelmingly Hindu style of architecture and stone carving. According to experts, they are either of Rajasthani or Gujarati style. This is due to the simple reason that the Rajput Hindu kings were the real authors of those buildings and palaces. But to hide the true history, the despicable creatures, callef secular and Marxist historians, say that, Akbar engaged both Hindu and Muslim artists of Persia for building the palaces and stone carving. They also say that, Akbar was so generous that he had no hesitation to accept Hindu style of architecture. But all these lies are going to be exposed very soon as the real history of Fatehpur Sikri has started to reveal due to fresh archaeological discoveries. We expect to deal that aspect in the next installment.

(To be continued)


[1] H.M. Elliot and J. Dowson, The History of India -As Told by Its Own Historians (in 8 volumes), Low Price Publication, Delhi (1996) V, 332-333.

[2] V. A. Smith, Akbar the Great Mogul, Oxford Clarendon Press, 105.

[3] V. A. Smith, Akbar the Great Mogul, ibid, 104-105.

[4] R. C, Majumdar, The History and Cultures of the Indian People, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan (in 12 Vols) ,VII ,125.
[5] V. A. Smith, Akbar the Great Mogul, ibid, 107.

[6] (www.taj-mahal-india-travel.com/monuments-places-to-visit/fatehpur-sikri.html)

[7] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatehpur_Sikri)

[8] R. C, Majumdar, ibid, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, VII, 760.

[9] R. C, Majumdar, ibid, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, VII, 763.

[10] H.M. Elliot and J. Dowson, ibid, IV, 40.

[11] H.M. Elliot and J. Dowson, ibid, IV, 62.

[12] H.M. Elliot and J. Dowson, ibid, IV, 268.

[13] H.M. Elliot and J. Dowson, ibid, IV, 267.

[14] H.M. Elliot and J. Dowson, ibid, IV, 269.

[15] R. C, Majumdar, ibid, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, VII, 36.
[16] H.M. Elliot and J. Dowson, ibid, IV, 272.

Manipulated Indian History (Part - 8)

When the Part 5A of the current series of articles DISTORTION OF INDIAN HISTORY FOR MUSLIM APPEASEMENT, was posted on the FFI, a reader commented, “Historians site two historic rulers of India as ‘the great’. One is Buddhist Asoka. The next is Muslim Akbar. The subcontinent has been the abode of Hindus throughout history, but why has there not been a single Hindu ruler who could earn the honorific ‘The great’? Why couldn’t Hinduism produce one? What is wrong with Hinduism?” In this context, I would request the reader to note that Hindus do not write Holy Vedas, Holy Upanishads or Holy Bhagavadgita and so on, because the Hindu religious scriptures are really holy.

In a similar manner, almost all the Hindu kings were great and hence it is unnecessary to tag them as great. We should quote the comment of another reader, in this regard. He writes, “Unfortunately the Indian History was written by the British colonialists and they wanted to show that British Empire was the best thing for India and after independence Leftist took over. In fact, there were innumerable great Hindu kings. … Alexander although was able to defeat Porus, a Hindu king, but the fight was so frightening that his soldiers revolted for any further attack on India and thus he started moving backward from there to Greek.” In this context, it should be said that Alexander was badly defeated by King Porus at the Battle of the Hydaspes River. Particularly, the Greek army failed completely to defend the attack by trained elephants of Porus. Moreover, Alexander suffered a mortal wound in that battle which caused his death at Babylon . The Hollywood film Alexander, directed by Oliver Stone, confirms this fact.

However, it should also be mentioned that the history of India , which we read in the history books, has been written according to the guidelines set by the British occupiers and those British rulers were Hindu bashers. But somehow or rather, they could not ignore the greatness of Emperor Ashok. It is to be noted here that the so called secular historians of India try to project Akbar even greater than Emperor Ashok. While commenting on this aspect, V A Smith writes, “Akbar would have laughed at the remorse felt by Ashok for the miseries caused by the conquest of Kalinga, and would have utterly condemned his great predecessor’s decision to abstain from all further wars of aggression.” [1]

We should quote here the comment of another author regarding the greatness of Akbar. He writes, “The personality and nature of Akbar has been nicely summed up by the Editor of Father Monserrate’s Commentarius. The editor’s introduction states, “In the long line of Indian sovereigns, the towering personalities of Ashoka and Akbar (because of his dread) stand high above the rest… Akbar’s greed for conquest and glory and his lack of sincerity form a marked contrast to Ashoka’s paternal rule, genuine self-control and spiritual ambition. Akbar’s wars were those of a true descendent of Timur, and had all the gruesome associations which this fact implies. … His character with its mixture of ambition and cunning has now been laid bare. He has been rightly compared to a pike in a pond preying upon his weaker neighbours.” [2] He also writes, “With his treacherous nature and the unlimited power than he wielded over a vast region qualifies him to be one of the foremost tyrants and sadists in India ’s history, or perhaps, even world history. He was no less cruel a tyrant than any of his ancestors.” [2]

The so called secular historians of India also assert that, since Akbar was born and died in India , he must be accepted as an Indian monarch. In this context, V A Smith writes, “Akbar was a foreigner in India . He had not a drop of Indian blood in his veins.” [3] To elaborate this point, P N Oak writes, “Akbar was a direct descendant in the 7th generation on his father’s side from Tamerlain (or Taimur) and on the mother’s side from Chengiz Khan.” [4] He also writes, “Intemperance was the besetting sin of the Timuroid royal family, as it was of many other ruling Muslim houses. …Babur was an elegant toper. … Humayun made himself stupid with opium. …Akbar permitted himself the practice of both vices.” [5]

Whosoever has studied even a bit of Islam, has seen that the concepts like nationality, nationalism, patriotism or love for the motherland etc are absent in Islam. On the contrary, Islam imposes the concept of Millat and Kufr and divides the entire humanity into two groups, namely Momems (or Muslims) and Kafirs. The aggregate of all the Muslims is called Islamic Umma. As a result, Muslims have no loyalty to the country where they live. They have loyalty to the Islamic Umma and to the Islamic holy places, Mecca and Medina . From this view point, even the converted Muslims, who live in India , are not Indians. They have no loyalty to India and to its history and culture, and that is the reason, they refuse to sing India ’s National Song “Vande Mataram” (I worship my motherland). They are loyal to Allah, loyal to Islam and Islamic Umma, and loyal to Mecca and Medina . They can be called resident non-Indians but not Indians. So it is not difficult to understand that Akbar’s Indian-ness is a myth.

Another reader has expressed a completely different view. He writes, “Why would historians paint Akbar good to please Muslims doesn’t make sense. Because, Akbar was not a Muslim himself. He was the follower of Din e Elahi, a religion founded by himself which had elements of Hinduism and Islam in it. Just because he had a Muslim name doesn’t make him Muslim.” In this context, it should be said that Akbar preached his religion at the fag end of his life and hence through most of his life, he was a Muslim. If a robber commits robbery throughout his life and abandons it just before his death, should he be called a robber or an innocent gentleman! Despite his preaching of his new religion Din-i-Ilahi, many believe that “Akbar was born a muslim, lived like a muslim and died as a muslim; that too a very fanatic one.” [2]

At this point, it should be made clear that, Akbar preached his new religion Din-i-Ilahi not out of his respect for other religion, but for his personal glorification. He wanted to be a prophet, like Muhammad, by inventing and floating this new religion. “He understood the trick of Muhammad and wanted to be another Muhammad with a new religion din-i-Ilahi”, says a commentator. In this context, we should mention another aspect of Akbar’s life that reflects his intense desire to project himself as a religious personality. Xavier, a Jesuit in Akbar’s court, gives a typical instance of Akbar’s perfidy in making people drink water in which his feet had been washed. [2] While commenting on this aspect, V A Smith writes, “Xavier writes, Akbar posed “as a Prophet, wishing it to be understood that he works miracles through healing the sick by means of the water in which he washed the feet.” [6]

To lure the Hindus to his new religion, he proposed to repeal Jejya (Poll Tax) and pilgrimage tax and ban of cow slaughter. But they were never implemented. So the author of Akbar: The Great Tyrannical Monarch writes, “The infamous Jiziya tax, which is special tax exaction from the Hindus, was never abolished by Akbar. Time and time again different people had approached seeking exemption from Jiziya. Everytime the exemption was ostensibly issued, but never was actually implemented.” [2]

Many believe that Akbar, who might be a lecher and a diabolic killer, not an iconoclast and he did not demolish Hindu temples. As a matter of fact, Akbar was mainly concerned with his personal glorification, money and women and hence might not have found much time to concentrate on the matter of desecrating Hindu temples and breaking Hindu Idols.

However, Akbar’s hands were not clean from this sin. While commenting on this aspect of Akbar , Col Tod writes, “Not only that he forcibly annihilated innumerable humans, he also had no respect for temples and deities and willingly indulged in destruction of such places of worship. ).” [7] “Throughout Akbar’s reign, temples used to razed to the ground or misappropriated as mosques and cows were slaughtered in them, as happened in the battle at Nagarkot. No symbol of Hindu origin and design was spared from the iconoclastic wrath of Akbar.” [2]

While commenting on this aspect of Akbar, V A Smith writes, “The holy Hindu cities of Prayag and Banaras , were plundered by Akbar because their residents were rash enough to close their gates! No wonder Prayag of today has no ancient monuments — whatever remain are a rubble! It is rather obvious that Akbar had no respect and reverence for cities considered holy by Hindus, let alone esteem for human life and property. Also, it is evident from this instance that Akbar’s subjects were horrified and scared upon the arrival of their king into their city. If at all Akbar was so magnanimous, why then did not the people come forward and greet him?” [8]

Monserrate, a contemporary of Akbar, writes, “The religious zeal of the Musalmans has destroyed all the idol temples which used to be numerous. In place of Hindu temples, countless tombs and little shrines of wicked and worthless Musalmans have been erected in which these men are worshipped with vain superstition as though they were saints. Not only did the muslims destroy the idols, but usurped the existing temples and converted them into tombs of insignificant people.”[9]

He further continues, “Akbar has neither any love or compassion for Hindus as is apparent from the above examples. Hindus were openly despised and contemptously treated under Akbar’s fanatical rule as under any other rule. Akbar was only one of the many links of the despotic and cruel Moghal rule in India , and enforced the tradition of his forefathers with sincerity and equal ruthlessness.”[9]

Akbar’s shameless court flatterers, to please their master, have painted him as the most handsome man on the earth and our secular and Marxist historians are also following those flatterers. But Akbar’s physique was anything but handsome. Historian V A Smith, in this regard, writes, “Akbar (in mid-life) was a man of moderate stature, perhaps 5’7” in height, broad-chested, narrow waisted and long armed. His legs were somewhat bowed inward and when walking he slightly dragged the left leg, as if he were lame. His head drooped a little toward the right shoulder. … The nose was rather short, with a bony prominence in the middle and nostrils dilated as if with anger. …and his complexion was dark.” [10] So a commentator writes, “Not only was this guy a barbarian, he was also very ugly.”

Akbar’s Lechery:

It has been said earlier that Akbar was mainly concerned with personal glory, money and women and his wars and conquests were aimed to achieve these three goals. So the author of Akbar; the great tyrannical monarch, writes, “Akbar possessed a inordinate lust for women, just like his ancestors and predecessors. One of Akbar’s motives during his wars of aggression against various rulers was to appropriate their women, daughters and sisters.” [2]

Some historians try to project that Akbar practiced monogamy throughout his life. While commenting on this aspect, V A Smith writes, “That Akbar remained monogamous throughout his life is indeed history falsified myth.” [11] He also writes “Akbar, throughout his life, allowed himself ample latitude in the matter of wives and concubines! … Akbar had introduced a whole host of Hindu women, the daughters of eminent Hindu Rajahs, into his harem.” [12] Historian Dr A L Srivastava has given a detail account in his Akbar the Great, how Akbar coerced the rulers of Jaipur for sending his daughters to Akbar’s harem [2]

Historian J M Shelat writes,”After the “Jauhar” that followed the killing of Rani Durgawati, the two women left alive, Kamalavati (sister of Rani Durgawati) and the daughter of the Raja of Purangad (daughter-in-law of the deceased queen) were sent to Agra to enter Akbar’s harem.” [13] “It should also be observed that admittance into Akbar’s harem was available mainly to virgins and others’ were “disqualified”. In spite of such disgusting and lewd personal affairs, inducting women of abducted or killed Hindu warriors into his harem as slaves and prostitutes; it is bewildering that Akbar is hailed as a righteous and noble emperor.” [2]

To describe Akbar’s uxorious character, V A Smith writes, “Abul Fazl never tires of repeating that Akbar during his early years remained ‘behind the veil’. What he means thereby is that Akbar used to spend most of his time in his harem.” [14] Akbar habitually drank hard and used to have, for the most of the day, licentous relations with women of his harem. There is no doubt that, both drinking and engaging in debauched sexual activities was inherited by Akbar from his Tartar ancestors. [2]

To describe Akbar’s infinite lewdness, Abul Fazl in his Ain-i-Akbari, writes, “His majesty has established a wine shop near the palace … The prostitutes of the realm collected at the shop could scarcely be counted, so large was their number .. The dancing girls used to be taken home by the courtiers. If any well known courtier wanted to have a virgin they should first have His Majesty’s [Akbar's] permission.” [15] He also writes that, His Majesty [Akbar] himself used to call these prostitutes and ask them who had deprived them of their virginity? “This was the state of affairs during Akbar’s rule, where alcoholism, sodomy, prostitution and murderous assaults were permitted by the king himself. The conditions of the civic life during Akbar’s life is shocking!” [16]

“Whole of India was reduced to a brothel during the Moghal rule and Akbar, one of the Emperors, is being glorified as one of the patrons of the vast brothel. The above instances may suffice to convince the impartial reader that Akbar’s whole career was a saga of uninhibited licentiousness backed by the royal brute.” [2] Who were these so called prostitutes? Wherefrom did a whole army of prostitutes suddenly descend on Akbar’s realm, like swarm of locusts? “The answer is that these ever-increasing prostitutes were none other than decent Hindu women whose homes were daily raided and plundered and their men-folk were either massacred or converted, were haplessly left to fend for themselves and exposed to the mercy of the sex hungry Mussalman courtiers.” [16]

Akbar had made it a pernicious custom to demand choicest women from the household of vanquished foes. Thus all the women in territories conquered by Akbar, whether a commoner, or of noble or royal descend, were at Akbar’s mercy. According to this custom, all the Rajput kings who had submitted to Akbar, were forced to sent their daughters or sisters to Akbar’s harem, where they had to live as sex-slaves. Raja Man Singh of Jaipur had to offer his sister to Akbar. Akbar’s cruelty towards the Hindu women, kidnapped and shut up in his harem, were staggering and his much vaunted marriages, said to have been contracted for communal integration and harmony, were nothing but outrageous kidnappings brought about with the force of arms. It has been mentioned earlier, how the Rajput women of the Chittor Fort sacrificed their lives in Jauhar to avoid this disgrace and humiliation.

Only in one occasion, the said custom was slackened and when the Treaty of Ranathambhor between Akbar and the chiefs of Bundi (who owned the fort) was made, the first condition of the said treaty read that the chiefs of Bundi be exempt from the custom, degrading to a Rajputs, of sending a ‘bride’ to the royal harem. To narrate the incident, V A Smith writes, “A treaty was drawn up on the spot, and mediated by the prince of Amber {Jaipur], which presents a good picture of Hindu feeling. [The terms were] (1) that the chiefs of Bundi should be exempted from that custom, degrading to a Rajput, of sending a dola [bride] to the royal harem; (2) exemption from jizya or poll-tax; (3) that the chiefs of Bundi should not be compelled to cross the Attock; (4) that the vassals of Bundi should be exempted from the obligation of sending their wives or female relatives ‘to hold a stall in the Mina bazaar’ at the palace, on the festival of Nauroza [New Year’s Day] and so on. [17]

In the middle of Jan 1562, Akbar made a pilgrimage to the tomb of Khwaja Mainuddin Chisti of Ajmir. On the way, Raja Bihari Mal of Amber entered a peace treaty with Akbar and, according to the said custom, Raja Bihari Mal offered him the hand of his daughter in marriage to Akbar. However, the princess later on became the mother of emperor Jahangir.

Even the Muslim women were not safe from Akbar’s lust. In 1564, Akbar compelled one Shaikh of Delhi to divorce his wife in his favour. [18] Akbar had an eye on Bairam Khan’s wife and married her soon after Bairam Khan was murdered. Akbar did not hesitate to have caused this violent and tragic end of his erstwhile guardian for the satiation of his lust. In this context, it should also be mentioned that, in 1558, when Bairam was more than 50, he married his 19 year old cousin Salima begam. Meanwhile, Bairam was sacked and Akbar asked him to go to Mecca and on his way to Mecca, Bairam Khan was assassinated on 31st January, 1561, at Patan by some Afghans. Akbar was then 19 year old and hence Akbar and Salima Begam were of the same age. [19] This is a fine example of fight between two lechers, just like fighting of dogs in their mating season.

In this way Akbar, with the army of forcefully abducted women, created a harem of 5000 inmates, in the capital city of Agra . While commenting on it, V A Smith writes, “The imperial harem constituted a town in itself. No less than 5000 women dwelt within the walls, and each of them had a separate apartment. The maintenance and control of such a multitude of women necessitated a carefully devised system of internal administration and the organization of adequate arrangements for discipline. The inmates were divided into sections, each under a female commandant (daroga), and due provision was made for the supply from the ranks of clerks to keep the accounts. A strict method of check was applied to the expenditure, which was on a large scale.” [20] Smith further continues, “The inside of the enclosure was protected by armed female guards. Eunuchs watched on the outside of it, and beyond them again were companies of faithful Rajputs, while troops of other classes posted at a greater distance gave further security.” [20]

Though, following Abul Fazl, Smith wrote above that ‘each of the inmates of the harem were provided with a separate apartment’, but in Agra there is not even a single building with 5000 separate rooms. So, the above conclusion is a lie. One can, therefore, easily understand in what wretched condition these unfortunate women were condemned to live. Itmad-ud-daula, the father-in-law of Jehangir, has thrown some light on some other features of the inmates of this harem. If someone had given birth to a female child, she was saved because in future she could be used as a sex-slave. But, if anyone happened to give birth to a male child, he used to be murdered or blinded as in future he could never pose a threat to the throne. It may be mentioned here that, another lecher Ferozshah Tughloq, used to get the private part of the women of his harem sewed, to be sure that they were not having sex with other man.

However, Akbar’s lechery was not confined to his harem of 5000 women and P N Oak, while commenting on this matter, writes, “Despite an exclusive harem of 5,000 women, and all the virgin prostitutes of the realm whose virginity, as Abul Fazl tells us, was at Akbar’s exclusive royal command and could not be violated without special permission by any courtier, the honour of the wives of noblemen and courtiers was itself always subject to Akbar’s sexy pleasure.” [21] Akbar did not spare even the wives of the ministers and nobles of his court, if they happened to draw attention of Akbar’s lust.

To highlight this point, Abul Fazl writes, “Whenever Begams or wives of nobles, or other women of chaste character, desire to be presented, they first notify their wish to the servants of the seraglio and wait for reply. From thence they send their requests to the officers of the palace after which those who are eligible (sic) are permitted to enter the harem. Some women of rank obtained permission to remain there for a whole month.” [2] The above passage is a clear admission that Akbar used to compel wives of courtiers and noblemen, toward whom he felt sufficiently attracted to remain within his harem at least for a month at a time.

To expose another feature of Akbar’s lechery, V A Smith writes, “Grimon’s statement that Akbar had confined himself to one wife and distributed his other consorts among the courtiers is not directly confirmed from other sources.” [22] “This adds a new dimension to Akbar’s lechery because it reveals how women were considered as mere chattel to be freely exchanged among Akbar and his courtiers in a continuous round of sex-traffic.” [19] “Then there was the notorious institution of Meena Bazar, according to which on New Year’s Day, the women of all households had to be paraded before Akbar for his choosing.” [19]

It has been mentioned earlier that Muhammad Ghori, Qutb-ud-din and Iltutmish were sodomites. It has also been mentioned that Babur, Akbar’s grandfather, has given a lengthy description of this sodomic infatuation for a male sweetheart in hia auto-biography. Humayun was no different. Therefore, sodomy was also a precious service of Akbar’s own family… Though, perhaps, Akbar did not engage in sodomy, but many believe that he allowed” it to be practiced by his servants, courtiers and sycophats. Abul Fazal in Ain-e-Akbari provides accounts of some such acts which are too disgusting to even mention. Such perverse gratification was prevalent during the entire Mughal rule, including Akbar’s times.


[1] V. A. Smith, Akbar the Great Mogul, Oxford Clarendon Press, 32..

[2] Akbar The Great A Tyrannical Monarch – http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/modern/akbar_ppg.html

[3] V. A. Smith, Akbar the Great Mogul, ibid, 7..

[4] P N Oak, Islamic Havoc in Indian History, Published by A Ghosh, 298.

[5] P N Oak, Islamic Havoc in Indian History, ibid, 294.

[6] V. A. Smith, Akbar the Great Mogul, ibid, 189.

[7] J Todd, Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan, 2 volumes, Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd., London , 1957, II, 259.

[8] V. A. Smith, Akbar the Great Mogul, ibid, 58.

[9] S J Monserrate, “The Commentary,” translated from original Latin by J.S. Hoyland, annotated by S.Banerjee, Humphrey Milford, Oxford Univ. Press, London , (1922),.27.

[10] V. A. Smith, Akbar the Great Mogul, ibid, 242.

[11] V. A. Smith, Akbar the Great Mogul, ibid, 47.

[12] V. A. Smith, Akbar the Great Mogul, ibid, 212..

[13] J M Shelat, “Akbar,” Bharatiya Vidya Bhawan, 1964, Bombay. , 90.

[14] V. A. Smith, Akbar the Great Mogul, ibid, 31.

[15] Blochmann, H., “Ain-e-Akbari,” translation of Abul Fazal’s Persian text, 2nd Edition, Bibliotheca Indica Series, published by the Royal Asiatic Society of Bengal., 276.

[16] P N Oak, Islamic Havoc in Indian History, ibid, 300.

[17] V. A. Smith, Akbar the Great Mogul, ibid, 99.

[18] V. A. Smith, Akbar the Great Mogul, ibid, 47.

[19] P N Oak, Islamic Havoc in Indian History, ibid, 301.

[20] V. A. Smith, Akbar the Great Mogul, ibid, 359.

[21] P N Oak, Islamic Havoc in Indian History, ibid, 300.

[22] V. A. Smith, Akbar the Great Mogul, ibid, 185.

Manipulated Indian History (Part - 7)

Akbar was a cruel killer:

There are many incidents to show that, like all other Muslim rulers, Akbar was a merciless cruel killer. It has been mentioned earlier, how Akbar beheaded helpless Samrat Vikramaditya Hemraj to earn the title of Ghazi (the slayer of infidel). It has also been mentioned how the so called pseudo secular historians are trying to distort the history and conceal Akbar' s inhuman cruelty. It should be mentioned here the opinion of the renowned historian R C Majumdar in this context. He writes, “In this helpless condition, Himu was put to death, according to some, by Bairam, on the refusal of Akbar to kill him with his own hands and, according to others, by Akbar himself at the instigation of his protector.” [1] But still there are some historians, though very rare, who does not hesitate to expose the truth.

Such a historian, Mr S Roy, writes, “Akbar accordingly struck Himu with his sword and Bairam Khan followed him. The story of Akbar’s magnanimity and refusal to kill a fallen foe seems to be a later courtly invention. The humane and liberal emperor of Hindustan who preached ‘sulh-i-kull’ (universal toleration) was not born but made.” [2]

In this context, an incident may be described to expose Akbar’s mindless cruelty. The incident has been narrated by Asad Beg in his Wikaya. It reads, “At that time the Emperor used to retire for a long interval, after evening prayers, during which time the servants and courtiers used to disperse, assembling again when they expected His Majesty to re-appear. That evening he (Akbar) happened to come out sooner than usual, to hear the news from the Dakhin, and at first found none of the servants in the palace. When he came near the throne and couch, he saw a luckless lamplighter, coiled up like a snake, in a careless death-like sleep, close to the royal couch. Enraged at the sight, he ordered him to be thrown from the tower, and he was dashed into a thousand pieces.” [3] One would be extremely frustrated if he try to discover such an act of cruelty by a Hindu king, because Hindu kings were human beings.

Humayun, Akbar’s father, blinded his elder brother Kamran so that he could never pose a threat to the throne and Akbar assassinated Kamran’s son for the same reason. To describe this cruelty of Akbar, Vincent Smith writes, “Executing Kamran’s son [namely, Akbar's own cousin] at Gwalior in 1565, Akbar set an evil example, initiated on a large scale by his descendents Shahjahan and Aurangzeb.” [4] ;

There is no doubt that Akbar inherited such inhuman and brute cruelty from his forefathers. As a matter of fact,

Akbar's ancestors like Babar and Humayun were barbarous and vicious killers, and so were his descendants like Aurangzeb and others’ down the line. “Akbar was born and brought up in a illiterate and foul atmosphere characterized by excessive drinking, womanizing and drug addiction.” [5] The so called secular historians of India are trying to project Akbar as the greatest of all Moghals, righteous in his deeds and noble in character. He is being portrayed as the only and truly secular Emperor of the times, very caring and protective of his subjects. And, above all, he is being projected as a divine incarnate. But Vincent Smith in his Akbar – The Great Mogul writes, “Intemperance was the besetting sin of the Timuroid royal family, as it was of many other muslim ruling houses. Babur (was) an elegant toper … Humayun made himself stupid with opium … Akbar permitted himself the practices of both vices .. Akbar’s two sons died in early manhood from chronic alcoholism, and their elder brother was saved from the same fate by a strong constitution, and not by virtue.“ [6] “With such an atmosphere to nourish Akbar’s thoughts, it is rather usual for Akbar to become “divine incarnate“, rather than a divine incarnate.[5]

Babar, Akbar’s grandfather, was diabolic killer and a terrible iconoclast and Guru Nanak was an eye-witness to the treatments meted out to the people by Babar when he invaded India in 1521. “Nanak was at Sayyidpur, now called Eminabad, 80 kilometres from Lahore, in the Gurjanwala district. Babur ordered a general massacre of the people and thousands of persons were taken as prisoners. The barbarous treatment of prisoners, in the camp, particularly pitilessly lashing of women and children, broke tender heart of Nanak. In his agony he even took God to task.” [7] Guru Nanak said, “Thou, O Creator of all things, Takest to Thyself no blame: Thou hast sent Yama disguised as the great Moghal, Babar. Terrible was his slaughter, loud were the cries of the lamenters. Did not this awaken pity in Thee, O Lord? [8]

It has been said above that like all other diabolic and infernal Muslim rulers, Babar was also a terrible iconoclast. Babar’s barbarism desecrated and demolished thousands of Hindu temples and converted several thousands into mosques. “Babar converted famous Jain temple at Chanderi and the Lord Shiva temple at Sambhal into mosques. By the order of Babar, his general Mir Baqi partially pulled down the Ram Janmabhumi Temple at Ayodhya and converted the same into a mosque.. Babar also demolished the famous Jain temple near Ubhar.” [9]

But our historians to narrate Babar, write, “Babur was the best of the rulers of his times. He had eight great qualities, such as prudence and foresight, great personal ambition, skilled warrior, skilled and generous administrator, a man free from religious discrimination and the quality to gain the hearts of the army. Beside that, he was a great admirer of art, music and learning. He was also a poet and could write good poetry in Persian language” [10]

A few words should be said in this context about composing poetry by Babar. While at Ghazni, the lecherous and sodomite Babar became extremely addicted to young boy called Babri and it was the subject matter of Babar’s poetry, with which he enriched his autobiography. Gradually he became so enamored of Babri that he lost interest in his wife Ayesha. “At that time I used to meet her at an interval of 10, 15 or 20 days. …Before this I never had conceived a passion for anyone, and indeed never been so circumstanced as either to hear or witness any words spoken, expressive of love or amorous passion. In this situation, I composed a few verses in person of which the following is a couplet –

Never was a lover so wretched, so enamored, so dishonoured as I,

And my fair never be found so pitiless, so disdainful as thou,” Writes Babar in his autobiography.[11]

In another similar verse, Babar wrote –

“I am abashed whenever I see my love,

My companion looks at me while I look to the other way.

… … … … … … … … … … …

I had neither strength to go nor power to stay,

To such distraction you have reduced me

Oh, my (male) sweetheart.” [11]

It has been mentioned earlier that Muhammad Ghori, Qutb-ud-din Aibak and Altamash, all of them were sexual perverts and lascivious sodomites and Babar naturally followed that legacy..

After defeating Rana Sangram Singh at the Battle Khanua, Fatehpur Sikri, Babar massacred nearly 100,000 prisoners of war and another 100,000 civilians and raised two towers with the slain heads of the victims. Akbar seems to have preserved this great legacy of erecting minarets with slain heads of the Hindus in several occasions, as is obvious from the accounts of battles he fought, particularly at Chittore Fort.

Picture of Chattore Fort

Humayun, Akbar’s father, had a similar legacy of cruelty, slaughtering Hindus in thousands and taking Hindu women and children as captives. Many believe that he was even more degenerate and cruel than his father. After repeated battles, Humayum could ultimately capture his elder brother Kamran and subjected the latter to brutal torture. A detailed account is left by Humayun’s servant Jauhar and is quoted by Smith, which says, “He. (Humayun) had little concerns for his brother’s sufferings. One of the men was sitting on Kamran’s knees. He was pulled out of the tent and a lancet was thrust into his eyes. Some lemon juice and salt was put into his eyes.” [12]

One can imagine the cruelty and torture that Humayun was capable of inflicting on others when he subjected to his own brother to such atrocities. Humayun was also a slave to opium habit, engaged in excessive alcohol consumption and a lecherous degenarate when it came to women. He is also known to have married a 14 year old Hamida Begum by force. The cruelties perpetrated by of Akbar’s descendants (Jehangir, Shahjahan, Aurangzeb, etc..) are not entirely different from those of his ancestors. Having brought up in the company and under the guidance of a lineage of drug addicts, drunkards and sadists, it is rather anamalous that Akbar held such a gentle and noble character. Even assuming that he fancied nobility, it is amazing that Akbar let his comtemporaries and Generals, like Peer Mohammad, loot and rape the helpless citizenry that he was ruling! It would however be interesting to observe the incidents in Akbar’s reign and evaluate his character. [13]

After defeating Muzaffar Shah, the ruler of Ahmedabad, in November 1572, “Akbar ordered his opponents to be trampled to death by elephants. Hamzaban, commander of Akbar’s forces laying siege to Surat in 1573 A.D. was barbarously punished by Akbar by excision of his tongue. Masud Hussain Mirza, a near relation of Akbar, who had risen in revolt, had his eyes sewn up after capture. … Some of them (300 supporters) were executed with various ingenious tortures. “It is disgusting to find a man like Akbar sanctioning such barbarism which he inherited from his Tartar ancestors”, says Smith.” [14] Such were the acts of Akbar’s barbaric cruelty.

Akbar,s Savagery and Barbarism at Chittor:

In 1567 AD, Akbar advanced with a large army against Rana Uday Singh, the son of Rana Sangram Singh, of Mewar and put the Chottore Fort under siege. But even after 4 months, no indication of surrender was visible from the other side. On the contrary, the Mughal army continued to suffer large scale casualties due to occasional Rajput attack under the leadership of brave Rajput generals Jaimal and Patta.

At last, Akbar ordered to dig two Sabats (a trench covered with leather is called a Sabat) from a far away places to the wall of the fort. Then explosives in large quantities were dumped at the walls of the fort and a severe blasts collapsed the wall. Expecting imminent fall of the fort, nearly 300 Rajput women sacrificed their lives in Jauhar (self immolation in fire). When the Mughal army entered the fort, nearly 800 Rajput soldiers were alive and all of them were put to the sword.

Next morning, victorious Akbar entered the fort riding an elephant. The Emperor was not so pleased as he had to face a lot of hardship in occupying the fort. At that time there were nearly 40 thousand civilians in the fort and this civilian population had assisted the Rajput army to inflict damage to the Mughal army. And hence they became the target of Akbar’s wrath. To narrate the event, Vincent Smith writes, “The eight thousand Rajput soldiers who formed the regular garrison having been jealously helped during the siege by 40,000 peasants, the emperor ordered a general massacre, which resulted in the death of 30,000.” [15] Col Tod, to describe the incident as, writes, “The emperor’s proceedings were marked by the most illiterate atrocities.” [16]

But our secular historians are trying hard to hide Akbar’s cruelty and guilt. So, R C Majumdar, to describe the incident, writes, “Akbar then gave order for mass execution of 30,000 non-combatants, for which all modern historians have condemned him.. According to Kaviraj Shyamadas, however, out of 40,000 peasants who were in the fort, 39,000 had died fighting and Akbar ordered the remaining 1000 to be executed.”[17] (RCM, BVB, VII<, 334)But historian A K Roy writes, “Thirty thousand were slain; among them was gallant Patta, who fell after he had displayed prodigies of valour.” [18] While another historian writes, “According to Abul Fazl, 30,000 persons were slain, but the figure seems to be highly exaggerated.” [19]

However, it was not possible to ascertain the exact figure of the victims who fell to Akbar’s sword, or rather, it was not manually possible to count the large number of the corpses. According to Abul Fazl, the figure was 30,000, but it is needless to say that he did not count the dead bodies but only made a rough estimate. The actual figure could be 50,000 or 80,000; or 100,000 or more than that. It is really astonishing that, most of our historians have reluctantly avoided the concluding part of the episode.

Akbar had a curiosity to know the actual number of Hindus slain. As it was impossible to manually count the heaps of dead bodies, Akbar ordered his men to collect the sacred threads from the corpses. The order was carried out the sacred threads collected were weighed. What was the result of weighing? Vincent Smith, in this regard, writes, “The recorded amount 74½ mans of eight ounce each.” [20] Many believe that Smith was wrong to estimate the weight of a sacred thread and it should exceed 3 ounce each. Man or Maund is an old unit of weight, which is nearly equal to 37 Kg. So, by easy calculations, one can get an idea how many Hindus were slain on that day.

It is being said that, Aurangzeb, the grand grand son of Akbar, promulgated an order that, he should be presented 1¼ maunds of sacred threads daily, collected from slain Hindus. Simple calculations show that 24,000 sacred threads, 3 ounce each, make 1¼ maunds. So, it can be said that, nearly 24,000 Hindus were slain daily during the times of Aurangzab.[xx] (pn oak 576) These fanatic Muslim rulers used to maintain that, more the number of Hindus slain, better would be the place they occupy in jannah or Islamic Paradise.

However the Rajputs, to make the above incident immemorial, treat the number 74½ as cursed and an evil omen. Still today, if someone writes 74½ on the cover of a letter, none but the addressee opens that letter. They believe that if someone opens that letter, his life would also be cursed. .

It has been mentioned above that when Akbar occupied the Chittor Fort, more than 300 Rajput women jumped into fire (Jauhar) so that they may not be abducted to Delhi and dumped into the hell called Akbar’s harem to spend the rest of their lives as prostitutes and sex-slaves. Akbar, the devil incarnate, possessed a inordinate lust for women, just like his ancestors and predecessors. One of Akbar’s motives during his wars of aggression against various rulers was to appropriate their women, daughters and sisters of the defeated Hindu kings. That was the reason, the Rajput women of Chittor prefered “Jauhar”( self immolation) than to be captured and disrespectfully treated as servants and prostitutes in Akbar’s harem. [5]

However, according to the Islamic faith, killing so many kafirs and drenching the Chittor Fort with kafirs’ blood, Akbar had undoubtedly done a great service to Allah and Islam and to seek blessings for this great service, Akbar went to Fatehpur Sikri, bare footed, to his religious guru Salim Chisti. It is needless to say that his guru was extremely delighted after hearing this good news from Akbar. It should be mentioned here that Salim Chisti was a Sufi darbesh and the incident was sufficient to expose the true colour of the Sufi saints.

History of Jauhar and Sati:

This was not a new phenomenon and the ritual began in 711 AD, as soon as barbaric Muslim invaders set their foot on the Indian soil. In 711 AD, Muhammad bin Qasem invaded Sind,.by the sea through the city port of Karachi . At that time, it was called Devalay (or the abode of the God). There was big and tall temple at the sea shore which could be seen from a long distance. The Hindu King Dahir was the ruler of Sind .

King Dahir had 500 Muslim Arab soldiers in his army. In the mid-night, these Arab Muslims treacherously opened the gate of Dahir’s fort and the army of bin Qasem entered and occupied the fort by massacring the security guards of the fort. When the news of fall of the fort reached the women of the fort, including the women of the royal family, they decided to end their lives by consuming poison. At that moment a minister of Dahir’s court came running to them and said that the Muslims were so lecherous that they rape even the dead body of a kafir woman. So, the Hindu women of the fort immediately decided to destroy their bodies by jumping into fire. Then a great fire was made and all the women burnt themselves to escape humiliation and sexual assault of the lecherous Muslims. The practice was, later on, called Jauhar.

It is well known that, during the Muslim period of Indian history, thousands and thousands of Rajput women sacrificed their lives in Jauhar to save their honour and respect. There was another practice prevalent among the Muslim rulers. On the event of death of a Hindu fighter of their army in a battle, they used to bring the wife of the dead warrior into their harem. But the reluctant Hindu widows chose to burn themselves in the fire of their husbands’ pyre to avoid to be captured and live the rest of the life as sex slaves in the harems of the lecherous Muslim rulers. The practice was known as Sati (or Suttee). The term is derived from the original name of the goddess Sati, who self-immolated because she was unable to bear humiliation of her husband Shiva. The term sati also stands for a chaste woman. However, the Muslim rulers were against this practice as it meant snatching away the prey from the predator.

The so called secular historians of India , to glorify Akbar, say that Akbar was so great and generous that he wanted to ban the practice of Sati. But the incident they project as a proof of their claim, tells, a completely different story. Jaimull was a cousin of Bhagawandas (probably a minister of Akbar’s court) and his wife’s beauty attracted the attention of Akbar’s lust. One day Akbar sent Jaimull to a distant place on a false pretext and before he commenced his journey, Akbar’s men poisoned him. So Jaimaull died on his way. Jaimaull’s wife could apprehend Akbar’s trick and decided to burn herself on her husband’s pyre to avoid living as a prostitute in Akbar’s harem.. Akbar, on the other hand, lost no time to send his men to capture the widow and those who accompanied her. Thus Akbar succeeded to drag the unwilling widow of Jaimull into his harem. [21]

However, the practice of Sati, or voluntary co-cremation with the dead husband, continued even in the British period. Later on the custom got corrupted and in most cases, unwilling widows were burnt by the relatives of the deceased husband to grab his properties and riches. And thus, Sati, once a noble practice, became in infamous. The first formal British ban on Sati was imposed in 1798, in the city of Calcutta only, by the effort of Raja Rammohan Roy and Lord William Bentinck, the then Governor General of the British East India Company.

However, after that tragic incident, the Chittorgarh Fort was abandoned for ever and none of the descendants Rana Uday Singh set his foot on the Chittor Fort. All the Kings of Mewar, including Rana Pratap Singh, used Udaypur as their capital the Udaypur Fort as the seat of the government. So, the Chittor Fort gradually turned into a desolate thicket.


[1] R.C. Majumdar, H.C. Raychaudhury and K. Datta, An Advanced History of India, Macmillan & Co (1980), 439.

[2] R. C, Majumdar, The History and Cultures of the Indian People, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan (in 12 Vols) , VII ,106.

[3] H.M. Elliot and J. Dowson, The History of India -As Told by Its Own Historians (in 8 volumes), Low Price Publication, Delhi (1996) VI, 164.

[4] V. A. Smith, Akbar the Great Mogul, Oxford Clarendon Press, 50.

[5] Akbar The Great A Tyrannical Monarch - http://www.hindunet.org/hindu_history/modern/akbar_ppg.html

[6] V. A. Smith, ibid, 294.

[7] R C Majumdar, ibid, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, VII, 308..

[8] R C Majumdar, ibid, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, VII, 306

[9] R C Majumdar, ibid, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, VII, 307.

[10] C Roy, Bharater Itihas (in Bengali), Maulik Library, Calcutta (1985), I, 16.

[11] Babur’s Memoirs, Tr by John Leyden and William Erskine, Revised by Sir Lucal King, p 125-126 (as quoted by P N Oak, Islamic Havoc in Indian History, ibid, 268).

[12] V.A. Smith, ibid, 20.

[13] Shelat J.M, Akbar, Bharatiya Vidya Bhawan, 1964, Bombay , 27.

[14] P N Oak, Islamic Havoc in Indian History, ibid, 305.

[15] V.A. Smith, ibid, 90.

[16] P N Oak, Islamic Havoc in Indian History, ibid, 302

[17].R C Majumdar, ibid, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, VII, 334.

[18] R C Majumdar, ibid, Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, VII, 122.

[19] .R C. Majumdar, H.C. Raychaudhury and K. Datta, ibid, (1980), 443.

[20] V.A. Smith, ibid, 91.

[21] V.A. Smith, ibid, 103.