History of killings of Hindus in India by Islam

38 Responses

  1. Baji Rao 1 says:

    @Unknown Scholar,

    Hindus, along with Sikhs, retaliated massively in East Punjab and Delhi against the Muslims.
    In Jammu also, the Dogras and Sikhs killed and drove out a good chunk of Muslims as well.

    In Bihar, in retaliation for Noakhali and Calcutta, Hindu mobs killed a good many Muslims.
    These Hindus were obviously from the 1920’s generation, so it shows that Hindus are no
    cowards when sufficiently provoked. When Hindus started killing Muslims, Gandhi started
    criticizing them. It shows what a confused hypocrite Gandhi was.

    If Hindus don’t confront and kill Muslims, Gandhi branded them as “cowards”
    If Hindus started killing and confronting Muslims, Gandhi condemned them as evil.

    As the saying goes, Damned if you do, Damned if you don’t!

  2. Face_The_Truth says:

    “It is in this context that Gandhi called Hindus as cowards.”

    You are not detailing the context.

    M.K. Gandhi said to British Field Marshal Archibald Percival Wavell that “If India wants bloodbath she shall have it… …if a bloodbath was necessary, it would come about in spite of non-violence”.

    That (this) type of sentence meant (means) only one thing: M.K. Gandhi did not at all want India’s “Hindus” to retaliate after Indian Muslims rioted and murdered “Hindus” in Calcutta and Noakhali.

    Otherwise, why would British stooge M.K. Gandhi consult with a British Christian Army General named Wavell in abstract form in 1946 A.D.?

    As a born traitor to all “Hindus” (as well as to “Hinduism”), M.K. Gandhi politically acted as a two-headed snake!

    M.K. Gandhi could not give up his affection for British Christian imperialism and Islam’s founder Muhammad ibn Abd’Allah and, as a result, M.K. Gandhi could not fully support eternal “Hindu” traditions of counterattacks.

    When Indian Muslims raped local “Hindu” girls, M.K. Gandhi chided local “Hindu” girls instead for not willingly allowing Indian Muslims to rape!

    On the one hand, M.K. Gandhi tricked many average Indian “Hindus” into believing that “Hinduism” required the steadfast practice of “Ahimsa” (i.e., non-violence) regardless of how savage the enemies of “Hindus” were (are).

    On the other hand, M.K. Gandhi considered “Hindus” cowards for “not being able to” retaliate against Indian Muslims in Calcutta and Noakhali.

    If anyone needs historical proof, I cite Bihar where in 1946 A.D. Indian “Hindus” retaliated against and massacred Muslims on a large scale and, as usual, M.K. Gandhi condemned “Hindus” for doing so.

    M.K. Gandhi was a shrewd lawyer (i.e., English Barrister) and knew how to manipulate “Hindu” religious sentiment for the betterment of Christians and Muslims in Indian subcontinent with the untold expectation that Christians and Muslims would return same or similar favors to Indian “Hindus”.

    So, M.K. Gandhi used to recite Bhagavad Gita all the time and used to falsely claim that Christians and Muslims were (are) worshipers of the same “Supreme Being” as “Hindus” were (are) and “Hindus” had (have) no moral superiority over the imperial forces of Christians and the genocidal forces of Muslims.

    Other than worthless verbal statement(s), M.K. Gandhi did not steadfastly oppose British Christian imperialists for gerrymandering (i.e., a practice intended to establish a political advantage for a particular party or group by manipulating district boundaries) by dividing large colonial provinces into two (or more) separate provinces to give the defeated Indian Muslims a sense of superiority and a need for the creation of exclusive Muslim states namely East Pakistan and West Pakistan.

    M.K. Gandhi dis-united Indian “Hindus” from claiming their motherland intact from foreign invaders while uniting Indian Muslims for solidifying all Islamic bases by giving Indian Muslims everything Indian Muslims needed.

  3. @Baji Rao I, the Hindus were successful after a more than 1100-year battle with Islam from AD 636 to AD 1768 (Ahmedshah Abdali’s last invasion of India). But when Gandhi said ‘Hindus are cowards’ he was talking of the Hindus of the 1920s in India. He was in a way partly right, since India was partitioned without much resistance by the Hindus in the 1940s, and the Hindus did suffer in riots in India, like in 1920s in Malabar in Kerala at the hands of the Moplahs (Who Gandhi called “My God-fearing brave Moplah brothers”), in 1946 in Bengal especially Noakhali etc. It is in this context that Gandhi called Hindus as cowards.

  4. Baji Rao 1 says:

    @Unknown Scholar,

    Muhammad Ghori was killed in a battle by the Khokkar Jats in 1206 AD.
    According to Elliot and Dowson, a force of some 25 000 Khokkars led by Aniruddh Khokkar
    defeated and killed Ghori in battle. This was in the Punjab, near Dhanyak.

    After reading Sita Ram Goel and Ram Gopal Mishra’s books, don’t you really think that
    Mahatma Gandhi was an idiot for saying that Hindus are cowards? If Hindus really were
    cowards, then how did they manage to overcome Islam and not get converted by the invaders
    back then? How did Hinduism manage to survive back then and upto today, if Hindus really
    were a cowardly people? If Hindus were cowards, how do you explain the rise of the Maratha
    warriors and Sikh warriors among them, who fought and defeated the Mughals?

    Gandhi was a confused person. He confused hooliganism for “heroism” and civilized
    conduct with “cowardliness”. Muslims are brave only in a mob situation attacking small
    numbers of non-Muslims, who are outnumbered at the time of attack and surprised.

  5. Baji Rao 1 says:

    @Unknown Scholar,

    RC Majumdar is okay but I think that he isn’t aware of the Hindu inscriptional sources of
    medieval history. He is correct on some points but wrong on other points.

    For example, he makes the claim that during Mahmud’s raids, the Hindu kings did not
    collaborate with one another to stem his advances, but that is not true. Muslim historians
    like Ferishta mention about Hindu Kings forming confederacies to check Mahmud’s

    According to Dr KS Lal, there are Hundreds of Hindu inscriptions recording Hindu battle
    victories on the part of our kings against the Delhi Sultanate. I don’t think RC Majumdar
    is aware of these Hindu inscriptions and has not factored them into his analysis.

    All I am trying to say is his works may not be complete or comprehensive enough,
    particularly in light of Indian sources, such as our inscriptions.

  6. @ Baji Rao I,
    I already have both those books which you said! I have read both of them and they are with me. R C Majumdar edited BVB books are regarded most authentic. Read this article http://historyofmuslimattacks.blogspot.in/2013/02/islam-in-india-history.html

  7. Baji Rao 1 says:

    @Unknown Scholar,

    The Battle of Bairaich, 1033 AD, was not the only battle fought and won by the Hindus
    against the Ghaznavid Muslims. Even after Mahmud Ghazni’s death in 1030 AD,
    his successors kept making attacks besides the Bairaich battle of 1033 AD.

    But pretty much all those attacks of the later Ghaznavids were defeated by the Hindu Kings.
    There is a wealth of Sanskrit-language inscriptions from this era, ie. 1030 AD-1178 AD, which
    details the many Muslim attempts and the successful repulsion of these attacks by the Hindu
    Kings of that era. Some notable Hindu Kings of this era are Arnoraja Chauhan, Govindachandra
    Gahadavala, Vijayachandra Gahadavala, Kirtivarmadev Chandella, Lakshmadev Parmar,

    I recommend you get this book, “Indian Resistance to Early Muslim Invaders” by Ram Gopal
    Mishra. His book is sort of an outline with some examples but it is not exhaustive in covering
    all the relevant Sanskrit based inscriptions detailing the Hindu victories. It gives a sampling
    of the information. You’ll get an idea.

    Also read this book by Sita Ram Goel, “Heroic Hindu Resistance to Muslim invaders”.
    It gives a summary of Dr. Ram Gopal Mishra’s book.

  8. @Baji Rao I, I know the successes of Hindus against Ghazni. Salar Masood Ghazni was defeated massively along with his entire Army in AD 1033 in June in Behraich, Uttar Pradesh in India (140 km or so from Lucknow). Salar Masood Ghazni’s tomb is still there. This defeat halted Islamic invasion of India for the next 150 years. This article is not written to demean Hindus as if there were only defeats, but to show the killings committed by Islam unprovoked on others. There will be another article on real history of India.

  9. Face_The_Truth says:

    How BIG was the “Hindu” Maurya Empire?

    Please click on the LINK below to see.


    Christiãns and Muslims united again and again and partitioned Indian subcontinent in 1947 A.D. into 3 pieces to allow Indian Muslims to either outright murder or drive out all “Hindus” then living in their forefathers’ properties in newly created West Pakistãn and East Pakistãn.

    When Moplãh Muslims in 1921 A.D. were butchering un-armed local “Hindus” and cutting off the breasts and ears of local “Hindu” females, British Christian imperialists did not intervene immediately to stop the Moplãh Muslims from murdering un-armed local “Hindus”; British Christian imperialists rather waited until the massacre was complete before sending troops to stop Moplãh Muslims to continue Islamic Jihãd on un-armed local “Hindus”.

    And, the British stooge M.K. Gandhi later said out loud, “My brave Moplãh (Muslim) brothers!”

    Christianity and Islam are based on falsehoods that borrowed a Jewish scoundrel named “Jehovah” as their God.

    Christians believe that, if a lie is always repeated, the lie becomes “Universal Truth”.

    Ali Muhãmmad Amir Abd’Allãh Umar Salehi ibn Sinã is a follower of Christian falsehoods as “Universal Truth”.

  10. Baji Rao 1 says:

    @Unknown Scholar,

    Some of the factual errors in the write-up:

    About Mahmud Ghaznavi’s attacks. He did not make an expedition in 1027 AD against the
    Jats. His last expedition was against Somanath temple in 1026 AD. Most Historians do not
    agree with the story of his expedition in 1027 AD. It is a made up story by Muslim writers.

    Also Mahmud suffered some 8 tactical military defeats in India at the hands of Hindu kings.
    For example, in 1014 AD, Battle of Toshmaidan Pass, he was defeated by the Kashmiri King
    Sangramaraj and beaten back. In 1015 AD, 1st Battle of Loharakot, Mahmud was defeated
    again by the Kashmiris under Raja Sangramaraj. In 1018 AD, Mahmud was confronted by
    the Chandella King Vidyadhar during his raids against Kannauj. An inscription known as
    the Jayavarman inscription mentions Vidyadhar as churning the Amirs’s army in battle and
    driving them away. In your write up, it says that Vidyadhar fled, but that is not correct.
    In the battle of 1018 AD, he drove back Mahmud’s forces from North India.

    In 1019 AD, Battle of Yamuna, Vidyadhar along with the Shahiya Princes Bhimapala
    and Trilochanapala, defeated and beat back Mahmud’s forces.

    In 1019 AD, according to Muslim Historian Al-Athir, Mahmud attempted an attack on
    Vidyadhara Chandella, but that too was defeated. Carvings in the Khajuraho temples
    show this battle and the crushing of the Islamics. In your write-up, it says that Vidyadhar
    fled and Mahmud captured some elephants. But that is wrong.

    In 1021 AD, 2nd Battle of Loharakot, Mahmud makes another attempt against Kashmir,
    but is defeated by the Kashmiris of Sangramaraj.

    In 1022 AD, Battle of Gwalior, Mahmuds’s repeated attempt against Chandella Vidyadhar
    is defeated. Also at the Battle of Kalanjar, 1022 AD, once again Vidyadhar defeats him
    and forces him away. Not only that, he launches a counter-attack and reconquers
    15 forts from Mahmud and expels him permanently from North India. After this, Mahmud
    never tries again against Kashmir or the Chandellas.

    You could have been somewhat more balanced in your write-up rather than presenting it
    in a one-sided manner.

  11. Ron says:

    @Baji Rao,

    I clearly said International empires (across Continents)
    Also I said after 622 AD there were no Hindu (International) empires.
    I have not created those links and those tables. That is history.

    Fanatical-political-religious groups will distort history for indoctrination purposes. That has happened in so many countries.

  12. Baji Rao 1 says:


    Christianity became the dominant belief system throughout the Roman Empire between
    300 AD-400 AD. In 300 AD, only about 10 % of the inhabitants of Roman Empire were
    Christian but within a century, around 400 AD, Christianity had become practically the only
    faith allowed in the Roman empire. All other beliefs were suppressed and exterminated.
    Paganism was practically wiped out by 400 AD. So, by the time of the Islamic conquests
    of the Middle east and North Africa, these areas were practically 99% Christian and not
    pagan. Christianity was not spread by the sword? Yes it was. The spread of Christianity
    in the Roman empire was done by mob violence by Christian monks and lay-people.
    They routinely attacked pagan temples and murdered innocent people and forced people
    at sword-point to convert to Christianity. Read about the murder of Hypatia, by Christian
    monks. In Europe as well, Christianity was forced on Europeans. Read about the Inquisition.

    The miracles attributed to Christ in the Gospels are not reliable because the Gospels are not
    historically sound documents. They were written sometime after the time of Jesus.
    They are not contemporary eye-witness accounts and have too many contradictions on
    basic aspects. No serious Christological scholars consider the Gospels to be reliable
    historical accounts.

    In the link you sent about the largest empires in the world, you said that there were no Hindu
    empires bigger than any Muslim empire or any since the advent of Islam in 622 AD. But you
    are wrong. On that link, there are two Hindu Empires, namely the Maurya Empire and the
    Gupta Empire. These empires were bigger than the Delhi Sultanate and the Mughal empire
    based on area and length of duration. As for Hindu empires since the advent of Islam, there
    have been at least 6 Hindu Empires: I will list them below:

    1. Harshan Empire- 606 AD-647 AD.
    2. Pratihara Empire- 650 AD-1036 AD.
    3. Pala Empire- 700 AD-1174 AD.
    4. Chola Empire-300 BC-1290 AD.
    5. Vijayanagar Empire- 1336 AD-1646 AD
    6. Maratha Empire/Maratha Confederacy- 1674 AD-1818 AD.

    The “Sun never setting” empires are just hyperbole. The British empire collapsed
    some 80 years ago. It doesn’t exist. Same with the Spanish empire. It collapsed
    some 200 years ago in Latin America. Ever heard of the Latin American general
    Simon Bolivar? All empires rise and fall. There is no exception to this rule.
    Just because Hindu empires were mostly home-based doesn’t undermine their
    greatness or achievements.

  13. Face_The_Truth says:

    This message is for Ron_The_Christian:

    Get your Christianity out of India and go preach your Jesus Christ in Pakistan and Bangladesh.

    After all, Christians like yourself created “Pakistan” by collaborating with Indian Muslims in 1947 A.D. by murdering millions of Indian “Hindus”.

    Unfortunately, today most Indian “Hindus” do not know the true histories of Christianity and Islam and most “Hindus” ignorantly believe that Muslims and Christians believe in the same God as “Hindus” do.

    Lack of knowledge about the origins of Christianity and Islam cost Indian “Hindus” a lot in the past; but, it doesn’t have to be that way now.

    Go preach your Jesus Christ in the Islamic Republic of Iran and Saudi Arabia.

    World’s Muslims will *** Christians like you very well.

  14. Baji Rao 1 says:


    About slavery in India, I agree it is despicable but it has nothing to do with Hinduism.
    There is nothing in Hindu teachings/theology that promotes or sanctions slavery.

    Historically, Hindu society did not practise slavery, as testified by ancient Greek observers.
    Slavery on the other hand is permissible in Islam and Christianity.

  15. Ron says:

    Christianity never spread with a sword unlike Islam.

    Christianity founded by Jesus and then spread through the 12 apostles and Paul. These simple fishermen, tentmakers etc. and other followers of Jesus underwent a lot of persecution (under the Romans and the religious Jews) of being fed to lions, crucifixion. Hanged, burnt, imprisoned, exiled, etc. Yet they kept to their faith and performed works and miracles of healing, generosity, caring for the poor, sick, widows, orphans, lepers, plague victim, dying etc.

    They owned NO territory. They established NO state. These non-state actors who had genuine faith in Jesus believed that Jesus was the Son of God, was holy, sinless, divine, did miracles and died and rose up again.

    They further believed that Jesus is in Heaven and will come back again and He is the ultimate judge.

    These initial believers and all others later followers of Jesus obeying the commands of Jesus went to different parts of the world and preached Christianity to pagans, cannibals, Jews, nature worshipers, Buddhists, atheists, polytheists etc.

    The Roman Empire which was the largest and most powerful empire at that time was fully pagan. These Romans felt Christianity was a rebellious group (not believing in Caesar and other Roman kings) routinely rounded up Christians and fed them to the lions, crucified and persecuted them.

    It was only through the fruits of continuous prayer by persecuted Christians that Emperor Constantine of Rome got a dream that the Cross would give him victory and show him the way. He then accepted Christianity and Christian influence grew.

    Christianity still did not spread by the sword but by the people responding to the message of love, hope, healing and grace from genuine Christians.

    The Roman empire did break up with most factions being non-Christian and largely pagan. When Christianity grew in Europe it was under the Roman Empire and the influence of the Christian clergy increased.

    Islamic hordes could only capture the non-Christian areas or where Christianity was a minority and not so strong.

    Islamic hordes could easily defeat the pagans.

    If you look at this table of the largest empires (international empires not kingdoms) in world history, you will notice three things.

    1) No Hindu empire existed or could exist since the advent of Islam in 622 AD.
    2) No Hindu empire was ever larger than an Islamic empire.
    3) The only two empires in the world where the sun never sets were Christian a) British Empire b) Spanish Empire.

    This doesn’t mean that Hindu Kingdoms never existed. They existed but not as an international empire crossing continents.

    The pagan Hindus of Pakistan, Afghanistan, Persia, India, Bangladesh were converted to Islam by sword or cowardice or to escape Jizya tax.

    The expansion of Islam in India was largely stopped by some brave Hindu and Sikh kings, entry of the British, Portuguese who defeated both the Muslims, Sikhs and the Hindus and ruled India.


    Many times we see that fanatical regimes, distort history, make conspiracy theories, spread hatred and blame minorities for all social and economic problems, instill patriotism with a mixture of hatred and religion (or atheism) to garner and create vote banks and get power and cling to power.

    The Nazis, Fascists, the Democrats in US till WWII, Communists in Eastern Europe, USSR, Arab Nations, Iran, Afghanistan, Cambodia Indian, Pakistani, Sri Lankan, Rwanda, South Africa, Rhodesia, Nigeria have all done these activities.
    Some like India and Pakistan and the are still doing it. There are many like Amartya Sen, late Maulana Edhi etc. who see it and there are others who don’t. If you speak out, you are immediately branded as unpatriotic and traitor.

    History always tells us that the threat to democracy and subversion of democracy is always from the majority and never from the minority.

    As Jesus said you can only conquer hate by love and forgiveness. We need to win Muslims by love.

  16. Baji Rao 1 says:


    I have nothing personal against you or Christianity as such. But your understanding
    of history appears somewhat weak. You forget the fact that much of Islamic territory
    or the “Muslim world” is based on conquered Christian land. Christianity was practically
    wiped out or marginalized demographically in its place of birth, namely the Middle east.
    The vast majority of Muslim countries are sitting on what was once Christian land.

    The Muslim invaders did not have it easy in attacking India. Actual history shows that
    they faced many, many defeats at the hands of the Hindu Kings over a period of about
    570 years, ( 636 AD-1206 AD). Eventually, around 1200 AD, they did break through.
    But you see, even then, the Hindus kept the fight going for the next 550 years, when
    in the final round, starting with the rise of the Hindu Marathas in the 1600’s-1700’s AD,
    the Hindus defeated the Islamic barbarians, something similar to the Spanish reconquest.

    It cannot be said that paganism has always lost or Christianity has always won against
    Islam. Actual reality is more mixed. Most pagans around the world might have lost
    to the Monotheist creeds, but Hindus/Hinduism have so far been an exception.
    Middle-eastern Christians couldn’t face Islam but European Christians could.

    Similarly, Islam was not always victorius. It suffered defeats and reverses at the hands
    of both Christianity and Hinduism. It was brutally crushed under the Buddhist Mongols
    of Genghis Khan. After world war 1, the ottoman empire was defeated and dismantled
    by Christians of Europe.

  17. @ Baji Rao I, please inform the factual errors, if any. There is another article on the real history of Islam’s encounter with India. The Hindus were also successful, and despite suffering a lot over 1000 years, they finally won the 1000-year war with Islam. Read here http://historyofmuslimattacks.blogspot.in/2013/02/islam-in-india-history.html

  18. Baji Rao 1 says:

    @Unknown Scholar,

    There are some factual errors in your above write-up. Also I want to know why
    you didn’t mention about the Hindu military resistance to the Muslim invaders spanning
    the 1000 years? For example, you didn’t mention the fact that virtually almost all the Arab
    attacks were defeated by the Hindu kings at the time. The Arabs basically failed in trying
    to conquer India even after trying for nearly 2 centuries.

  19. Face_The_Truth says:

    In MahaBharata, Kuru King Shantanu of Hastinapur married a fisherman’s daughter named Satyavati who later became the mother of seer Veda Vyāsa.

    A so-called “lower-caste” man named Kocheril Raman Narayanan became 10th president, which is the highest post in a Constitutional Republic called India.

    By the way, what did President Narayanan do to improve the economic lives of his fellow “lower-caste” people?

    The most wretched “lower-caste” man ever lived — by his own self-deprecating admissions, not mine — in Indian subcontinent, namely Dr. Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar, wrote the Constitution of the Indian Republic!!!

    How many more examples one may have to cite before the British Broadcasting Corporation and Christian Missionaries will stop their propaganda videos in order to denigrate “Hinduism” (i.e., Sanãtana Dharma)?

    Does Indian educational system award higher scores based on a student’s existing or non-existing “caste”?

    Do so-called “lower-caste” people pay Jizyah (i.e., additional tax) today as “Hindus” were required to pay under Islamic law in Indian subcontinent for centuries?

    Do Indian transit systems have two divisions of seating areas based on so-called “Lower-Caste” and “Upper-Caste”?

    Do Indian shop-owners refuse to sell merchandise to so-called “lower-caste” people who are able to pay?

    Do Indian medical doctors refuse to treat “lower-caste” people who can pay?

    Then, it appears that the real problem is not the so-called “Caste System”, rather the real problem is economic in nature where millions of Indian citizens do not find jobs for myriads of reasons!

    And, what is the solution to the economic problems of millions of unemployed Indian citizens?

    Obviously, the British Broadcasting Corporation and Christian Missionaries will not recommend taking all so-called “lower-caste” people of India to Great Britain.

    Will all so-called “lower-caste” people’s conversion to Christianity solve the economic problems?

    There are many economically poor countries (e.g., the Philippines) on earth where all Christian citizens’ steadfast faith in a dead Jew on the Cross does not really reduce any economic hardship of a day-laborer.

    There are few provinces (e.g., West Bengal) in independent India where Marxists ruled for decades without sustained economic improvement in the lives of so-called “lower-castes”.

    In pre-independence Indian subcontinent, both the Muslim rulers and the Christian rulers did not do anything for the so-called “lower-caste” people for centuries.

    Christian Missionaries’ favorite Indian politician M.K. Gandhi did not want to dissolve so-called “Caste-System” and, yet, M.K. Gandhi is praised all over the West while Indian patriots such as Swami Dayānanda Saraswati or Vināyak Dāmodar Sāvarkar who wanted to demolish any existing “Caste-System” are still vilified by Christian Missionaries as well as by the so-called Indian “Humanists”, “Marxists”, “Progressives”, “Liberals”, and “Atheists”.

    So, it is quite clear that, today those people who broadcast propaganda videos do not have any solution to the economic problems of so-called “lower-caste” anyway.

    It is just their livelihoods to broadcast propaganda videos to make their own living, to justify their high positions with high salaries, to feel great about doing something “worthwhile” and nothing else.

  20. @Mr Ron, the Hindus have made amends for past caste discrimination. There is reservation for people belonging to the so-called lower castes in India. There are a lot of incentives, fees waiver, special grants, scholarships etc for them. There is reservation even in the Parliament, State Assemblies etc for them. No human society ever existed in the past, nor does it exist now which does not have caste system in some form or the other. When casteism was practiced in India, the rest of the world was practicing slavery (which Hindus never did). In America, slavery was practiced until as late as the 19th century AD. In America racism was institutionalized under the 20th century. The slavery practiced by the rest of the world, in particular in Islamic & Christian societies was not practised in India. Medieval Europe burnt & tortured women in the name of witchcraft. India also practised casteism. But all that is past. The Hindus today give special reservation & special incentives, concessions for lower caste people, and have been giving for the past almost 70 years. The Hindus follow modern civil laws today, not Manusmriti. If imperfections of the society of the past are to be mentioned, a lot can be said against almost all societies of the world, in particular Christian societies of Europe & USA which practised slavery & committed atroities on women.

  21. an atheist says:


  22. Ron says:

    The Biggest killers and persecutors of Muslims are Muslims themselves (Sunnis killing Shias etc)
    The Biggest killers and persecutors and discriminators (using casteism and Manu Smriti) of Hindus are Hindus themselves.

  23. Face_The_Truth says:

    Indian historians such as Romila Thapar, Mohammed Habib, Irfan Habib, D. Narayan Jha, Ram Sharan Sharma, Muzaffar Alam, Bipan Chandra, R. Champaka Lakshmi, Sukumari Bhattacharya, H. Mukhia, Suvira Jaiswal, Shereen Ratnagar, Madhavan K. Palat, Satish Saberwal, Sarvepalli Gopal, Mridula Mukherjee, Sumit Sarkar et al. do not write about the killings of millions of native Pagan people (i.e., “Hindus”) from the advent of Islamic imperialism mostly by Arabs, Turks, and Pathans (i.e., Afghans) and through the end of Christian imperialism mostly by the British and the Portuguese in Indian subcontinent.

    So, from the above named highly-reputed and financially very well-to-do Indian historians, the rest of the world learns about Indian “Hindus” as followers of a despicable, worthless creed called “Sanãtana Dharma” that, to this day, has survived and that promotes “idol-worship” while everyone knows that the “idols” CANNOT do anything that a living-breathing Jew or a living-breathing Christian or a living-breathing Muslim can do.

    We are also bombarded with well-financed Western media everyday about how good and benevolent both Islam and Christianity are!

    However, at this FaithFreedom.Org website, all readers can learn what promoted both Muslims and Christians to either murder or very cruelly exploit millions of native Pagan idol-worshipers (i.e., “Hindus”) for centuries in Indian subcontinent.

    Both Christianity and Islam derive their basic “divine” foundation from Judaism where Jewish people were originally polytheists (e.g., idol-worshipers), but brought into exclusive “monotheism” by the thunderous commands of Jehovah.

    Every time Jews fell into polytheism (e.g., idol-worshiping), Jews faced the “divine” wrath of Jehovah.

    Unfortunately, most “Hindus” today do not know anything about Jewish history of “monotheism”, let alone wasting precious time in digging into and finding out the actual basis of Christian or Islamic genocidal theology that killed millions of polytheists (e.g., “Hindu” idol-worshipers) in Indian subcontinent in a span of 1300 years.

    The above-named very highly “respected” and govt.-sponsored and financially wealthy Indian historians do NOT tell us anything about ideological reasons behind the iconoclastic activities of Christianity or Islam.

    So, here I post short glimpses on Jewish history of “monotheism” (i.e., worshiping Jehovah exclusively).

    ‘Jehovah commanded his servants again and again not to leave alive anything that breathes.

    “So Joshua massacred the population of the whole region — the hill country, the Nageb, the Shephelah, the watersheds — and all their kings.

    “Joshua left no survivor, destroying everything that drew breath as the Lord God of Israel had commanded.”

    “But as the war of conquest drew to a close and the Jews settled down in the promised land they reverted more and more to the normal human habit of worshiping the Divine in many Names and Forms.

    “Jews intermarried with the neighboring non-Jewish tribes, defying the ban which Jehovah had imposed on them.

    “The foreign brides brought their own Gods, and also priests who tended to those foreign Gods.

    “The defiance of Jehovah reached a new high in the reign of Jewish King Solomon.

    “King Solomon had SEVEN HUNDRED wives, most of them foreign princesses, and THREE HUNDRED concubines who “turned his heart to follow other gods.”

    Jehovah warned King Solomon twice, but to no avail.

    King Solomon simply ignored Jehovah and Jehovah could not do a thing.

    Jehovah consoled himself that he was sparing Solomon for the sake of the latter’s father, Jewish King David.

    The Jewish kingdom split into two after the death of King Solomon — Israel in the north with its seat at Samaria, and Judah in the south with its seat at Jerusalem.

    The scribes who wrote the story of Jewish King Solomon credited Jehovah with a curse which broke the kingdom after King Solomon’s death.

    In any case, the worship of other gods continued unabated.

    Ahab, the King of Israel, had married a foreign princess named Jezebel, who was a devotee of Baal.

    Temples were built for the new God, Baal, where his priests presided.

    Jewish King Ahab himself paid homage to the new God, Baal.

    Elijah, a self-appointed prophet, admonished King Ahab, but was dismissed with contempt by Jewish King Ahab.

    So, the self-appointed prophet Elijah took resort to trickery.

    Elijah invited the priests of Baal to Mount Carmel in order to demonstrate to them the superiority of Jehovah over Baal.

    Elijah’s swordsmen who lay in ambush seized four hundred and fifty priests.

    Elijah himself “took them down the Kishon and slaughtered them in the valley.”

    Then, self-appointed Jewish prophet Elijah ran away for his own dear life, because Queen Jezebel (i.e., wife of Jewish King Ahab) had summoned him.

    Since Elijah ran away for dear life, the mantle of elf-appointed Jewish prophet Elijah fell on Elisha.

    Elisha earned his well-deserved reputation as a prophet by cursing some naughty children, forty-two of whom were torn to pieces by she-bears!

    Elisha egged on an adventurer, the tenth king of the northern Kingdom of Israel, Jehu, who seized the throne of Israel after mercilessly slaughtering the sons of Ahab,… and getting Queen Jezebel thrown out of a palace window so that “some of the BLOOD SPLASHED ON THE WALL and the horses who trampled Queen Jezebel under foot.”

    The worship of Baal, however, was far from finished in the Jewish kingdom, and many of his priests were still around.

    Guided by Elisha, Jewish King Jehu falsely announced that he, too, had become a devotee of Baal and was holding a great sacrifice in the big temple in the capital city.

    King Jehu invited all the priests of Baal and saw to it that all of them assembled.

    King Jehu’s armed guard fell on them suddenly and slaughtered them to the last man.

    The idols in the temple were brought out and burnt.

    The sacred poles were broken and the sacred pillars pulled down.

    The temple was turned into a lavatory for public urination and defecation.

    Jehovah blessed the enterprise and confirmed the kingdom in the family of King Jehu for four generations!

    Self-appointed prophet Elisha lived thereafter a much satisfied man who had fulfilled his “divine” mission.

    And so on, the story snowballs through the rest of the books in the Bible.

    The common people in the two kingdoms relapse into polytheism and idol-worship, again and again.

    More prophets appear on the scene and do what self-appointed prophets Elijah and Elisha had done.

    Each succeeding prophet turns out to be a gangster greater than the preceding one.

    They curse and torment their own people, and invoke calamities on them.

    But as the people remain indifferent to them, the self-appointed prophets feel utterly helpless and console themselves by praying for the “great day” when the Lord Jehovah will destroy all other gods together with those who worshiped them.

    Jehovah views the worship of other gods as adultery and fornication, and denounces both Jewish kingdoms as harlots given to willful whoredom.

    Jehovah addresses his prophet Ezekiel and says: “Son of man, cause Jerusalem to know her abominations.

    “And it came to pass after all thy wickedness, that thou hast also built unto thee an eminent place and made thee a high place in every street, and hast opened thy feet to every one that passed, and multiplied thy whoredoms.

    “Thou has also committed fornication with the Egyptians thy neighbours, great of flesh.

    “They give gifts to all whores: but thou givest thy gifts to all thy lovers, and hirest them, that they may come unto thee from every side for thy whoredom.

    “O harlot, hear the words of the Lord: Thus saith the Lord God: Because thy filthiness was poured out, and thy nakedness discovered through thy whoredoms with thy lovers, and with all the idols of thy abominations.

    “I will gather all thy lovers with whom thou has taken pleasure.

    “I will gather them round about against thee, and will discover thy nakedness unto them, that they may see all thy nakedness.

    “And I will also give thee into their hands, and they shall stone thee with stones, and thrust thee through with their swords.

    “And they shall bum thy houses with fire, and I will cause thee to cease from playing the harlot, and thou also shall give no hire any more.”

    In another message to the same prophet, Jehovah says, “Son of man, there were two women, the daughters of the same mother.

    “And they committed whoredoms in Egypt; they committed whoredoms in their youth: there were their breasts pressed, and there they bruised the teats of their virginity.”

    Turning to Samaria, Jehovah pronounces: “Neither left she her whoredoms brought from Egypt: for in her youth they lay with her, and they bruised the breasts of her virginity, and poured their whoredoms upon her.”

    Coming back to Jerusalem, Jehovah’s language becomes filthier!

    “And when her sister saw this, she was more corrupt in her inordinate love than she, and in her whoredoms more than her sister in her whoredoms.

    “For she doted upon their paramours whose flesh is as the flesh of asses and whose issue is like the issue of horses.”

    Jehovah’s character, as portrayed in the Bible, can now be summed up.

    Jehovah behaves like a bully and a coward par excellence, apart from his proclaiming, again and again, that he is a hardened gangster who has committed many crimes!

    Jehovah takes the whole credit every time the Jews are victorious and commit slaughter and rapine.

    But when the tables are turned on the Jews, Jehovah turns tail and blames the Jews for betraying him by worshiping other gods.

    The Jews on their part try to return to “monotheism”, and its concomitant, iconoclasm, again and again, on being admonished by their prophets.

    But their situation does NOT improve.

    Jews get defeated and enslaved successively by the Assyrians, the Babylonians, the Persians, the Mecedonians, the Seleucids, and the Romans.

    In the final round, the only country which they had occupied after making rivers of blood flow is lost to them for ever, and Jehovah’s only temple at Jerusalem is destroyed from the foundations, never to be built again.

    Jehovah does not bat an eye.

    Jehovah remains unshaken in the hallucination that he is the Lord.

    Another self-appointed prophet named Jesus follows in the footsteps of his predecessors and harangues the Jews to repent, for the Last Day is drawing near.

    Jesus shows some miracles, collects crowds, and gets picked up by the Roman police as a disturber of peace.

    Jehovah does not lift his little finger to save his prophet from a cruel and shameful death;

    Jesus is crucified along with two common thieves.

    The prophets that follow beat their Lord’s record in double-talk.

    On the one hand, they pin down the crime of the Jews, so that this already tormented people gets subjected to repeated POGROMS for two thousand years.

    On the other hand, they spread the abominable superstition that Jesus was the Christ who mounted the cross willingly and voluntarily in order to wash with his own blood the SINS of mankind.’



  24. Face_The_Truth says:

    Don’t be so stupid Ron

    I asked you a very simple question and that was how did your Jesus Christ allow Muslims to take over Byzantine Christian Empire and run over many Christian countries until Pagan war-lords named Genghis Haan and Hulegu Haan stopped Islam in the 13th century A.D. by heading Islam’s Caliph in Baghdad.

    ‘…Muhammad, the founder of Islam, was born in 570 AD.

    From 622 AD when Muhammad went to Madina until his death in 632 AD i.e. in a short span of just ten years Muhammad consolidated Arabia into a single political and religious unit with his undoubted abilities as a proselytiser and strategist.

    The Caliphs who succeeded Muhammad, in spite of internal politicking and bickering, expanded the boundaries of the Muslim Empire within the next 10-12 years to cover the territories of the two great powers of the time, the Byzantine and the Sassanid empires.

    Between 637 and 651 AD Persia was conquered and the Islamic borders touched Afghanistan (Gandhara) which was then a part of Bharat. Egypt fell in 641 AD.



    Within one hundred years of the Prophet’s death, the Arabs became the masters of a vast region extending from the Bay of Biscay to the Indus and the frontiers of China, and from the Aral sea to the Upper Nile.


    Caliph Umar had sent a naval expedition in 636 AD itself to capture the port of Thane (now a suburb of Mumbai), but the attack was successfully repulsed.

    Immediately thereafter the ports of Broach in Gujarat and Debal in Sindh were unsuccessfully attacked.

    Umar wanted to avenge these defeats by attacking Makran (Baluchistan), but the Governer of Iran, Abu Musa, realising that it will be futile in view of the strength of the ruler of Sindh, Chachrai, advised him that ‘…he should no more think of Hind i.e. India’.

    It should be noted that this happened at the time when the Arab armies were marching victoriously in the West.

    Umar wisely decided to concentrate on expanding his sway over Turkish speaking territories of outer Mongolia, Bukhara, Tashkand, Samarkand etc.’

  25. Ron says:

    Spain was not one large country as you see today but it was a bunch of small kingdoms who were ruled by the Visigoths. The Visigoths earlier practiced Arianism where the divinity of Christ is not acknowledged. Moreover there were some Spanish who were against the local King Roderic and did support the invaders. We don’t know how much of the local population of Spain were Arians and how much Christians. But we know that Islamic forces succeeded.

    Anyways Islam made forays into Europe but were stopped by Charles Martel.

    Spain did revert to Christianity by slowly defeating and driving out the Muslims and it become a strong global power and eventually went on to colonise the pagan nations of Central and Latin America, North America Asia., and Africa and converting many of them to Christianity.

    The Spanish Christian also colonised Islamic countries like Morocco, Western Sahara.

    So you see that Spain was once ruled by Muslims. They the Spanish slowly converted to Christianity, and defeated and pushed out the Muslims and then the Christian Spanish Empire became one of the largest empires in the world and became the first global empire in world history.

  26. Face_The_Truth says:

    This message is for Ron_the_Christian:
    You’re still not answering how Muslims won over Christians in Spain and Southern France if worshiping alone your Jesus Christ solves all problems.

  27. Truth Seeker says:

    @Ali Sina

    Wisdom of Indian sages who reached state of Samaadhi was far higher than Jesus it reflects from their writing according to which

    Creation of our Solar System: Why, how, where and when it all started. The three causes – the efficient cause, the material cause and the common cause (skill/knowledge, time, space and labour/instrument.)

    Nothing in this world can be produced without proper application.” Mimansa Darshan Written by Jemini

    “Nothing can be done or made without the expenditure of time.” Vaisheshika Darshan written by Kanad

    “Nothing in this world can be produced without the material cause.” Niyaya Written by Guatam

    “Nothing can be made without the requisite skill, knowledge and thought.” Yoga Written by Patanjli

    “Nothing can be made without the definite combination of atoms.” Sankhaya Darshan wirtten by Kapil

    “Nothing can be made without a Maker.” Vedanta Darshan written by Rishi Vyas

    FACT: Creation of the world or anything created by man can never come into being without a maker, material, skill/knowledge, time, space and labour/instrument.

    According to Darshan Scriptures

    There are three eternal (without beginning and without end) entities, God (primary efficient cause, Soul, the secondary efficient cause and matter, the material cause. Since God, soul and matter are eternal entities, creation and dissolution have to be an on going eternal process and not one time phenomena.
    WHY:The purpose of creation is two-fold: The Creator gets to exercise His creative energy and souls need to reap their rewards or punishments of previous actions virtuous or sinful.

    The first combination is called the beginning of Creation. This is the joining of the highly subtle, indivisible separately-existing particles called atoms (or more appropriately correct – electrons) derived from the primitive ether. The various combinations of atoms, in different proportions and ways, give rise to various grades and conditions, of subtle and gross matter until it reaches the gross visible multiform stage called the universe. That which brings about the first combination existed before the combination, and shall exist after the component parts are pushed asunder. This is called the Cause. That which comes into existence after the combination, and ceases to exist after it has come to an end is called the Effect. That out of which something is made is called a Cause. Whoever produces an Effect out of a Cause is called the Maker.

    HOW: God energized the subtle Eternal Primordial Matter (Atoms) and the first principle, WISDOM was produced. This reduces matter to one degree less subtler which led to the principle of INDIVIDUALITY. However, it is still less subtler than the five Subtle Entities, optic, auditory, olfactory, gustatory and tactile: (the spiritual senses or the media through which these senses make contact with the soul through the mind).

    This further led to the creation of the principles of SENSATION (hearing, seeing, smell, taste and touch) and the five principles of ACTION (speech, grasp, locomotion, reproduction and excretion) plus the principle of ATTENTION. These are all less subtle by passing through various stages of less subtle conditions of matter (action and reaction) give rise to the five subtle principles (the five elements- inanimate objects of creation) SPACE (MATTER), AIR ( or gas), HEAT (fire or electricity), LIQUIDS, and SOLIDS respectively. The order of dissolution is the reverse. Of these twenty-four, matter in the primitive state is uncreated. After solids come all the formation of the planetary systems which, by the way, is not the only one since space is infinite these systems are infinite also and beyond counting. They then start to rotate and revolve, thus the concept of time began and when the condition of the first region is right for habitation, vegetation and living creatures and then intelligent life forms take hold.

    WHERE: That region was called Trivistaph, now known as Tibet, northern part of Aryavarta which is India today. Thousands of people were created and among the four purest souls were revealed four Vedas, instructions of ethics, morals and all sciences in the language of Sanskrit which were then taught to the rest of the population. These instructions are necessary as physical man is 100% matter and evil is inherent in matter.

    “That condition of matter in which the intellect-promoting, passion-exciting and stupidity-producing qualities are found combined in equal proportions is called the eternal elementary matter.” The Light of Truth.

  28. Truth Seeker says:

    @Ali Sina

    Why Jesus and Bible fail in test of truth

    Five Tests of true religion

    1. It (revelation) must exist in its entirety from the very beginning of creation for all of mankind, and not over a long period of time after.
    Oppose – It is unjust of Yahwe, Allah and Christ, to deprive millions born before the revelation of the Ten Commandments, the Q’uran, and the New Testament of His ‘divine wisdom’. An injustice which cannot be the work of a Just, Compassionate and Merciful God.

    2. It must conform with (immutable) natural laws
    Oppose – The cause of the physical body is the reproductive element – any other method as man was created from dust or blood-clot and all other miracles of God and Prophets are a breach to this law.

    3. It must be in harmony with reasoning.
    Oppose – Incest which results in mental and physical infirmities, is an immoral action and it had to be the same also in the beginning (creation of one man and one woman).

    4. It must be in harmony with science.
    Oppose – Modern science has proven creation to be more than 6,000 years old, the earth is spherical and it rotates and revolves, contradictions to the Torah, Bible and Q’uran.

    5. Its truth must be confirmed by four evidences :-
    Direct Cognition – Not all that is known by perception can be true.
    Inferences – God is eternal therefore we can infer that there were past creations and as well as there will be future ones.
    Testimony – The testimonies of Rishis, sages and seers of the Vedas (altruistic teachers are all in harmony with each other.
    History – There are many books (Mahabharata, Valmiki’s Ramayan) and source of other civilization which speak of the past ancient Vedic (Aryan) civilization of 5,000 years ago and earlier.

  29. Face_The_Truth says:

    This message is for Ron_the_Christian

    [When you pray to the true God you win wars in spite of all odds.


    This Allah Oh Akbar cry and rally in the past had helped the Islamic forces defeat the pagan Hindus who were shouting Hara Hara Mahadeva…
    So, yes, Hindus have lost to Muslims and Christians.
    And the Christians have defeated the Muslims and Hindus in spite of being heavily outnumbered.]















  30. It is not as if the Indians only lost. In fact, the Hindus were successful at the end of the 1000+ year war against Islam when the Marathas liberated India from the Mughal rule after 1707, the death of the last powerful Mughal ruler Aurangazeb. Marathas, Sikhs & Rajputs recaptured most of India. This article gives the truth of the reality of the history of India since encounter with Islam starting in AD 636 http://historyofmuslimattacks.blogspot.in/2013/02/islam-in-india-history.html

  31. Truth Seeker says:

    Q. Whose invasion/rule was more devastating (both as economically & spiritually) for India?- 1. Muslim Rulers, 2. Christians/Britishers, 3.Congress/Gandhis

    The most devastating rule was that of Muslim rulers starting from Muhammad Bin Qasim, to Ghori to few generations after Aurangzeb. We faced highest number of rapes, beheading and were literally being ruled by those who were more brutal than ISIS.

    The killings in Muslim rule was not just political. These rascal Jihadis enjoy brutality. See how ISIS makes stylish films out of beheadings and shootings. Compare with Humayun who gouged out eyes of his own brother Kamran with his own hands! Akbar who, at age of 13, slayed unconscious Hemu as if he was doing a goat Halal. After every victory, they would cut heads of people, and make tall towers to display. They will capture women and distribute to soldiers to rape. Akbar had a haram of 5000 captured women!

    Eventually this brutality and promiscuity led to downfall. Each Muslim ruler will have hundreds of bast**d children who will fight with each other for power. Muslim rule was worse than rule of ISIS.

    British rule was economically devastating. But there was law and order after power passed from East India Company to British Crown. It was a political war but not a war with psychopath Jihadis. There was a coded law in place. That is why before 1942, every Congress session would begin with praise of Queen.

    Gandhi/Nehru family hit a jackpot with freedom of India. They got an opportunity to loot the country at their will. The amount of wealth amassed by them is unimaginable. We can only see the results that country is poor even after 70 years!

    Muslim rulers were terrorists like Gabbar Singh. British rulers were businessmen. Congress has been greedy thief like Crime Master Gogo of Andaz Apna Apna.

    Who is worst is anybody’s guess. But in my view, I would tolerate a thief but not a rapist.

  32. Truth Seeker says:


    Mahabharata War happened 5100 years before in Kurukshetra where Duryodhan had the army of 12 Laks in which highest skilled commander of that era were leading his army while Pandava Army was just half of Duryodhan Army and not blessed with skilled commander the army like Duryodhan’ army. But Pandva were truthful to the God and they defeated mighty Army of Duryodhan.

  33. Truth Seeker says:

    @Ali Sina

    After reading Yog and Sankhya Darshan I realised Jesus was on same path as prescribed by Patanjali. But it is obvious after reading his book like Bible he did not reach highest state of enlightenment like
    Rishi Patanjali author of Yog Darshan, Rishi Kapil Author of Sankhya , Rishi Guatam Author of Nayay Darshan, Rishi Vyas Author Uttar Mimans and many more Rishi who reached highest state of Samaadhi (enlightenment). Jesus was not even 10% of these Rishi in wisdom. These Rishi came to earth thousands of year before birth of Jesus. These Rishi explored many things like eternal trinity of Souls, God, and Primordial matter. Jesus could not know this fact. These enlightened sages knew many things like Cycle of universe creation its maintenance and its dissolution in its cause happens like day after night happening since eternity. Jesus could not know such things during his life time.
    I laugh on stupidity of People who called Bible is Gold mine of knowledge. These people never have a look on Yog Darshan, Sankhya Darshan. Bible is not even 5% of Yog Darshan & Sankhya Philosophy. If anyone doubts on my claims please read Yog Darshan I am giving link though there are many discrepancies in translation but even than far batter from Bible.


    If anyone have guts to disapprove single word written by of Rishi Patanjli I am ready to accept his religion While Bible is full absurdity.

    Note: Doing Physical exercises, Breathing techniques is not Yoga. For more details please have a look 196 Sutra of Yog Darshan.

  34. Ron says:

    When you pray to the true God you win wars in spite of all odds.

    The Imperial Christian British with only 7072 men and 40 cannons defeated the Mughal Emperor Shah Alam and 3 other Muslim kings who had 40,000 men and 140 cannons at the Battle of Buxar.

    Again the Christian British defeated the Muslims Army in spite of being heavily outnumbered and saved further Islamization of India.

    British troops engaged in the fighting numbered 7,072[4] comprising 857 British, 5,297 Indian sepoys and 918 Indian cavalry. The alliance army’s numbers were estimated to be over 40,000. According to other sources, the combined army of the Mughals, Awadh and Mir Qasim consisting of 40,000 men was defeated by a British army comprising 10,000 men.

    In spite of being heavily outnumbered in terms of men, cannons, cavalry and guns the Christian British won.
    The Christian British Army was used to saying Psalm 91 (also used by the IDF (Israeli Defense forces)) before commencement of hostilities.

    The Muslims using “Allah of Akbar” could NOT defeat the Christian forces.

    This Allah Oh Akbar cry and rally in the past had helped the Islamic forces defeat the pagan Hindus who were shouting Har Har mahadev

    The British then consolidated their position by defeating the Marathas in the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd Anglo Maratha war. This last Anglo Maratha war happened in 1817-1818.

    The war was mostly a mopping-up operation intended to complete the expansion of the earlier Anglo-Maratha war, which was stopped due to economic concerns of the British.[35] The war began as a campaign against the Pindaris.[36]

    Seeing that the British were in conflict with the Pindaris, the Peshwa’s forces attacked the British at 16:00 on 5 November 1817 with the Maratha left attacking the British right. The Maratha forces comprised 20,000 cavalry, 8,000 infantry, and 20 guns[25] whereas the British had 2,000 cavalry, 1,000 infantry, and eight guns.[37] On the Maratha side, an additional 5,000 horse and 1,000 infantry were guarding the Peshwa at Parvati Hill. The British numbers include Captain Ford’s unit, which was en route from Dapodi to Khadki.[37]

    In spite of being heavily outnumbered in terms of men, cannons, cavalry and guns the Christian British won.

    The Christian British Army was used to saying Psalm 91 (also used by the IDF (Israeli Defense forces)) before commencement of hostilities. The IDF always win wars.

    This pagan Hindus saying Har Har mahadev cry and rally in the past could not defeat the Christian British.

    So Yes Hindus have lost to Muslims and Christians.
    And the Christians have defeated the Muslims and Hindus in spite of being heavily outnumbered.

  35. Face_The_Truth says:

    Dear Readers:

    Writing something original on my own is always preferable to quoting from various authors to support my opinions.

    However, I am neither a professional historian like R.C. Majumder was, nor a historical figure by myself like Swami Dayanand Saraswati was and, as a result, when I post about medieval history of Indian sub-continent, I must rely on information provided by authors who were either renowned professional historians or truthful authors who have provided us with treaties of corroborated history.

    So, here is a short quotation from author A.P. Joshi’s “Hindu Resistance to Islamic Rule in India” as all readers can read the full article by clicking on the LINK provided below:

    ‘It will be a surprise to most readers, especially to those who have been fed on the post Independence ‘secularised’ history books, to know that it is the “Hindus” who resisted the onslaught of Arabs for over hundred years, unlike other countries which succumbed immediately.

    It took another five hundred years for the Afghans and Turks to lay down a foundation for their empire in India and another two centuries before a stable Mughal Empire could be formed with Akbar’s reign.

    The Mughal Empire also cracked after a century and a half.

    It is also a mistaken belief that the Arabs ruled over India.

    Actually the Arab rule was confined to some parts of Sindh for about one hundred and fifty years and a small kingdom in Madura in the south for a few years, although many Arab families had settled in the country.

    The Muslim rulers of India were mostly mutually warring Turks, Mughals, and Afghans while several senior officers hailed from Iran (i.e., Persia).


    The Turkish race originated in Central Asia which was mostly a part of the erstwhile Soviet Union.

    They were initially imported as slaves, both domestic and military, from beyond the eastern borders of Islam in the ninth century.

    They gradually rose to high ranks in the military and ultimately took over the Muslim world as empire builders.

    From 960 AD onwards whole Turkish tribes got converted and these converts moved to the Middle-East in waves and changed the whole demography of the region including the present day Turkey.

    The Turks accepted Islam without any reservations, sank their national identity in it and became its greatest champions even pushing the Arabs to the background.


    Most of the important conquests of the British of the cities of Delhi, Agra, Lahore and Peshawar, and the bulk of the territory were from Marathas, Sikhs, Rajputs, Jats, and other non-Muslim rulers.

    Only the regions in Karnataka, Tamilnadu, Andhra, Bengal, Bihar, Sindh, and middle and eastern Uttar Pradesh were captured from the Muslim rulers.

    The “Hindu” kingdoms put up a sustained and valorous resistance to the invading Islamic armies.

    It should be remembered that all the accounts of the Muslim period have been written by Muslim and European historians.

    Both are much distorted and exaggerated.


    Historians have assigned various reasons for it.

    (1) The greatest fault of “Hindus” lay in not studying the Islamic scriptures and psychology, which alone could give them a clue to the peculiar Mohammedan behaviour.

    (2) “Hindu” standards of principled and ethical warfare were not reciprocated by the invaders.

    When Muslims were defeated, Muslims were magnanimously pardoned and allowed to go back.

    But Muslims used the reprieve only to regroup and attack treacherously again.

    “Hindus” did not understand that surprise, deception and terrorism were essential features of Mohammedan’s holy war (Jihad) strategy.

    Besides, “Hindus” always fought a defensive war and there too it was each king for himself.

    (3) “Hindu” intelligence was very inadequate, if not absent, and the enemy could always spring an element of surprise, leaving no time for them to re-equip themselves.

    (4) Never did the “Hindu” rulers, even after convincing victories, adopt an aggressive retaliatory posture.

    “Hindu” rulers did not take the trouble of uniting their forces and driving out the invaders once for all from the Indian subcontinent and then fortifying the borders.

    Briefly speaking, major causes of “Hindu” defeats were, (a) lack of knowledge of the Quranic war; (b) rigid and degenerate caste system, which had confined the fighting to the dwindling Varna of Kshatriya ;(c) multiplicity of religious orders with their cumbersome rituals; (d) inadequate intelligence network; (e) lack of right leadership.

    On top of all these was the absence of a central national authority, a powerful central government, like the one from Chandragupta Maurya (322 BC) to great Gupta kings (4th to 7th century AD).

    Unfortunately, all these maladies continue to plague “Hindu” society even today.

    After winning the battle of Plassey in 1757 British Christian imperialists grew from strength to strength and gradually consolidated their hold by defeating several chieftains like Hyder, Tipu, and the Nizam in south and “Hindu” and Muslim rulers in the north and annexing their territories.

    After defeating the Peshwas in 1818 British Christian imperialists’ supremacy was absolute and British Christian imperialists ruled this country for a long period of nearly one hundred and fifty years until they departed in 1947 after partitioning the country.’



  36. Amina says:

    Terror is not assumed in Islam. It is there in the book and that is why they follow it. Muhammad’s life was also that of banishing Jews and plundering property and that is what is followed as sunnah. The Quran Sura Al Anfal 8:12 says = “I am with you, so strengthen those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieved, so strike [them] upon the necks and strike from them every fingertip.”

  37. Face_The_Truth says:

    In American colleges and universities, non-Muslim academics typically take the most preferable views towards Sûfîs and Sûfîsm and the “likes of Mansûr al’Hallãj, Bãyazîd Bistãmî, Jalāl ud’Dīn Muhammad Rûmî, and Farīd ud’Dīn Attãr.

    The common name which is used for these early Sûfîs as well as for the teeming breed belonging to the latter-day Silsilas, has caused no end of confusion.


    By and large, the Sûfîs that functioned in this Indian subcontinent were the most fanatic and fundamentalist activists of Islamic imperialism, the same as the latter-day Christian missionaries in the context of Spanish and Portuguese Christian imperialism.

    Small wonder that we find Sûfîs flocking everywhere ahead or with or in the wake of Islamic armies.

    Sûfîs of the Chishtîyya Silsila in particular excelled in going ahead of these armies and acting as eyes and ears of the Islamic establishment.

    The Hindûs in places where these Sûfîs settled, particularly in the South, failed to understand the true character of these Sûfîs till it was too late!

    The invasions of South India by the armies of Alãu’d-Dîn Khaljî and Muhammad bin Tughlaq can be placed in their proper perspective only when we survey the Sûfî network in South India.

    Many Sûfîs were sent in all directions by Nizãmu’d-Dîn Awliyã, the Chistîyya luminary of Delhi; all of them actively participated in Jihãds against the local Hindû population.

    Nizãmu’d-Dîn’s leading disciple, Nasîru’d-Dîn Chirãg-i-Dihlî, exhorted the Sûfîs to serve the Islamic state.

    ‘The essence of Sûfîsm,’ Nasîru’d-Dîn Chirãg-i-Dihlî versified, ‘is not an external garment. Gird up your loins to serve the Sultãn and be a Sûfî.’

    Nasîru’d-Dîn’s leading disciple, Syed Muhammad Husainî Bãndã Nawãz Gesûdarãz (1321-1422 A.D.), went to Gulbarga for helping the contemporary Bahmani Muslim Sultan in consolidating Islamic power in the Deccan (i.e., South India).

    Shykh Nizãmu’d-Dîn Awliyã’s dargãh in Delhi continued to be and remains till today the most important center of Islamic fundamentalism in India.

    An estimate of what the Sûfîs did wherever and whenever they could, can be formed from the account of a pilgrimage which a pious Muslim Nawwãb undertook in 1823 to the holy places of Islam in the Chingleput, South Acort, Thanjavur, Tiruchirapalli, and North Arcot districts of Tamil Nadu.

    This region had experienced renewed Islamic invasion after the breakdown of the Vijayanagar Empire in 1565 A.D.

    Many Sûfîs had flocked in for destroying Hindû temples and converting the Hindû population, particularly the Qãdirîyyas who had been fanning out all over South India after establishing their stronghold at Bidar in the fifteenth century A.D.

    Sûfîs did not, however, achieve any notable success in terms of conversions, but the havoc they wrought with Hindû temples can be inferred from a large number of ruins, loose sculptures scattered all over the area, inscriptions mentioning many temples which cannot be traced, and the proliferation of mosques, Khãnkahs, dargãhs, mazãrs, and maqbaras.”

    Famous Sûfî biography of Shykh Khwãja Mu’în al’Dîn Chishtî of Ajmer (Rajasthan) tell us the following:

    “The other miracle is that before Shykh Khwãja Mu’în al’Dîn Chishtî’s arrival the whole of Hindûstãn was submerged by unbelief and idol-worship.

    All India was IGNORANT of orders of religion and law.

    All were IGNORANT of Allãh and His Prophet.

    None had seen the Ka’ba.

    None had heard of the Greatness of Allãh.

    Because of Shykh Khwãja Mu’în al’Dîn Chishtî’s coming, the Sun of real believers, the helper of religion, Khwãja Mu’în al-dîn, the darkness of unbelief in this land was illumined by the light of Islãm.

    In the land where there were the sayings of the idol-worshippers, there is the sound of ‘Allãhu Akbar’.

    The descendants of those who were converted to Islãm in this land will live until the Day of Judgement; so too will those who bring others into the fold of Islãm by the sword of Islãm.

    Although at that time there were very many temples of idols around,,,, when Khwãja Mu’în al-dîn saw them, Khwãja Mu’în al-dîn said:

    ‘If Allãh and His Prophet so will, it will not be long before I raze to the ground these idol temples.’

    It is said that among those temples there was one temple to reverence which the Rãjã and all the infidels used to come, and lands had been assigned to provide for its expenditure.

    When the Khwãja Mu’în al-dîn settled there, every day Khwãja Mu’în al-dîn’s servants bought a cow, brought it there and slaughtered it and ate it.

    Khwãja Mu’în al-dîn had a second wife for the following reason:

    One night Khwãja Mu’în al-dîn saw the Holy Prophet in the flesh.

    The Holy Prophet said: ‘You are not truly of my religion if you depart in any way from my Sunnat.’

    It happened that the ruler of the Patli Fort, Malik Khitãb, attacked the unbelievers (i.e., Hindûs) that night and captured the daughter of the Rãjã of that land.

    Malik Khitãb presented the captured daughter of the Rãjã to Khwãja Mu’în al-dîn who accepted her and named her Bîbî Umiya.”



  38. Walter Sieruk says:

    The following essay applies more to the United States then to the nation of India, nevertheless, here it is. It’s a strange but common phenomena in America’s modern PC culture that when it comes to Islamic terrorism there are many people who are afraid to call it what it is. That’s odd because no one is afraid to call a person who engages in violence for anarchy and “anarchist terrorist”. Nor are people afraid to call a Marxist who engages in violence for the ideology of communism a “Communist terrorist.” Likewise, a person who commits violence for Environmentalism an “Environmentalist terrorists. “Nevertheless, when it comes to a Muslim terrorist who engages in deadly violence because of the theology and ideology of Islam, many people fear to call that person an “Islamic terrorists.” Strange but true.