Jump to content
sandeep

Gyanvapi mosque in Kashi - whats going on?

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, sandeep said:

Didn't find a thread on this.

 

Can we get some quality info on this? Without any bigoted froth please, if possible.

 

 

While the entire subcontinent was Hindu -- why is it that the oldest Hindu temples are found almost exclusively in South India ? 

 

Thats because Mughal rule for the longest time was in north and central india - not in South India. and Tyrant invaders like Babur and Aurangazeb razed several of the most revered Hindu places of worship in North India.

 

By one account more than 30,000 temples in North India were razed and mosques were built on top of them 

 

These evidences are going to keep coming up. They were not allowed to come out to main "communal harmony "  in the country previously.

 

Sadly, the fast majority of muslim population in India considers these barbaric central asian invaders as heroes ( in this regard they are no different than greenbros )

 

Any attempt to villainize barbaric Mughal tyrants who razed 1000s of Indian temples is seen as "unsecular"  and "anti-minority" in our country.

 

That rogue from Hyderabad Akbaruddin Owaisi, recently paid great tributes to Aurangazeb in a visit to his tomb in Aurangabad. It is a shame that we still have the city named after him. 

 

https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/mumbai/akbaruddin-owaisi-faces-flak-for-visiting-aurangzeb-tomb-in-aurangabad-7914525/

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, rangeelaraja said:

 

 

While the entire subcontinent was Hindu -- why is it that the oldest Hindu temples are found almost exclusively in South India ? 

 

Thats because Mughal rule for the longest time was in north and central india - not in South India. and Tyrant invaders like Babur and Aurangazeb razed several of the most revered Hindu places of worship in North India.

 

By one account more than 30,000 temples in North India were razed and mosques were built on top of them 

 

These evidences are going to keep coming up. They were not allowed to come out to main "communal harmony "  in the country previously.

 

Sadly, the fast majority of muslim population in India considers these barbaric central asian invaders as heroes ( in this regard they are no different than greenbros )

 

Any attempt to villainize barbaric Mughal tyrants who razed 1000s of Indian temples is seen as "unsecular"  and "anti-minority" in our country.

 

That rogue from Hyderabad Akbaruddin Owaisi, recently paid great tributes to Aurangazeb in a visit to his tomb in Aurangabad. It is a shame that we still have the city named after him. 

 

https://indianexpress.com/article/cities/mumbai/akbaruddin-owaisi-faces-flak-for-visiting-aurangzeb-tomb-in-aurangabad-7914525/

 

 

 

Why won't Muslims idolize them?? Don't we love Shivaji Maharaj too? Instead of losers victors should always be praised by a specific community. 

You know there's hiuuuge respect & love for Timurlame in Uzbekistan.  There's a beautiful tomb of him there.  He is a national hero.  If he had lost in India nobody would eveb remember him. 

In India he is probably our biggest & most hated invader by a country mile... Tyrant word seem so nice even. 

Probably same for Nader Shah in Iran.  He made tax free for 2 straight years for his subjects back in Iran after looting Delhi. 

History is always written by victors. 

Crying & whining won't change that simple fact. 

Indian Muslims have so much to rectify about themselves but they are well within their rights to praise their Mughals. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lone Wolf said:

Why won't Muslims idolize them?? Don't we love Shivaji Maharaj too? Instead of losers victors should always be praised by a specific community. 

You know there's hiuuuge respect & love for Timurlame in Uzbekistan.  There's a beautiful tomb of him there.  He is a national hero.  If he had lost in India nobody would eveb remember him. 

In India he is probably our biggest & most hated invader by a country mile... Tyrant word seem so nice even. 

Probably same for Nader Shah in Iran.  He made tax free for 2 straight years for his subjects back in Iran after looting Delhi. 

History is always written by victors. 

Crying & whining won't change that simple fact. 

Indian Muslims have so much to rectify about themselves but they are well within their rights to praise their Mughals. 

It’s ironic that most Indian Muslims are decendents of the products of mass rapes and forced conversions to Islam.. they have no gene or ethnic connection with Arabs or central turkics I’m so glad I’m still a Hindu cos my ancestors fought for survival and didn’t compromise our faith.

 

their praise right now is part of their wider inferiority complex which compels them to try assert dominance over kaffirs just to get validation from their high masters

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Lone Wolf said:

Why won't Muslims idolize them?? Don't we love Shivaji Maharaj too? Instead of losers victors should always be praised by a specific community. 

You know there's hiuuuge respect & love for Timurlame in Uzbekistan.  There's a beautiful tomb of him there.  He is a national hero.  If he had lost in India nobody would eveb remember him. 

In India he is probably our biggest & most hated invader by a country mile... Tyrant word seem so nice even. 

Probably same for Nader Shah in Iran.  He made tax free for 2 straight years for his subjects back in Iran after looting Delhi. 

History is always written by victors. 

Crying & whining won't change that simple fact. 

Indian Muslims have so much to rectify about themselves but they are well within their rights to praise their Mughals. 


 

Sorry you don’t make any sense.

 

One has got to be sick and perverted to celebrate “victors” who brutalize your ancestors and forcibly convert them.

 

Aurangazeb beheaded Guru Tegh Bahadur Singh. No Sikh celebrates Aurangazeb because Guru Tegh was a revered figure who fought to protect Hinduism and Sikhism. 
 

It’s only the sick peacefuls who celebrate such “victors”. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


 
Sorry you don’t make any sense.
 
One has got to be sick and perverted to celebrate “victors” who brutalize your ancestors and forcibly convert them.
 
Aurangazeb beheaded Guru Tegh Bahadur Singh. No Sikh celebrates Aurangazeb because Guru Tegh was a revered figure who fought to protect Hinduism and Sikhism. 
 
It’s only the sick peacefuls who celebrate such “victors”. 
Classic Stockholm Syndrome
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Lone Wolf said:

Aurangzeb destroyed the temple back in the day & now Places of worship act 1991 prohibits any change of status quo.  Long story short that's the argument & counter argument. 

Unless its ancient structure 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Lone Wolf said:

Why won't Muslims idolize them?? Don't we love Shivaji Maharaj too? Instead of losers victors should always be praised by a specific community. 

You know there's hiuuuge respect & love for Timurlame in Uzbekistan.  There's a beautiful tomb of him there.  He is a national hero.  If he had lost in India nobody would eveb remember him. 

In India he is probably our biggest & most hated invader by a country mile... Tyrant word seem so nice even. 

Probably same for Nader Shah in Iran.  He made tax free for 2 straight years for his subjects back in Iran after looting Delhi. 

History is always written by victors. 

Crying & whining won't change that simple fact. 

Indian Muslims have so much to rectify about themselves but they are well within their rights to praise their Mughals. 

Shivaji wasn’t invader neither was any Hindu ruler except may be ones from Kashmir. So stop making comparison between victim response to atrocious invaders actions.
 

Now second part, There is nothing to be proud of invasion , slavery butchery of any king or queen. Glorification of such rulers just goes to show how backward those countries and their peiple are vis a vis rest terms of thought process. If British and European glorified their imperialism, world would have been still having slave markets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, Lone Wolf said:

Why won't Muslims idolize them?? Don't we love Shivaji Maharaj too? Instead of losers victors should always be praised by a specific community. 

You know there's hiuuuge respect & love for Timurlame in Uzbekistan.  There's a beautiful tomb of him there.  He is a national hero.  If he had lost in India nobody would eveb remember him. 

In India he is probably our biggest & most hated invader by a country mile... Tyrant word seem so nice even. 

Probably same for Nader Shah in Iran.  He made tax free for 2 straight years for his subjects back in Iran after looting Delhi. 

History is always written by victors. 

Crying & whining won't change that simple fact. 

Indian Muslims have so much to rectify about themselves but they are well within their rights to praise their Mughals. 

 

/** YE SAB DOGLAPAN HAI **/

 

@Lord @Lone Wolf You wouldn't be calling for Germans to celebrate Hitler's victories over mainland Europe and teaching the nations a lesson for the sanctions imposed post WW1. Worse, if ethnic Germans claimed victory over German Jews and celebrated nazi monuments built over destroyed synagogues. If you do, that really is an awful thought process. That kind of behavior is being condoned here since they're "victors". 

 

@sandeep Creating (and retaining via the places of worship act) a dispute over the holiest sites of the prominent religion is in itself bigoted froth. 

 

 

 

Edited by Clarke
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
5 hours ago, mishra said:

Shivaji wasn’t invader neither was any Hindu ruler except may be ones from Kashmir. So stop making comparison between victim response to atrocious invaders actions.
 

Now second part, There is nothing to be proud of invasion , slavery butchery of any king or queen. Glorification of such rulers just goes to show how backward those countries and their peiple are vis a vis rest terms of thought process. If British and European glorified their imperialism, world would have been still having slave markets.

Look first of all this is not how world worked back then.  Even today we see might is right. 

This is how great military minds were born.  That's why Alexander is called Great.  Although he was a cruel butcher.  He wiped out so many tribes en route to India. 

The Hun ruler Mihirkula didn't even spare his own subjects.

We can't change history instead we should learn from it.  There are a lot of thesis written on how the Great India who was only place apart from western Europe was a frontier for Massive Arab Caliphate.  But after a couple of hundred years fell to teeny tiny Afghan robbers & Turkic slaves. 

Now we can't set the rules who should be termed great.   Genghis is a national hero in Mongolia,  him & Sabutai invented Bio warfare.  Created a legendary empire.  Sacked Arab caliphate's capital Baghdad killed Millions of people in Iran. 

My point is those people back then were not backward by any means.  It is said that Indian rulers during those conquests were extremely backward & their armies were outdated,  fighting techniques as well. 

Turks,  Eastern Europeans in a constant sparring learned a great deal from each other.  New aspects of Turkish Horse archery spread like wildfire in Europe.  Siege warfare from Europe & everything.  Innovating battle formations. 

India was cut off...  Failed to evolve with time & in the end paid the ultimate price.  We were backward in reality.  We had the numbers advantage every single f*** time. 

 

If Ulagu Khan had ordered Invasion of India not at the time of Khilji or instead we had few tiny Rajput Kingdoms like Ghori times...  We would have witnessed same fate like Iranians. 

 

 

 

Edited by Lone Wolf
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Clarke said:

 

/** YE SAB DOGLAPAN HAI **/

 

@Lord @Lone Wolf You wouldn't be calling for Germans to celebrate Hitler's victories over mainland Europe and teaching the nations a lesson for the sanctions imposed post WW1. Worse, if ethnic Germans claimed victory over German Jews and celebrated nazi monuments built over destroyed synagogues. If you do, that really is an awful thought process. That kind of behavior is being condoned here since they're "victors". 

 

@sandeep Creating (and retaining via the places of worship act) a dispute over the holiest sites of the prominent religion is in itself bigoted froth. 

 

 

 

Lol..  WtF kinda logic is that??? 

 

USA invaded & killed every single etnic species in Diego Garcia..  How many champions of Human rights questioned it?? 

That's as recent a example as it comes. 

 

You know when Spanish conquistadors landed in Americas they were enormously fewer in number but they wiped out the ethnic people of the land.  Did unthinkable atrocities on them as well.  And it is argued as it was always supposed to happen. 

There's a scientific explanation to this in a chapter in Biology & diversity chapter.  An invasive species always tries to change the status quo & wipe out the originals in a quest for settlement in the area. 

 

Maybe if the industrial revolution had happened in India/China which it should have considering we were the richest & culturally champions of glory since ancient times we all wouldn't be talking about freakin Mosque over a destroyed Temple. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Lone Wolf said:

Lol..  WtF kinda logic is that??? 

 

USA invaded & killed every single etnic species in Diego Garcia..  How many champions of Human rights questioned it?? 

That's as recent a example as it comes. 

 

You know when Spanish conquistadors landed in Americas they were enormously fewer in number but they wiped out the ethnic people of the land.  Did unthinkable atrocities on them as well.  And it is argued as it was always supposed to happen. 

There's a scientific explanation to this in a chapter in Biology & diversity chapter.  An invasive species always tries to change the status quo & wipe out the originals in a quest for settlement in the area. 

 

Maybe if the industrial revolution had happened in India/China which it should have considering we were the richest & culturally champions of glory since ancient times we all wouldn't be talking about freakin Mosque over a destroyed Temple. 

 

So you start at celebrating barbarian victors which is an extremely territorial mindset to inculcate within a subset of a population to scientific observations and alternate history. Pretty much a theme that ruins a debate, this shifting goalpost business besides the word womit. Just like Kashmir & Pandits & BJP is mixed into AAP & Punjab. 

 

I'd rather not stick around & waste my time here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Clarke said:

 

So you start at celebrating barbarian victors which is an extremely territorial mindset to inculcate within a subset of a population to scientific observations and alternate history. Pretty much a theme that ruins a debate, this shifting goalpost business besides the word womit. Just like Kashmir & Pandits & BJP is mixed into AAP & Punjab. 

 

I'd rather not stick around & waste my time here.

Again u are horribly misunderstanding the point.  I am not the one glorifying this.  Why would Hindus glorify their genocide?   Point is why would Muslims not celebrate this?  You can't fight the nature.  And nature has billed it that way since the start of time. 

Might has always been right.  Either u win or u lose.  There's no middle way. 

Hindus should look into their past do some self introspection...  Change their Outlook.  Get bolder.  Blaming Muslims for their past has no bearing on future.  They are still the same.  They have a clear mindset.  They have one goal.  We are still in majority but we act like we are in minority.  How come Muslims made the ecosystem to suit them? The day we start to learn this....  These petty things won't matter. 

 

Also I have  a question?  Marathas at their peak had a puppet Mughal ruler in Delhi.  Why didn't they tried to re create the temple?  And demolished the Gyanvapi mosque? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sandeep said:

you need to read up on Ahilyabai Holkar

Subu Swami cleared this myth a while ago

Also I'd like to say it was Md Ghori who first destroyed the compound of the temple back in 1194 after/before Battle of Chandwar with Jaichand. 

It was rebuilt during Sultanate's rule in 1211-1266 by a Gujarati Merchant & Hindu community. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Lone Wolf said:

Subu Swami cleared this myth a while ago

Also I'd like to say it was Md Ghori who first destroyed the compound of the temple back in 1194 after/before Battle of Chandwar with Jaichand. 

It was rebuilt during Sultanate's rule in 1211-1266 by a Gujarati Merchant & Hindu community. 

 

 

 

where did I say she rebuilt the Shiv temple? You questioned why the Marathas didn't "do anything" about temple destruction and rebuilding - that's what I responded to...

 

She did a lot on that front...

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...