Wednesday, April 22, 2015

A crie de couer from a Kshatriya-IV

Kammas were kings belonging to the Solar,lunar and Haihaya clans of Kshatriyas(warriors),who ruled over a famous land called Kamma rashtra or kamma nadu.They were basically an amalgam of the lunar clan Chalukyas and the solar clan Cholas who initially fought ferociously for the coveted land of kamma nadu, and later on made peace by entering into marital alliances.
 
Every one claims such lofty pedigrees but it is difficult to show any continuance from the decline of those dynasties to the establishment of these relatively petty kingdoms.
The only one in Indian history I can think which has any credibility is the Mauryas of Konkan named for the erstwhile Maurya empire 400 years prior.
Interestingly Cholas were Tamil and Chalukyas were Kannada and yet you have a purely Telugu dynasty, odd is it?
 
 
Practically all the ruling families of South India as well as Sri Lanka excepting Kerala were related to the Kammas.
 
More unsubstantiated claims.
 
A clan of chalukyas conquered Gujarat and are known as "Solankis", which is one of the major clans among the Rajputs.
According to the puranas Kammas were descendants of a lunar dynasty king Maharaja Kamra and his 500 brothers.
The Kammas were hailed as kamma Prabhus,kamma Nayakas and Kamma Doras. Their names were suffixed by raju,naidu,needu,neni,deva,verma etc.They were called Manneelu (Mannan or king) in Tamil Nadu.
 
Naidu and Verma et al are titles which can be adopted by those who move up in ranks and prove their mettle on the battlefield.
 
The events of 11th and 12th centuries brought a seachange in the social heirarchy of south India. Due to the rise of veerasaivism, hitherto low castes gained in wealth and power. A dynamic farmer lady Reddi Nagamma was able to become minister in the court of the kings of Palandu. She laid the foundation for politics based on groupism, treachery, propaganda, and assassinations ( akin to the present politics in which her descendants are excelling )
 
Cheap shot.
 
in the place of the cultured, noble politics practiced by the valiant aristocrats.
 
We could've used more treachery and assasinations in dealing with Muslims. We have seen what nobility has led us to.
 
 As she became very popular among the low castes in the soceity including her kapu community, the existing minister Brahma Naidu who was a relative of the royal family and himself a very popular personality, tried to check her by following the method of appeasing the low castes including the untouchables (whom Nagamma left out) by giving them elevated posts like military generals and adopting them and treating them on par with high castes. His efforts to unite the soceity actually fragmented it further like all similar efforts in India did. Seelam Brahma Naidu belonging to the Recherla gothra ( one of the two most famous gothras among the Kammas; the other being Vallutla) of the Kammas was ostracised (or veli)from the community and he became the founder of a new caste, the Velamas
 
And thank you Velamas for bringing the Nizams to power and even now siding with their offspring to create Telengana as your personal fiefdom. Bravo!
 
The various gameplans of Nagamma and Brahma Naidu's efforts to counter them snowballed into a catasrophic war famous as 'Palanati Yuddam' or Battle of Palnadu which was fought between two Kamma brothers of haihaya clan around 1180 A.D.,in which all the royal families of South India Participated. This battle took a very heavy toll of the Kammas and at the same time provided ideal ground for some agrarian communities like Reddis to take up military jobs and climb up in social heirarchy .
The fatal impact of the battle of Palnadu was felt in 1323 A.D.,some 150 years later when the mighty Kakatiya Emperor Pratapa Rudra Deva II,after having thrashed the muslim invaders many a time before,finally succumbed because of the treachery of the low castes in his army, who have attained military status during the tumultuous period of the battle of Palnadu, on the pretext that the Emperor did not treat them on par with the Kamma and Velama generals.
 
There are many differing accounts as to why Prataprudra lost the war. He didn't pay proper attention to logistical matters, he failed to pursue and vanquish the defeated Turks. But this lower caste defection is the first I have heard of. If indeed it was true, it is most likely due to the Velama leadership under whom they defected. Stop covering for the Velamas!

The aftermath of the muslim conquest of Andhra was horrible as was anywhere else. These conquerers were total strangers; their appearence, language, customs everything was strange. While the Hindus were soft hearted,kind even to the defeated enemy, had a code of war which was strictly followed by all, like maintaining scheduled timings, sparing the lives of fleeing or surrendering and unarmed enemy etc., the muslims didn't have any such morals.
 
Hmm, so wouldn't the Reddy approach be more useful in dealing with them than yours?
 
They resorted to all sorts of treacheries, massacred fleeing armies and subjected captured enemy kings to most horrific and barbaric forms of tortures like burning alive, cutting of tongue, deskinning alive etc. Even ordinary people were not spared. Villages were looted, men killed, women raped, temples destroyed. No one was secure. An unprecedented catastrophe, that changed the course of history forever fell over the people of Andhra because of the treachery of a few mean and jealous people.
 
Look history is replete with short sighted and oppressed people who have been well shorted by the powers to be and often these guys end up supporting foreign invaders out of a combination of spite and an entitlement attitude. It is best to learn from such episodes to reduce discontent all around to a manageable level which doesn't seem to be the case with your ancestors and their jealously guarded privileges.

In this dark period, two Kamma brothers Musunuri Prolaya Naidu and Kapaya Naidu rose to the task of saving Andhra. They were relatives of the Emperor and rulers of a province in present krishna district.They regrouped all the scattered generals and soldiers of the defeated army,and started recapturing the lost kingdom. As a classical example of the meanness of Indian rulers, in such dire circumstances, where helping a neighbouring king was most due, the rulers of Oodhra(Orissa), saw an oppurtunity to invade Andhra and avenge previous humiliations.Prolaya Naidu was killed in one such battle with the Kalingas and it was left to Kapaya Naidu to carry on the fight against the muslims.
 
I think it was Sitaram Goel who noted that following the collapse of the Gupta dynasty, Indians had become quite provincial and lacked a wider perspective of the world. This was true more of eastern dynasties like the Andhras ,Oriyas and Bengalis especially in the wake of Chola naval might which gave a sense of security from foreign invaders from that direction. The Chola naval supremacy may be comparable to the American naval forces aircraft carriers stationed in strategic bottlenecks which facilitate world trade by offsetting pirates.
Those on the West coast such Rashtrakutas and Chalukyas who squashed once and for all Arab dreams of an Indian conquest were more cosmopolitan and realistic about world affairs well because they had to be. At the same time, they weren't xenophobes. Rashtrakutas appointed Arab merchants as governers of various regions. And these Arabs didn't dare pull a Hyder Ali or Tipu Sultan on their bosses. Indeed they engaged in hyperbolic praise of them as one of the 4 most powerful kingdoms in the world.
Interestingly Reddys trace descent from Rashtrakutas, wonder what our Kamma friend thinks of that!
 
Musunuri Kapaya Naidu (or Nayaka) waged a relentless war against the muslims and after 13 years of relentless fighting, recaptured the capital city Warangal and freed Andhra soil totally from the conquerers.(It is to be noted that the success of Kapaya naidu was one of the greatest moments in Indian history, where a Hindu king was able to recapture his capital lost to muslims.Even Rana Pratap was able to recapture only a part of his kingdom from Akbar,but failed to take the capital Chittoregarh). He was recognised as the successor to the Kakatiya empire with the titles Andhra Desadheeswara and Andhra Sura Trana .
 
To be fair, Rana Pratap was facing far worse odds than Kapaya Naidu. Though that is certainly not to diminish the Naidu brothers achievements which were formidable.
 
Kapaya Naidu restored order, rebuilt the temples, patronised brahmins and ruled Andhra for 35 years.After his death in a battle, Andhra again fell into the hands of muslims. The Kammas retreated to the south of the river Krishna and were patronised by the newly formed Vijayanagar kings who offered them the highest military and governor posts.
 
Thank you for atleast not claiming that Vijayanagar founders were Kammas!
 
The Vijayanagar Empire was found by two brothers Harihara and Bukka,probably of kannada origin and courtiers of the Hoysala king Veera Bhallala.Veera Bhallala struck terror in the hearts of the muslim invaders.Unable to take him on in a straight battle,the muslims played a game of surrender and deceitfully captured him and put him to a horrific death.
 
More Turko Afghan dirty tricks as a substitute for courage in noble warfare.
 
Harihara and Bukka were said to be closely related to Kapaya Naidu(mentioned as 'Kanhaiyya nayak' by muslim historians) and helped Kapaya in his struggle against muslims.After the demise of Kapayya,the Vijayanagar Kingdom effectively restricted the advance of muslims to the south of the river Krishna for 250 years.The Kammas formed the cream of the Vijayanagar army with majority of the Generals being chosen from them. The Vijayanagar kings followed the Nayankara or feudatory system of the Kakatiyas and honored the Kammas by giving them the lion's share of these feudataries. The supreme commander of the army invariably used to be from the Gandikota royal family, who also had marital relations with the Vijayanagar kings.(Similar to the Jaipur royal family vs the Moghuls).
 
Eh? That it is rather bad analogy!
 
The Gandikota king Pemmasani Bagaru Thimma Naidu,became a folk hero by defeating the combined forces of the Bahamani Sultans(popular in folklore as Bangaru Thimma Raju Katha).Pemmasani Ramalinga Naidu,Ravella Mallikarjuna Naidu etc.,were some other extremely famous supreme commanders of the Vijayanagar army.
After the fall of Vijayanagar in the battle of Talli kota around 1565 A.D., and Gandikota a 100 years later,the Kammas retreated into deep south as the kings of Tanjavur,Madurai,Ginjee,Ramanathapura in Tamil Nadu and Candy in Sri Lanka were Kammas who conquered them under the behest of Vijayanagar kings.
 
The Nayaks in general have a mixed record. More engaged in petty squabbles with each other than any substantial offensive against Muslims. The best that can be said about hem is that they held out for another 150 years or so.
 
The Kammas were reduced to the Status of big Zamindars and landlords by the British after suppressing their revolts and confiscating their armies.
After the fall of the Kakatiya empire in 1323 A.D., a section of the Kammas entered into the deep forests of Bastar in today's Chattisgarh under the leadership of Raja Ammaya Deva, brother of the Emperor Pratapa Rudra. They found a kingdom there which existed till the advent of the Indian independence.
After India attained Independence and Zamindaries were abolished, the social and political clout of the Kammas started to decline as the changed circumstances did not suit them. Neverthless they have become successful farmers, industrialists, doctors, engineers and film heroes and producers. Due to their high success rate because of their sincere and hardworking nature, they are being grudged and envied by other communities.
 
This is what we call in colloquial Telugu as "Sontha dabba" ie beating your own drum while singing your praises!
 
Their aristocratic behaviour and unwillingness to treat others as their equals and mingle with them may also be the reasons. Now, the Kammas are at the crossroads and they have to organise themselves and brace up for the rapidly changing circumstances, if at all they want to keep up their affluence.
 
You can start by not burning bridges left and right with other communities!

82 comments:

  1. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Earlier I mentioned that as Afghanistan goes to the dogs and gets ravaged by the Russians, Paki/Punjabis(Taliban interrum funded by ISI) , the Americans and soon the Chinese, I will revel in their destruction and sit back with pop corn for all that their ancestors did to ours.
      However I personally do not wish to directly avenge the crimes of their fathers on them. Of course if some Afghan POS tries to invade India, I hope the Indian government will give the Putin treatment as he did in Chechnya.

      The reason we avoided(for the most) the genocidal conflicts which plagued Europe is due to our inclination to temper our hatred but concentrate on our own valor and resistance. In other words forgive but never forget. Of course hatred in some doses is required for national cohesion against enemies. Even Kautilya recommends it I believe.
      But then again just enough so that we dont let South Asia turn into the Balkans circa 1994 but neither go the Chauhan/Ghori or Nair/Tipu Sultan route.

      Delete
  2. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @ Iniyavel

      "The anime Dragon Ball is back on TV after a hiatus of 18 years! Dragon Ball Super, releasing in 2015! " - probably the same wine in different bottle :) I think dragon ball z lost its charm with the death of Frieza.No other antagonst could match Frieza in quality.Particularly I miss the Namek Saga in DBZ.Every single episode of Namek saga brought new dozes of suspense and excitement.

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. @ Iniyavel

      Sure Capt will replace Frieza soon,if he continues at this rate :) But you are the first cartoon follower I have heard of ,who did not see any of the Dragon Ball cartoons :P

      Delete
    4. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  3. @ysv_rao
    can you remove the background, it's distracting. Keep it simple.
    only add pix for blogs when necessary but keep the layout of blog simple.

    @others
    Why do you keep on talking about capt. I would call that capt a dhimmi who believes in nonsensical zionist conspiracy.

    funny insight into whats going to happen to russian army in few years, if true.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gg3WVE8lI9c&feature=player_detailpage#t=3653

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The captain is far far worse than a dhimmi. He actually takes the crimes of Muslims and attributes them to Jews.
      Recently he claimed that the Armenian genocide was carried out not by Turkish Muslims but by crypto Jews masquerading as Muslims.
      Similarly Tipu Sultan apparently was acting out the dictates of Rothschid in killing HIndu and stealing their gold rather than the time honored Islamic tradition in the same.

      To that end, he claimed that Islam is a noble and peaceful religion whose texts were corrupted by..guess who?

      Even the most shameless of Muslim apologists dont claim this. The captain is just a self loathing secular Nehruvian on steroids

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. @SMME: I came across this website while reading comments on news articles.
      Since you are well versed in Arabic you can cross check this list with gives various detailed insights into the life of muhammad with references from all islamic sources..

      https://themuslimissue.wordpress.com/2013/01/18/islam-the-crimes-of-prophet-mohammed/

      @ysv_rao
      on the topic of dhimmi, then the capt must be dhimmi who converted to islam long back unknowingly may be due to having too much muslim friends or staying in their proximity or as you claim, an extreme case of nehruvian secularism who thinks the hate of muslims for jews written in quran is reasonable and logical.

      Delete
    4. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    5. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    6. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    7. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    8. I would say problem is not Muslims but their religion. Muslims dont kill because they have blood lust but because God commands to do it.

      In Indonesia, there is a prophecy that one day Indonesia will give up Islam and revert to Hinduism. So they know that Islam is only a temporary phenomenon.

      Delete
    9. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    10. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    11. Islam is nothing but a heretical form of Eastern Orthodox Christianity. If Muhammad had existed, he would have been nothing more than a Christian leader like Calvin or Luther. There was no Islam as late as 680 AD ---- means the Arab conquerors who captured West Asia and North Africa are actually Xtians.

      Delete
    12. Evil men have always existed, still exists and will continue to exist. But an idea that sanctions any sort of violence on people who dont belong to your camp is even more evil.

      Why?

      It encourages even good people to commit evil - since committing evil on infidel is all right.

      Anyway, you are correct on one point. Medieval Islam was more tolerant than Xtianity. Cruelty done by Inquisition in Goa is far more barbaric than what Muslims.

      Delete
    13. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    14. What makes Islam and Xtianity so dangerous is that they have action plan that spans over millenia with a single point agenda of global domination.

      You are 100 percent correct --- Buddhists and Jains are not such innocent lambs as they claim.

      In fact, Jain fanatics in particular have committed horrible atrocities in Tamizhakam (Tamizh Nadu and Keralam) during Kalabhra rule --- forced conversion, destruction of shrines, confiscation of temple property and many acts of intolerance were done by Kalabhras.

      Delete
    15. In medieval Europe, where "religion of love" ruled supreme, Jews were banned from most professions.

      Instead they were often forced to do unpleasant jobs so that Xtians will not have to do sins.

      Thus Jews were forced into many unsavory activities like money lending, prostitution, pimping, slave trafficking and so on because these were the only jobs that a Jew can do.

      These Jews had to pay a good share of their profits to their Christian patrons!!! (Usually local Church, prince or lord).

      Jew was thus blamed for many social ills while their Christian puppet masters always got away.

      Anti-Semites say that Jews dominate white collar crime. But truth is that Jews dominate all fields that require application of intelligence whether it is legal or illegal.

      Delete
    16. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    17. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    18. @SMME

      "But one cannot deny that for 30 pieces of silver, Jews had Jesus killed (John 8:44, Matthew 23:33, Matthew 23:15)"

      This is the source of all antisemitism- the charge of deicide. Note that the New Testament was written atleast 30 years after Jesus' death hence its contents may not be historically accurate. There is a strong motivation in the Bible to shift the blame of Jesus' death from the Romans who were after all the intended audience to the Jews.

      Sagar has nailed it in his description of Medieval antisemitism.

      Anti-semitism is unique in world history because of various reasons- one of it is the time involved. 2000 years is a long time to hate a group of people. Besides, Judaism is a religion rather than a race. It has been found through genetic analysis that Jews on a worldwide scale are not a single ethnic group. Ethiopian Jews look like other Africans while Ashkenazis look like Europeans. Jesus who was a Jew probably looked like modern Levantine Arabs.

      "Read his life history and how he gave equal rights to Jews and Muslims in the land he conquered,"

      SMME, both Jews and Christians were tolerated by the Caliphs as long as they humbly acknowledged their Dhimmi status, paid the jizya tax and did service jobs like physician. However, they were not allowed to step out of the line. The yellow badge identifying Jews was invented in Baghdad, not Berlin (were it was later used).

      Delete
    19. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    20. No one claimed that Jews don't commit crimes. Anti Semitism is not disliking one particular Jew or say Jewish mafia in the 1920s NYC and Miami for commiting crimes etc.
      Yes Jews were disproportionately represented amongst Bolsheviks but so were Georgians and other Caucasian peoples. In fact more so.

      Anti Semitism is the IRRATIONAL hatred of Jews accusing them of possessing "too much" power( how much is too much) and planning nefarious schemes to take over the world
      ANd yes such thoughts do not neccesarily amount to mental illness(a strawman) but a skewed and ignorant view of the world which inevitably does damage to the person holding those views as he forfeits any agency for his station in his life if there is someone out there pulling strings which you are unable to combat.

      Delete
    21. Salahudeen was a glorified warlord who is celebrated because he ousted the Crusaders . To be sure the Crusaders were often cruel but not much more than Turks in their midst.
      They had a strong cassus belli for invading what was then The Holy Land as Muslims had desecrated Christian shrines and raped female pilgrims etc.

      Delete
    22. Jews were unfortunate in the sense that the offshoot religions Christianity and Islam used it against them since the latter claimed that they had fulfilled the covenant with God rather than Jews . So when the Jews refused to convert by contesting this claim, they were ripe for persecution.

      Both the Bible and Quran are so insecure about the existing presence of Jews as those defying their theology that the extermination or mass conversion of Jews is mandatory before Judgement Day is to arrive.

      Delete
    23. We have to keep things in perspective when discussing the state of minorities in intolerant areas like Europe and the Middle East.

      They were not like the Indians like Rashtrakutas who appointed Arab Muslims as governers and let them build mosques in peace. Or like the Keralites who were comfortable with having Muslim generals and Jewish pseudo kings(Joseph of Rabban) in their midst. Not to mention Syrian Christian nobility.
      No one bats an eyelid at this. The mutual distrust and violence between Jains,Buddhists,Hindus etc was due to political factors and power equations rather than serious theological differences.

      In the context of ME and Europe. A dhimmi status for a Jew in 11 th century Arab Spain was preferable to say 11 century England where they were expelled and their assets seized by King Edward Longshanks(the villain in Braveheart)

      But obviously the condition of 19th century European Jews was better than that of 19th century Jews in the Islamic world.
      Discounting for places like Algeria and Egypt where Jews were enfranchised by the colonial powers which is a different matter altogether.

      Delete
    24. @SMME : My knowledge about islam comes from ex muslims like ayaan-hirsi-alis. on researching about rape in quran, I came across this website which states that the term for rape doesnt exist in quran and as you read the website the forced sex is accepted as allah has made lawful.
      http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Rape_in_Islam

      Verse 4:24
      Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess. Thus has Allah ordained for you. All others are lawful, provided you seek them from your property, desiring chastity, not fornication. So with those among them whom you have enjoyed, give them their required due, but if you agree mutually after the requirement (has been determined), there is no sin on you. Surely, Allah is Ever All-Knowing, All-Wise.
      Qur'an 4:24

      What we see in the beginning of this verse as “forbidden” refers to sexual intercourse. The Qur'an dictates, women already married are forbidden for Muslims except those whom their right hands possess (sex slaves).
      Context

      It is important to know the context of this verse, as it sheds light onto the nature of allowance. If we go through a Sahih Hadith in Sunan Abu Dawud:
      Abu Said al-Khudri said: "The apostle of Allah sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain. They met their enemy and fought with them. They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the apostle of Allah were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Quranic verse, "And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess". That is to say, they are lawful for them when they complete their waiting period." [The Quran verse is 4:24]
      Abu Dawud 2:2150

      Here in the above hadith, we are told why verse 4:24 was revealed to Muhammad. It was to encourage his fighters, who were reluctant, to have sexual contacts with female captives even while their husbands were alive as prisoners of war. This is made clear when we read:

      "Some of the Companions of the apostle of Allah were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers."

      The Abu Dawud hadith is confirmed by the two Sahih collections, namely Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim.

      In Sahih Bukhari we read:
      Narrated Ibn Muhairiz: I entered the Mosque and saw Abu Said Al-Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about Al-Azl (i.e. coitus interruptus). Abu Said said, "We went out with Allah's Apostle for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. So when we intended to do coitus interrupt us, we said, 'How can we do coitus interruptus before asking Allah's Apostle who is present among us?" We asked (him) about it and he said, 'It is better for you not to do so, for if any soul (till the Day of Resurrection) is predestined to exist, it will exist."
      Sahih Bukhari 5:59:459

      Similarly in Sahih Muslim:
      Abu Sa'id al-Khudri reported that at the Battle of Hunain Allah's Messenger sent an army to Autas and encountered the enemy and fought with them. Having overcome them and taken them captives, the Companions of Allah's Messenger seemed to refrain from having intercourse with captive women because of their husbands being polytheists. Then Allah, Most High, sent down regarding that:" And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess (Quran 4:. 24)" (i. e. they were lawful for them when their 'Idda period came to an end).
      Sahih Muslim 8:3432

      Delete
    25. @SMME : my knowledge of islam comes from ex muslim like Ayaan hirsi ali and atheist Christopher Hitchens.
      google for raping quran results shows a website which states that term rape doesn't exist in quran and muhammad starts making verses to justify sex on sex slaves by saying allah has made lawful.

      /s
      about the muslims were raping women after war? actually they were not raping them but having sex with what their right hand possesses as allah had made it lawful.
      /s

      wikiislam . net/wiki/Rape_in_Islam

      Verse 4:24
      Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess. Thus has Allah ordained for you. All others are lawful, provided you seek them from your property, desiring chastity, not fornication. So with those among them whom you have enjoyed, give them their required due, but if you agree mutually after the requirement (has been determined), there is no sin on you. Surely, Allah is Ever All-Knowing, All-Wise.
      Qur'an 4:24

      What we see in the beginning of this verse as “forbidden” refers to sexual intercourse. The Qur'an dictates, women already married are forbidden for Muslims except those whom their right hands possess (sex slaves).
      Context

      It is important to know the context of this verse, as it sheds light onto the nature of allowance. If we go through a Sahih Hadith in Sunan Abu Dawud:
      Abu Said al-Khudri said: "The apostle of Allah sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain. They met their enemy and fought with them. They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the apostle of Allah were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Quranic verse, "And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess". That is to say, they are lawful for them when they complete their waiting period." [The Quran verse is 4:24]
      Abu Dawud 2:2150

      Here in the above hadith, we are told why verse 4:24 was revealed to Muhammad. It was to encourage his fighters, who were reluctant, to have sexual contacts with female captives even while their husbands were alive as prisoners of war. This is made clear when we read:

      "Some of the Companions of the apostle of Allah were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers."

      The Abu Dawud hadith is confirmed by the two Sahih collections, namely Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim.

      In Sahih Bukhari we read:
      Narrated Ibn Muhairiz: I entered the Mosque and saw Abu Said Al-Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about Al-Azl (i.e. coitus interruptus). Abu Said said, "We went out with Allah's Apostle for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. So when we intended to do coitus interrupt us, we said, 'How can we do coitus interruptus before asking Allah's Apostle who is present among us?" We asked (him) about it and he said, 'It is better for you not to do so, for if any soul (till the Day of Resurrection) is predestined to exist, it will exist."
      Sahih Bukhari 5:59:459

      Similarly in Sahih Muslim:
      Abu Sa'id al-Khudri reported that at the Battle of Hunain Allah's Messenger sent an army to Autas and encountered the enemy and fought with them. Having overcome them and taken them captives, the Companions of Allah's Messenger seemed to refrain from having intercourse with captive women because of their husbands being polytheists. Then Allah, Most High, sent down regarding that:" And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess (Quran 4:. 24)" (i. e. they were lawful for them when their 'Idda period came to an end).
      Sahih Muslim 8:3432

      Delete
    26. There is an entire chapter devoted to this in the Sahih Muslim collection. The title of the chapter speaks in volumes as we read:

      Sahih Muslim. Chapter 29: Title: It is permissible to have sexual intercourse with a captive woman after she is purified of menses or delivery. In case she has a husband, her marriage is abrogated after she becomes captive.
      Ibn Kathir, the most prominent of all Qur'an interpreters, had this to say in regards to verse 4:24:
      The Ayah (verses) means Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess.), you are prohibited from marrying women who are already married, except those whom your right hands possess) except those whom you acquire through war, for you are allowed such women after making sure they are not pregnant. Imam Ahmad recorded that Abu Sa`id Al-Khudri said, "We captured some women from the area of Awtas who were already married, and we disliked having sexual relations with them because they already had husbands. So, we asked the Prophet about this matter, and this Ayah (verse) was revealed, Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those whom your right hands possess). Accordingly, we had sexual relations with these women." (Alternate translation can be: as a result of these verses, their (Infidels) wives have become lawful for us) This is the wording collected by At-Tirmidhi An-Nasa'i, Ibn Jarir and Muslim in his Sahih.
      Forbidding Women Already Married, Except for Female Slaves
      Tafsir Ibn Kathir

      Similarly in Tafsir al-Jalalayn (Qur'an interpretation by two Jalals namely: Jalaluddin Mahalli and Jalaluddin Suyuti):
      And, forbidden to you are, wedded women, those with spouses, that you should marry them before they have left their spouses, be they Muslim free women or not; save what your right hands own, of captured [slave] girls, whom you may have sexual intercourse with, even if they should have spouses among the enemy camp, but only after they have been absolved of the possibility of pregnancy [after the completion of one menstrual cycle]; this is what God has prescribed for you.
      Qur'an 4:24
      Tafsir al-Jalalayn

      Delete
    27. "Is it impossible for God to have communicated with various people which make up the NT Bible?"

      Don't put words in my mouth. When did I claim any of these things? I said the NT is not the infallible word of God because it clearly has numerous textual problems. There are 4 Gospels and they don't agree with each other in their description of Jesus' life and lineage. May be you need come out of that blissful ignorance and enlighten yourself about these things.

      "I'm now 1000% sure you have NOT read the history of the great ruler Saladin."

      What the hell does Saladin got to do with my comment? If I read about Saladin, I will also start believing that Jews are the spawn of the devil? Man, these neo-nazi types are a really deranged lot.

      Delete
    28. @SMME Just FYI Salahuddin had a Jewish doctor- the great philosopher Ibn Maymun, better known as Maimonedes.

      Delete
    29. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    30. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  4. @JAM, Do you use disqus for posting comments on news articles? I am asking cause the other day I saw comments from a account named JAM posting on various articles and I would like to follow you on Disqus.

    you are making the same mistake as SC Bose. you are talking along secular lines and not along Indian lines which does not accept the notion of good or bad/evil.

    I most of the time agree with Sagar M comments, and even during the moksha discussion I agree with Sagar M.

    Do you know the plight of dhimmis who lived under darul islam?
    visit these two websites

    indiafacts.co.in/falta-extensive-violence-against-hindus/

    hinduexistence.org

    you and SMME, you both are showing signs of dhimmitude because SMME harbors a strong affinity for islam thinking it's success is something more than ordinary and you talk like the Ramakrishna Paramahamsa who read some version of quran whether it was genuine or not who knows and started believing in it and detested idol worship. if he would have read Mein Kampf he would have said that it is valid path and he would have started killing Jews. Maybe I am exaggerating the bit about murdering others?

    Many hate Indian Idol worshipers, yet the patriotic atheist or abrahamic religious citizens who hate idol worship , be it American, Christians, Chinese, Japanese revere their holy book bible (in case of Christians) , revere and salute their national flags and defend their Land and Leader with their life. is it not a form of idol worship?

    Onto the question about balderdash you were discussing with Sagar M in the previous blog related to abrahamic semitic god. I would like to tell you if during WW2 had Nazism not been made extinct, after few 100 years Hitler too would be called a prophet and Nazism would be indeed be called as a religion to be accepted under secularism like Islam.you need to remove this allah fuckbar as god nonsense from your thinking and actually read the islamic texts: quran, sahih hadith of al bukhari, sira/sunna.

    Many Indians rationalist thinkers and leaders were against the idea of allowing muslims to stay back in India during partition but the secular duo GandhiNehru fucked it up.

    the religion of islam is not successful in China and Japan and why is that? because a Rabid Dog of Communism keeps it in check while education, logical and rational thinking non-appeasing and the insular nature of Japanese keeps it check in Japan.

    the religion of islam will never have success in Japan/Communist China.

    Now onto Jesus, Christopher Hitchens said that Jesus introduced the eternity of hell concept which didn't exist earlier? and then you have another wrong teachings preached by Jesus during sermon of mount: present another cheek and in matthew love thy enemy nonsense. what a pile of shit which again brings in the idea of right and wrong. this particular religion seemed to have been used as a political tool by the British to get a safe exit out of India without receiving any sort of causalities on their end.

    the dhimmi Gandhi ended up making Indians into a non retaliating Christians with this particular teachings what ysv_rao terms as lacking thumos even when after Indians were being subjected to dhimmitude under islamic rule.

    dhimmis should search what is dhimmi/dhimmitude and its side effects while living amongst muslims and entertain them and their ideas and watch the complete video I shared in my previous reply.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @ makesdevildance

      "@JAM, Do you use disqus for posting comments on news articles? " - I do not have disqus profile.The only two websites where I comment using this profile are YSV blog and mediacrooks.

      "you are making the same mistake as SC Bose." - Before you spot a mistake in the secularism of SC Bose,do understand this that he had been able to bring out the patriotism in Muslims also,who fought along with Hindus under his leadership for the United India(and not Pakistan or Bangladesh).Muslim merchants had donated generously to the INA fund,and that was for a free India and not Pakistan.And for your info,the first tricolour in the mainland of India was hoisted by a Muslim commander of INA,named Col. Shaukat Ali Malik.The same Muslims had turned patriotic and nationalistic under the correct guidance.My point is that it is the secular parties after independence which has corrupted the Muslims,firstly by spreading anti-national religious fanaticism among them,and also by the lack of education and development(as Sachar committee suggests).This was all done to keep a dedicated votebank in their favour,who would vote along religious lines.
      SC Bose was not the congress secular type whose image you have in your mind.He had deep respect for the tenets of Sanatan Dharma and ancient indian heritage.But he understood that Muslims need to be infused with nationalism so that the whole of India might remain intact,and not get divided along communal lines(like what was done in in Pakistan partition later on).The British had already planted the seed of communalism among the Muslims in undivided India.The Hindu Mahasabha ,along with their Muslim counterparts,were only adding fuel to the fire.Hence Netaji decided to strongly implement nationalist secularism,and history suggests that he was highly successful.Don't blame him for the later rot that Congress has done to the muslim psyche.

      "you and SMME, you both are showing signs of dhimmitude" -Before you accuse me of that,understand that I abhor the Islamic dominance and violence as much as you do.When I speak about Koran,it does not mean that I am preaching that Islam was always a religion of love and tolerance.Infact it has always been the other way round. without the aggression of the abrahamic religions,the world would have been a peaceful place.


      " you talk like the Ramakrishna Paramahamsa who read some version of quran whether it was genuine or not who knows and started believing in it and detested idol worship." -This is the problem with inaccurate statements.You put everything under the same lens and try to get the same derivation from completely different points,which btw are based on incorrect facts.Ramakrishna did not just read versions of Qurun or Bible,he had practised Islam ,CHristianity and Buddhism for a few years in his life with strict religious discipline,and then he had come to the conclusion that all religions lead to the same God.You will have to stick to the goodness of the religion.This was his derivation.The pseudo-seculars have done far more damage than either Ramakrishna or Bose,whom you are bashing.And Ramakrishna detested idol worship???Learn more about him,preferably from the Gospel of Ramakrishna published by RK Mission,before you give such ridiculous statements.Ramakrishna had worshipped Bhavatarini Kali deity like his own mother,throughout his life.Ramakrishna was more interested in the inner devotion and not in religious theories.He used to say that God exists both within idols and without,so what's the need to criticise different religious philosophies,if God exists everywhere?


      Delete
    2. @ Makesdevildance

      "Many hate Indian Idol worshipers, yet the patriotic atheist or abrahamic religious citizens who hate idol worship , be it American, Christians, Chinese, Japanese revere their holy book bible (in case of Christians) , revere and salute their national flags and defend their Land and Leader with their life. is it not a form of idol worship?" - Why should I worry about what other nations think?I am a follower and believer of idol worship,being a Hindu.And I am least bothered about the western nonsense of detesting idolatry.The problem is that we are suffering from some inferiority complex wrt to the dominance of abrahamic religions.I think we should build a "fuck off" attitude like China or Japan(the two nations you have already mentioned) towards the modern Abrahamic shit ,ie, no care for this idolatry vs non-idolatry debate.Believe whatever you like and stop there,no need to spread your God-gifted knowledge.See I detest Islam and christianity as much as you do,but I had read the Qurun and New Testament in the past.I found that both of them carry many good messages and instructions for their followers.Ofcourse I didnot read the original hebrew bible or Arabic qurun,so if you say that the translations eliminate the bad things,then I will have to concede to you on the point.But YSV will surely know better on this topic.


      "Now onto Jesus, Christopher Hitchens said that Jesus introduced the eternity of hell concept which didn't exist earlier" - I did not claim that the concept didnt exist earlier.I just mentioned that it was probably introduced in abrahamic tradition only to infuse fear of crime among the followers.I might be wrong in my derivations .And this was just a passing point made by me in the discussion.It was my own observation on the topic and I can be wrong here.

      "and then you have another wrong teachings preached by Jesus during sermon of mount:" - Then what are the right teachings?I really had no idea about this.

      "the dhimmi Gandhi ended up making Indians into a non retaliating Christians with this particular teachings what ysv_rao terms as lacking thumos even when after Indians were being subjected to dhimmitude under islamic rule." - For the same reasons,I hate Gandhi + nehru fucking duo.I repeat that I do not support Abrahamic aggression,I hate it as much as you do.When I try to discuss the theological points of Qurun or Bible,why do you assume that I am an abrahamic ass-licker?IN many of my comments(including the last comment on that discussion thread which you have referred),I have clearly mentioned that no other religion can match the depth of Sanatan Dharma.
      India was always a Hindu nation and even the muslim rulers of India had to accept this latent Hinduism undercurrent.The pseudo-secular nonsense of Congress will not be able to erase Hinduism,but it will surely destroy the fabric of the nation.SC Bose was secular because of the cause of nationalism.He was not the Hindutva oppressing pseudo-secular that you are thinking.Ramakrishna was secular even while worshipping Kali through Tantra marg,as he had experienced that abrahamic religions can also lead you to God.He was not the muslim vote seeking pseudo-secular.Dont get confused between the true secularism and the votebank politics of Nehru.True secularism in statehood demands that the leader would not discriminate on the ground of religion.It stops at that,and pseudo-secularism goes on to lick the ass of minority communities.A real secular leader will whip a community if reqd,to keep them on the track of nationalism,like China or Russia does and I support that.


      Delete
    3. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    4. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    5. @ Iniyavel

      "JAM, China and Russia do not follow true secularism, they kick Muslims on their collective balls. " - I never said that Russia and China are true seculars. I wrote " A real secular leader will whip a community if reqd,to keep them on the track of nationalism,like China or Russia does and I support that." I meant to say that real seculars will not think twice before whipping antinational elements of any community.However I did not mean that China and Russia are the epitome of secularism.It's just that I support the stance of China and Russia on this issue,though this might not be possible in case of full-fledged democracies.Neither China nor Russia are actually true democracies.

      Delete
    6. @ Iniyavel

      "HAD IT NOT BEEN FOR THE TEMPORARY DELHI SULTANATE BACK THEN, PROBABLY WE WOULD BE A TOTALLY MONGOLOID RACE BY NOW." - Very well-made point Iniyavel.Abrahamic religions have surely contributed to the evil of the world,but things might have even got worse without them.Who knows?

      Delete
    7. Mongols rampaging through Asia has happened with and without Islam. Timur had embraced Islam but that didn't stop him from killing people. At least the pre-Islamic Mongols treated all religions equally, patronized religious scholars and preserved religious entities. Not like Bhaktiar Khilji who burnt the Nalanda University and destroyed much of India's intellectual wealth in one stroke. Not to mention the destruction of so many temples, looting the wealth etc. There is even a mosque in Uzbekistan where a Shivling from an Indian temple was (is?) used as a stepping stone.

      Delete
    8. @ PremChand

      Ofcourse Abrahamic faiths have contributed a lot to the buildup of faith-based bigotry.But the point where I agree with Iniyavel is that the Delhi Sultanate had defended India from the Mongol waves.It was in their own interests,and there is no doubt in that.Still I think the Mongol invasion would have turned the whole of North India into a large graveyeard,had it not been for strong Delhi sultanate rulers.Bakhtiyar Khilji burnt Nalanda and hence destroyed India's ancient knowledge base,and I agree with you that pre-islamic mongols were a better lot only in terms of religious tolerance and nothing else .Just look at the destruction they brought in the middle east and Europe.I had read that one ancient line of wisdom on Mongols(I dont know whether this originated from Europe,Mideast or India) said that you will be able to predict Mongol invasion by looking at the sky,it is because the horizon would be filled with vultures,who feasted on the dead bodies left by Mongols :)

      Delete
    9. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    10. The Arabs were not exactly bunnies when it came to war and conquest. How do you think they created the huge Caliphate from Spain in the west to Sindh in the East? By the time they reached India, their resources were stretched thin so they couldn't continue their conquest.

      Even without the Mongols coming to India (actually they did in the form of Mughals), Indians were slaughtered en masse or sold into slavery during the Sultanate era. The Hindukush mountains were named so because Hindukush means 'killing Hindus' ie the enslaved Indians being dragged across this terrain usually die from the intense cold.

      Delete
    11. @makesdevilsdance
      Cant please everyone :) I would say it is not as distracting as the black. You get used to it soon. Anyway I will change it again eventually

      I don't think JAM every was grateful to Islam in anyway but only acknowledged its usefulness as a united front against the Mongols.
      As compared to the fractitiousness of Hindu kingdoms.

      But I think some explanations are in order. In history, while we should not go overboard on "what if" scenarios ,let us still recognize the butterfly Effect. If there was no Delhi sultanate, I believe the Mongols would still be defeated though yes at some cost to northern Indian culture but then Khilji had already wrecked northern (and to a lesser extent) Southern India.
      The three warring empires Palas, Rashtrakutas and Pratiharas were at each others throats for the golden triangle of Kannauj. But they did come together for the battle of Rajasthan to defeat the Arabs who had the most powerful army in that era. Keep in mind these same Arabs had also defeat the Turks who were a proto Mongol peoples
      And so did Indians who defeated the proto Mongol Kushans and Hunas

      So nothing is a foregone conclusion.

      http://koenraadelst.blogspot.ae/2013/08/did-ramakrishna-practice-other-religions.html

      Check out above link where Koenraad Elst thoroughly debunks any secularist (and sadly even RK mission) claims that Ramakrishna practiced or even praised Islam or Christianity in anyway.

      I don't think Nazism would've lasted beyond Hitler even if it won the war just as say LTTE didn't last beyond Prabhakaran's death
      This is not to say the two organizations were equivalent but that they were heavily into a personality cult which made their incoherent ideology manage to create a cohesive and effective fighting force.

      Nazi generals were highly irritated with Hitlers decision to invade Russia and some even went as far as to attempt an assassination.Most Nazi soldiers preferred to spend the war in Italy and France, living the good life and romancing local women rather than fighting any further wars. They cooled on the ideology and even Jew hatred(many were not quite aware of the concentration camps run by the most extreme Nazis) of Nazism



      Delete
    12. @SMME

      Interestingly the historian Kanakasabhai Pillai claims the Tamils were originally a Mongoloid race who migrated from Tibet ,spent some centuries in Bengal where they picked up many of their belief systems as well as the name for their language (from Tamralipti->Tamil) and then moved to TN.
      He notes a self description of ancient Tamils to ripened mango leaves (golden yellow color)

      Delete
    13. Actually Jews didn't even have a conception of hell or heaven for that matter. For them the afterlife was just a dark gloomy place called Sheol while not exactly a pleasant place was not a site of torture,horrors and punishment ala the warped imagination of Hieronymous Bosch.

      You had to wait till judgement day to join the Kingdom of Heaven and I assume whatever sins a sinner had would be purged by then.

      Delete
    14. Jesus was probably influenced by Zoroastrian dualist thought which was introduced by Persians by Cyrus after his conquest of Babylon and granting Israelite autonomy.
      Zoroastrianism itself is a corruption of Vedic religion While Hindus do have a heaven and hell, it is no where as definite and severe as the Abrahamic or Zoroastrian version.

      Perhaps because we have dieties like Shiva who are beyond good and evil even as it is recognized that evil has an inbuilt flaw which always leads to its downfall. Hence Asuras are inevitably overextend in order to outwit Shiva and meet their doom.

      Delete
    15. Kanakasabhai Pillai of Lemuria continent fame? You know the Lemuria theory has grown really wide with its beliefs that ancient Tamils had three eyes and precognition talents and whatnot. Besides, if you were looking for the source of anti-Brahmin sentiment in the Dravidianist movement, you don't have to look farther than Pillai.

      Delete
    16. Hahaha, I was not aware of the three eyes and ESP claims

      But I am surprised to learn that Kanakasabhai subscribed to those views It seemed to contradict his Mongolian thesis , which while a tad fantastic is far more believable than Lemuria

      I read a book of the history of Tamils by Pillai ,while it contained many interesting and some extraordinary claims and research, I didn't come across the Lemuria or the three eyes etc aspect.

      Can you give references for the same.

      Delete
    17. Jesus conceptualized his religion while trying to solve the problem of theodicy in Judaism. Throughout the Old Testament, we find that the suffering of Jewish people is explained as God's retribution for their flouting the laws of Moses. But during Jesus' time, he realised that most Jews obeyed the laws scrupulously yet still lived a less than perfect life. Jesus explained this away by holding that a perfect life, the Kingdom of Heaven would soon materialize on earth. The righteous would be rewarded and the wicked punished. He was the messiah bringing God's news to earth, the Son of God. This expression in Hebrew simply means a special person in God's eyes, not literally the Son of God! Of course the Hellenized Jews under Paul et al misunderstood this and believed that Jesus was literally the Son of God. To add to the confusion, the Jewish objection to polytheism meant that Jesus also had to be God himself.

      Delete
    18. I am not sure if those claims were made by Pillai himself or someone after him. Sorry, I read it a long while ago in a magazine! But in general the Lemuria theory has been debunked in scholarly circles. Suffice to say that the continent itself has not been discovered by archaeologists. Lemuria is in the same realm of pseudo history as Atlantis or Thule.

      Delete
    19. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    20. @Premchand
      Good points but some qualifiers.The area where Jesus preached was already saturated with the imagery of a rising and dying god (Adonis) who while born mortal was ascribed godlike powers due to goddesses like Aphrodite who were bewitched by his beauty.

      The Hebrew for Lord is Adonai. And Jesus was buried in a cave which is associated with an Adonis fertility cult.

      There is really no different to Jesus's angle about Jewish suffering and Jeremiah and Isiah. They had maintained the same views of corruption of Israel leading to the imperial powers of Babylon and Assyria devastated it.

      Jesus was a social reformer like say Amos who also railed against the corrupt priesthood.

      Where Jesus differs from other prophets is that he had a humble pedigree while the earlier ones were usually associated with the nobility or the priesthood.

      All in all, if it weren't for the books of Ezekiel and Isiah , Jesus would be a nobody.

      Delete
    21. @ PremChand

      The Lemuria theory was real funny :) On your point of Jews being a race,recent genetic studies are being conducted on whether Jews have some sort of distinct genetic signature,that is not apparently being detected.Most probably the findings will be negative,ie,Jews cannot be grouped as a race.This will be like telling that Hindus/Christians are a race :)

      @ YSV

      "All in all, if it weren't for the books of Ezekiel and Isiah , Jesus would be a nobody." - What's your opinion on the actual contribution of Jesus in his lifetime?Has it been exaggarated by the later authors?



      Delete
    22. @ YSV

      "You had to wait till judgement day to join the Kingdom of Heaven and I assume whatever sins a sinner had would be purged by then." - A great perspective YSV .Even from the yogic or mystic point this is valid.God principle starts with the Ananda aspect in Ajna chakra,hence a soul will have to go to the level of Ajna to meet God with the concept of duality.And to reach Ajna chakra,you will automatically have to purge all your sins .So probably no one will actually suffer a thing called eternal damnation,it is more like an illusory concept.

      Delete
    23. @YSV

      This narrative is parallel to the Christ myth theory although I don't think you are claiming that Jesus did not exist. Interestingly, the CMT is supported even by a few Christian clerics, while it is criticized by the atheist scholar Bart Ehrman :).

      I think the similarity of Jesus' death and resurrection experience with other religions is a coincidence. After all, a resurrection is a miraculous event hence we can expect different religions to come up with it independently.

      The author of the Gospel of Matthew has worked hard to fabricate prophecies predicting Jesus' life in the Old Testament. But in doing so he has made some whoopsies like mistranslating the Hebrew alma to Greek parthenos. Alma means a young woman while parthenos means virgin. So while the OT predicted Mary to be just a young woman, Matthew thought she had to be a virgin, hence the whole idea of a virgin birth.

      Delete
    24. Ghaznavids in Punjab and later Delhi Sultanate in North India presided over murder of some 80 million Indians in matter of five hundred years. In contrast, Mongol terror was limited only during conquest phase.

      If India had not lost her ancient vitality (which helped Indians defeat all invaders from Greeks to Ghaznavids), Ghori would not have conquered India nor would have Mongols.

      If Mongols had conquered India, we could have kept away political Islam for a few more centuries. Also Mongols would not have worked overtime to destroy our heritage like Turkish Sultans.

      Delete
    25. And forgot to add - Bahmani Sultanate in Deccan too had a very bloody and criminal record.

      Delete


    26. I can go on about Christian tyranny, which was very much against Jesus PBUH. Christianity on paper is actually a very peaceful religion, "

      Jesus actually beat up the money changers in the temple using a whip.
      "I am not here to bring peace but I came here with a sword"
      Mathew 10:34

      He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. Luke 22:36

      And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war. Revelation 19:11

      He also cursed a fig tree to become barren when it would not yield fruit when out of season.

      And the "turn the other cheek" is an allegory which one has to understand in a Middle eastern context of left /right cheek and left and right hand.

      Delete
    27. @ JAM
      what I meant was that Jesus was drawing upon the prophecies in Ezekiel and Isiah about the coming messiah. Before those two, there were quite a few prophets who went around doing the same things as Jesus but didn't reach his stature and the messiah handle couldn't be placed on them.

      @Premchand

      My point was that the authors need not have misunderstood or mistranslated in order to elevate Jesus to God. But that polytheism in monotheistic Judea was alive and well due to it being a cross road of all peoples especially under the Roman Empire. And they could well be influenced by those views.

      Delete
  5. The Arabs were not exactly bunnies when it came to war and conquest. How do you think they created the huge Caliphate from Spain in the west to Sindh in the East? By the time they reached India, their resources were stretched thin so they couldn't continue their conquest."

    Not really Arabs tried various attempts at conquering India during the height of their power. Their resources weren't stretched thin but were reinforced by their conquests which were complete.
    I maintain that Arabs were much more interested in learning and culture than the Turks. Look at the golden age of the Caliphate and all the scholars it produced.
    It wasn't Arabs who burnt the libraries of Alexandria but the Romans and later the Christians.
    In Kerala and the West coast, they were only interested in trading colonies. The Moplahs always sided with the Hindu Zamorins until the British started instigating them.

    .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The so called golden age of Caliphate is actually the remains of Persian civilization which the Arabs hijacked. Al Khwarizmi, Avicenna, Rumi et al were all Persians with Arabic names. Even in the hadiths, it is remarked that the Persians were gifted by God with their talents (or something like that).

      The Arab conquest was not complete for a long time with the Persians and other subjugated folk revolting and even assassinating the Caliph.

      Delete
    2. Politically the Persians were finished. There were small wars of attrition but nothing to compare to their defeat in India. The assassination of Caliph Omar took place very early in Islamic history.

      Arabs gave due credit to the Persians or for that matter Indians for their contributions to the sciences and math. And sure they had a lot of Chritisans be they Greek or Assyrian patronized by them as well.
      This does not take away from the fact that Arabs were patrons of culture but the Turks and Mongols weren't.

      Many of the later "Persians" were in fact Arabs who resided in Persia so long that they were referred to Al Ajami(Persian). Same with Ibn Khaldun who Uzbeks claim as their own but was ethnically an Arab.

      Conversely Arabs claim Salahudin even though he was Kurdish.

      Delete
    3. "Many of the later "Persians" were in fact Arabs who resided in Persia so long that they were referred to Al Ajami(Persian)."

      Still, the best intellectuals in the Caliphate were usually Persians. The Arabs learnt from them.

      "This does not take away from the fact that Arabs were patrons of culture but the Turks and Mongols weren't."

      The Mughals patronized Persian and deshi culture in India. Dara Shikoh translated the Upanishads to Persian. The Taj Mahal didn't materialize from thin air!

      Delete
    4. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    5. @ YSV

      I would have to disagree with Koenraad Elst.He has based his deduction on the musings of Siva Prasad Ray and Ram Swarup,yet he neglected(probably to establish his point) the compilation called "Ramakrishna Kathamrita/Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna".Now I would like to make one thing clear,ie,Ramakrishna Kathamrita had not been compiled by any RK Mission monk.It was written as a daily account of Ramakrishna's conversations by Mahendranath Dutta,who used to visit Ramakrishna almost everyday in the evenings.This compilation is the most authentic one on Ramakrishna's sayings,as it is like a live diary.Now if Koenraad Elst comes with a new theory that Mahendranath Dutta was a zionist stooge then I can't do anything :) (though Mr Elst is not inclined towards zionism as much as another messiah :P )

      If you ever read "Ramakrishna Kathamrita/The Gospel of Ramakrishna(in English)", you will find interesting detailings,like the gradual transformation of the wrestler and bodybuilder atheist sceptic narendranath Dutta into a Samadhi seeking Vedanta loving Vivekananda.And this whole transformation happened within a few years(as Vivekananda had reached Samadhi at the age of 23-24).This is possible only because Mahendranath had diligently recorded all the events of Ramakrishna's day-to-day life just like a personal diary.Apart from this the meeting of Ramakrishna with Vidyasagar has also been described.The original Kathamrita even had a few desi slangs which Ramakrishna used to hurl when angry :) These slangs and abuses were filtered in the later editions.

      From the Kathamrita I am quoting this particular passage :

      "I have practised", said he, "all religions — Hinduism, Islam, Christianity — and I have also followed the paths of the different Hindu sects. I have found that it is the same God toward whom all are directing their steps, though along different paths. You must try all beliefs and traverse all the different ways once. Wherever I look, I see men quarrelling in the name of religion — Hindus, Mohammedans, Brahmos, Vaishnavas, and the rest. But they never reflect that He who is called Krishna is also called Siva, and bears the name of the Primal Energy, Jesus, and Allah as well — the same Rama with a thousand names. A lake has several ghats. At one the Hindus take water in pitchers and call it 'jal'; at another the Mussalmans take water in leather bags and call it pani'. At a third the Christians call it 'water'. Can we imagine that it is not 'jal', but only 'pani' or 'water'? How ridiculous! The substance is One under different names, and everyone is seeking the same substance; only climate, temperament, and name create differences. Let each man follow his own path. If he sincerely and ardently wishes to know God, peace be unto him! He will surely realize Him."

      This was Ramakrishna's own saying recorded by Mahendranath in his diary.Now it is hard to justify whether Mahendranath had exaggerated this in his diary or not.But remember one thing,ie,Mahendranath did not have any agenda of establishing secular world-view or Ramakrishnaism like RK Mission.He used to go to Ramakrishna daily only to get spiritual guidance and mental peace.

      Delete
    6. @ YSV

      I understand that this might irritate or irk you ,but here Anu had suggested something on the background of the blog :) Again the comment overflow ensured the suppression of this comment :)

      http://empiresoflight.blogspot.in/2015/04/a-crie-de-couer-from-kshatriya-iii.html?showComment=1429842372764#c4059412018086073204

      Anyway you cannot be blamed for the irritation as 8 of us will suggest 8 different things on the background of the blog :P However I have liked the background very much.It is better than the ones you have used till now.

      Delete
    7. Mughals got around to patronizing local culture as a sop to Rajputs and the restless Doab and Deccani people which gave rise to Hindi and Urdu respectively.
      The Turks and Mughals had amongst religious fanatics like Timur,Khilji, Ghazni,Ghori ,Aurangzeb etc but also pragmatic pleasure seekers like Humayun(an opium addict) , one Khilji who wore womens clothing, Alauddin Khilji himself who was bisexual as well as Akbar who wished to start his own religion!

      Building a Taj Mahal is what despots do as monumental works herald their glory. Patronizing scholars and scientists requires some foresight, delayed gratification and humility which are the traits of a civilized ruler.

      And Dara Shikoh was brutally executed by Aurangzeb

      Delete
    8. If the Arabs did not often build gigantic monuments, it was out of their iconoclastic zeal rather than foresight. Mughals like Babur patronized Persian culture even before invading India hence not as a sop to Rajputs. Babur was an accomplished poet in Persian.

      I did not mention the religious fanaticism point because it is not an indictment of the Turks or Mongols, but the religion they both followed.

      I am in a hurry right now so I am not able to give a detailed response, Sorry!

      Delete
    9. Arabs built quite a few secular establishments not to mention elaborate mosques.
      They left much of Babylon relatively unscathed and spared most of the churches in Syria and Egypt.
      Their iconoclasm was overwhelming only in Saudi Arabia due to Mohammeds saying on his deathbed that let no two religions remain in the Arabian heartland.
      Now many scholars say that he foresaw an upcoming rift within Islam and this was his way of preventing. But it wasn't to be.

      Babur hated India and its culture. And his poetry was mostly in Chagtai Turkic which included his love sonnets for a young Indian boy named Baburi!
      He admired Persian culture because Afghanistan and Uzbekistan was saturated in it.
      Admiration is not the same as emulation. The barbarian Germans also admired the Roman penchant with words and writing so much that their word for enchanting magic and charm "glamor" is derived from grammar" - a concept unknown to them.
      That didn't prevent them from sacking Rome .They got civilized eventually but it was atleast a half a millennium long process much to the embarrassment of Nordic supremacists like Hitler.
      They solved this problem by claiming the Romans and Greeks of Germanic origin and have the Germans piggyback off these dark haired peoples!

      Delete
    10. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  6. @SMME

    The British have done to themselves what they had done to us-ie disarm and emasculate themselves and this is the result.

    The French and Italians who have militarily inferior still have the cultural self confidence to deal with Muslims in a more firm manner. Never mind the Russians!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  7. @JAM: I will stop pussyfooting around the charges I made in my previous comment addressing you but wait sometime for I will definitely make my stance clear within a few days.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @ makesdevildance

      I hope you do so.I myself do not play hit and run in a debate,and I accept defeat openly if the other person gives a better logic.

      Delete
  8. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete