Your response is typical

Submitted by Vinodgupt (United States), Sep 11, 2007 at 18:54

Mr. Shuja,

Please read history of India during the Muslim period as written by Muslim historians, invaders and rulers themselves -- like Utbi -- secretary of Mahmud Ghaznavi, Babarnama by Babar himself, Malfuzat-e-Timuri recorded by Timur Himself -- to give a few examples. If I were to quote history written by a Hindu, you will call it bias or unreliable. Hindus did not wirte much history anyway, specially of the Muslim period. Most history of India of the Muslim period was written by the Muslims only.

Let me quote a few paras from Timur's Malfuzat-e-Timuri:

"In a short space of time all the people in the fort were put to sword, and in the course of one hour the heads of 10,000 infidels were cut off. The sword of Islam was washed in the blood of the infidels, and all the goods and effects, the treasure and the grain which for many a long year had been stored in the fort became the spoil of my soldiers. They set fire to the houses and reduced them to ashes, and they razed the buildings and the fort to the ground."

"A grim tragedy, perhaps unparalleled in the history of the world, was an indirect consequence of this battle. There were at this time about 100,000 Hindu prisoners in the camp of Timur. Two amirs reported to Timur that "on the previous day, when the enemy's forces made the attack upon us, the prisoners made signs of rejoicing, uttered imprecations against us, and were ready to go and join the enemy, and to increase his numbers and strength." Timur having asked their advice, "they said that on the great day of battle these 100,000 prisoners could not be left with the baggage, and that it would be entirely opposed to the rules of war to set these idolaters and foes of Islam at liberty. In fact, no other course remained but that of making them all food for the sword". Timur thereupon resolved to put them to death. He proclaimed "throughout the camp that every man who has infidel prisoners was to put them to death, and whoever neglected to do so should himself be executed and his property given to the informer. When this order became known to the ghazis of Islam, they drew their swords and put their prisoners to death. 100,000 infidels, impious idolaters, were on that day slain. Maulana Nasir-ud-din Umar, a counselor and a man of learning, who, in all his life had never killed a sparrow, now, in execution of my order, slew with his sword fifteen idolatrous Hindus, who were his captives".

Let me close with the description of massacre in Delhi.

"On that day, Thursday, and all the night of Friday, nearly 15,000 Turks were engaged in slaying, plundering, and destroying. When morning broke on the Friday, all my army, no longer under control went off to the city and thought of nothing but killing, plundering, and making prisoners. All that day the sack was general. The following day, Saturday, the 17th (December 27), all passed in the same way, and the spoil was so great that each man secured from a fifty to a hundred prisoners, men, women, and children. There was no man who took less than twenty. The other booty was immense in rubies, diamonds, garnets, pearls, and other gems; jewels of gold and silver; ashrafis, tankas of gold and silver; and brocades and silks of great value. Gold and silver ornaments of the Hindu women were obtained in such quantities as to exceed all account. Excepting the quarter of saiyids, the ulama, and the other Musulmans, the whole city was sacked."

Go from 712 CE to 1947 and add the figures yourself.

Over the period of time 80 million HIndus killed is rather a conservative figure -- and there is no count of temples demolished and wealth plundered.

Let me quote the destruction of a temple by Mahmud Ghaznavi:

"The Sultan next directed his attacks against the sacred city of Mathura. The city was surrounded by a massive stone wall, in which were two lofty gates opening on to the river. There were magnificent temples all over the city and the largest of them all stood in the center of it. The Sultan was very much struck by its grandeur. In his estimate it cost not less than 100,000,000 red dinars, and even the most skillful of masons must have taken 200 years to complete it. Among the large number of idols in the temples, five were made of pure gold, the eyes of one of them were laid with two rubies worth 100,000 dinars, and another had a sapphire of a very heavy weight. All these five idols yielded gold weighing 98,300 mishkals. The idols made of silver numbered 200……. He seized all the gold and silver idols and ordered his soldiers to burn all the temples to the ground. The idols in them were deliberately broken into pieces. The city was pillaged for 20 days, and a large number of buildings were reduced to ashes."

Budhs did not leave India because they were being masscred in India as some one has led you to believe. Chinese ambassdor recently said that India conquered China without sending a single solidier. When Nehru visited France in the last century, I think it was Albert Camus or Romain Rolland -- I am not sure about the name right now -- asked Nehru what is it in India that India converted from Hinduism to Buddhism and back without any massacres. It had never happened anywhere else in the world.

Why go that far back. At the time of partition of India there about 25% Hindus and Sikhs in the western wing of what became Pakistan and about 33 - 35% in the East wing. The corresponding figures today are around 1% and 8%. In residual India there were around 10 -12% Muslims at the time of partition -- there are 15% today.

The translation of the Koran I quoted are not by Saudi Arabia. And which translation one reads does not matter much as they differ from each other only marginally. Most translators unless they are driven political agenda are quite honest and convey the same meaning, more or less. I really don't know of any translation of the Koran done by the Saudis -- may be you do. Please give me the reference, I will like how they translate. I have several translations but none by the Saudis.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".