Become more and more innocent, less knowledgeable and more childlike. Take life as fun - because that's precisely what it is!
Become more and more innocent, less knowledgeable and more childlike. Take life as fun - because that's precisely what it is!
Jihad is a relative term and has provided several meanings of the word to different people at different times, Nowadays a tendency has developed that every fight involving Muslims on the one side and people of other religions on the other is declared as a Jehad during medieval times of Indian History. This misnomer has been injected by the British historians on India who divided Indian history into three parts : Ancient Indian History was designated as Hindu Hisstory; Medieval period history as Muslim History and lastly modern History as the British History. Whereas it is found that in all the three periods existence of numerous ruling dynasties and elites do not justify this division into religion based division of Indian History.
Of course, religion has been used time and again by the rulers to solicit and consolidate unflinching support of their coreligionists and there are numerous instances and many examples of Jehad carried out by Muslims in various parts of the world. But so far as political expeditions with imperialist design carried out by Babur in India are concerned, they do not fit into this scheme of things. He raised the bogey of Islam in danger to establish his empire in India by removing his rivals from the scene but did little in the service of Islam as Jehadi.
History is best when created, better when re-constructed and worst when invented.
vk23 (October 3rd, 2014)
Point 1 - Agreed.
Point 2 - Name of his father was Umar Shaikh Mirza who was a petty chief of Fargana in central Asia.
Point 3 - As per his autobiography, he stopped drinking on the evening preceding his battle of Khanwa against Rana Sanga, whom he calls 'pagan' who had failed him in keeping his word to join him with his forces coming from Agra Side towards Delhi against Ibrahim Lodhi, the then Sultan of India.
History is best when created, better when re-constructed and worst when invented.
I think muslims misused the Jehadi word to invoke the sentiments of their large population which was not having proper food in their region of Arab in old time. The rich muslims & traders did all this to achieve their own selfish motives. As I came to to conclusion that in Arabs & Persia there was custom of human slaves. Poor persons ( Man/Women/child) were being sold and purchased in markets and then being used to invade other territory by these Muslim riches and traders. To keep them together and to avoid revolt they misused the idea of Jehad.
Friend,
Contemporary incidents of butchering the innocent people using religion as a cover to their real designs to capture political power are reprehensible and must be condemned by one and all. Taliban forces in Afghanistan are killing their coreligionists to establish their political supremacy in the name of 'Jehad'.
However to read past history by applying these contemporary events to colour our decisions of historical processes does not fit in the methodology of historical studies.
As mentioned earlier, the term Jehad has several meanings and must be used with caution to understand development and progress of medieval Indian History.
Thanks and regards
History is best when created, better when re-constructed and worst when invented.
I am in full agreement with what Babur wrote in his autobiography as well as the conclusion derived by Satish Chandra on the issue that Babur misused the name of religion to grind his own axes to found Indian Empire.
As regards extracts contained in History and Historians of India by Elliot and Dowson, I have just cautioned the researchers to use them after consulting the original references wherever possible and must desist from using its translation only.
Thanks.
Last edited by DrRajpalSingh; October 3rd, 2014 at 12:38 PM.
History is best when created, better when re-constructed and worst when invented.
vk23 (October 3rd, 2014)
Become more and more innocent, less knowledgeable and more childlike. Take life as fun - because that's precisely what it is!
DrRajpalSingh (October 3rd, 2014), Romar (October 3rd, 2014)
Friend,
My reply is straight forward as regards Indian medieval History. It is for others whether to agree or disagree with me.
What other definitions of the word 'Jihad' are available other than Islamic teachings which you have followed in making your perception regarding medieval Indian History.
Thanks and regards
History is best when created, better when re-constructed and worst when invented.
vk23 (October 3rd, 2014)
For understanding meaning and progress of word 'Jihad'.
http://www.milligazette.com/news/786...ctive-on-jihad
But other aspect of the current perception you may enjoy reading articles on the site :
http://www.historyofjihad.org/india.html
History is best when created, better when re-constructed and worst when invented.
Friend,
Read for answer of the first question :http://books.google.co.in/books?id=5...0Jihad&f=false
For conceptual clarity log : http://www.islamicsupremecouncil.org...e.html?start=9
Regarding your advice to me to read the history again seriously, I am striving to keep myself updated in my field of interest and have never stopped reading it seriously. Nonetheless, thanks for your words of wisdom !
It would be good if other participants also contribute the factual aspects of history of India as it happened not as it ought to have happened or as coloured by the present day distortions being applied by 'terrorist groups'.
Thanks and best wishes
Last edited by DrRajpalSingh; October 3rd, 2014 at 04:38 PM.
History is best when created, better when re-constructed and worst when invented.
Aap ka tark tha ki babur ki ladaai hindustaan me zeehad nahi maani ja sakti kyonki usne mussalman maare thhe. Aapki yeh baat galat saabit ho chuki hai.
Doosra aapka tark thha ki babur sharaab pita tha isliye woh sacha mussalman nahi tha aur uske dwara ladaai zeehad nahi maani jaa sakti. Yeh bilkul bebuniyaad baat hai.
Abhi tak aapne thos parmaan nahi diya ki aap Babur ke dwara apni jiwani me likhe kathan ki, jahan weh kaha raha hai ki usne hindustan mein zeehad chede, kaise avmanana kar rahe hai?
Jin kitabon aur lekhon ke link aapne diye unme se kisi ka babur se lena dena nahi hai.
Aap yeh kyon nahi maan rahe hain ki aapa najariya galat ho sakta hai? Aur Babur aapse jyada zeehad ke vishay me jaanta hai?
prashantacmet (October 6th, 2014)
prashantacmet (October 6th, 2014)
prashantacmet (October 6th, 2014)
Aapki baat sarasar galat hai. Angrejon ka koi lena dena nahi hai. Mughal apni kitabon mein jagah jagah per likh rahe thhe ki unhone kai martaba hinduon ke khilaaf zeehad chedi. Ek Udharan saamne hai babur ki jivani se.
Aap is tarah se sach ko kaise tod marod sakte hain?
prashantacmet (October 6th, 2014)
[QUOTE=Romar;368404]Aap ka tark tha ki babur ki ladaai hindustaan me zeehad nahi maani ja sakti kyonki usne mussalman maare thhe. Aapki yeh baat galat saabit ho chuki hai.
Doosra aapka tark thha ki babur sharaab pita tha isliye woh sacha mussalman nahi tha aur uske dwara ladaai zeehad nahi maani jaa sakti. Yeh bilkul bebuniyaad baat hai.
Abhi tak aapne thos parmaan nahi diya ki aap Babur ke dwara apni jiwani me likhe kathan ki, jahan weh kaha raha hai ki usne hindustan mein zeehad chede, kaise avmanana kar rahe hai?
Jin kitabon aur lekhon ke link aapne diye unme se kisi ka babur se lena dena nahi hai.
Aap yeh kyon nahi maan rahe hain ki aapa najariya galat ho sakta hai? Aur Babur aapse jyada zeehad ke vishay me jaanta hai?[/QUOTE]
Friend,
the links were provided to find out clarification on the issue of 'Jehad'.
I would like to say, though Babur has nowhere declared his intention to carry out Jehad expeditions in India and carried out his victorious arm at Panipat against Ibrahim Lodhi.
Then he decided to stay in India as this victory enabled him to possess vast territory to rule and also fabulous wealth. But to ensure safety of his newly founded kingdom he had to face a powerful Indian king of the times, Rana Sanga, who had also his eyes to capture the territories left by the Sultan. Hence the struggle for supremacy was to be decided in the battle ground but his friends in high positions lost nerves on learning about the bravery of Indian forces and personal prowess of the Rana. Though they collected at the ground of Khanwa yet showed inclination to retire to Kabul in the darkness of the night.
At this step he warned them against the danger involved in leaving the battle ground and fall prey to the pursuer Indians and die at their hands. He called them to join them in the battle field where they can either win or die. If they won, the fruits of Indian wealth and comfort of the empire would be at their feet; conversely if they fell in the fight they would be remembered as GHAZIS.
Thus to boost the lowly morale of his comrades in arms, he used Religious Idioms like Pagan for Rana Sanga, Jehad for the ensuing battle and Ghazis for his army officers. To confirm his own credibility as a true Muslim he enacted the drama of breaking golden and silver pots containing costly wine imported for his use from central Asia.
Thus, Babur who was a great general and seasoned war planner of not only India but of Asia of his times proved himself a fine event manager. He was successful in turning a pure political fight to 'JEHAD' i.e.battle carried out to spread Islam against Rana Sanga who had earlier invited Babur to invade Delhi Sultan.
In this way, Babur the imperialist invader feigned for as 'Jehadi or Mujaheddin' and won this political battle against his formidable enemy. This is an example of sheer misuse of religious feelings roused for attainment of political ends.
After reading the above course of events on the night before the actual battle happened, it is for the historians to draw there own conclusions whether he was an imperialist foreign invader or a Jehadi or mixture of the two !
I stand by findings arrived at by Satish Chandra as quoted by you in one of your earlier posts and also add that Babur was an imperialist invader and determined conqueror to spread his Kabul based empire over India who at times even posed as a Jehadi-which he was not.
I think the issue stands amply clarified and it is for the readers to derive their own conclusions, they may test the verocity of our findings after reading the available and accessible sources on Babur and are free to add their newer findings, if any.
In the meantime, let us move to some other topic which may be relevant to the heading of the title of the thread.
Thanks and regards
Last edited by DrRajpalSingh; October 4th, 2014 at 10:02 AM.
History is best when created, better when re-constructed and worst when invented.
Yeh Bahut ghatia darje ka majaak hai. Dharam ke naam pe nirdosh longo ko marana aur ise dharmikta ka kawach pahanakar aapne swarth purati me lage rahana.
Yehi Babur ne kiya Khanwa ke ladai mein Jahan apane naraz aur dare hue sathi uzbekon ko dharam naam kee afim khila ke yudh me jhhonk diya aur apane takatwara virodhi to haraya!
History is best when created, better when re-constructed and worst when invented.
Kindly participate in the discussion with democratic ethos in mind. I say Babur posed to be 'Jehadi' on the basis of my studies; you on the basis of your findings find him 'true jihadi.'
Can we not agree to disagree a bit with each other on the issue.
If you have regard towards rights and duties of the free citizens of India of free discussion, kindly desist from issuing such type of fatawas : Aapki baat sarasar galat hai.
Last edited by DrRajpalSingh; October 4th, 2014 at 10:54 AM.
History is best when created, better when re-constructed and worst when invented.