Fwd: Whitewashing of Indian History -- 3 washes: Nithin Sridhar

[Guest guest]

IndiaArchaeology , kalyan97 <kalyan97 wrote:

 

http://hindutva97.blogspot.com/2008/05/whitewashing-of-indian-history-3-washes.h\

tml

 

Whitewashing of Indian History – 3 washes: Nithin Sridhar (May 1, 2008)

 

The history of India has been whitewashed and distorted, first by European

rulers, and after independence by eminent historians of India and their

supporters the Leftists, Seculars and self-claimed Progressives of

India to

meet their own ends. They have painted the pre-Islamic invasion period

as a

Dark Age and have glorified the Islamic period to be very peaceful and

prosperous.

 

Ram Swarup says, * " Marxists have taken to rewriting Indian history on a

large scale and it has meant its systematic falsification. They have a

dogmatic view of history and for them the use of any history is to prove

their dogma. Their very approach is hurtful to truth…. The Marxists'

contempt for India, particularly the India of religion, culture and

philosophy, is deep and theoretically fortified. It exceeds the contempt

ever shown by the most die-hard imperialists. " *1 Some of the common claims

of these eminent historians are:

 

1] The Aryan Invasion Theory is true2

 

2] Large scale destruction of Buddhists and Jain temples was done by

Hindus

in pre-Islamic India.3

 

3] The Muslim rulers were religiously tolerant and Islamic rule was

prosperous. The eminent historians deny the destruction of Hindu

temples or

the killing of Hindus at the hands of Muslim rulers. They also deny the

religious motive behind the killing of Hindus at the hands of Muslim

rulers.

4

 

Footnotes:

 

1 Indian Express, January 15, 1989, quoted in book " Hindu Temples: What

Happened to Them Vol. 1 " by Sita Ram Goel

 

2 For example, JNU historian Romilla Thapar.[Article titled " Romila Thapar

Defends the Aryan Invasion Theory! " by Vishal Agarwal published here-

http://www.india-forum.com/articles/60/1 ]

 

3 In letter published in *The Times of India* dated October 2, 1986,

Romilla

Thapar had stated that handing over of Sri Rama's and Sri Krishna's

birthplaces to the Hindus, and of disused mosques to the Muslims

raises the

question of the limits to the logic of restoration of religious sites. How

far back do we go? Can we push this to the restoration of Buddhist and

Jain

monuments destroyed by Hindus? Or of the pre-Hindu animist shrines? [

Quoted

in book- *Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 2 The Islamic

Evidence*by Sita Ram Goel]

4 In his book Medival India [NCERT 2000], Satish Chandra writes- " The raid

into India (by Timur) was a plundering raid, and its motive was to

seize the

wealth accumulated by the sultans of Delhi over the last 200 years… Timur

then entered Delhi and sacked it without mercy, large number of

people, both

Hindu and Muslim, as well as women and children losing their lives. " , but

Timur repeatedly states in his memoirs, the *Tuzuk-i-Timuri*, that he

had a

two-fold objective in invading Hindustan. " The first was to war with the

infidels, " and thereby acquire, " some claim to reward in the life to

come. "

The second motive was " that the army of Islam might gain something by

plundering the wealth and valuables of the infidels. " He further says

" Excepting the quarter of the saiyids, the ulema and other Musulmans, the

whole city was sacked. "

 

Read more...

http://hindutva97.blogspot.com/2008/05/whitewashing-of-indian-history-3-washes.h\

tml

 

--- End forwarded message ---