This article is aimed to make counter arguments to Dr. Ram Puniyani's youtube post that has been referred in blog (http://chagataikhan.blogspot.de/search/label/Bajrang%20Dal). The arguments Dr. Ram Puniyani make in this video is that "All kings Hindus/Muslims/Christians have destroyed holy places of other religions. The reason to destroy temple is to loot wealth stored in the temple". Furthermore, in this video Dr. Puniyani suggest that Mahmud of Gazni's iconoclasm and destroying holy places was not unique to Hindu places of worship. Mahmud of Gazni also destroyed Muslim places of worship. we will examine these claims made by Dr. Puniyani in this article.
It is not surprising that Dr. Puniyani has chosen to follow Marxist history to build his opinion. Marxist flavor of history is widely accepted as real history of India. Furthermore, Marxist historians have dominated in writing history books for NCERT (National Center for Educational Research and Training) in India.
Lets examine arguments presented in this video one by one. In this video Dr Puniyani mentioned that on the way to Gujarat, Gazni (also known as Gaznavi) had to fight with Muslim king of Multan. Latter than destroyed many mosques in Multan after conquest. In this narrations, Dr. Puniyani omits one important feature that the mosque destroyed by Gazni were those belonging to Ismaili sect of Islam. Sectarian violence is well known among different sects of Islam. Mahmud of Gazni was an orthodox Sunni Muslim[1]. It is, therefore, justified for him to destroy mosques of other sects of Islam. Furthermore, Mr Khaled Ahmed notes in his article published on August 14, 2005 in daily times "... Ghaznavi attacked Multan and Mansura and killed non-orthodox Muslims along with the infidels."[2]. This shows Mahmud of Gazni's religious zeal for Sunni sect of Islam. Dr. Puniyani and other Marxist historians conveniently forgets the fact that Islam is not a monolith religion. In the same article, Mr Khaled Ahmed also notes "Sadly, the Ismailis destroyed another mandir in Multan and built a mosque in its place ...". This emphasis that Muslims freely used their muscle power to destroy Hindu places of worship irrespective of their sects.
In order to undermine religious zeal in demolishing Hindu places of worship, new concepts were introduced. In case of Somnath Temple, a classic case of historical subversion, Mr. Khaled Ahmed quotes acclaimed historian following Marxist approach of historiography, Prof. Romilla Thapar.
"Sunday magazine of Nawa-e-Waqt (17 July 2005) had a write-up derived
from Romilla Thapar saying that before Mehmud Ghaznavi destroyed the
mandir of Somnath in Gujarat, he was told by someone that Somnath was
actually the temple of Manat.
Manat was a goddess of pre-Islamic Arabia whose black statue (unshaped
stone) was taken from Makka and brought to Gujarat. Ghaznavi was
supposed to be following the directive of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) that
the mandir of Manat should be destroyed."
However, the argument, Somath temple was a temple for a Arab goddess of pre-Islamic era, does not hide the Islamic religious zeal of destroying non-Islamic places of worship and iconoclasm. Furthermore, there is no historical evidence that shows Somnath temple was indeed a temple of Arab goddess Manat. It is plausible that Gazni's greed for wealth in Hindu temples may tempt him to employ Hindu generals to direct his army. This employment does not show Gazni's generosity towards infidels.
In another case, Dr. Puniyani makes a failed attempt to portray generosity of Aurangzeb - A Mughal king towards infidels. Aurangzeb has phenomenal record of destroying Hindu temples in India[3]. In another classic example of historical subversion, Dr. Puniyani narrates a story of Aurangzeb's journey to Kolkata with 44 Hindu kings. This story was first appeared in a book, The Feathers
and the Stones, authored by Dr. P. Sitaramayya. This story has been discussed in detail by Dr. K. Elst [4]. It is interesting to note that there exist no authentic record of Aurangzeb made any visit to Bengal during his life time[4].
Historical subversion by intellectuals is knowingly performed to avoid communal disturbance in today's globalized environment. However, Historical subversion leads to gross injustice to natives of any geographical region. It not only undermines atrocities perpetrated by foreign armies but also justifies their actions. How can one justify unprovoked invasion, loot and plunder of Mahmud of Gazni in Gujarat?
Note: The sources depicted as Anonymous refers to either multiple author(s) in case of Wikipedia or unknown who present collection of historical recordings by noted historians in case of reference [3].
References
[1] Anonymous, (2011) "Mahmud of Ghazni", http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmud_of_Ghazni
[2] Ahmed, K., (2005) "WORD FOR WORD: Was Somnath a temple of goddess Manat?", http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_14-8-2005_pg3_3
[3] Anonymous, (2009) "Temple Destruction by Aurangzeb (Proof Documents)", http://aurangazeb.wordpress.com/2009/04/09/temple-destruction-by-arangzeb-proof-documents/
[4] Elst, K., (2002) "Why did
Aurangzeb Demolish the Kashi Vishvanath?", http://koenraadelst.bharatvani.org/articles/ayodhya/kashivishvanath.html
Good blog. I always felt that the history was molded in our school books in a clever way by neglecting the actual facts.. Hence the need to revamp the school history books. Slowly people are realizing it.
ReplyDeleteRecently when I have come across this guy Ram Puniyani and felt how conveniently once again they are molding it and spoon feeding general public in a different dimension.Clever way of making us fools for decades, once again..
Your blog tried to explain this very well , in brief. Though I read it very late, I should appreciate your effort and article.
Dr Ram Puniyani's thesis and presentation seems to support his theory of past historical events with the current statistical matrix. Because, any king, who is in power and who would destroy a Hindu temple of worship would want to wipe out the that faith also by using forced conversion methods or by so called "ethnic cleansing", But the fact that current population of India is about 85% hindus and 15% muslims indicate that a destroyer of temples did not do ethnic cleansing.
DeleteAnd if he just wanted to destroy temples then even his 44 hindu generals and ministers or whatever their post was, would have opposed and made some attempts to kill him, since they were located at a close proximity. But instead, they supported the king in the battles. Even the mughal battles, the army on both sides was mixed. Shivaji had muslim generals and soldiers also. On Mughal side, Afzal Khan had hindu generals and soldiers. So, it can be logically, sensibly, impartially, but unbiasdly, concluded that the battles had the roots and real motivation of territorial annexation, not religious enforcement. (Forget bout historians or Puniyani or others. We can read the past and see the present and think with an open mind.
Absolutely false information in the blog. I dont think Vihang Bhatt has any credentials to comment on the historic events mentioned in the blog. The historians like Romila Thapar have painstakingly researched these events and then have come to conclusions.
ReplyDeleteEven Hindu kings destroyed temples of rival kings when they conquered their kingdom.It was done to humiliate the defeated king and to communicate to the people of the conquered kingdom that there is a new king now.In some cases the hindu kings used to take the idols from the temples as war trophies.
There is no need to look at these events from a religious angle. As there were so many small kingdoms and each one trying to expand its influence, these events should be seen from the persepctive of power struggle.
Some historians deliberately try to prove a specific theory or understanding,for example aryan invasion by romilla thapar or destruction of temples by aurangzeb and other muslim rulers as non bigoted act purely drove by imperialistic motives by irfan habib
Delete,but history has a different say on these issues also ,like AIT has been nailed to grave by scientific studies and destruction of temples can be shown by the actual orders of aurangzeb preserved in museums,also muslim rulers followed and imposed islam strictly on self and sundry which is quite conspicuous in different historical texts scattered throughout.
Go to sikh libraries u will encounter some bitter truth.
Thanks Vihang for a well referred article . In the comments section I see the contradiction that the author is supportin Dr. Punwani based on studies made by Romilla Thapar . Same Romilla Thapar was on most of the educational committees which framed the textbooks . These are the same textbooks that Dr. Ram Punwani says taught us distorted history . Am I missing something ?
ReplyDeleteDr. Ram Puniyani : He is one of the extraordinary scholar whom we
ReplyDeleteneed from the core of every heart. In my opinion his every kind of work is supposed to be translated in various languages ,so that more and more mass can get the essence of such thought.
Dear Dr. Puniyani
ReplyDeleteHave you read Hindu spiritual books like Veda and upnisad.What is your comments about the Hinduism.You are giving a lecture on the basis of some books written by historians influence by Western culture.Can you explain why your family father was forced to leave Pakistan after division. Explain some hard fact about the atrocities carried by Muslim during partitions of our country.