Ranjit Singh subdued NWFP and put Peshawar directly under his control (Hari Singh Nalwa wa governor) Kabul was paying tribute to Sarkar Khalsa of Lahore Darbar in 1824. Ranjit Singh died in 1838 and his kingdom collapsed after British defeated the Sarkar Khalsa in series of six battles starting in 1845 and then in 1849.
Why don't Indian government put this in Indian education (primary, secondary or others)?
No map that you posted here shows that Sarkar Khalsa ruled from 1799 till 1849 in the area as large as Beus till Khyber and Kashmir till Sindh (In this period Kashmir was always under Sarkar Khalsa and paid tribute). Even General Zorawar
Singh who got Leh, Ladakh, Gilgit Baltistan under Sarkar Khalsa issued his orders for tribute "protectorate of Sarkar Khalsa of Lahore"
Government of India cannot upset the PEACEFUL you know who.
I saw a documentary on the History or Discovery or Natgeog Channel.
In the early or mid Fifties in South India an underground storage area was located which contained Idols from Temples that had been destroyed by the PEACEFUL you know who 200-400 Years earlier.
When the people of the Area wanted to build New Temples to house these Idols the Government persuaded them not to do so but distribute the Idols amongst the various Temples functioning in the Area.
The government opined that if new Temples were built to House these Idols then people might spew their hurt feelings on the PEACEFUL you know who.
Such is our Secular Government.
Never mind : Raaj Kareyga Khalsa â Aki Rahey Na Ko.
Until recently history books were written by JNU
an alliance of muslims and marxists
In these books, Guru Teg Bahadur is portrayed as a bandit
The Jats under Surajmal as dacoits and so on
This started with Gandhi who to appease muslims, way back in 1920, called
Rana Pratap, Guru Gobind Singh and Shivaji as misguided violent people
The noted psec Dilip Padgaonkar of Times of India in an interview with
Naipaul says he is afraid to tell true history since enraged hindus may take vengeance on muslims
The BJP under MM.Joshi has introduced new NCERT books
which tell the truth
I suggest you get a copy from Delhi
The psecs are protesting this as 'Saffronisation of history books"
<!--QuoteBegin-sbajwa+Jan 20 2004, 04:16 PM-->QUOTE(sbajwa @ Jan 20 2004, 04:16 PM)<!--QuoteEBegin--> No map that you posted here shows that Sarkar Khalsa ruled from 1799 till 1849 in the area as large as Beus till Khyber and Kashmir till Sindh (In this period Kashmir was always under Sarkar Khalsa and paid tribute). Even General Zorawar Singh who got Leh, Ladakh, Gilgit Baltistan under Sarkar Khalsa issued his orders for tribute "protectorate of Sarkar Khalsa of Lahore" <!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
sbajwa: Do you links to maps of northern India under the different sikh gurus and/or rulers? I'm especially interested in the various campaigns of Nalwa.
<!--QuoteBegin-G.Subramaniam+Jan 21 2004, 07:44 AM-->QUOTE(G.Subramaniam @ Jan 21 2004, 07:44 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin-->
The noted psec Dilip Padgaonkar of Times of India in an interview with Naipaul says he is afraid to tell true history since enraged hindus may take vengeance on muslims
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<b>G.Subramaniam :</b>
Is it possible to post a link about Dilip Padgaonkar's interview with Naipaul?
I do believe you but would like to have it for my records.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->sbajwa: Do you links to maps of northern India under the different sikh gurus and/or rulers? I'm especially interested in the various campaigns of Nalwa.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sikh Gurus did not ruled any territory people called them " Sacha Padishah" i.e. "True kings". Guru Hargobind the sixth guru who militarize Sikhs when he ordered them to come to his prescence with horses, swords and guns and not with food, money, etc. He organized a small army (700 foot and 300 horse) that protected Amritsar until a small skirmish broke out between Jehangir and his people in the vicinity of Lahore/Amritsar. After this and series of battles Guru Hargobind was arrested and jailed in the fort of Gwalior from where he was released when Jehangir became sick and someone reminded him that the cause of his sickness could be the arrest of a Sikh saint Guru Hargobind., Guru Hargobind refused to be freed without the 52 other prisoners lodged in the same Gwalior fort that is now used by Indian Army.
Then Guru Tegh Bahadur was martyred at Delhi, Guru Gobind Singh's four sons and his mother (father having been martyrd earlier) were also martyred. He alone while travelling to south was attacked by two Pathans (set loose on him by Governor of Sarhind) attacked and wounded him, he breathed his last at Nanded (1708).
Around the same time Banda Singh Bahadur came to Punjab/Haryana/UP/Rajathan area and started organizing people against Mughals. Their bands looted mughals treasury and ultimately the army of banda bahadur became so large that he defeated Sarhind (the mughal governorship) without any big guns and with spears,swords and muskets and started the first Sikh state. He told all farmers in this area to only pay 10% if they wish to his cause and totally eradicated Zamindari system of Mughals.
Banda sieged Lahore several times but could not broke through the fort since he didn't had any guns. Mughals got their forces togeter at Delhi and organized a huge effort to defeat Banda, he was arrested along with 760 Sikhs and martyred at Delhi in 1716. The people of Punjab, Haryana, Rajasthan, UP by this time had tasted freedom under Banda and they created small bands of Sikhs, villagers called them "Sardars" i.e. "Leaders"., and gave them rations, etc while they raided Mughals and corrupt Zamindars.
In 1724 Nadir Shah attacked India and defeated Mughals, this created a huge vaccum in the area between Indus and Jamuna. The Sikh Sardars organized themselves under two bands (Buddha i.e. old and Taruna i.e. young). These two bands worked to free slaves from Nadir Shah, snatched back the looted property from Nadir Shah. both of these bands were organized under a Sikh named Kapur Singh Virk, he was a person of extraordinary qualities. Thus
Mughals sort to create a truce with Sikhs and gave Sikhs three villages (amritsar district) under Kapur Singh making him a Nawab. But this truce was soon broken when small holocaust broke out and Sikhs were again arrested and massacred, at this time it is said that price of a dead sikh was more than the price of a live horse. At horses market Lahore over 40,000 Sikhs were martyred., this place was later renamed as Shaheedganj (and that's what it is called now) by Sikh sardars.
From 1750s-1760s Ahmad Shah Abdali attacked India several times, the first was the battle at Panipat against Marathas., then the next eight times he attacked Punjabi to subdue Sikhs., each time he destroyed Golden Temple but Sikhs came back each time. Sikhs after death of Kapur Singh Virk were organized under another Sikh named Jassa Singh Ahluwalia (who was adopted by the widow of Guru Gobind Singh and raised as a Gurusikh), he was
the first literate Sikh after Banda and he created 12 Sikh Misls (misl means equal bands)., these 12 bands were given a distinct area to rule and thus from Indus to Jamuna the area came under Sikhs., here is their jurisdiction
Misl Bhangi = Sialkote, Gujrat, Multan, Amritsar, Tarn tarn and Lahore. (Bhangi since they were addicted to Bhang)
Misl Shukarchakia = Gujranwala area (Shukar means Small, Chak means petty tract of land, Ranjit Singh's forefathers from this misl)
Misl Shaheedan = Malwa part, Ludhiana, Bhatinda, etc.
Misl Phulkian = Patiala (later Patiala state)
Misl Kanhaiya = Batala and Gurdaspur area (under Jai Singh Kanhaiya so called since he was handsome like God Krishna)
Misl Ahluwalia = Jalandhar and Kapurthala (later Kapurthala State)
Misl Dallewalia = Rahon, Mahatpur, Nawanshaher and Phillaur
Misl Singhpura = The territories held were Jalandhar, and the villages of Banur, Ghanauli, Manauli and Bharatgarh, in the Malwa (Ludhiana).
Misl Karorasinghia = Hoshiarpur and then under Baghel Singh Dhaliwal they occupied all the area upto Delhi (all the Sikh Gurdwaras in Delhi were created by Baghel Singh in 1780s)
Misl Nakai = Lahore and South of Lahore.
Misl Nishaanwala = Ambala, Ropar, Anandpur Sahib and current day Chandigarh.
Misl Ramgarhia = Their territory was parts of Amritsar, Qadian, Batala and Sri Hargobindpur, in the Bari doab and Miani, Sarih, and Urmur Tanda in the Jalandhar Doab.
So in 1798 when Zaman Shah (son of Abdali) tried to invade India again, Ranjit Singh (then 16 years old) in the Sarbatt Khalsa (congregation of all Sikhs assembled to solve the issue of this attack) told everyone to face Zaman Shah straight head on instead of a Guerilla warfare and he himself led the forces., defeating Jahan-Dad Khan the advance general of Zaman Shah. It is said that one night Ranjit Singh got up on the Mussumam Burj (a high tower next to the fort of Lahore) and publicly challenged Zaman Shah to come fight if he has any guts. Zaman Shah retured to Kabul with Sikhs chasing him all the way and threw his guns in the river indus in a hurry so that Sikhs could not get to them. Ranjit Singh got 3 guns out of the river and one such gun is still installed in a crossing at Lahore.
Ranjit Singh declared himself Maharaja in 1799 and created Sarkar Khalsa. Next he got all the misls together assimiliated into his forces (except for Ahluwalia and Phulkian) he attacked Kasur and defeated its pathan ruler, multan was attacked next in 1810s. In 1820s he turned north beyond Rawalpindi area and across the river indus (Sikhs in North were already ruling upto River Indus). Hari Singh Nalwa who had immpressed Ranjit Singh with his bravery (having killed a tiger with a small sword) was given a charge of a whole regiment called SherDil Rajaman (This regiment was later absorbed into British and in 1947 was given to Pakistan while in India it was disbanded, in Pakistan it is called 5 Punjab). The Sherdils of Hari Singh Nalwa first fought Pathans and Afghanis in the battle of Naushera in 1824. In this battle a Sikh fort right next to river attock (across river attock) was sieged by Afghanis and Sikhs desperetly signalled Maharaja Ranjit singh for help. Ranjit Singh decided to attack the Pathans and sent Hari Singh and his son Sher Singh with advance columns. Battle was fought Sikhs won but after a huge loss, Akali Phula Singh who was chasing Afghanis went so far behind them that he was murdred. Then Hari Singh Nalwa's platoon Sher Dil Rajaman was given charge to subdue the people across the river indus. It is said that he was so ruthless that he and Sherdils tracked to the villages and give them two choice? tribute to Sarkar Khalsa or death., if they refused the tribute the village was sorrounded and burned., any villagers running out were shot to death. He did this to 2-3 villages and soon the whole area upto Peshawar was paying him tribute and came under him. He occupied Peshawar and started preparing for operations across the Khyber pass.
The real story even before the capture of Peshawar and Kashmir is that Dost Mohammad Khan (descendant of Abdali) was caputred by treachory by the Mughal governor of Kashmir and put in Jail. His wife approached Ranjit Singh to get him freed., Ranjit Singh agreed on annual tribute as well as Kohinoor Diamond. Hari Singh Nalwa, Ranjit Singh, Misr Diwanchand and Sher Singh led Khalsa troops to Kashmir, occupying it and freeing dost mohammad khan, who was thankful to Ranjit Singh and giving him annual tribute as well as Kohinoor diamond, Sarkar Khalsa flag was flown at Kabul and Srinagar as long as Dost Mohammad Ruled. Dost mohammad khan was shunned by his fellow pathans for giving tributes to Kafir and thus Ranjit Singh had to fight the battle of Naushera and occupy the territories across Indus. Initially he had some muslim governors for this territory but later he gave it ti Hari Singh Nalwa and told him to do anything to get tribute.
Hari Singh Nalwa created small series of forts from Peshawar all the way to Khyber pass, each such fort had provisions for 100+ soldiers and was well stocked and defended. He and Ranjit Singh assembled the army in the vicinity of Peshawar and got Kabul under their protection, the descendants of Abdali started paying tribute to Ranjit Singh. By this time Ranjit Singh's army had several european generals (mostly french who after Napolean's defeat were fleeing from Europe he had no british general though). Such was the terror of Hari Singh Nalwa in this area that even today people remember him. Nalwa was one day inspecting the fort of Jamrud (close to Khyber pass) when he was hit by a sniper's bullet. He was brought inside the fort of Jamrud before dying he told his comrades to not disclose his death until Ranjit Singh is informed and they are well defended. His body was kept in the courtyard for three days in a sitting position which Pathans could watch from far away. They didn't attacked the fort of Jamrud fearing Hari Singh Nalwa.
So. the whole current NWFP and some parts of Northern Baluchistan were paying tribue to Ranjit Singh., Southern Balochistan and Sindh was already occupied by British.
Viren. You are welcome. I do not know why India has not honoured Ranjit Singh and/or Hari Singh Nalwa (except for Amar Chitra Katha books).
The Sherdil Paltan (platoon) that was originally calld Sher Dil Rajaman and was put together by Ranjit Singh (Cavalry) which was later made a batallion number
5/14 of Punjab regiment under British (served in both the world wars in middle east as well as europe)., after independence this platoon (sherdil) was
given over to Pakistan while Hindu/Sikh soldiers of this regiment were assimiliated into other battalion of Punjab and armoured regiments. Funny thing
is that the regiment that was once started and led by Hari Singh Nalwa is now part of Pakistan's Punjab regiment still calling themselves as SHERDILs with 100% muslim soldiers.
sbajwa,
Nehru and Indra and other Cong leaders tried to project secular India by suprassing History of Sikhs/Punjabis, Marathas, Dravids and others by appeasing Muslims and projecting only twisted Islamic history which only talks about buildings and park build by Islamic kings but hiding Hindu holocaust.
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Nehru and Indra and other Cong leaders tried to project secular India by suprassing History of Sikhs/Punjabis, Marathas, Dravids and others by appeasing Muslims and projecting only twisted Islamic history which only talks about buildings and park build by Islamic kings but hiding Hindu holocaust.
<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yeah. That is so true. Have you ever driven from Chandigarh to Ludhiana? close to the satluj canal there is a one museaum that houses the artifacts excavated from the closeby archeological sites. I saw it and was amazed by the wealth of information but THE PUNJAB GOVERNMENT BUGGER WHO WAS POSTED IN THIS MUSEAUM WON'T LET ME TAKE ANY PICTURES AND/OR MAKE A VIDEO (against their policy). If you have seen Chanakaya (TV serial) the bulidings, arches, temples, idols, utensils, instruments, etc are all there but people don't know about this. It is only 1-2 hour drive from Chandigarh. The site is as old as Harappa and Mohanjodaro excavations.
Even funny thing about Nehru and Indira is that they are Kashmiri Brahmins while one from their biradari (kashmiri pundits) Kirpa Singh Dutt who led delegation to Guru Tegh Bahadur to stop persecution in Kashmir became Khalsa and attained martyrdom fighting mughals at Chamkaur (December/January 1704/05 A.D). Nobody in India knows about him. How about Bhai Nand Lal Goya who was persecuted by Aurungzeb for having too much "Quranic" knowledge and thus must convert he was given shelter by Guru Gobind Singh at Anandpur and he later wrote many books for him.
Indian history is glorious because Islamic hordes failed to achieved their objective., India assimiliated them and protected its core set of beliefs. Muslims never ventured out to rule countryside only ruled cities., up until the rule of Aurungzeb. It was under Aurungzeb that most of the current day Pakistan's Punjab was converted to Islam., earlier it was always majority Hindu.
There was always protest and revenge attacks against Mughals while our movies and books glorify Mughal culture as "peaceful emperors" For example when Mughals banned Holi celebrations in Delhi (during aurungzeb's rule) Hindus revolted and at last Aurungzeb had to give in. Similarly after Guru Tegh Bahadur's martydom at Delhi one Sikh threw two bricks when he saw Augungzeb boat (Takht-e-Rawan) in the nearby river Jamuna, one of which hit and injured Aurungzeb., this sikh was never caught by the Mughal soldiers.
Indian history is glorious because Islamic hordes failed to achieved their objective., India assimiliated them and protected its core set of beliefs. Muslims never ventured out to rule countryside only ruled cities., up until the rule of Aurungzeb. It was under Aurungzeb that most of the current day Pakistan's Punjab was converted to Islam., earlier it was always majority Hindu.
----------------
Can you give some details
- According to some source - 15% of Punjab was converted by 1400-1500
Aurangzeb was from 1650-1707 and he increased in to 50%.
I am only speculating from my knowledge of Sikh history and Sikh sources.
Guru Nanak Dev in his Babarvani writes about atrocities of Babar when he attacked India in 1520s. At that time Muslims in that part of India (Lahore, Sheikhupura) were in a minority judging from the fact that earlier in Guru Nanak dev's village Talwandii, that is now called Nankana Sahib there was only one muslim family Rai Bular (who owned the village) and from close by villages there was another muslim (low caste ministrel mirasi) who later became a Sikh named Mardana.
Simple facts like Khokhars, Chatthas, Virks, Chauhan and other Rajput/Jutts who were in Punjab were always hindus before Aurungzeb and it was due to money, land, women that these guys were converted. Khokhars who were valiant Rajputs that all muslim invaders dreaded are almost all converted to Islam now.
Punjab was softened by the concept of Punj Peers by the sufi saints and then when there was no difference between Hindus and Muslims, Hindus became Muslims for such flimsy reason as "meat is allowed to eat","I can marry four times", etc. It was slow before Akbar but after Jehangir (when Naqashbandi Islam took over that was precursor to Deobandi sect) it passed all limits. Till 1947 Punjab was divided into Hindu/sikh villages and Muslim villages and cities had separate Muslim Mohallas. Lahore even today have Gawalmandi (gawala mandi for milk sellers) that had huge temples and shivalas (not any more).
Earlier (1200 A.D.) Muslim sufi saint Baba Sheikh Farid Shakarganj wrote in a mixture of Sanskrit/Punjabi and not using Arabic and/or Persian., though he migrated from Iran. Here is a sample of what he wrote 800 years ago
From Guru Granth Sahib
"Roti meri Kaath ki, laavan meri bhukh"
"jeena khadi choprian, ghane sahenge dukh"
now that is a chaste Punjabi. it says
"My bread is made out of wood and that satisfy my hunger"
"The one's who ate bread and butter will suffer immense sorrow"
meaning that people who use vicious ways to earn money will loose their peace of mind.
800 years ago a foreigner who ventured into Punjab learned punjabi and spoke a chaste punjabi without using any urdu/persian/arabian words., that tells me a lot about that Punjab. It is not same any more.
I am sorry there is no data to validate what I am saying but believe me before Aurungzeb all the area upto river Indus was a majority Hindu.
Padgaonkar: My colleague, the cartoonist, Mr R K Laxman, and I recently travelled thousands of miles in Maharashtra. In many places we found that noses and breasts had been chopped off from the statues of female deities. Quite evidently this was a sign of conquest. The Hindutva forces point to this too to stir up emotions. The problem is: how do you prevent these stirred-up emotions from spilling over and creating fresh tensions?
"An area of awakening", interview by Dileep Padgaonkar, The Times of India, July 18, 1993
Padgaonkar: The collapse of the Soviet Union and the subsequent rise of Islamic nations in Central Asia, the Salman Rushdie affair, similar harassment by fundamentalists of liberal Muslim intellectuals in India: all these factors taken together persuaded some forces to argue that a divided Hindu society cannot counteract Islamic fundamentalism.
Naipaul: I don't see it quite in that way. The things you mentioned are quite superficial. What is happening in India is a new, historical awakening. Gandhi used religion in a way as to marshal people for the independence cause. People who entered the independence movement did it because they felt they would earn individual merit.
Today, it seems to me that Indians are becoming alive to their history. Romila Thapar's book on Indian history is a Marxist attitude to history which in substance says: there is a higher truth behind the invasions, feudalism and all that. The correct truth is the way the invaders looked at their actions. They were conquering, they were subjugating. And they were in a country where people never understood this.
Only now are the people beginning to understand that there has been a great vandalising of India. Because of the nature of the conquest and the nature of Hindu society such understanding had eluded Indians before.
What is happening in India is a mighty creative process. Indian intellectuals, who want to be secure in their liberal beliefs, may not understand what is going on, especially if these intellectuals happen to be in the United States. But every other Indian knows precisely what is happening: deep down he knows that a larger response is emerging even if at times this response appears in his eyes to be threatening.
However, we are aware of one of the more cynical forms of liberalism: it admits that one fundamentalism is all right in the world. This is the fundamentalism they are really frightened of: Islamic fundamentalism. Its source is Arab money. It is not intellectually to be taken seriously etc. I don't see the Hindu reaction purely in terms of one fundamentalism pitted against another. The reaction is a much larger response... Mohamedan fundamentalism is essentially negative, a protection against a world it desperately wishes to join. It is a last ditch fight against the world.
But the sense of history that the Hindus are now developing is a new thing. Some Indians speak about a synthetic culture: this is what a defeated people always speak about. The synthesis may be culturally true. But to stress it could also be a form of response to intense persecution.
P: This new sense of history as you call it is being used in India in very many different ways. My worry is that somewhere down the line this search for a sense of history might yet again turn into hostility toward something precious which came to use from the West: the notion of the individual......
N: This is where the intellectuals have a duty to perform. The duty is the use of the mind. It is not enough for intellectuals to chant their liberal views or to abuse what is happening. To use the mind is to reject the grosser aspects of this vast emotional upsurge.
P: How did you react to the Ayodhya incident?
N: Not as badly, as the others did, I am afraid. The people who say that there was no temple there are missing the point. Babar, you must understand, had contempt for the country he had conquered. And his building of that mosque was an act of contempt for the country.
In Turkey, they turned the Church of Santa Sophia into a mosque. In Nicosia churches were converted into mosques too. The Spaniards spent many centuries re-conquering their land from Muslim invaders. So these things have happened before and elsewhere.
In Ayodhya the construction of a mosque on a spot regarded as sacred by the conquered population was meant as an insult. It was meant as an insult to an ancient idea, the idea of Ram which was two or three thousand years old.
P: The people who climbed on top of these domes and broke them were not bearded people wearing saffron robes and with ash on their foreheads. They were young people clad in jeans and tee-shirts.
N: One needs to understand the passion that took them on top of the domes. The jeans and the tee-shirts are superficial. The passion alone is real. You can't dismiss it. You have to try to harness it.
Hitherto in India the thinking has come from the top. I spoke earlier about the state of the country: destitute, trampled upon, crushed. You then had the Bengali renaissance, the thinkers of the 19th century. But all this came from the top. What is happening now is different. The movement is now from below.
P: My colleague, the cartoonist, Mr R K Laxman, and I recently travelled thousands of miles in Maharashtra. In many places we found that noses and breasts had been chopped off from the statues of female deities. Quite evidently this was a sign of conquest. The Hindutva forces point to this too to stir up emotions. The problem is: how do you prevent these stirred-up emotions from spilling over and creating fresh tensions?
N: I understand. But it is not enough to abuse them or to use that fashionable word from Europe: fascism. There is a big, historical development going on in India. Wise men should understand it and ensure that it does not remain in the hands of fanatics. Rather they should use it for the intellectual transformation of India.
Because of this large scale Punjab conversion - Hindu political power became weak in the heartland and could not raise to defeat the moghuls in the indus plains after 1600.
Only when the moghul dynasty withered away the maratas and hindus could come together.
Sikhs later under khalsa were able to create the political union.
<span style='font-size:14pt;line-height:100%'>The weakness of the political union of the non-muslims is the key deciding factor in every major battle and opposition to the political islam.</span>
To give an idea the 1941 census for british India
showed a population of 28 million for United Punjab vs 400 million for British India
Out of this 12 million were hindus and sikhs and 16 million were muslims
In east punjab it was 4 mil muslims vs 8 mil non-muslims
In west punjab it was 4 mil non-muslims vs 12 mil muslims
The demographic growth in Pakistani Punjab is because the british built large scale irrigation in west punjab
Indirectly this british action is leading to islamisation of India
How is it that only the Israelis know that World War III started on September
11, 2001?
By Nissan Ratzlav-Katz
Published Thursday, 22 January 2004
They're not targeting Jews, Christians, and the West only, in case you didn't
know. Centuries ago, conservative Muslims determined that they would establish
caliphate hegemony over India as well. More than a year ago, Arutz-Sheva's op-ed
editor Nissan Ratzlav-Katz wrote an excellent executive summary of Islamic
attempts to conquer non-Muslim India over the last thirteen hundred years. The
original essay was entitled Indians, Jews and Islam. With his permission, we've
reprinted it here.
Indians, Jews and Islam
By Nissan Ratzlav-Katz, Israel
December 18, 2002
The vast expansion of the Islamic empire from the mid 600's through World War I
was primarily achieved with the persuasive power of the sword. The first victims
of the Mohammedan belief that Islam must subjugate all infidel faith communities
were the Jewish and non-Islamic tribes inhabiting the Arabian peninsula during
Mohammed's lifetime. The story of the conquest and exploitation of these tribes
is both commanded and recorded in the Quran, Islam's central text. As Islam
expanded throughout the Middle East, the local Christians and other non-Moslems
struggled to preserve their communal honor under denigrating Islamic laws, and
were often subjected to murder and collective extortion. In Europe, the Moslems
eventually brought even Spain under the crescent moon and the scimitar. In North
Africa, the native Berber tribes put up a valiant struggle against the Arab
Moslem invaders, under the leadership of a Jewish woman, Queen Kahena. However,
an Islamic commander ultimately succe
ssfully employed a divide-and-conquer approach, and 50,000 Berbers and Jews
were killed when the conquering Arabs offered them the familiar choice of Islam
or death.
However, one nation suffered the most brutal depravities in order to "persuade"
its members to accept Islam - the Indians. This year, November 24, according to
the Sikh Nanakshahi calendar, or December 8 in the Hindu Bikrami calendar,
marks the commemoration of the martyrdom of Sikh guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib. The
traditional story of his encounter with Islam will undoubtedly strike most
Jewish readers as reminiscent of the ancient and modern persecutions suffered by
the Jews under other empires, including the Hellenist Syrians of the
just-completed Chanukah holiday.
In 1669, after having taken the throne of Mughal (Islamic) India by imprisoning
his father and killing his brothers, Alamgir ("world-shaker") Aurangzeb
implemented policies designed to convert all the peoples of India to Islam. He
issued orders to all his governors and officers throughout India to use all
possible means to accomplish his jihad for Allah. Non-Moslems were not given
jobs, additional taxes were imposed on them, torture and murder were used as
tools of persuasion, and even Moslems who stepped in to defend their neighbors
were put to death. Many temples were destroyed and were replaced by mosques -
similar to the policy implemented by the earlier Moslem ruler Babar in Ayodhya,
which has come to the fore with modern Hindu nationalists demanding the
restoration of the temple and the elimination of the currently existing mosque.
Aurangzeb's policy of forced conversion began in the Kashmir region of northwest
India, where Islamist terrorists today continue his tradit
ions and slaughter Hindus and Buddhists at prayer, on the roads and in their
beds.
Eventually, the Hindus of the Kashmir region approached the leader of the more
militant Sikhs, Tegh Bahadur Sahib, and asked for his help. Tegh Bahadur told
the Kashmiri Brahmin delegation to inform Aurangzeb that if he could convert the
Sikh guru Sahib to Islam, then all the Hindus and Sikhs would convert as well.
When the guru was eventually taken into custody and brought before the Moslem
ruler in Delhi, he was offered one of three options: 1) Accept Islam and be
given part of the empire and all the comforts of life; 2) Show a miracle proving
holiness and be released; or, 3) Be prepared to face death. The Sikh leader
replied: 1) "I cherish my faith and I am not prepared to give it up. Forcing
someone to give up one's faith is not only a sin but rather a deadly sin and
such interference is against the principles of a true religion"; 2) "Showing a
miracle is against the will of Waheguru and is act of shame and cowardice. The
real miracle is to be truthful and attain union wi
th Waheguru"; and, 3) "The threat of physical death ossesses no terror for me.
You make your preparations and you shall also see the miracle."
Needless to say, Aurangzeb decided to try more brutal methods to force Tegh
Bahadur Sahib to accept Islam. The Sikh was kept in chains and imprisoned for
three days in an iron cage designed to be shorter than the prisoner's height,
with sharp spikes pointing inwards, so that the victim could neither stand, nor
sit, nor lean against the walls of the cage. The Moslems then moved on to
exploiting Tegh Bahadur's humanity by cruelly putting three of his disciples to
death in front of him. The torturous deaths need not be described here, but, as
a Jew, it is interesting to note the statement made in traditional Sikh sources
regarding this incident: "the three disciples died with the name of God on their
lips...." Many, many Jewish martyrs died the same way - at the hands of pagans,
Moslems, Christians and atheists.
Ultimately, Aurangzeb failed to convert Tegh Bahadur Sahib to Islam, and he
ordered the execution of the stubborn Sikh. On November 11, 1675, Bahadur Sahib
was executed in the Chandni Chowk in Delhi. At the site of the execution stands
Gurdwara Sis Ganj, commemorating the supreme martyrdom offered by a Sikh
believer in the face of 17th century Islamic jihad.
Jews, Hindus, Christians, Buddhists and others today face a reinvigorated jihad
mentality, which, as the original version, has its roots in the Arab world. The
Jews are again a focal point of the Islamic rage, as we have established a state
of our own in the midst of what remains of the Moslem empire; however, we are
far from alone as targets, as New Yorkers, Balinese, Indians and Muscovites all
know first hand. The threat posed by al-Qaeda, Hizbullah, Hamas,
Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jamaat Islamiyya and their ilk is emphatically not a result of
India's Kashmir policy, US intervention in the Gulf, Jewish settlement in Gaza,
or any other cause to which the Islamists hook their cart. The threat must be
recognized for what it is - an imperialist war of conquest for the sake of
Islam. If we fail to look that threat in the eye, we may one day be forced, like
the Kashmiri Brahmin, to desperately search for men like Tegh Bahadur or the
hero of Chanukah, Judah Maccabee, and there is no guara
ntee that they will be found.
