09-01-2006, 01:59 AM
<!--QuoteBegin-Bharatvarsh+Aug 31 2006, 05:34 AM-->QUOTE(Bharatvarsh @ Aug 31 2006, 05:34 AM)<!--QuoteEBegin--><!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Hindu monks told him (who is a king of entire Kashmir) that they cannot make him a Hindu as they cannot decide what his "Jaati" would be.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually the Muslim chronicle "Baharistan-i-Shahi" of the 16th century gives a very different view of what happened (it actually gives a view that is contrary to the currently held mass opinion), here is what it says:
.......
[right][snapback]56524[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bharatvarsh,
Muslims are usually big liars and I would rather trust the other version. Note Rinchin wanted to legitimize his rule as he was an usurper. Since majority population was Hindu only a Hindu could be considered legit. The version I wrote was actually from M.J. Akbar's book.
-Digvijay
Actually the Muslim chronicle "Baharistan-i-Shahi" of the 16th century gives a very different view of what happened (it actually gives a view that is contrary to the currently held mass opinion), here is what it says:
.......
[right][snapback]56524[/snapback][/right]
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Bharatvarsh,
Muslims are usually big liars and I would rather trust the other version. Note Rinchin wanted to legitimize his rule as he was an usurper. Since majority population was Hindu only a Hindu could be considered legit. The version I wrote was actually from M.J. Akbar's book.
-Digvijay