Alauddin Khilji and Padmavati: just who is afraid of History?

Will the Indian censors, the courts, the government permit the screening of a film which depicts Alauddin or Aurangzeb’s brutality as recorded in history for defending the freedom of expression?

Several “liberal” columnists have expressed anguish at the recent protests against the director of the upcoming controversial film ‘Padmavati’, which is based on the historical saga involving the characters of Alauddin Khilji, the 13th century ruler of the Delhi Sultanate and the contemporary Rajput princess, Padmini. Their defense of the film-maker and demonization of the protestors involves the following ‘liberal’ arguments:

(1) Rani Padmini was not a real historical figure and so there is no historical distortion, just re-imagination of an old legend.

(2) Cinema is a form of creative expression and artistic license permits historical reinterpretation, even if devoid of historical merit.

(3) What about freedom of expression? If you don’t like the movie, do not watch it, or just make your own movie on the subject.

The analysis of each of these positions reveals the problematic nature of contemporary Indian “secular-liberal” discourse, its bias, duplicity, mendacity and lack of sensitivity, while exploring Hindu culture, history and traditions.

First, the historicity of Padmini is far more complex than the rude and vulgar “secular” fictionalization of a legendary figure whose sacred memory is alive in the hearts and minds of millions of Hindus. In the land of Chittor, century old temples and shrines dedicated to the memory of the legendary princess continue to be active sites of devotion. Therefore, there is clearly an element of traditional religiosity in the Padmavati saga, which has over time acquired a graceful sanctity.  Any attempt, to apparently violate the sacred memory of Padmavati built through centuries of cultural memory and oral tradition through a reckless act of commercial Bollywood cinema could be interpreted as an act of perversion, at least by those who believe and identify with her.

Moreover, the insistence on Padmavati’s historicity as some essential prerequisite for upholding the moral validity of protest is also suggestive of a deeply semitic rather than Indic way of thinking where indigenous figures on the margins of history like Bhishma, Draupadi, Vikramaditya or Raja Bhoja have animated popular culture and thought for generations. The same “secularists” who demand historical evidence enthusiastically while considering respect for tradition fulminate against the idea of historical evidence documenting large scale pogroms, genocides, forced conversions and temple destructions during the medieval age by Islamist invaders.

Nevertheless, purely from a historical perspective, it is true that there is no contemporary account, which corroborates the legend of Padmini, the beautiful Rajput princess who along with thousands of other women defied the will of the Muslim ruler, Alauddin Khilji through the act of Jauhar (mass immolation) and frustrated his designs of possessing her. This significant omission was observed by the preeminent historian of medieval India, Prof. K S Lal in his monumental book ‘History of the Khiljis’. Unfortunately, Lal in his later years experienced a disgraceful academic apartheid from leftist dominated academia since he had the audacity to produce brilliantly researched texts on medieval India like ‘The Legacy of Muslim Rule in India’ and ‘Muslim slave system in Medieval India’, which did not shy from documenting religious excesses and violence.

But returning to Padmini, such an absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. For instance, there is no reliable contemporary Greek record to affirm the existence of the Chandragupta of Mauryan antiquity. There is no contemporary Hindu source, which documents the invasions of Mahmud of Ghazni at Somnath. Probably, the availability of a powerful concept of cyclical time permitted Hindus to cast away unrecorded, at least in writing most painful historical events even as they persisted in popular memory and acquired embellishments through the vicissitudes of time.  In his well-researched, but unfortunately poorly documented work ‘Rani Padmini: the heroine of Chittor’, B K Karkra makes the assertion that references to Padmini in Malik Mohammed Jayasi’s ‘Padmavat’ was predated by her mention in Chhitai Charita authored by Narain Das of Sarangpur in 1526. Karkra makes the compelling argument that since the work mentions her alongside incontrovertible historical figures like Deval Rani (a Gujarati princess who was abducted and forcibly married to the Sultan’s son), it is possible that Padmini’s legend had become well entrenched in the popular consciousness during Das and Jayasi’s age. Furthermore, the cryptic suggestion by Amir Khusrau, the famed poet in Khilji’s court, through a reference to the Biblical story of Solomon and queen of Sheba during Khilji’s march to Chittor in 1303 should not be overlooked. Other instances of jauhar have been correlated with Khilji’s military expeditions like the one performed by the queen Ranga Devi of Ranthambore. While these indirect evidences lend credence to the idea of Padmini as a real historical figure, Karkra ultimately suggests that Padmini’s memory was deliberately erased from the official Rajput literary tradition in order to promote a patriarchal counter narrative eulogizing her husband Ratan Singh whose estimation of valour in popular consciousness had plummeted in permitting the Sultan, Khilji, a glimpse of the royal queen. Similarly, contemporary Muslim chronicles were silent on the episode since the act of Jauhar and Padmini’s unearthly defiance resulted in Alauddin’s ambitions to be reduced to a spectacular failure.

The demand for historical authenticity should also necessarily imply that the character of Alauddin Khilji be subject to an accurate historical estimation. The Sultan ascended the throne by murdering the emperor Jalauddin Khilji. His expeditions against Hindu kingdoms resulted in at least three instances of Jauhar or mass immolation by thousands of Hindu women in order to protect their honour both in life and death. At Chittor, Amir Khusrau found the emperor to ‘have cut the Hindus like dry grass’ by ordering a general massacre of the population, a feat, which was replicated by the great Mughal emperor Akbar almost two centuries later. During his tyrannical rule, the historian R C Majumdar observed that Khilji’s ruinous economic policies caused ‘the country at large to be bled’. According to the contemporary Muslim chronicles, the ‘Sultan Alauddin demanded from his ulema, rules and regulations, so that the Hindu should be ground down, and property and possessions, which are the cause of disaffection and rebellion should not remain in the house.’ His actions successfully “grinded the Hindus depriving them of their wealth so that they could never think of revolt…There was no sign of any gold in the Hindu households” Such means of systematic discrimination were canalized through unjust taxation like jizya and high revenue burden upon Hindus. It is difficult to discover any redeeming feature of Alauddin’s reign, including his much-vaunted defense of his kingdom against the Mongols, since there is no reason to assume that the latter would have been more barbaric or less accommodating to Hindu beliefs and practices.

Left Liberal columnists can mock the Hindu right in their inability to use cinema as a vehicle for advancing ideology, unlike them. The asymmetry in resources apart, they are well aware that in contemporary India, no potential Indian films critical of Islamic or Christian (historical) personalities, culture and religion can see the light of the day due to the institutionalized sense of exceptionalism accorded to ‘minority sensibilities’. When even a film critical of Naxal ideology like ‘Buddha in the traffic jam’ met with such collective hostility and total opposition by mainstream leftist film reviewers, it leaves little scope for tolerant reception of actual “Hindutva” genres!  Will the Indian censors, the courts, the government permit the screening of a film which depicts Alauddin or Aurangzeb’s brutality as recorded in history for defending the freedom of expression? Will the “liberal” intellectuals support the creation of such cinematic genres? Will the consortium of cinema hall owners promote and screen such cinema, if public demand and profits are assured? Will such films be insulated against draconian sections 295-C and 153-A of the IPC in the face of potential protest and disruption of law and order by communal organizations? A long deafening silence might await us.

Feature Image:

Disclaimer: The facts and opinions expressed within this article are the personal opinions of the author. IndiaFacts does not assume any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, completeness, suitability, or validity of any information in this article.
  • Shridas

    “Will the Indian censors, the courts, the government permit the screening of a film which depicts Alauddin or Aurangzeb’s brutality as recorded in history for defending the freedom of expression? ” YES.
    Yes, they did just that and that film is called “Padmaavat”.
    Since its release, showing Padmavati and Rajputs in glorious light and Alauddin in very bad one, the protestors look even more foolish. And still no apology from them.

  • JagoBharatVasiyo

    I think it’s time we call calling akbar as great.
    Murderer of tens of thousands of innocent Hindus CAN’T and SHOULD NOT be called great.

  • Niyazov11

    The Hindu dogs can only lie. Aurangzeb and Alauddin, they have been shown in negative light even before. Padmavat was made into a movie in 1960s. Aurangzeb too had a negative role in 2005 Taj Mahal: An Eternal love story. Besides he also has been negatively represented in songs and other media. Never “blocked”.

    And the funniest thing, they’re claiming some temples are proof of her existence. Her “temples” and ger “Jalmahal” were constructed much after 1303 Siege of Chittor. Next you’ll claim your Hindu gods are real because of temples.

  • Niyazov11

    Also Hindutva dogs should completely read from where they quote and be truthful. They claim Alauddin’s policy to prevent Hindu rebellion from Barani’s account as discrimination. Alauddin even says the Hindu landlords were not obeying the government and always fighting.

    “Sultan Alauddin demanded from his ulema, rules and regulations, so that the Hindu should be ground down, and property and possessions, which are the cause of disaffection and rebellion should not remain in the house.”

    The above statement clearly say they are about preventing revolts by Hindus. Also see your own face before talking about discrimination, even Alauddin tells of the difficulties the Hindus gave him.

    “I have discovered that the khuts and mukkadims ride upon fine horses, wear fine clothes, shoot withride upon fine horses, wear fine clothes, shoot with Persian bows, make war upon each other, and go out for hunting; but of the kharaj, jizya, kari and chari, they do not pay one jital. They levy separately the khut’s share from the villages, give parties and drink wine, and many of them pay no revenue at all, either upon demand or without demand. Neither do they show any respect for my officers.”

    The Hindus have always acted like dogs are disloyal.

  • Niyazov11

    Hindutav dogs should stop barking and making false allegations without watching movies. No one stopped Indu Sarkar even though it was a clear dig at Indira Gandhi, no one will stop any film portraying Alauddin or Aurangzeb.

    There was no Padmini, all the so-called “temples” and “palaces” were constructed much after Khilji’s siege of Chittor in 1303. Had she been real then definitely Alauddin’s contemporary would have mentioned her, just like they mentiones Gujarat’s queen and princess.

  • Milin Patel

    “At Chittor, Amir Khusrau found the emperor to ‘have cut the Hindus like dry grass’ by ordering a general massacre of the population, a feat, which was replicated by the great Mughal emperor Akbar almost two centuries later.”

    Are you serious? Buy a copy of Khazain-ul-Futuh and read it. The 30 000 people that were said to be slain were described as being enemy (Rajput) warriors that were actively resisting Alauddin. Civilians were not killed. And the rubbish about tax you posted is from Baranis work, which is not considered authentic.

  • Milin Patel

    According to actual history, the Padmavat (1540) poem is fiction. No contemporary source mentions that Alauddin failed to capture Padmavati or that Jauhar was done. Instead, the comparison of her to Bilqis suggests that Alaudding (Solomon) had her come to Delhi, convert to Islam, fall in love with Allauddin, submit to him, and become his concubine. See my blog post for additional details:

    • Anfauglir

      In reality, Padmavati’s descendants are famously Hindu royals who’re still living, e.g. Padmavati scion MK Vishvaraj Singh interview Nov 15, 2017

      It goes without saying that Padmavati’s royal descendants know their ancestors (including their ancestors’ history and Hindu status) better than anyone else, whereas crypto-monotheists are compulsive liars, famous for their bad attempts at rewriting history, selectively citing their preferred islamic sources as Milin Patel does at his self-promoting link.

      Note also that absolutely every article by “Milin Patel” at his blog is anti-Hindu: subversionist in the extreme of Hinduism and Hindu epics, personages and sacred literature. And in this, his articles sound practically identical to the islamic subversions of the same Hindu matters like Mahabharata and Ramayana earlier seen at the now-defunct (in)famous Pakistani site dalitstan (a site that was itself outed since over a decade as being a Pakistani disinformation site, by sources such as the western internet/cyber security site cromwell-intl).

      So the reason Milin Patel’s deliberately subversive spins on Hindu matters sound like the works of an anti-Hindu crypto-monotheist is because he is a missionary monotheist, one of many hoping that cryptoism will give them success where their outright attempts to deHinduise Hindus had failed.

      In the past, such pathetic methods were employed by Pakistani “intelligence”, as seen with the Paki site dalitstan. But nowadays, many paki and Indian islamic self-anointed footsoldiers trolling on Indian/Hindu nationalist sites tend to use cryptoism too: in the form of Hindu names, user pics and Hindu “themed” websites in their risible attempts at misleading Hindus or derailing nationalist sites. (Another immediate example is the islamic “Samrat Bharat” trolling directly below, whose crypto-monotheism was outed earlier when he had accidentally revealed it.)

      The hallmark of all chrislamics is that their compulsive lying is terribly, hopelessly bad. Case in point: Milin Patel’s desperate subversions on the Ramayana, Mahabharata, Sri Rama, etc.

      It’s why people like “Milin Patel” never write a blog on real facts of history such as how:
      2. Islam’s prophet Mohamed was factually this and this (that’s if the islamic prophet existed, because several islamic theologians have come to the conclusion that he didn’t exist either)

      Now, no atheist or other non-chrislamic will have any problem affirming 1 and 2.
      So if Milin Patel will publicly affirm points 1 and 2 above, that is the only way he may prove to others he is not a crypto-chrislamic (though he then may merely be the 1% plain vanilla/non-chrislamic communist, who more rarely indulge in cryptoism for Hindu-baiting). Notably, Samrat Bharat and other Hindu-baiting islamic trolls her and over at Swarajya expressly refused to affirm points 1 and 2, while some others tried to avoid doing so. All absolutely failed the test that would prove their self-professed neutrality, and in doing so revealed their true colours, or religious affiliations rather. Not that it was a surprise. Though most already accidentally outed it by all kinds of mistakes and monotheist stupidities on their part. Sort of like Milin Patel’s horrendous monotheist mistakes are plastered all over his website and which all Hindus can tell but Paki/islamic types never can.

      • Milin Patel

        The words of her so-called descendants have absolutely no value because there are no contemporary Rajput records that support her existence. The first time we hear of Padmavati is in the works of the 16th century (by non-royalty), and after that, the Royalty incorporated Padmavati into their historical records, and propagated from one generation to the next that she was the wife of Ratnasimha.

        Now the question is that if Padmavati was not mentioned in a contemporary Rajput record, but only mentioned 200 yrs later, how authentic is the record that mentions her? Since the writer did not live in the time of Padmavati, he could not have known about her story and is clearly writing a work of fiction.

        The rest of your comment is an incoherent rant to establish me as a Christian…

        • Anfauglir

          “The words of her so-called descendants have absolutely no value because there are no contemporary Rajput records that support her existence.”

          Her descendants cannot be falsified by your say-so. They, not you (nor your selective, preferred and conveniently islamic “sources”), know the matter better. No wonder that you’re desperate to dismiss them: they completely give you and your islamist “historians” the lie. Even as they are simultaneously the evidence of her Hindu life.
          Thanks for negating and discrediting your own nonsense.

          As for historical records, many Kurds living in the evil shadow of islam in ISIS occupied areas have ceased to keep proper records too, and much of what they had in records has been obliterated as sure as the islamic disease blew up Assyrian and other middle-eastern monuments for the past few years, yet again. That doesn’t mean the affected Kurds and those that are born and die in captivity now are not historical, nor that surviving Kurdish society won’t be keeping a collective memory of events, to document it hereafter, even if it’s only possible two centuries hence. With any luck, they’d have obliterated islam by then.

          Fortunately, with the tech we have nowadays, there’s more chance of evidence of victimised populations surviving despite islam’s attempts at total destruction. E.g. here’s news documentation (with photo) of another Kurdish “Battling beauty takes her own life to avoid Islamic State torture ” 7 Oct 2014 (Note, it was Ceylan Ozalp’s fellow Kurdish female fighter and friend who killed herself rather than be captured and raped by the terrorists known as muslims. The two look alike and were apparently mistaken for each other.) So now the beautiful, heroic and loyal Kurdish woman–who acted quite like beautiful, heroic and loyal Padmavati and countless Hindu women that were likewise threatened by islam in the past, and like several reported anti-muslim Kurdish women have done in the present–has thwarted your dear islamic rapist brothers (ISIS) too by killing herself before she’ll let their disgusting islamic selves touch her. But because there’s documentary proof of it in her case, she has also thwarted your future attempts to desperately reinvent her as the next woman who supposedly “chose” to convert to islam and fall in love with a disgusting islamist and live on as a supposed islamic thereafter. Countless millions of people, throughout history and throughout the world, have killed themselves rather than convert to islam. Very few have ever converted voluntarily, and all of those few did so only because they were deceived by the compulsive lies of islamics.

          In an interview with the other female Kurdish hero, Ceylan Ozalp, who’s also been fighting islam in its ISIS form, where she explains what absolute cowards muslim “soldiers”/terrorists are (nothing’s changed there either), Ceylan observes accurately that “One of ours is worth hundred of them.”

          Since chrislam has never produced heroes, only cowardly rapist genociders and liars, chrislamics realised that they needed to steal the heroism of their non-monotheist victims. Hence you see desperate chrislamic attempts at history rewriting such as concerning Padmavati, just like many of Malaysia’s Hindu soldiers/national heroes who died in battle suddenly get reinvented by the islamic government as supposed last-minute converts to islam based merely on random muslim say-so (despite the dead Hindu heroes still going on pilgrimage to Hindu temples until their very death). (This is another example underscoring how muslims always compulsively lie to rewrite known Hindus’ religious identity as being supposedly muslim, based on muslims’ mere say-so.)

          Like the countless christian falsehoods of “deathbed conversions” manufactured throughout history, muslims too are well-known the world over to invent impossible stories about alleged last minute conversions to islam: in islamised Malaysia, muslim leaders are very jealous of non-monotheist national heroes, and therefore they always try to rewrite the nation’s non-muslim heroes as “muslim” in some deathbed conversion fiction. Because non-chrislamic Chinese and Indian Malaysians have often taken out protests about this, numerous instances of such compulsive islamic lying in Malaysia have been well documented as with the above instance, including in court cases.

          Here’s another one of many famous examples of how desperate islam is to rewrite Hindus as muslims, from just last year: 7,000 Hindus in Malaysia wrongly documented as Muslims: NGOs. When any among them die, they’ll again threatened with islamic burials. Worse still, when any have wed Hindus (as Hindus do) and have children, the evil islamics of Malaysia will attempt to declare the offspring as supposedly muslim all because the conniving islamics deliberately misrecorded these 7000 Hindus as muslims. But then, christianity/islam consists purely of compulsive lying, terrorism, genocide and rape and other threats of forced conversion or death. It’s all chrislamics are good at.

          “The rest of your comment is an incoherent rant to establish me as a Christian…”

          Poor attempt at trying to avoid answering the one question which could have established you as having no religious affiliation and motivation. By deliberately avoiding the question, you have only confirmed that you are a crypto-monotheist of either chrislamic variety. It would have been an easy question to answer after all, and only chrislamics have ever refused to, as all atheists and others have immediately answered it with no qualms. Whereas every chrislamic is allergic to making the requested affirmations: it’s why your avoidance of making the affirmation is another dead giveaway of your chrislamism.

          Not that your over-obvious chrislamic identity wasn’t already apparent from the Paki “dalitstan” quality of subversive content on your site, all of which absolutely scream how you have no Hindu background at all, as you get even the basics wrong that no one raised Hindu would get wrong and which chrislamics regularly get wrong.

          Interesting that you selectively mention that I only suspected you of being christian rather than either of the twins of christianity/islam, and despite the fact that I alluded to known islamic precursors generating exactly your pecular kind of subversive nonsense.

          I’ll give you one more chance. If you respond, do so by starting with the affirmation requested in my previous comment to you. If you respond in any other kind, it means you thereby admit that you are a chrislamic. Remember: it’s an easy affirmation to make for absolutely all but chrislamics, and only they will avoid it by whatever means (as you just did). Therefore, if you’re not a chrislamic, you will respond with a clear affirmation in this final chance. Any other response from you is a direct admission of your crypto-monotheism.

          • Milin Patel

            “Her descendants cannot be falsified by your say-so. They, not you (nor your selective, preferred and conveniently islamic “sources”), know the matter better. No wonder that you’re desperate to dismiss them: they completely give you and your islamist “historians” the lie. Even as they are simultaneously the evidence of her Hindu life.
            Thanks for negating and discrediting your own nonsense.”

            These descendants are living in the 21st century. How do they know what happened in the 14th century? From the hearsay of their ancestors? Ok… But how do we know when this oral tradition began? It may have began in the 14th century, but it may have even began much later. So, since we do not know for sure when the oral tradition began, it has no value…

            You do have a point if you can point out a text where this oral tradition has been written down on paper, that dates to the 14th century… However, the earliest written record (Padmavat poem), belongs to the 16th century, and hence is detached from the actual event by 200 years. Do you see why historians don’t consider these written records authentic? How does a 16th century person know what happened in the 14th century without consulting contemporary sources? Saying that oral traditions were propagated between this gap of 200 yrs is an assumption, that cannot be confirmed. Furthermore, the Rajputs reconquered Chittor a few decades after they lost it. So, if the oral tradition was created right after the fall of Chittor, the royalty should have penned it down once they reconquered the fort.

            To further debunk these oral traditions, a Kumbhalgarh Prahasti from the 15th century mentions that Ratnasimha fled from Chittor. Furthermore, Kakka Suri (Jain scholar), mentions in 1336 that Ratnasimha was captured by Alauddin and then made to move like a monkey from one city to another (the record actually states “monkey”). No mention of Badal/Gora saving Ratnasimha is mentioned. Collaborating these records suggests that before Saka, Ratnasimha was captured, and then forced to move from one city to another and not interfere in Chittor’s affairs. Since Ratnasimha did not return to Chittor after being released, the royalty of Chittor felt that Ratnasimha abandoned the defence of the fort of Chittor.

            According to your oral traditions, Ratnasimha fought till death in Chittor. Rajput and Jain contemporary sources both contradict this oral tradition, hence the oral tradition has no value.

          • Anfauglir

            You just admitted you’re a chrislamic, since I specifically told you to answer my initial question in your response yet you deliberately avoided the question for a second time. I stressed to you that if you avoided it again, it could only mean you admit to being a chrislamic. And you did just that. Thanks for the admission.

            That you’re particularly a crypto-monotheist of islamic flavour was also apparent as stated earlier. And besides, christian types have no interest in propping up islamic stories on Padmavati. At most they’d do what some other islamics do: deny that she was anything more than a legend.

            “So, since we do not know for sure when the oral tradition began, it has no value…”
            It is of great value for its existence: it demonstrates the existence of a context of unknown antiquity where Padmavati is exclusively Hindu. Combined with her descendants today, and the continuance of Hindu traditions surrounding her, it confirms the Hinduness of Padmavati. (Whereas islamics we know to be compulsive liars on any matter that may serve them; and we all still know islamics’ penchant arising from their jealousy to rewrite popular Hindus and other non-muslims as converts to islam.)

            As for the rest of your latest comment, you’re only repeating your earlier non-arguments, already discounted. I’m sure you’ll continue whining the same things again and again hereafter in your chrislamic attempt to have the last word despite having lost.

            In contrast, here’s the tally:

            1. Her descendants are still around and still trump anything you or your selective “sources” claim, despite your repeated non-arguments against this.

            Your kind keeps jumping between insisting Padmavati didn’t exist, when convenient to your storytelling. Or when now forced to admit she did exist, suddenly selectively referring to convenient modern islamic re-interpretations of bad historical islamic poetry and other dubious islamic sources to rewrite her as a supposed convert to islam. And your reference to non-informative non-islamic sources that you wrongly imagine can be used as supposed evidence, when they’re not evidence of her alleged islamic conversion at all, but which at best provide details that even if true don’t in any way impinge on her first and final religious affiliation.

            2. Many Hindu families do keep memory of their ancestors for many centuries. My own family has remembered for up to the 15th century at least in one lineage and some centuries longer still for some other lineages. The entire lineage going to the 15th lineage is moreover confirmed by other Hindu nodal descendants online, who have posted their family tree, and this tree shows that the earlier branches overlap with ours just until where our families diversified. More proof.
            And I have noted that the family of a Jain acquaintance from Uttar Pradesh has keep ancestral memory for several centuries too, so that covers a large geographical range of the native population of India.

            It would therefore be very reasonable that the descendants of Padmavati remember their ancestress and other ancestors. Probably more so when they’re royalty.

            In contrast, chrislamics chose to not keep track of their ancestry, understandable when they’re nothing more than the product of islamic harems/rapes and colonial christian rapes and forced conversions in Gomantak and other parts of Bharata, and when chrislamics want to pretend to themselves that their Hindu/other non-monotheist ancestors converted “willingly”. All of this is contrary to documented evidence, of course.

            3. I’ve demonstrated with a recent example that, just like many Hindu and other non-monotheist women in the past, even today, the non-muslim women who’re resisting islam continue to kill themselves (when all other forms of resistance fails) rather than convert to islam/let islamics touch them.

            4. I’ve also demonstrated with a couple of the countless examples around that islamics are still compulsive liars, always seen inventing recurring fictions about Hindus and other non-muslims’ alleged “conversion” to islam, all long outed as islamic fantasy/lying.

            Another example of the last is how several attractive actors in East Asian dramas beamed in Saudi and other islamic nations capture the attention of lecherous muslimahs. Fearful of the non-muslim East Asian males’ effect on muslimahs resulting in outmarriages and deconversion, the muslims males of affected muslim nations often launch articles and youtube videos inventing ridiculous stories about how these East Asian actors have supposedly converted to “islam”. The silly muslimahs, triumphant in their delusions about islam’s non-existent superiority, then troll drama sites thanking allah that their favourite thus-and-so popular East Asian actor is now supposedly muslim. (One of the many recent examples targeted by such islamic lying is the catholic South Korean actor Jung Il-woo.)

            The muslimahs continue on in dogged desperation even after the actors themselves via their agencies issue articles in response to the islamic delusions, explaining that the actors in question are Buddhist or even Catholic (and hence never muslim). Needless to say, muslims are always laughed at by other commenters
            for being incorrigible, and the stupid lecherous muslimahs eventually
            slink away in embarrassment, though I’m not sure if they continue to
            hang on to their self-delusions. Not that they’re entirely to blame: muslim males are so disgusting, that even muslimahs from Arabia to Indonesia and Africa prefer non-muslim males.

            Of course, once you’re done convincing yourself with your shallow “research” that Padmavati would have converted to islam if she had existed, we may all expect that you’ll next be citing the islamic youtube videos and other islamic lies as “sources of evidence” for the alleged conversions to islam of these East Asian actors (none of which ever happened).

            Thanks again for admitting that you’re a crypto-muslim. I already knew of course, as indicated in my first response to you. But your own admission is useful for my purposes.

          • Milin Patel

            Stop behaving like a troll, get your head out of your ass, and look at facts.

            “It is of great value for its existence: it demonstrates the existence of a context of unknown antiquity where Padmavati is exclusively Hindu. Combined with her descendants today, and the continuance of Hindu traditions surrounding her, it confirms the Hinduness of Padmavati. ”

            Exactly. You said “unknown antiquity”. Now, when we research, are not looking at evidence from any time period, but instead, we are looking for evidence from the 14th century records, as they would be written by people who lived the same time as she did. So present these 14th century evidence, and stop your nonsensical rants…

            In the rest of your rant, the only semi-coherent thing you wrote is that you know your family line till the 15th century. Ok. Do you have any written sources from the 15th century to back these claims, or is it just hearsay. That is to say, did your 15th century ancestor leave any written records of the family line? If not, how can you claim that the hearsay is accurate if you do not have these written records to refer to?

            If Padmavati did exist, why are there no 14th century records left by the royalty? The present Rana of Mewar release 13000 historical documents to the present. From that, have you found a single one dating to the 14th century, that mentions Padmavati? If so, then present it.

            I am simply not interested in seeing your anti-islamic/christian bigotry. Present some actual evidence, or just don’t bother replying. I am a proud Hindu, and do not need your confirmation to say that.

          • Anfauglir

            You’re the obvious troll. Not to mention, the compulsive lying cryptochrislamic who refuses to come clean.

            A typical example of your chrislamic lies: “I am a proud Hindu.”
            Numerous proofs that this is a lie are in your very own blog that you’ve flogged just above. Here are some sample blog entry titles of yours, which are anything BUT Hindu:
            – “The Affair of Rama and Lakshmana with Shurpanakha!”
            – “Rama – The Most Overrated Warrior in Ramayana!”

            – Etc. Need I even go on?
            That’s why I said all your blog contents are entirely akin to the islamic Paki site “dalitstan”. They are so extremely the inversion of all things Hindu that only chrislamics can and have ever made such claim. Absolutely never anyone Hindu, because your blog contains views that are the very opposite of anything Hindu. Chrislamics are so very stupid to think that Hindus would accept chrislamic spew originated in a “Hindu” if the spewer claimed to be a Hindu.

            So, having established, yet again, that you’re anything but a Hindu, let’s move on. You seem to want to claim you’re not a chrislamic. Of course that’s another typical crypto chrislamic lie on your part. But you can still prove your claim by this single means: by affirming the below (repeat, by saying you affirm the following–copy it verbatim, include the hyperlinks, but do not use the crypto name you’ve adopted, just say you affirm):

            2. Islam’s prophet Mohamed was factually this and this (that’s if the islamic prophet existed, because several islamic theologians have come to the conclusion that he didn’t exist either)

            Affirm the above to prove you’re not a chrislamic. If your reply does not contain the affirmation or you otherwise avoid affirming it in any way (such as by avoiding replying), then you’re admitting with deliberation that you are absolutely a chrislamic. You have NO WAY OUT of making the affirmation now.

            Not that I or anyone with half a brain is left in any doubt that you’re a chrislamic. But it’s for everyone else. And when I see you troll anywhere again, I will be pointing every Hindu to your comments in this section, to point out that you’re yet another chrislamic troll, as demonstrated by the chrislamic anti-Hindu subversions in your blog and your utter refusal to make the affirmation. If you avoid making the affirmation, I will use it against you. If you try to be clever and make the affirmation, it will also be used against you–in more ways than you can imagine. So, go ahead and make it to pretend you’re not a serial liar.

          • Milin Patel

            “You’re the obvious troll. Not to mention how you’re the compulsive lying cryptochrislamic who refuses to come clean.”

            Hahahahaha! You are the one who drags Islam and Christianity here when we are not even discussing religion, let alone Abrahamic ones… And now I am the troll? LOL.

            “Here are some sample blog entry titles of yours, which are anything BUT Hindu:
            – “The Affair of Rama and Lakshmana with Shurpanakha!”
            – “Rama – The Most Overrated Warrior in Ramayana!””

            None of this can be said to be anti-Hindu. Stop behaving like a fanatic. Criticizing some religious character does not mean that one is against the religion. Seems like you are a puppet follower of the crackpot Rajiv Malhotra…

            And as usual, you end off by branding me a Christian… LOL. What else can thoroughly incompetent Hindutvadis like you do?

            Anyways, thanks for reminding me that stupid people still exist in this world. 🙂

          • Anfauglir

            So you avoided making the affirmation, just like I predicted you would. (Only christoislamics wouldn’t make the affirmation.)
            So you own to being a christoislamic. Q.E.D.

            “None of this can be said to be anti-Hindu.”
            Yes, all of it is by definition anti-Hindu. Because there are certain things that no one Hindu would ever subscribe to/think. (And which specifically only chrislamics invent and propagate.) And those are the very things you’re claiming as truths.

            Thanks for proving–yet again–that you’re a chrislamic.

          • Milin Patel

            Whats up with this anti-christian/islam rant? Are you so insecure regarding your Hindu beliefs that you need to abuse other religions to uphold your own religion?

            Out of your entire comment, you mentioned only one thing that had some substance:

            “Yes, all of it is by definition anti-Hindu. Because there are certain things that no one Hindu would ever subscribe to/think. (And which specifically only chrislamics invent and propagate.) And those are the very things you’re claiming as truths. Hindu does NOT mean anything, let alone chrislamic beliefs about what being a Hindu entails.”

            I have come across many Hindus that have had no problem with my posts, and were willing to accept and/or debate with the claims I made. Don’t try to shove this Rajiv Malhotra type Hindutva disguised as Hinduism down my throat, where anything slightly against your beliefs (which you call as Hinduism) becomes anti-Hindu… That is why I earlier told you to grow up and embrace diversity. I will repeat the same now also…

          • Anfauglir

            Hindu-baiting hyper-hypocrite Milin said: “Whats up with this anti-christian/islam rant?”

            Bad ploy to avoid making the affirmation. You’ve now proven for the 4th time (or is it already the 5th) you’re nothing more than a crypto-chrislamic. Thanks for playing at cryptoism and failing so appallingly.

            Absolutely every actual Hindu (a.o.t. crypto monotheist claiming to be Hindu a la you) can now read your comments proving that you’re a chrislamic.

            Amazing what ueber morons every chrislamic is. They think that if they peddle their anti-Hindu bile under a concocted “Hindu” persona that actual Hindus would fall for it.

            Summary of Milin:
            – Hindu baiting – check
            – subverts all things held sacred by all heathen Hindus – check
            – jumps to protect chrislamics and the usual chrislamic whine about religious persecution and religious “diversity” defined as enforced inclusion of the parasitic chrislamic canker. Check.
            – concocts typically Paki dalitstan scale lies about Hinduism based on desperate chrislamic interpretations all while refusing to restate facts about chrislamics–facts upheld by modern historians, bible/islam studies experts and (in the case of christianity) ancient Romans. Check
            – resorts to special pleading for chrislamism: facts exposing chrislamism result in special sensitivity on the part of crypto-chrislamic, here “Milin”. Check.
            Q.E.D. again.

            Keep yapping moron. Every Hindu who sees this–and I will point them here, if I ever come across you trolling Hindu/Indian nationalist sites–will know you to be a chrislamic from your own comments and your determined avoidance of making the affirmation combined with your desperate Hindu-baiting (and your laughable attempts to pass that off as Hinduism). Oh, and your randomly bringing up Malhotra, someone only chrislamics care about to keep whining on about him. Hindus have Hindu texts on our Gods, knowledge repeatedly revisited by all our acharyas, all of which define Hindusim and have been consonant with each other. All of which you’ve expressly gone against in your chrislamic redefinition of your chrislamic bile as “Hinduism”. But as I said, chrislamics are such morons they never realise how fatal their mistakes are. No wonder every actual atheist hates chrislamics equally.

          • Milin Patel

            Hahaha… I am just laughing how uneducated you are about Hinduism. Get your head out of your ass and start reading some Hindu scriptures… It is clear that you are quite ignorant on the topic, so until you educate yourself, don’t bother replying back.

          • Anfauglir

            I’m the one laughing, dweeb. Note how Hindus upvote me and only chrislamics ever upvote you. (That’s ’cause every Hindu can tell you’re a chrislamoron and no Hindu who’s heard you long enough will ever mistake your subversive anti-Hindu bile as Hinduism.)

            Oh, and unlike you, I *am* a Hindu and I actually know about many Hindu scriptures. That’s in constrast to you, who chooses to get your version of the Ramayana, Mahabharata and Gita etc from the defunct Paki “dalitstan” site filled with islamist versions. As seen in your absurdly christlamic claims like
            – “The Affair of Rama and Lakshmana with Shurpanakha!”
            – “Rama – The Most Overrated Warrior in Ramayana!”

            And that too proves you’re a chrislamic. Q.E.D. again.

            So keep spewing your anti-Hindu nonsense, you’re just helping all Hindus get immunised to crypto-chrislamics. Because if it spews anti-Hindu bile like a chrislamic… it IS a chrislamic, as all Hindus will conclude. And one day, there will be consequences for the anti-heathen activism of all cryptomonotheists, in the form retaliation. It’s already happening in China, other parts of Asia and parts of Africa.

          • Milin Patel

            Upvotes? Is that a way for you to see if your work is accurate or not? If so, I pity you… Majority of Hindus online know nothing about Hinduism. If you ask them to name all the Kandas/Parvas of Ramayana/Mahabharatha, they will likely be unable to do so. You also belong to that category it seems…

            Anybody who presents an alternate viewpoint is not a christian/muslim/dalit? Have you picked up a reputed journal and read some of the peer reviewed research papers on the Mahabharatha/Ramayana? Go do that first before denying the plurality of the Hindu scriptures…

            [BTW, just for your info… Nobody has liked the past few comments of yours… LOL]

          • Anfauglir

            “Have you picked up a reputed journal and read some of the peer reviewed research papers on the Mahabharatha/Ramayana?”

            Hilarious. Which heathen gets their knowledge and correct perception of any heathenism let alone their ancestral one from peer-reviewed papers, you incorrigible dweeb? The Sanatana Dharma/Vaidika maarga aka “Hinduism”, being a heathenism, is a religio and traditio (used in the original Roman sense alone). By definition it is worship of the Gods based on established tradition (from tradition derives the accurate knowledge of the Gods and knowledge of the correct rituals for worship to each God and the right way to perform said rituals).

            I get my knowledge in my own field of science (i.e. in my profession) and in other scientific fields like biology etc from peer-reviewed papers. Don’t pretend to be all “scientific” with your pathetic talk of
            peer-reviewed papers: peer-reviewed papers are only ever really relevant in sciences, not in sociology or other charlatan fields like “South Asian/Hinduism” studies which are just masks for the Christian “theology/comparative religion” frauds.

            Whereas of course Hindus don’t and won’t get Hinduism from “peer-reviewed papers”. It’s not a research topic, you hopeless mental midget. It is a heathenism. Which is why Hindus continue to learn of Hinduism the same way it was always transmitted (which was of course never by means of peer-reviewed papers, let alone any written by aliens, moron). Like all heathens including all Hindu heathens, I get Hinduism from traditio, which is the only right mode of transmission of heathenism, as all heathens from ancient Graeco-Romans to modern day Taoists have repeatedly stated.

            Needless to say, the Ramayanam and Mahabharatam
            are known by all Hindu heathens, having heard them transmitted in the correct manner from Hindu heathen sources. (Unlike crypto-chrislamics like you who get your novel/alien=crap interpretations from your own delinquencies, from Paki sites likes dalitstan, from types like Wendy Doniger the daughter of a known evangelical christian missionary, etc.)

            An incontrovertible truth that holds eternally for all heathenisms, including Hinduism, Taoism, Shintoism, Graeco-Roman religio etc:
            Only heathens of any heathenism have authentic views on all things pertaining to their heathenism, like their heathen texts, etc.
            (So, to explicitly state for the Hindu case: only Hindu heathens have authentic views on the Hindu texts and all other Hindu matters.) Everyone else’s views are that of aliens looking in, which is why they’re always wrong in the nonsense that they write about Taoism (as Taoists have regularly stated), Shintoism, Graeco-Roman religion, Hinduism etc.

            I win this argument. Or rather, heathens win this argument for all time: ONLY HEATHENS KNOW AND CAN EVER KNOW THEIR HEATHEN TEXTS, RITUALS, TRADITIONS, GODS, ALL THINGS PERTAINING TO THEIR HEATHENISM. FACTUALLY. So your opinions to introduce the contrary are declared meaningless and void in advance, for all time.

            As for anything written about Graeco-Roman religio, not to mention Taoism, Shinto and Hinduism by the non-heathen west:
            The modern west doesn’t even know their ancestral heathenism
            –wherein it is a big FAIL– let alone the heathenisms of others, such
            as the Graeco-Roman religion, Taoism, Shintoism or Hinduism. This is why Classicists write about their incomprehension of the explicit expositions of religious views and ritualistic details that the final late 4th/5th century Graeco-Roman philosophers gave about texts of the Olympic religion, such as the Odyssey. (And yes, the Odyssey is very much a religious text: it is a highly ritualistic-philosophical text as per even the very ancient philosophers alluded to, and which all the ancient adherents of the religion knew, including the most lay of Graeco-Romans; but which ancient expositions on the text the modern Classicists admit they don’t understand–which is because the latter are aliens. So it’s even less of a wonder that all aliens make even greater blunders on Taoism, Hinduism and Shintoism.)

          • Milin Patel

            Are you done with your rant?

          • Anfauglir

            More like: when are you finally done with trolling, you unwanted, uninvited, disinvited, crypto-chrislamic troll?

          • Milin Patel

            Dude, you are the one who is trolling. Commenting on my post, without me inviting you here, and continuing to do so after I made it clear that you are not welcome. What I did was create a well structured rebuttal to this article and posted it in the comments section of the article, considering that the author accepts he is open to criticism.

            Now Sanghis are going to teach me what casteism is? I have seen enough of your discrimination against Muslims and Christians here, so its better you not lecture me on casteism.

          • Anfauglir

            “Continuing to do so after I made it clear that you are not welcome.”

            No no, get it straight you unwelcome self-outed crytpo-chrislamic parasite. This is a Hindu nationalist site. You’re the one not welcome here. Get lost, you repeatedly self-outed crypto-chrislamic vermin.

            “its better you not lecture me on casteism.”

            You are incontestibly casteist, as already proven by your repeated insistence on chrislamically referring to scheduled caste persons as “dalits”, when all studies (from Alan Marriot 2003 and papers since) have shown once again that

            – all persons of scheduled castes self-designate only as “Harijan” (the majority and Hindu as indicated by the self-naming as “Harijan”) or else as “scheduled castes” (the minority);

            – and that ex-scheduled caste converts to chrislam only refer to themselves as chrislamics.

            ONLY other chrislamics, being casteist like you, refer to ex-SC converts to chrislam as “dalits” and enforce “dalits” on Harijan=Hindus and other SC persons. Again, Q.E.D. that you’re an extreme casteist. Why are still pretending that you’re not a casteist, when all can see you’re a casteist by your own insistence to refer to and drag in “dalits”–a term which nobody uses for themselves, but which chrislamics forcibly label scheduled caste and even ex-SC chrislamic converts with (to castigate them) in the hope that the unwanted label will catch on and will create a new, religiously neutralised identity as a preliminary to missionary harvest?

            “I have seen enough of your discrimination against Muslims and Christians here, so its better you not lecture me on casteism”

            Oh more of the exclusively chrislamic act of feigning “persecution” after your repeated Hindu baiting. Did you feel discriminated when I outed you for the vile crypto-chrislamic Hindu-baiter that you are? Oh, poor you, you disgusting self-outed casteist and bigot. (Remember: “Bigot” technically refers to christians, stemming from “Bei Gott”, German for “By God/ in the name of God” the phrase which christians uttered before bludgeoning European heathens into conversion, i.e. the phrase for which christians became famously known to their heathen victoms as “beigotts” and thence “bigots”. Only chrislamics can therefore be bigots, by definition.)

            Why are you suddenly pretending that your deliberate use of “dalits” doesn’t make you a casteist? Not to mention your insidious listing of “dalits” as some comparable group alongside chrislamics–something only chrislamics do, but we already know that’s what you are–thereby denying the majority self-designated Harijan their Hinduism, who are all Hindus by self-definition (Harijan means Hindu, as all Harijan know, being a more emphatic term for Hindu) and who by definition have nothing to do with chrislam, except when they’re sadly victimised by chrislamics, such as by being constantly and violently labelled “dalit” against their will. Which is but more proof of your serial and rabid discrimination against Harijan=Hindus. Why are you constantly baiting the religion of Harijan, you discriminating crypto-chrislamic casteist?

          • Milin Patel

            Are you unable to comprehend what I wrote earlier? Re-read my above comment.

            You say:

            “No no, get it straight, you unwelcome self-outed crypto-chrislamic parasite. This is a Hindu nationalist site. Your Hindu-baiting crypto-chrislamic trolling self is the one not welcome here. Get lost, you repeatedly self-outed crypto-chrislamic vermin.”

            Are you the owner of this site? Did I reply to your original post? Nope. So with what right do you have to tell me to get lost. I am telling you to get the fuck out of here because you are replying on my comment when I told you that you are not welcome. And stop stalking my profile you retarded cunt.

            Your comment on dalits is just stupid and reveals just more and more about your stupidity. Dalits refer to themselves as dalits and thats why I call them as such. I usually refer to dalits using the word sudras, BTW. Using the term dalit/sudra is not casteism. Instead, refusing to address the mistreatment of them and pretending that the Varna system does not cause them any discrimination is casteism. Get it you orangutan?

            And, LOL. Go search up what a bigot is. I am not asking you for its etymology you clown. Now Harijan is a religion? LOL. Go visit a psychiatrist ASAP. You are badly in need of one.

            If anyways, you do decide to reply, I will get more entertainment from seeing your comedy… 😛

          • Anfauglir

            “Dalits refer to themselves as dalits and thats why I call them as such.”

            Stop compulsively lying you chrislamic. Again, I’ve already referred to Alan Marriot’s study from 2003, but also to those that cited his work many years later and confirmed his findings: all of which point out that “dalit” is NOT used by anyone of scheduled caste for themselves. Most used the word Harijan (which by definition is a simultaneous affirmation of their Hinduism), the remaining few used “scheduled caste”. A later study found that ex-SC converts to chrislam used designated themselves as christian/muslim, i.e. chrislamic, never dalit either.

            The ONLY people using the word “dalit” are chrislamics who are not of a former SC background, and–like you–they’ve conspired to keep using the term, contravening what SC Indians themselves refer to as, in the hopes it will catch on among all Indians. But they’ve been trying this trick for years and it still hasn’t caught on, least of all among the very people tattoed with the label. FAIL.

            Now don’t continue to be all islamically casteist like your defunct Paki islamic “dalitstan” site in continuing to insist on using the word “dalit” against people who don’t use it for themselves, you bigot. I already told you why it’s casteist to enforce your chosen terminology on people whose chosen terminology it isn’t. Why do insist on being such an extreme casteist, you monotheist bigot?

            “Now Harijan is a religion?”
            Learn to read, you incorrigible cretin.

            – “Harijan” is the term that Hindus of SC communities call themselves. That they know themselves to be Hindu is indicated by their determination in continuing to choose the self-designation of Harijan, which means people of the Vedic Gods named “Hari” (Indra, Vishnu, Shiva, Brahma, Yama, Shukra are all among the Vedic Gods name named Hari, as Hindus know, but you don’t you chrislamic moron).
            – The SC Indians that are not Hindu refer to themselves as “SC”, being far fewer in number as per published studies.
            – An unrelated group are ex-SC who converts to chrislam — i.e. people who are not legally SC. They refer to themselves as chrislamics. The rest of chrislam tries to chrislamically refer to these as “dalit christians” and “dalit muslims”, but according to published studies, the term is not even catching on among them.

            So no Harijan is NOT a religion. But Harijan are exclusively and emphatically Hindus, starting with their own say-so.

            “Go search up what a bigot is. I am not asking you for its etymology you clown.”

            Oh, feeling persecuted by facts again, you cretinous chrislamic bigot?

            The etymology of bigot — as of cretin– are tied to deeply to their meaning, informing all aspects of the meaning. Which is why I brought it up when I aptly called you a bigot, you dweeb.

            Here, illiterate chrislamic:

            Resistance is Futile?
            Etymological clues exist of a forlorn pagan resistance to ‘conversion’ –

            BIGOT, meaning an obstinate and intolerant holder of particular [i.e. chrislamic] religious opinions, arrived in English via French. It originated centuries before among Germanic/Frankish tribes of Gaul. ‘Bei Gott’ (‘By God’) mocked the exclamation frequently used by the crusading Christian missionaries who were bludgeoning the tribes into conversion.

            CRETIN, a stunted or intellectually subnormal person, came into
            English in the 18th century from Franco-Provençal ‘creitin’ or ‘crestin’, again both ancient in origin, derived from the Old French ‘chretien’ and the Lombard, ‘cristanei’ – meaning “Christian”!


            Since it is undeniable that you’re a chrislamic, I have every right to call you a chrislamic bigot (and of course cretin), whereas you’d make no sense if you tried to repeat the same to me.

            As for the particular reason why you’ve proven yourself a bigot: you are the one chrislamically attacking Hinduism, the religion of all Hindus, including Harijan. So I ask again: why are you forever attacking the religion of the majority SC population all while feigning concern for those you slur with the unsupported term “dalit”, you casteist bigot=chrislamic?

            “Are you the owner of this site? Did I reply to your original post?”

            More importantly, why have you repeatedly been pretending that I should get lost, when I’m unquestionably a Hindu on a Hindu nationalist site, whereas you’re a repeatedly self-outed crypto-chrislamic trolling on Hindu and nationalist sites. I have every right to stay if I wish, and every right to make comments including in response to trolls. In contrast, it is but logical that chrislamics should make themselves scarce.

            “I am telling you to get the fuck out of here because you are replying on my comment when I told you that you are not welcome”

            Oh, the chrislamic foul-mouthedness makes an appearance. As it always does. But as I explained, if anyone has the right to shut up and get lost from Hindu and nationalist sites, it’s chrislamics like you. Stop throwing disgusting tantrums, you vile bigoted casteist crypto-chrislamic cretin.

      • Niyazov11

        There is no verified descendant of Rani Padmini, their claims are just like that of Rajputs claiming to be descendants of Suryavansh. There is no record of Padmini until after Malik Jayasi mentions her.

        • Anfauglir

          “Niyazov” – that’s a Soviet Turkish name from Turkmen, isn’t it? And what could such a person ever even actually know about such topics? (Not counting any lies islam may be whispering in your ears.)

          Even if you really are a Central Asian Turk (less likely) and not just a subcontinental poseur (most probably), you’re islamic by religion, since that explains why you’d expressly choose to dismiss the heathen nature of historic and legendary heathens and dynasties well-remembered by their descendants and the community at large, just as expressly as you have carefully chosen to propagate islamising fictions spun by erstwhile islamics jealous of the popularity of Hindu heathen heroes he’d have heard of in the folklore among Hindus.

          As for your non-arguments, they were already answered repeatedly in this comment section.

          Short answer: you’re absolutely wrong, because islamic “testimony” where it contradicts any heathen account is entirely inadmissible

          – since chrislam always lies — compulsively — for self-aggrandisement.

          – and since heathens (Hindus, but also demonstrated in other cases) have no need to lie. Least of all about their heroes or their enemies, about both of whom heathens maintain a very long memory of, be it in writing, in recollecting family ancestry or through folk tales.

          Long answer as to why yours are non-arguments:

          1. Like every missionary religion, islam too is only famous for rewriting history to force-project their own religion onto popular heathens. (It’s one of the many forms of their compulsive lying.) However, this particular tendency of theirs is born from missionary religions’ correct sense of inferiority vis-a-vis heathen religions, an inability of missionary religions’ to produce people of such quality as heathen religions alone are able to produce, and the consequent need felt by missionary religions in their desperate attempts at self-aggrandisement to rewrite devout heathens as converts instead (and to rewrite heathen narratives as somehow pertaining to the missionary religions instead).

          Remember how islam stupidly kept claiming that Alexander was one of the major prophets in islam? Then some islamics finally realised this absurdity. However, in their failed attempt to save face, the best they managed was to transfer the error onto another well-known non-muslim: they next claimed a famous Zoroastrian hero from Iran was that prophet instead, until other islamics finally pointed out that impossibility too. Which is but more proof that islam has always been compulsively lying and inventing islamising stories about about famous non-chrislamics.

          In this very page’s comments section, I’ve already brought up several well-documented examples from the present where we can see islam’s ongoing attempts to rewrite famous non-chrislamics as “converts to islam”. E.g. many Hindus in Malaysia, especially Hindu war heroes. Or many anti-muslim Kurdish and Persian and African women kidnapped by islam. But such islamic claims on these islamically-falsified non-muslims — even when the islamic claims on them are pronounced as “authentic” in wannabe shariah courts of islamic theocracies, as reported in the news — remain as false as the wishful thinking of the ever-dubious erstwhile islamic writers/poets in their rewriting of anti-muslim devout Hindu women as “muslims”.

          Of course, it’s not just islam, but other missionary religions too. Let’s not forget that christianity has always tried the same trick, even before the invention of islam. For example, christians eventually rewrote the pagan victims of Nero’s persecution as having been “christian victims” instead, for missionary religion’s usual reason of self-aggrandisement.

          “an immense number” of good pagans met their death under Nero. A later pagan writer composed a “martyrology” of the men and women who were victims of Nero’s insanity; and it has been suggested that the Christians borrowed this model, if not many of the pagan names in the book.
          — Legends of Saints and Martyrs, from The Story Of Religious Controversy, by Joseph McCabe [McCabe’s the famous historian known as the “encyclopaedic brain” who was once a Franciscan monk]

          (The truth took a long time and a lot of painstaking effort to uncover, but historians have repeatedly confirmed it now.)

          McCabe further goes on to reveal that there’s actually zero evidence of persecution of any christian by Nero. And other historians have since revealed there to have been no evidence of christians (or christianity) in Nero’s time. But christianity and christians’ existence at this early time was already challenged by 4th century learned Roman scholars. And the fact that the earliest christian writings mention places that did not exist until centuries into the 1st millennium further gives us the earliest date for when christians/christianity could have existed.

          Then there’s chrislam’s infamous attempt in the past centuries to invent christian and islamic sidestories about a certain Hindu God. These chrislamic attempts at insinuating chrislam into HInduism have been documented by a western writer as dating to no earlier than the colonial era (for the christian lies) and to as late as end of the 19th century for the islamic lies. The same western writer, who’s anti-Hindu and hence their testimony is beyond suspicion where it ends up supporting the Hindu case, owns that the Hindu “stories” regarding the Hindu God date over a millennium as far as this can be traced, and may be older still.

          As seen above and in countless examples besides, chrislamic “testimony” — as that of missionary religions in general — is nothing more than absolute lies. The sole value in any islamic fiction-writing about popular heathens, including that of Malik Jayasi, is only this: that it provides external validation of either the heathen’s historicity OR at least of the heathen character’s popularity among the heathens, either of which then merely led to the jealous chrislamic’s attempts to insinuate chrislamism into the subject.

          All chrislamic “testimony” in its own favour must therefore ALWAYS be dismissed out of hand.

          2. In contrast to chrislam, which can only lie and which seeks self-aggrandisement, Hindus and other heathens have no need to lie. Hindus take care to make their infamous traitors go down as infamous in collective memory (e.g. various Jaichands of the past and present). Hindus likewise take at least as much care to preserve in popular memory all those Hindus who remained devout and loyal, like Padmini. Heathens all over the world take great care to not confuse or conflate traitors with heroes. Whereas missionary religions, being opportunists, will readily concoct stories about adherents of heathenism as converts to their own. This is a constant in all missionary religions, not just chrislam.

          3. Further, many lay Hindu families have privately kept track of their ancestors upto a great many centuries. And some of us have even had it verified with external sources.

          Understandably, prominent Hindus like those of royal dynasties keep even better track where they come from and who they are and are not related to.

          As for your misspelled “Suryavansh” non-argument, many Rajputs (like other extant heathen Hindus) are directly as in genetically descended from this dynasty, whereas other Rajput and other Hindu heathen families were adopted into it by means of established Vedic rites. This has happened for about 2 millennia in southeast Asia, where the rite adopting persons, families and communities into certain Hindu dynasties is also well documented: the rites are organised and presided over by actual descendants of the dynasty and their ritualists.

          Rather than question Hindus’ excellent recollection of their ancestry, it is you chrislamics’ own ancestry and legitimacy that is in question. But — unless you’re a genuine Turk from central Asia, as opposed to be an islamic pretender from the subcontinent — perhaps you’re finally honest enough to own to being a product of a harem and islamic slave system at last, going by your chosen username.

          4. To claim that the earliest chrislamic “testimony” becomes “evidence” for the chrislamic version of history, and that the lack of (discovery of/surviving) literary testimony by Hindus or any heathens is proof against heathens’ version of events or their version of events being older and original, is a false argument.

          Firstly, the only thing chrislam ever produced was lies. For the rest, chrislam has only ever brought destruction: besides outright genocide, there’s destruction and commandeering of temples and destruction of libraries (e.g. christianity destroyed all but the last Graeco-Roman libraries of antiquity, while islam destroyed the last).

          And it’s not that heathens never penned evidence, but that chrislam is famous for doing away with evidence, almost in concord with chrislam inventing fictions chrislamising history to replace the heathen accounts. As a mere example, there’s supposed to be 7 or so volumes of “Kata Kristianon” (“Against the Christians”), a thorough debunking of christianity and christians by 4th century Roman Emperor Julian. Christianity allowed nothing more than a few snatches to even survive: and only because a christian bishop hand-selected the easiest arguments to dare to respond to.

          Even so, we know from what remains that emperor Julian — like many other ancient Romans — outright denied that jesus ever existed and that christians could therefore never produce proof of jesus’ historicity. As a result, centuries later, christianity attempted to “forge” evidence, as historians have revealed. Which is but more proof of chrislamic attempts at history rewriting.

          But we know that it’s chrislam tendency to destroy historical truths and evidence, and to invent fictions to install in their place.

          Same thing with Padmavati and countless other matters in India’s history. There’s every reason to never give the benefit of the doubt to chrislam (or any missionary religion), and every reason to never doubt heathens until proof of otherwise. In Padmavati’s case, there’s only absence of literary evidence on the Hindu side. And absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Furthermore, there are Hindu oral accounts of her having lived and died a Hindu, with no interest in islamics or islam. Furthermore, there are her descendants, who testify not only to her existence but to her having lived and died a Hindu, again with no interest in islam and islamics. Now, you or anyone would only deliberately choose to doubt her descendants as being her descendants when you have no evidence that they’re lying (as you insidiously imply they are, even as you pretend islamic fictions must be “true”), if you’re motivated by one of the missionary religions, a course of action on your part which would merely dismiss you in entirety but not Padmavati’s Hindu descendants.

          If you respond by repeating your mere opinions and predilections for false islamic “testimony” over the authentic Hindu recollection, you’ve demonstrated yourself to be no more than an islamic troll. In fact, if you respond in any way that — as your comment has done so far — adds no actual value, but only more nonsense islamic views on history and Hindu characters, then you’re also no more than an islamic troll.

          Do not keep attempting to bring up the same “arguments” — and don’t try to derail the comments section with other chrislamic trolling topics, as every chrislamic visiting here always does. I’ve answered all your Mere Assertions in this and other comments here, and other Hindus have answered it both here and elsewhere.

          But if you’re really a Turk — from Central Asia — then why don’t you return to your ancestral religion already? I’ve read how you people are one of the most victimised, by over 4 missionary religions. Turks, of all people, should know the value of heathen memory versus missionary lying and history rewriting. Either way, what you’ve claimed here is wrong. Stand corrected. Don’t respond. And especially don’t interfere in matters that don’t concern you.

          But if you’re just a subcontinental missionary monotheist (albeit pretending to associate yourself to Central Asian Turks), your islamic trolling here is anything but a surprise, let alone your penchant for compulsive lying. I’ll just add you as yet another example of islam being incapable of producing anything better than compulsive liars. But you islamaniacs must be getting pretty desperate if you’ve now set your sights on Padmavati. Guess your love jihad projects aren’t progressing as fast as you hoped, and you’re banking on dawood ibrahim type bollywood propaganda and sad islamic fictions to help your cause. Must burn for you that so many anti-muslim Kurdish women soldiers too continue to commit suicide rather than ever let some vile islamaniac touch them. I forget how your brothers in islam in the mid-east are already writing islamising fictions about these Kurdish women after trying to do a localised public knowledge blackout on actual evidence. But then, history does keep repeating under chrislam’s continued compulsive lying.

  • Ayush Silakari

    Can you please post or direct me a link to read true and complete story of Maharana Pratap.

    • Milin Patel

      Read the book “Rana Pratap” by Dr. Bhawan Singh Rana.

    • Anfauglir

      Beware that “Milin Patel” is a crypto-muslim: e.g. his blog, which he’s been advertising here, is full of very islamic subversions of the Hindu epics and sacred literature (quite akin to the subversions by the defunct Paki site dalitstan). He also upvotes known cryptomuslim trolls. Anything “Milin Patel” suggests for reading you may therefore beware is intended to subvert rather than inform.

  • Samrat Bharat

      LOL.. Distortion of history may not be a big thing for you but we should not allow anyone to distort the history or else there wont be any learning from the history

      • Samrat Bharat

        LOL! What is there to learn from a several hundred year old story of murder and suicide?

        • FREE_SOUL

          LOL.. for millions of years people saw apple falling from tree and said what is there to learn from falling of apple but it was newton who found the concept of gravity . It is not your fault. May be you do not have the brain to learn from history.

          • Samrat Bharat

            So what did you learn from this story of lust, murder and suicide that is applicable today? That even today women are cows that need “raksha”?

          • Shubhangi Raykar

            Your arguments are cynical. Women needed it because the Muslim invaders were barbaric in their approach to women.They treated women as nothing but sex slaves.

          • Samrat Bharat

            Unlike ghoonghat, sati, devdasi and how a zamindar (even today in some parts) would treat the village women? Anyway, my question was what use is that knowledge today. You seem to be repeating something I already agree with – those were different times with different human rights standards.

          • Anfauglir

            “Samrat Bharat” is a known and outed islamic: it is the india-facts handle of a repeatedly resurrecting and repeatedly outed islamic over at swarajyamag. SB is the equivalent of a crypto-christian, doing false flag operations under a Hindu moniker and image. I’m not sure why Hindus keep falling for this.

            Here’s something Hindus may look out for: if it sounds like an anti-Hindu, it is obviously not Hindu but also, all anti-Hindus are motivated by one of the missionary monotheisms (christianity/islam) and their heresies (communism, psecularism). 99% of the time if you identify a anti-Hindu repeat offender as a chrislamic, you’ll be right. The other 1% is a communist that’s not particularly aligned to either monotheism.

            If you ever wish to confirm for yourself whether a crypto-monotheist Hindu-baiting troll is definitely a monotheist cloaking their Hindu-baiting under a secular or Hindu cover, then ask them to publicly affirm the following to demonstrate their alleged neutrality (I have so far found the test to always works):

            2. Islam’s prophet Mohamed (if he existed, there’s some doubt on that too) was factually this and this

            And if any Hindu-baiters do affirm both, make sure to inform any of the countless rabid islamic sites on the internet that the Hindu-baiter affirmed #2. And watch islam clean up (after) its own for a change.

          • Samrat Bharat

            Wow! I am honored to have been the subject of this PhD thesis. I am an atheist BTW. Mary being the pregnant virgin is as impossible to me as Kunti “praying” to Surya to give birth to Karna. Mohammed may be pedophile by today’s standards, but I am not ignorant of child marriages even today in India’s Cow Belt villages. And irrespective which religion, women needing to be illiterate, pregnant and in the kitchen is a common aspiration for all the priests, maulvis, babas/yogis etc.

          • Anfauglir

            But you never made the actual affirmation, you’re only making excuses (e.g. that your religious character “may be considered” a pedophile “by today’s standards” etc. before illogically trying to turn your excuses for mohammed into yet another of your exclusive tirades against Hinduism.)

            Make the affirmation. And then we’ll know you to be an ex-monotheist. (But nothing more than that. Possibly just a ex-monotheist communist. Atheists are never exclusive Hindu-baiters but would bait all religions equally. But you are as you always were, an exclusive Hindu-baiter.)

            Here, affirm this:

            2. Islam’s prophet Mohamed was factually this and this (that’s if the islamic prophet existed, because several islamic theologians have come to the conclusion that he didn’t exist either)

            These are simple facts that every atheist who claims to adhere to facts has always stated easily. So if you’re an atheist as you claim to be, make the affirmation.

          • Samrat Bharat

            LOL, you seem easily confused :D. As an atheist, I don’t believe in god. If Jesus, Mohammad etc did exist, they were either deluded human being who hallucinated about hearing god’s voice, or they were outright frauds like today’s evangelists, Zakir Naiks, Ravishankar, Ramdev etc.

            Sure Mohammad is a pedophile. I can’t affirm an entire website. Feel free to pick other things that make your life meaningful by me as an individual affirming it.

          • Anfauglir

            Did I ask you to affirm an entire website? I asked you to affirm the exact 2 points as stated (no random Mohammed in my statement) and yet you skipped most of it to affirm something about some unidentifiable Mohammed (there are so many).
            And the first link is for those who imagine jesus of the gospels may have existed to find out that he is ahistorical, if they didn’t know yet.

            So epic fail. Again.

            One last time for you to try again: affirm the statements as written — say “I affirm” and affix the text: copy and paste but make sure to include the hyperlinks for point 2, even if you leave it out for point 1.

          • Samrat Bharat

            You can feel free to ask me whatever you want :). Do let me know if you have more that I should do.

            I can’t affirm Jesus/Mohammad/Ram etc existed or not, as I haven’t cared enough to know if they did. I love the Chanakya avatar on my profile because of the reactions I get :D, so that definitely stays !

            Sure, call me crypto-monotheist. Is that a cool word coined by that American Rajiv Malhotra? We are suckers for phoren uncles.

          • Anfauglir

            So you refuse to affirm the one thing that every actual atheist knows? That Jesus Never Existed. So you utterly failed your claim at being an atheist. No one will take your moronic claims at being an atheist seriously.

            And your refusal to make the affirmation as stated has proved that you are a crypto-chrislamic. Q.E.D.

            (How often have you refused now, I’ve lost count: I’d asked you to make the same affirmation long ago already and you refused outright then too, essentially whining that you shouldn’t have to “prove your atheism”, though you never had a problem Hindu-baiting. Quite like Milin in that peculiar religious bias. Q.E.D. again)

            When you admit you know nothing, starting with Jesus’ ahistoricity, why are you still yapping: if you don’t know about the copious amounts of documented facts that jesus never existed (starting from the ancient Romans who dared early christians for proof of jesus’ alleged historicity), then you’re either just a chrislamic doign special pleading for jesus, or an absolute ignoramus who should be neither heard nor seen. You’re actually the former, because I just gave you a link–one of many sources of documentation on jesus ahistoricity–that could educate you on why, yet you “curiously” refuse to learn. That too is unlike an actual atheist, who’d rather arm themselves against imbecilic beliefs, starting with the most imbecilic, deranged and dangerous of all, christoislam.

            ” Is that a cool word coined by that American Rajiv Malhotra?”

            You chrislamics seem to know more about Rajiv Malhotras than Hindus do, certainly more than I do. Maybe
            it’s because you crypto-chrislamics can’t think for yourselves in your
            Hindu-baiting and need to get your ideas from whatever Malhotra or whoever is
            complaining about.

            And that’s another thing you have in common with the outed crypto-chrislamic “Milin Patel” and presumably all other crypto-chrislamic Hindu-baiters: because he, like you, keeps bringing up “Rajiv Malhotra, Rajiv Malhotra” whenever dealing with Hindus who point out crypto-chrislamism through the tell-tale signs of double standards and denial of facts about chrislamism. Milin’s a known chrislamic too, as proven with logic that can’t be gainsaid. And since you’re near identical to him in your one-sided baiting. Because only you guys care enough about Malhotra or whoever to whine on about them.

            “We are suckers for phoren uncles.”
            You like the other moron “Milin” are only speaking for yourselves.

            – So you admit you’re a sucker.
            – You’re into anything “phoren” like repeating Paki and other foreign chrislamic anti-Hindu bile, as “Milin” did in repeating Paki sites’ concoctions about Hinduism.

            – And you essentially admitted you’re a total and deliberate or rather convenient ignoramus: as you admitted you don’t know that jesus never existed, and refused to educate yourself on it either, despite being given ample opportunity.

            – And your statements outed you as merely playing at being an atheist: your refusal to make the affirmation, your refusal to admit or know or educate yourself that jesus never existed (and which atheist would ever do such a thing, you failure or rather fraud), your exclusive baiting of Hinduism and Hindus (no atheists exclusively bait any one religion).

            – And we know you’re a cryptomonotheist: someone who pretends to be so deliberately ignorant as to conveniently “not have an opinion” on whether jesus ever existed. Height of (failed) crypto-chrislamism. Nobody else would consider jesus to be historical: he only matters to religions where jesus is mentioned, i.e. chrislam.

            And that reminds me, you dweebs keep bringing up this strawman– one of tying Malhotra with Hindus–pretending that he has the pulse of Hindu thought or something. But it’s you chrislamics who have a tell: your deliberate attempts to keep jesus as a plausible historic character, contra all the evidence against this, indicates an obsession with jesus on your part–one only chrislamics have, as stated, since no one else entertains his existence.

            A refusal to affirm jesus’ ahistoricity is an exclusive chrislamic tell. Because an absurd belief in jesus historicity is what chrislamics share, and which no one else shares (not atheists, nor any other religionists). Which is why the jesus’ ahistoricity was part of the affirmation I asked you to make and which you refused, thus cementing you as a chrislamic playing at being an atheist and failing badly. You’re so lousy at this, maybe you should try another hobby, since I know you’re too stupid (and ignorant and impossible to educate, as per your own admission) to be employable in anything.

          • Samrat Bharat

            Wow ! This Milin Patel seems a smart type. Do you have a link to his profile?

            If Chankaya doesn’t wear these markings, what makes you think my profile pic is of him?

          • Anfauglir

            “This Milin Patel seems a smart type.”
            Of course you like your fellow crypto-chrislamic: all you missionary monotheists like each other (except when you’ve genocided everyone else, then you’ll get round to genociding each other).

            “If Chankaya doesn’t wear these markings, what makes you think my profile pic is of him?”

            The pic is of Chanakya by a Hindu artist (from a very early 20th century Hindu book translating his writings, I already confirmed by looking it up last time, dweeb).

            Why, after first bragging that you had consciously selected a pic of Chanakya, do you suddenly pretend you didn’t know what you were stealing and that you can’t do what I did: look it up? And now that you know, when will you relinquish the pic and get one of whoever that isn’t wearing Hindu markings and/or isn’t by Hindus and hence for Hindus?

            You already admitted to being crypto-monotheist/a compulsive liar, but why don’t you at least stop being a thief now you know that’s what you’ve got yourself into? Stop thieving Hindu stuff.

          • Samrat Bharat

            I never said the pic is not an artist’s impression of Chanakya 🙂 Unless the vedas already contained the science of photography, that Mughals and British made everyone forget. I was just trying to find some logic between your ramblings.

            You still haven’t given me a link to Milin Patel. I demand that you right away do so, and affirm that we are superior beings.

  • Samrat Bharat

    Rather than whine aimlessly, why not try making your version of “historically accurate” films? Half brains like Akshay Kumar, Anupam Kher etc can provide the star value.


      LOL.. Distortion of history may not be a big thing for you but we should not allow anyone to distort the history or else there wont be any learning from the history.

  • Bhuvan Chaturvedi

    To those making a big deal about historical accuracy, please come forward to support a film/documentary detailing the thousands of temples desecrated and destroyed during the islamic rule of India. That would be as historically accurate as one can be, with scores of primary first hand historical and archeological records.

  • SuchindranathAiyer

    History was maintained, distributed, like the Vedas, the Upansihads the Samhithas and the Smrithis in the memories of Indian Brahmins and could be construed from the Ballads of the Bards.These have been eradicated to make way for India’s PANGOLIN*s

    India’s Judiciary and Neta-Babus have certainly NEVER been objective or equitable.Even the Constitution is not

    *Note: PANGOLIN: An enemy of India who believes in inequality under law, exceptions to the rule of law and persecution of some for the benefit of others. At present, the sole purpose of the Indian Republic, Constitutional or otherwise, is to pamper and provide for certain constitutionally preferred sections of society who the British found useful to hold and exploit India at the cost of those who the British hated and persecuted. The Pangolin is a creature that is unique to India and feeds on ants that are known in nature to be industrious and hard working if not quite as fruitful as bees who flee to better climes. (PANGOLIN is an acronym for the Periyar-Ambedkar-Nehru-Gandhi-Other (alien) Religions-Communist Consensus that usurped the British Mantle and has worn it with elan to loot, plunder, and rape India since 1921 and re write History and laws to their exclusive benefit since 1947)

    • Sujata Srinath

      Well articulated! PANGOLIN is an apt name…had not heard of it before!

  • MangoManav

    Left liberal sickulars only like to insult Hindus and India must be the only country where beliefs of majority is insulted in the name of FoE.

  • https

    leftist thinker india me a isse chichiyayege jaise ki America me Trump ke ke baad waha ke liberal kr rahe hai.
    agar inko yaha lat padegi, ab wah America bhi nahi jo into funding dega.

  • Nanda Chandran

    good article.

  • Nanda Chandran

    good article.

    • Shabir


  • A S Mahadevan

    Talking about historical evidence, outside the New Testament there is no evidence of Jesus Christ having ever lived. Mohammed claimed the Kaaba was first built by Abraham (Ibrahim). Again, outside the Old Testament there is no historical evidence of Ibrahim having lived.

    • Samrat Bharat

      Every movie based on religion runs into controversy: Why are you comparing religion (full of fake stories) to a historical narrative that just has some missing pieces that the script writer is reimagining?

      • A S Mahadevan

        My comment was regarding the argument that since the story of Padmini does not have historical evidence, it is okay to retell it any way you want and no one should object. My point is, why not apply the same logic to religion also, especially for the so called minority religions? I have no objection if someone retells (“distorts” ) historical or religious stories in the name of freedom of artistic expression as long as it is done for all without exceptions.

        • A S Mahadevan

          Yes, every movie on religion runs into controversies. But who started it? Some religions have immunity while others do not. If liberals have uniform yardstick for all issues then I will support them.

        • Samrat Bharat

          Sure! Go ahead and retell religion also. It is all bullshit anyway.

          • A S Mahadevan

            You don’t seem to understand any logic. I give up. Goodbye.

          • Samrat Bharat

            Eh? I am agreeing with you. Something wrong with your logic?

      • Because in India whole history before 6th century is related with Hindu religion. No one talks about it. Very few pages are there in history books about that time. Even equality between all religions will ensure no controversy.

        • Samrat Bharat

          Could it be because methods to save the written word (quality of ink, the material it was written on etc.) got better over time, so the more recent portions of history are better preserved? It is of course also a given that “History is written by the victors.” And the superior camp at that point of time won (Mughals and later Europeans). And they survived to write history. The earlier inhabitants had their peak and then faded away. Such is life.

          • Sujata Srinath

            What about all the libraries that were burnt? Maybe there were a lot of historical texts there? Which is why they were razed to the ground?

  • Jishnu

    That Padmini is a “legend” and not a “historic account” makes it more owned by Hindus which cannot be tinkered with by rogues of bollywood, for it represents their experiences, ideals, trauma none of which is shared by the rogues of bollywood. The moment you say legend the question is whose legend it is. One question Hindus don’t ask. It is OUR legend, open only to those who share OUR ideas, culture, experiences, view of life, place stakes in those.

    • Shubhangi Raykar

      Two days ago, there was a representative from the dynasty to which Padmini belonged after her marriage. He said he was the 30th descendent from Padmini’s generation He was referring to that royal family. How can you say everything is fictitious.?

      • Jishnu

        Agree, and corrected in the comment.

    • Jitendra Desai

      You are right.Time for Hindus to declare this from the pulpits.No body should triffle with our history,our legends,our folk traditions,our norms in the name of freedom.

  • Ramesh

    Regarding the tolerance of the “liberal” leftists-let us remember that a theatre which featured Rambo was burnt by CPIM cadres in Calcutta in the late 80s. And these people preach tolerance to Hindus

  • Satishchandra Tanksale

    There are so many Myths , Western as well as Islamic and they are are authenticated as a form of History by Left Liberal Secularists . St Thomas of south India is a glaring example . Ishwar sharan`s ` The myth of St Thomas & the Mylapore Shiva Temple` is the detailed version of this conspiracy . The Euclidean myth is busted by Dr C K Raju , the History of Science writer.
    The myth of How Akbar was a tolerant emperor, How Sufi Awaliyas were peaceful preachers is a main course History for Indians.

    The point is why people with Hindu names & Hindu family backgrounds easily believe that Hinduism is a Myth, Hindu sciptures are all mythological ?

    • R. Singh

      The minute you use the term “scriptures “for any collection of data from Bharatian sources , you will have lost the plot.

      A “scripture” by its very definition, is a work based in a’ belief’ system and cannot be a source of reliable information.

      The corpii of gyan , be they Vedas, Upanishads, Puranas, etc of our nation Bharat, cannot and should not be reduced to something based on blind belief.

      They simply contain data, scientific, historical, and legends, and philosophy, especially the last.

      We should not make the mistake of treating them as ” HOLY”. or ” SACRED” giving them a status of a Koran or a Bible..

      • Milin Patel

        So Vedas are not scriptures? They do not present a belief system? LMAO!

    • R. Singh

      Our indigenous versions give us a different story.

      Akbar was a cruel little so and so.

      He raped and pillaged the country side, to build Fatehpur Sikri.

      Later Historians relied only on the works of Muslim authors, whose writings were taken as the Gospel Truth.

      e.g Elliot and Dowson’ s book see The History of India, as told by Its Own Historians – Wikipedia

      is a good example of colonial writing who accepted Islamic rantings as the absolute truth.

      These works along with Nehru Gandhi Historians- Irfan Habib,Rr Thapar, Subhash Chandra, V N Datta, shaped what history we are taught.

      K S Lal;s works, were ignored.

      They were a step in a scientific inquiry, so missing from Indian Historical thought.

      Uncovering evidence that had been buried. or simply ignored.

      Our indigenous versions need to given their due place in our historical teachings

      Sites like this are very welcome, for they bring out our version of events to reserachers and the Public.

      Hopefully we will succeed in changing the narrative