Comments on: On Aurangzeb, Kashi Vishwanath, Lies and Half-Truths

By: armu

armu — Wed, 27 Apr 2011 18:52:11 +0000

http://www.scribd.com/doc/19010845/Aurangzeb-ka-sach-kya-he-HINDI-

By: B Shantanu

B Shantanu — Thu, 11 Nov 2010 15:19:23 +0000

Placing this here for the record. A brief excerpt from Sandeep's take on the destruction of temples, "Girish Shahane Gets it Mostly Wrong":

So here’s a certain Girish Shahane criticizing Lonely Planet’s guide to India. He calls it “The Lonely Planet Misguidebook” but when he sets out to “prove” that it is indeed a “misguidebook,” he runs into several problems: history and reasoning being two prominent ones. The reason he embarks on this exercise because he finds its “misguided take on India’s history and culture deeply troubling.” Now when someone talks about the history and culture of a country, one expects the author to give at least a bird’s eye view of the entire history and culture from the time the country was, so to say, founded. With a country like India, that means going back roughly, to 5000 years. But Girish picks and chooses the parts he finds objectionable. ...let’s see what bothers him more. In his own words, “… than the constant highlighting of atrocities, often fictional ones, by Muslim rulers.”

Do read and share...

By: Mo

Mo — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 13:13:47 +0000

Thank you for the article.

I’ve seen the falsehood story propaganda for Aurangzeb. This hogwash is so ridiculous that it is funny that anyone believes the mulla’s fake version.
It is plain and simple. Aurangzeb was a wretched bigot of highest order.

History should be taught as is, and not fabricated and colored for p-secularist pleasure.

By: Sid

Sid — Fri, 21 May 2010 17:50:53 +0000

Vikas,
Now I can not give proofs.
Now if you have faith in internet
... which I havent read but I am presuming would detail more such instances.
But I can bet my life that he was not lying.
This is a funny way to argue against Shantanu’s much-documented post. You were assuming and betting a lot. I do not know you but I can assume that you assume a lot without doing any proper research. Would you agree to that assumption? How about some quotes for a change or few links that actually works? How can you give a reference to a book which you have not read at all?
On the ohter hand, I would give you a book that I have read before:
English translation of AHKAM-I-ALAMGIRI or otherwise known as
Anecdotes Of Aurangzeb
Look at section IV for his dealing with Hindus.
Here is a link (along with JN Sarcar’s very rigorous “A life of Aurangzib and Historical Notes”):

http://www.scribd.com/doc/420268/Anecdotes-of-Aurangzeb

By: Suman

Suman — Fri, 21 May 2010 07:16:33 +0000

” How can people believe that Aurengzeb be secular and he built temple. He is notorious for destroying Hindu Temple and Hindu Population. In history it was mentioned that he has a target of killing 1,000 hindus per day and You people are saying he was secular.
It is funny “.