Saturday, February 14, 2009

Destruction and Desecration in Ayodhya

Ayodhya TempleBack in 2005 I touched briefly on the destruction of a Hindu temple in Ayodhya by the Moghul emperor Aurangzeb. The desecration of Ayodhya was part of a vast project of devastation and massacre perpetrated by the Muslim invaders upon the Hindus, Buddhists, and Sikhs of India over a span over several hundred years.

The legions of the Prophet cut swaths of destruction across the Hindu heartland in the 14th, 15th, 16th, and 17th centuries, destroying temples, carrying off booty, and massacring millions of infidels. The mujahideen heaped up literal mountains of skulls in their pious zeal. They enslaved those whom they did not kill, and destroyed the magnificent sacred architecture and art of Hindu civilization that lay in their path.

Considering the Indian treasures that managed to survive the Muslim onslaught, it is heartrending to contemplate what was lost, since what remains is only a fraction of what once was. This deliberate wanton destruction of a civilization was not a byproduct of greed: it was the very purpose of Islam itself. Mass murder of infidels and the destruction of all “idols” remain the primary function of pious Muslims when they are unencumbered by any external restraints.

*   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *   *

The enormity of India’s struggle against the Great Jihad is daunting for a Westerner to come to grips with. The consequences that befell India in the wake of the Islamic juggernaut exceeded those of any European country by at least an order of magnitude. And the struggle continues to this day: the Muslim population of India is currently eight to ten times larger than in the whole of Europe, and is growing relative to India’s other ethnic groups.

So I’m grateful that Dharmaveer at Thoughts of a nationalist Indian has agreed to post a series of articles about the Muslim invasions of India. In a recent post he outlined the history of Ayodhya,

Babar’s demolition of the Ram Janmabhoomi temple complex: The gloating Muslim accounts

To the western world, an iconic image of Islamic aggression is the conversion of the Hagia Sophia — Eastern Christendom’s greatest church — into a mosque by the Ottoman Sultan Mehmet. It was his first act upon entering the conquered city of Constantinople (now Istanbul) in 1493AD.

It is relatively unknown in the western world that a mere 35 years later, in 1528AD, his fellow Turk — Zahir ud-din Babar, the founder of the Moghul empire in India, and a descendant of Tamerlane — demolished one of Hinduism’s greatest temple complexes, and erected a mosque in its place, which is known in India as the Babri Masjid (Babar’s mosque).

It is the purpose of this article to give my western readers a glimpse into this act of destruction, and to provide further evidence of the compulsive aggression and profanity of Islam.

Through the centuries of brutal Islamic rule over India, tens of thousands of Hindu temples were destroyed and mosques built at their sites. In northern India, which was under Islamic rule for a longer period of time, hardly any temple has survived the Islamic period. Among the temples destroyed were the 3 greatest temples of Hindu Dharma — those dedicated to Shri Ram, Shri Krishna, and Shankar, at Ayodhya, Mathura, and Benaras (Varanasi), respectively.

Muslims kept fairly accurate accounts of their temple demolitions, since they considered them acts of great piety. By destroying the temples of the “kufr”, they were doing Allah’s bidding, and imitating Muhammad, who himself had destroyed all the idols in the Kaaba and made it into a mosque. Muslim rulers throughout history have repeated this act. The West knows of the conversion of the St. Sophia in Constantinople into a mosque. Hindudom knows of thousands of such tragic instances.

Given below are some of the accounts left by Muslim historians of the destruction of the Ram Janmabhoomi temple in Ayodhya — one of the greatest temples of Hindu Dharma. We will never know its splendour, but judging by the temples of South India that did survive Islamic rule, it must have been a stupendous feat of architecture.

The Muslim writers unanimously describe the following:
- - - - - - - - -
1. The temple complex comprised of the Janmasthan of Shri Ram at Kot Ram Chander, the private apartments (mahal sarai) of King Dashrath and Shri Ram, and a temple and a kitchen popularly known as Sita Ki Rasoi, where tradition held that Sita lived and cooked for her husband.
2. All three were demolished and a mosque constructed thereupon in 1528 A.D. under the guidance of Babur’s commander Mir Baqi and the Patronage of a Muslim cleric named Sayed Musa Ashikan.

The earliest of such authors is none other than the granddaughter of the Moghul emperor Aurangzeb. Many of these Muslim writers were residents of Ayodhya (Awadh) and some were eye-witness to or participants in the Hindu-Muslim clashes that resulted from the numerous (77 recorded) attempts by Hindus to regain control of their holy site. Muslim records state that over 100,000 Hindus, over the centuries, perished in attempts to regain the temple.

Let us now see what the Muslim writers have said…

Dharmaveer goes on to quote in some detail the accounts of various Muslim historians concerning the destruction of temple in Ayodhya and the building of the mosque that replaced it.

He says, in conclusion:

It is this Babri mosque, built as a symbol of the subjugation and humiliation of Hindus at a spot they venerated so highly, that was damaged by a crowd of Hindus in 1992 at the height of the nationalist movement to rebuild a temple for Shri Ram at the site which had been venerated as his birthplace by Hindus for millennia.

Islam deliberately destroyed and desecrated what was most sacred to Hindus, and replaced it with a symbol of Islamic victory. The same reason Sultan Mehmet converted the Hagia Sophia into a mosque.

Go over to Thoughts of a nationalist Indian to read the rest.

The importance of the Indian front in the current conflict cannot be overemphasized. Dharmaveer’s desire to build bridges between his country and the rest of the West is commendable.

India is the natural ally of all those countries and cultures that lie in Islam’s crosshairs.

6 comments:

DP111 said...

The most heinous crimes which the followers of Mohammad called as jihadis or to use a more euphemistic term, Muslims, perpetrated was on peace loving Hindus in India. The entire civilization of Hindus called as Saraswati Civilization was decapitated and reduced to dust. The depth and the scope of holocaust which befell Hindus is so staggering that common human mind fails to understand this and goes blank. Vedic India, originally called as Bharatvarsha, stretched from Afghanistan all the way to Japan. Murderous Muslims layed siege to glorious Bharatvarsha almost 1400 years ago and by treacherous and totally subhuman techniques succeeded in destruction and plunder of the greatest civilization that humanity has known so far.

- from Rape of a Civilization, by Kuldeep Razdan, Sword of Truth, September 4th, 1999

What has been the Indian/Hindu experience with Islam?

"The Mohammedan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace may at any time be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying from within."
- W. Durant, "Story of Civilization"

Islamic slaughter of Hindus, the destruction of their civilisation, and their continuous humiliation through the centuries of Islamic rule, has had consequences that are present even to this day. Long term dhimmitude has induced a servility in Hindu minds to Islam. The humiliation of Hindu India was so great, that it is not surprising that Hindu India refuses to accept it. It is far too humiliating, and shameful, thus the mind, not unreasonably, just pushes it out of mind. Only in the last two decades has Hindu India started re-gain the confidence which should be its by right, but even now, it cannot face up to the reality of what happened in the centuries of Muslim rule.

Long term dhimmification of a population is akin to long term slavery. It continues to inflict a feeling of impotence, fatalism, lack of self-confidence, and shame, in the subject group, even after the subjugation is removed.

I have real sympathy for India. But there is hope. It is one of just two countries, Spain being the other, that has removed Islam from power. There are no other examples - which is sad portend for us, as we head, on our own steam unfortunately, towards dhimmitude.

DP111 said...

From summer patriot, winter soldier

why, indeed, does the man in the bowler hat not feel the sting of his leg being sawn off? why does the west remain indifferent to the image of daniel pearl, or the polish engineer, or the bearded american, having their heads sawn off by thugs who insult their victims by slaughtering them as though domestic animals, sheep for the ancestral bedouin table. why does not the slaughter at mumbai arouse the universal wrath of the western world, as it would have 100 years ago: wars were fought, and empires toppled, for far less insult than this, when the west was vigorous and robust.

why is there no outrage, no wrath, no blood boiling for revenge of our compatriots?

my intellect struggles with this, because more than killings, these outrages are humiliations and insults aimed at the values which underpin our very national existence, and the very existence of western civilization, as it was once comprised. these outrages are insults and humiliations which defame our manhood, our masculinity, or very will to exist.

summer patriot, winter soldier

As I've posted before, there is something wrong with us "men in the West" at a fundamental level ie the level of the soul, no, at the basic primeval level.

Fjordman said...

DP111: We're a completely empty shell of a culture which believes in absolutely nothing. At least we will be providing employment for centuries of future historians, who will scratch their heads and wonder exactly how a once-great civilization could just fall apart like this. I could add that I don't by this mean to say that the West will necessarily die from this, but the current incarnation of it will.

Zenster said...

This deliberate wanton destruction of a civilization was not a byproduct of greed: it was the very purpose of Islam itself.

It would be best if all non-Muslims bore this in mind when considering how to deal with Islam. A worldwide caliphate would be nothing more or less than Global Cultural Genocide™.

Mass murder of infidels and the destruction of all “idols” remain the primary function of pious Muslims when they are unencumbered by any external restraints.

That being the case, which it most definitely is, it's long overdue for a whole messa encumberin' to happen. One would think that the 9-11 atrocity was sufficient to motivate Western leaders in this respect.

What, then, shall be required? Toppling of the Eiffel Tower? Dynamiting of the Statue of Liberty? Bombing of the Cistine Chapel? Exactly what article of priceless Western heritage must be obliterated before Islam is finally brought to heel?

... the compulsive aggression and profanity of Islam.

For Muslims, the term "compulsive aggression" is redundant and the profanity intrinsic.

Muslims kept fairly accurate accounts of their temple demolitions, since they considered them acts of great piety.

Yet one more striking similarity to the Nazis who kept meticulous records of their mass murder.

DP111: why does not the slaughter at mumbai arouse the universal wrath of the western world, as it would have 100 years ago: wars were fought, and empires toppled, for far less insult than this, when the west was vigorous and robust.

Why, indeed. I still maintain that when history closes its book upon this new jihadist era, the 9-11 atrocity will stand as the beginning of Islam's end.

Flying fully loaded passenger airliners into occupied skyscrapers stands as one of the most heinous crimes that can be committed without resorting to massive military force or weaponry. This one event will eventually be recognized as the unignorable call to arms that hearlded Islam's final demise. How dreadful it is to think that even one more such atrocity, if not many more, will be needed to spur on Western powers in ridding this world of Islam.

DP111 said...

Zenster:
Succinct and precise remedies. Excellent.

9/11 was far worse then Pearl Harbour. A previous generation of Americans, some of who are still alive, would have devastated the ME. And not just physical devastation, though that is essential for what follows, the entire constitution of Islam would have been forcibly changed, just as that of Japan was changed for good. These days however, there is the assumption that the root culture of a people cannot be changed by force, though Islamic conquest is an example that it can.

Fjordman wrote: We're a completely empty shell of a culture, which believes in absolutely nothing. At least we will be providing employment for centuries of future historians, who will scratch their heads and wonder exactly how a once-great civilization could just fall apart like this.

We cannot abandon hope. Without hope, all is lost.

Do we believe in nothing? Fundamentally, yes. The trouble is that we have too much to believe in, and we end up believing nothing. Society has been atomised. The civilisation born from the Christian faith has cut itself off from its roots, so we have nothing to coalesce around. This is the same problem that Martin Luther diagnosed as the Turks (Muslim) armies laid waste to Eastern and Central Europe, and threatened Germany itself.

The nightmare of India under Muslim rule is so horrendous that modern India cannot face up to its reality, and hence they gloss over it and pretend that it never happened. This is the situation in all countries that were conquered by Islam. Iran and Pakistan are both heirs to an ancient and cultured civilisation, and yet Iranians and Pakistanis ignore the bestial treatment of their ancestors by Muslim invaders, and pretend that Islam just changed their minds in a peaceful manner. To acknowledge the reality is too shameful. This is where we are headed, and that is why this thread on India is important.

The problem is, why are men of the West so docile? This is particularly so in the case of Britain. This is a martial and militaristic island par excellence that made even the Japanese appear pacifist. What ever happened? It cannot be because women are in the majority. Women have been the majority for a long while, but that didn’t make men any the less assertive and robust. The normal response of men when their community or nation is attacked is to counter attack. What did we do after London 7/7? Nothing. Instead we sat back and congratulated ourselves that no Muslim in Britain was attacked, and we are “oh so civilised”. The same happened in Bombay after the train bombs. Indians did nothing, and the liberal Times of India and other papers were sanctimoniously congratulating themselves as to how civilised Indians are. There should have been some response, which of course could have been dealt by the police in the usual way. However, the message would have gone out to the authorities, as well as to Muslims - “Watch it, don’t push us”. Instead, the message that has gone out to the authorities is – “Ignore British men but be careful not to antagonise Muslims”. That is one of the fallouts, and is clearly evident in the Geert Wilders affair. Lord Ahmed claims he did not threaten parliament with 10,000 Muslim (violent) demonstrators – he does not need to, as the message has already been understood and digested by the authorities and Muslims, and Ahmed simply displays that.

Men, particularly Western men, are not behaving as men should.

The Poster Formerly Known as Gordon said...

The earliest of such authors is none other than the granddaughter of the Moghul emperor Aurangzeb.

Aurangzeb was Mogul emperor from 1658 to 1707. His granddaughter would have written even later.

This means that the first "eyewitness" account of the destruction of the temple was written almost 200 years after it actually occurred.