Thursday, May 01, 2008

Sex and Hinduism

Nithin Sridhar

"Her lap is a sacrificial altar; her hairs, the sacrificial grass; her skin, the soma-press. The two labia*(lips) of the vulva are the fire in the middle." [Brhad-Âranyaka Upanisad, 6.4.3]
"This man (ama) am I; that woman (sâ), thou!
That woman, thou; this man am I!
I am the Sâman; thou, the Rig!
I am the heaven; thou, the earth!
Come, let us two together clasp!
Together let us semen mix,
A male, a son for to procure!"
[Brhad-Âranyaka Upanisad, 6.4.20]1

Whenever the issue of Love, Nudity, Sex and Hinduism comes into picture, we usually get any one of the following reactions-

1] The Westerners in general and Western scholars doing South Asian studies [for example RISA2] in particular, and their Indian counterparts who consider Hinduism to be mix of voodoo and pornography.

2] The Hindu orthodox which thinks sex is a taboo.

Now I will examine, how valid is both of these perspective.

Hindu Purusharthas:

Purusharthas means objectives of a human being. They are the canonical four ends or aims of human life. They serve as pointers in the life. The four Purusharthas from lowest to highest-

? Kama - pleasure or desire3
? Artha - wealth
? Dharma - righteousness or morality
? Moksha - liberation from the cycle of reincarnation

According to Kama Sutra, "IN the beginning, the Lord of Beings created men and women, and in the form of commandments in one hundred thousand chapters laid down rules for regulating their existence with regard to Dharma, Artha, and Kama." 4 Further it says- "MAN, the period of whose life is one hundred years, should practise Dharma, Artha and Kama at different times and in such a manner that they may harmonize together and not clash in any way. He should acquire learning in his childhood, in his youth and middle age he should attend to Artha and Kama, and in his old age he should perform Dharma, and thus seek to gain Moksha, i.e. release from further transmigration.."5

So, according to Hindu scheme of thing, even though Enlightment is the ultimate goal of life, it encourages people to enjoy everything and fulfill all material desires. Moksha is a long process. It can be achieved only when all material desires are quenched. And hence, Hindu religion prescribes 2 methods, the path of renounciates, the path of householder. There is one more less popular but more maligned path of within "Tantras" which accept everything material, everything condemned as taboo and hence aims to rise above the animalistic desires.

Sex as Yajna:

Yajna or sacrifice is derived from root word "Yaj". It means Worship or offering an oblation.
Max Muller defines Yajna is an act by which we surrender something for the sake of gods"6.
Sex is worship. It is an act by which the couples surrender their ego, in order to gain pleasure, progeny, eventually even enlightment.

"Her lap is a sacrificial altar; her hairs, the sacrificial grass; her skin, the soma-press. The two labia of the vulva are the fire in the middle. Verily, indeed, as great as is the world of him who sacrifices with the Vâjapeya ("Strength-libation") sacrifice, so great is the world of him who practises sexual intercourse"7 (Brhad-Âranyaka Upanisad)

These verses clearly shows that, sex was treated as a form of worship, an act to not only fulfill one"s desires and gain pleasures, but also as an act of sacredness.

Sex as Meditation:

In Vigyana Bhairava Tantra8, during a conversation between Shiva and Shakti,

Devi Asks:

O Shiva, what is your reality?
What is this wonder-filled universe?
What consttutes seed?
Who centers the universal wheel?
What is this life beyond form pervading forms?
How may we enter it fully,
above space and time,
names and descriptions?
Let my doubts be cleared!

So, Shiva explains her 112 methods of meditation to attain enlightment. He says-

At the start of sexual union
Keep attentive on the fire in the beginning,
And so continuing,
Avoid the embers in the end.
When in such embrace your senses are shaken as leaves,
Enter this shaking.
Even remembering union,
Without the embrace.

These verses clearly indicate how sexual act can be utilized for achieving enlightment. Enlightment is a state, when all egos vanish. As in a sexual act, the couple leaves behind their ego and unites with each other and achieves sexual ecstasy. This very thing can be utilized to achieve spiritual ecstasy.


It is the study of "Sixty Four9" arts like- Singing, Playing on musical instruments, Dancing, Union of dancing, singing, and playing instrumental music, Writing and drawing, Tattooing, etc. "Kamasutra" or the "art of lovemaking" only a part of this Shastra.

Is Hinduism pornography and Tantra a sex manual?

The straight answer is a simple No. It is Victorian mentality which condemns any depiction of sex. Hinduism recognizes the role of sexual desires in human lives. The sexual depictions in some of the temples were mean to not only educate the people, but also to help those who were involved in sexual sadhanas for enlightment. There is a difference between Nudity and expression of beauty and pornography. What appears in Hindu puranas and Itihasas are the expressions of genuine beauty and not pornography.

"Tantra" is a much maligned word. "Tantra" actually refers to vast body of literatures called "Agamas" which are practical manuals for meditation. There are many Shaiva, Shaktha, Pancharatra Agamas. Using sex for meditation is prescribed in only few of the so many different paths described in Agamas. So, it is very wrong in equating Tantra with Sex.

Some Social Issues:

Sex Education: Sex education had always been present in Hindu history. Vatsayana says, both men and women should learn Kamashastra10.

Pre-Marital Sex and Love Marriages: In Hindu society sex was always considered to be individual choices. There are many instances in our history and scriptures depicting pre-marital sex and love marriages. So, crying out against them as being anti-Hindu is not quite proper. Manusmrithi recognizes 8 kinds of marriages of which "Gandharva Marriage11" is one of them. It is the voluntary union of a maiden and her lover, which arises from desire and sexual intercourse for its purpose.

The same can be said about extra marital affairs. As they are personal affairs, we should let individuals to decide about it. Hindu society has always given this much freedom to its people.


In Hindu society sex is neither a taboo nor pornography. Sex is sacred. Sex is recognized as human desire which should be satisfied and which can be used to attain the ultimate goal of enlightment.

References & Notes:

1 Brhad-Âranyaka Upanisad forms part of the Satapatha-brâhmana. The verses are taken from chapter titled "Incantations and ceremonies for procreation"

2 Religions In South Asia (RISA), a department under the American Academy of Religion (AAR), has been sponsoring studies for years now to deride Hinduism. Our gods and goddesses like Ganesha, Shiva, Parvati, Laxmi and Kali, our rituals like Upanayana our saints like Sri Ramakrishna Paramahansa and scriptures, Mahabharata, Ramayana and Gita all have come under such distasteful sexual connotation and nauseating voyeurism that one begins to wonder if it can at all be called academics.

3 Kama in general means material desires and pleasures- Physical, Emotional, Sexual, Psychological.
According to Kama Sutra of Vatsayana- "Kama is the enjoyment of appropriate objects by the five senses of hearing, feeling, seeing, tasting and smelling, assisted by the mind together with the soul. The ingredient in this is a peculiar contact between the organ of sense and its object, and the consciousness of pleasure which arises from that contact is called Kama."

4 Chapter 1, Preface, The Kama Sutra of Vatsayayana, Translated by Sir Richard Burton.

5 Chapter 2, Observations on the Three Worldly Attainments of Virtue, Wealth, and Love, The Kama Sutra of Vatsayayana, Translated by Sir Richard Burton.

6 Max Muller, Sacred Books of East series.

7 Brhad-Âranyaka Upanisad

8 Vigyana Bhairava Tantra.

9,10 Chapter III. On the Study of the Sixty-Four Arts, The Kama Sutra of Vatsayayana, Translated by Sir Richard Burton.


Monday, January 14, 2008

Orissa and Christian Missionaries

The recent Hindu-Christian clashes in Orissa during Christmas where many churches were burnt again shed light on the complexity of religious conditions in India. As usual Hindus and Hindu Organizations are being blamed. But, before getting into these blame games, it’s important to state the facts.

Orissa has been a favorite destination of Christian Missionaries for proselytization.
The illegal conversions are being carried out by missionaries in tribal areas. In Kandhamal District alone the Christian population has increased from 6% in 1970 to 27% in 2001, despite an Act enacted by Orissa Legislature in 1967 to prevent conversion by allurement, coercion, bribery and cheating1. On the eve of Christmas, the community had organized for a massive 'conversion' camp in a predominantly Hindu tribal area.2 When the Hindu tribals under the leadership of Swmi Lakshmanananda protested against this, he was attacked. Everything started from this unprovoked attack by Christian goons on Swami Laxmanananda Saraswati who was visiting his disciples in Darsingbadi village in Kandhmal District on 24 th December.

The issue again highlights the ugly face of religious fundamentalism, in this case Christian fundamentalism. It raises the questions about the motive and inspiration behind the ‘proselytization’.

The missionary works are not new. According to the documents of the Lausanne Committee for World Evangelization, the Biblical authority for missions begins quite early in Genesis 12:1-3, in which Abraham is blessed so that through him and his descendants, all the "peoples" of the world would be blessed. Others point to God's wish, often expressed in the Bible, that all peoples of the earth would worship Him. Therefore, Christian missions go where worship is not, in order to bring worship to God.3 In the 16th century the proselyization of Asia was linked to the Portuguese colonial policy. As soon as Christianity came into power, heathen temples were defaced and closed and their revenues transferred to the Church. "We command that all their (heathens') fanes, temples, shrines, if even now any remain entire shall be destroyed by the command of the magistrates" was the order of the day. (Theodosius Code, 380 A.D.). In Great Britain and Germany, priests and monks moved about destroying the groves and shrines of the people. The last regions to lose their religions in Europe were Prussia and the Baltic states.

Varying attempts to stamp out infidels and heretics often proved to be inadequate, so the Holy Inquisition was formed by Pope Gregory IX in 1231 to make the efforts more organized and efficient. Burning was quickly decided upon as the official punishment. In 1245, the Pope gave Inquisitors the right to absolve their assistants of any acts of violence which they might commit in the fulfillment of their duties. Torture of suspects was authorized by Pope Innocent IV in 1252. The Inquisition was not limited to Europe, as Spaniards brought it to the Americas and used it to punish the native inhabitants. Through the 1500s, 879 heresy trials were recorded in Mexico alone.4 The historian Hernando del Pulgar estimated that the Spanish Inquisition had burned at the stake 2,000 people and reconciled another 15,000 by 1490 just one decade after the Inquisition began.( Cited in Kamen op. cit., p. 62.). Juan de Zumarrage, first Bishop of Mexico, writing in 1531, claimed that he personally destroyed over 500 temples and 20,000 idols of the heathens.5 The Goa inquisition which lasted from 1560 to 1812 is considered as the most violent inquisition ever executed by the Portuguese Catholic Church. Inquisition proceedings were always conducted behind closed shutters and closed doors. Hindus were brutally interrogated, flogged, and slowly dismembered in front of their relatives. Eyelids were sliced off and extremities were amputated carefully6. Viceroy D Constantine de Braganca issued an order on April 2, 1560, instructing that Brahmins should be thrown out of Goa and other areas under Portuguese control.7 At the end of 1567, 300 Hindu temples were destroyed.8

These incidences are not just something to be read in pages of history, but it is very much happening even today. Swami Laxmanananda Saraswati says “There was no problem when Christians were not here in Paikia. With their numbers increasing, they forcefully took away Hindu girls and forced the neo-converts to eat beef. They set several temples on fire. Be it Birupakhya Mahadev´s temple or temple at Malarimaha or my Ashram at Rupagoan, the Christians conspired to set them on fire. They threw mortal remains of cows on mandirs. Kondh tribal´s Goddess Dharani Mata´s places of worship in several villages were dishonored. The sacred sword at a temple at Bramhanigaon was forcibly taken away by the converts who melted the sword in public and prepared their weapons with that looted material” 9

In the Lausanne report ‘Christian Witness to Hindus’, they state in details the methods to be adopted to convert different sections of Hindus. They discuss about Rural Evangelism, Urban Evangelism and Student Evangelism. They explain how ‘Miraculous Healing’ helps to convert people. They give strategies to be employed to use mass media, social gatherings, and seminars to their advantage.10

The Niyogi Report provided details of how much had been contributed by which Western country to the total of Rs. 29.27 crores received by Christian missions in India from January 1950 to June 1954. It notes that USA, UK, Canada and France contributed around 21 crores, 5 crores, 2 crores and 8 lakhs respectively. The Report revealed that the bulk of this foreign money received ostensibly for maintaining educational and medical institutions was spent on proselytization. It has been contended, said the Report, that most of the amount is utilized for creating a class of professional proselytizers, both foreign as well as Indian. There were 480 foreign missionaries working in Madhya Pradesh at that time. Out of them as many as 236 were Americans. The Report gave concrete instances of how mission schools were used to influence the minds of young people. Harijan and Adivasi students came in for special attention. They were given free boarding, lodging and books provided they attended Christian prayers. Bible classes were made compulsory by treating as absent for the whole day those students who failed to be present in those classes. School celebrations were used for showing the victory of the cross over all other symbols. Hospitals were used for putting pressure on poor class patients to embrace Christianity. The richest harvest, however, was reaped in mission orphanages which collected orphans during famines and other natural calamities such as floods and earthquakes. ‘No wonder,’ observed the Report, ‘that the largest number of converts is from such backward classes living in areas where due to various causes only Mission schools and hospitals exist. Most conversions have been doubtless insincere admittedly brought about in expectation of social service benefits and other material considerations’.11

Christianity has been following a policy of ‘Inculturation’. This means that it adopted Pagan elements in Christianized form in order to ease the transition from Paganism to Christianity. Pagan gods became Christian saints. Pagan Festivals became Christian festivals. In this process of inculturation, the Christian Church adapted old forms to its new message, but made sure that through the Pagan veneer the Christian doctrine was impressed upon the converts12. "Indigenization," says Kaj Baago, "is evangelization. It is the planting of the gospel inside another culture, another philosophy, another religion.13” In Indian case, ‘Inculturation’ or ‘Indigenization’ means ‘the incorporation of Jesus in Indian spiritual tradition’. Fr. Bede says "In India we need a Christian Vedanta and a Christian Yoga that is a system of theology which makes use not only of the terms and concepts but of the whole structure of thought of the Vedanta”14

Sita Ram Goel divides Hindu-Christian encounter into 5 phases. The first phase began with arrival of Portuguese and Saint Francis Xavier, where they used all crude and violent methods of proselytization. This ended with end of Portuguese rule. The second phase began establishment of British rule, where the language and methods of missionaries was as crude as before but they were not allowed to use physical methods. This ended with rise of Hindu reformation movements of Raja Ram Mohan Roy, Swami Dayananda Saraswathi, and Swami Vivekananda. The third phase starts with the advent of Mahatma Gandhi and his slogan of sarva-dharma-samabhAva which forced Christian missions to change and soften their language. This phase ended with the Tambram Conference of the International Missionary Council (IMC) in 1938, which decided to reformulate Christian theology in the Indian context. The fourth phase which commenced with the coming of independence where the Christian right to convert Hindus was incorporated in the Constitution. The missionary apparatus multiplied fast and became pervasive. Christianity had never had it so good in the whole of its history in India. The only rift in the lute was the ‘Niyogi Committee Report on Christian Missionary Activities’ published by the Government of Madhya Pradesh in 1956, and Om Prakash Tyagi’s Bill on ‘Freedom of Religion’ introduced in the Lok Sabha in December 1978. The fifth phase which is currently running started with Hindu awakening that resulted in Ram Janmabhumi movement.15

Over these long period of Hindu-Christian encounter, only the language and methods of ‘followers of Jesus’ has changed, but the motive has always remained same. Lausanne report in its introduction says- ‘We give thanks to God Almighty for his gracious act of salvation in Jesus Christ, which has made possible the entrance into the Kingdom of God for over 565 million Hindu people dispersed throughout the world, with the majority in the Indian sub-continent.
We rejoice in the fact that the saving Word of God preached faithfully by God's servants has brought about a Christian population of about 19 million people in India alone. However, we are conscious that God longs for the whole Hindu people to know Jesus Christ and live under his Lordship16’ These words clearly speak out that the sole goal of the missions have been Christianization of whole world including India and in this process destroy the cultures of the world.

This desire to Christianize the whole world is due to the fact that the doctrines of Christianity are intolerant of others faiths. The biblical God is Jealous and Violent. It is assumed that Jesus means ‘Peace’ and the message of Christianity is peace and equality. But Bible says-
‘Think not that I am come to send peace on earth; I came not to send peace, but a sword.”(Matthew, 10/34)
‘God is jealous, and the Lord revengeth; the Lord revengeth, and is furious; the Lord will take vengeance on his adversaries, and he reserveth wrath for his enemies’. (Nahum, 1/2)
The Biblical God is intolerant, ask its followers to torture Non-Believers, to break the idols and images.
And to them it was given that they should not kill them, but that they should be tormented five months; and their torment was as the torment of a scorpion, when he striketh a man.
(Revelation, 9/5)
But thus shall ye deal with them; ye shall destroy their altars, and break down their images, and cut down their groves, and burn their graven images with fire. (Deuteronomy, 7/5)
If a man abides not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned.(John, 15/6)

It is this intolerance, which inspired the ‘Followers of Jesus’ to commit great crimes. The source of proselytization by force and fraud lies in Christian doctrines which have heavily been criticized by Nietzsche, Thomas Paine, Voltaire, and Bertrand Russell. But, still it is common in secular brigade to say “All Religions are Equal”. How can we equate a religion which is so intolerant, whose God is jealous and tyrant and exclusive with a religion like Hinduism which is tolerant, inclusive and spreads peace? The best solution to counter the Christian threat is to counter the Christian Dogma which is the source of proselytization.

“Auspiciousness be unto all; peace be unto all;
Fullness be unto all; prosperity be unto all.
May all be happy! May all be free from disabilities!
May all look to the good of others!
May none suffer from sorrow” (Shanti Mantra)












11 Niyogi Committee Report On Christian Missionary Activities published by the Government of Madhya Pradesh in 1956

12 Salvation: Hindu influence on Christianity by Dr. Koenraad Elst.

13 Kaj Baago, Pioneers of Indigenous Christianity, Madras, 1969, p. 85

14 Bede Griffiths, op. cit., p. 24.



The Whitewashing of History

The History of India has been whitewashed and distorted first by European rulers which after Independence were continued by eminent historians of India and their supporters the Leftists, Seculars and self claimed Progressives of India to meet their own ends. They have painted the pre-Islamic invasion period as Dark age and have glorified the Islamic period to be very peaceful and prosperous. (The subject of distortions of history had been dealt by me in brief in the article “Indian History and 'Avarana' [Masking] of Truth by Marxists” which I elaborate here)

Ram Swarup says- “Marxists have taken to rewriting Indian history on a large scale and it has meant its systematic falsification. They have a dogmatic view of history and for them the use of any history is to prove their dogma. Their very approach is hurtful to truth…. The Marxists contempt for India, particularly the India of religion, culture and philosophy, is deep and theoretically fortified. It exceeds the contempt ever shown by the most die-hard imperialists”1 Some of the common claims of these eminent historians are-
1] Aryan Invasion Theory is True2
2] Large scale destruction of Buddhists and Jain temples was done by Hindus in pre-Islamic India3
3] The Muslim rulers were religiously tolerant and the Islamic rule was prosperous. The eminent historians deny the destruction of Hindu temples or the killing of Hindus at the hands of Muslim rulers. They also deny the religious motive behind the killing of Hindus at the hands of Muslim rulers.4

Let us examine the Aryan Invasion Theory [AIT].

The AIT was introduced to justify the presence of the British among their Aryan cousins in India, being merely the second wave of Aryan settlement there. It supported the British view of India as merely a geographical region without historical unity, a legitimate prey for any invader capable of imposing himself. It provided the master illustration to the rising racialist worldview-“the dynamic whites entered the land of the indolent dark natives and established their dominance and imparted their language to the natives; they established the caste system to preserve their racial separateness; some miscegenation with the natives took place anyway, making the Indian Aryans darker than their European cousins and correspondingly less intelligent; hence, for their own benefit they were susceptible to an uplifting intervention by a new wave of purer Aryan colonizers.”5

Dr.Koenraad Elst, in his “The Vedic Evidence”6 after examining the Vedic corpus for any evidence for Aryan invasion theory proposed by the Marxist school, concludes- “The status question is still, more than ever, that the Vedic corpus provides no reference to an immigration of the so-called Vedic Aryans from Central Asia….” He further provides Astronomical and Literary evidences against the AIT in his other essays.
Jim Shaffer. Wrote “Current archaeological data do not support the existence of an Indo-Aryan or European invasion into South Asia any time in the pre- or protohistoric periods. Instead, it is possible to document archaeologically a series of cultural changes reflecting indigenous cultural developments from prehistoric to historic periods...”7 Kenneth A. R. Kennedy, a U.S. expert who has extensively studied such skeletal remains, observes- “Biological anthropologists remain unable to lend support to any of the theories concerning an Aryan biological or demographic entity..”8
David Frawley while commenting on the Political and Social Ramifications concludes-“First it served to divide India into a northern Aryan and southern Dravidian culture which were made hostile to each other… Second, it gave the British an excuse for their conquest of India. They could claim to be doing only what the Aryan ancestors of the Hindus had previously done millennia ago. This same justification could be used by the Muslims or any other invaders of India. Third, it served to make Vedic culture later than and possibly derived from the Middle Eastern… Fourth, it allowed the sciences of India to be given a Greek basis… Fifth, it gave the Marxists a good basis for projecting their class struggle model of society on to India, with the invading Brahmins oppressing the indigenous Shudras (lower castes)” He further concludes that- “In short, the compelling reasons for the Aryan invasion theory were neither literary or archeological but political and religious that is to say, not scholarship but prejudice”9
Archaeological evidence in no way contradicts Indian tradition, rather it broadly agrees with it (except for its chronology). Whether from North or South India, tradition never mentioned anything remotely resembling an Aryan invasion into India. Sanskrit scriptures make it clear that they regard the Vedic homeland to be the Saptasindhu, which is precisely the core of the Harappan territory. As for the Sangam tradition, it is equally silent about any northern origin of the Tamil people. These clearly show that AIT which Marxists have been propagating is based on assumptions and pre-conceived notion, rather than hard evidences.
About the alleged destruction of Buddhist and Jain temples by Hindus, Sita Ram Goel observes10- “It is intriguing indeed that whenever archaeological evidence points towards a mosque as standing on the site of a Hindu temple, our Marxist professors start seeing a Buddhist monastery buried underneath. They also invent some Saiva king as destroying Buddhist and Jain shrines whenever the large-scale destruction of Hindu temples by Islamic invaders is mentioned. They never mention the destruction of big Buddhist and Jain complexes which dotted the length and breadth of India, Khurasan, and Sinkiang on the eve of the Islamic invasion, as testified by Hüen Tsang” He asks the eminent historians to produce epigraphic and literary evidences to suggest the destruction of Buddhists and Jain places by Hindus, the names and places of Hindu monuments which stand on the sites occupied earlier by Buddhist or Jain monuments. But, till today no concrete evidence has been given by the eminent historians to substantiate their claim.
But, there are enough evidences to show that Buddhist and Jain temples and monasteries at Bukhara, Samarqand, Khotan, Balkh, Bamian, Kabul, Ghazni, Qandhar, Begram, Jalalabad, Peshawar, Charsadda, Ohind, Taxila, Multan, Mirpurkhas, Nagar-Parkar, Sialkot, Srinagar, Jalandhar, Jagadhari, Sugh, Tobra, Agroha, Delhi, Mathura, Hastinapur, Kanauj, Sravasti, Ayodhya, Varanasi, Sarnath, Nalanda, Vikramasila, Vaishali, Rajgir, Odantapuri, Bharhut, Champa, Paharpur, Jagaddal, Jajnagar, Nagarjunikonda, Amravati, Kanchi, Dwarasamudra, Devagiri, Bharuch, Valabhi, Girnar, Khambhat Patan, Jalor, Chandravati, Bhinmal, Didwana, Nagaur, Osian, Ajmer, Bairat, Gwalior, Chanderi, Mandu, Dhar etc were destroyed by the sword of Islam.11
It should be noted that though Brahmanical, Buddhist and Jain sects and sub-sects had heated discussions among themselves and used even strong language for their adversaries, the occasions when they exchanged physical blows were few and far between. The recent spurt of accusations that Hindus also were bigots and vandals like Christians and Muslims seems to be an after-thought. Apologists, who find it impossible to whitewash Christianity and Islam, are out to redress the balance by blackening Hinduism.
The Islamic conquest has been described as the “Bloodiest”12, as “, monotonous series of murders, massacres, spoliations, and destructions.”13 And as “bigger than the Holocaust of the Jews by the Nazis; or the massacre of the Armenians by the Turks; more extensive even than the slaughter of the South American native populations by the invading Spanish and Portuguese”14
Irfan Husain in his article “Demons from the Past” observes- “While historical events should be judged in the context of their times, it cannot be denied that even in that bloody period of history, no mercy was shown to the Hindus unfortunate enough to be in the path of either the Arab conquerors of Sindh and south Punjab, or the Central Asians who swept in from Afghanistan…The Muslim heroes who figure larger than life in our history books committed some dreadful crimes. Mahmud of Ghazni, Qutb-ud-Din Aibak, Balban, Mohammed bin Qasim, and Sultan Mohammad Tughlak, all have blood-stained hands that the passage of years has not cleansed..Seen through Hindu eyes, the Muslim invasion of their homeland was an unmitigated disaster. Their temples were razed, their idols smashed, their women raped, their men killed or taken slaves. When Mahmud of Ghazni entered Somnath on one of his annual raids, he slaughtered all 50,000 inhabitants. Aibak killed and enslaved hundreds of thousands. The list of horrors is long and painful.These conquerors justified their deeds by claiming it was their religious duty to smite non-believers. Cloaking themselves in the banner of Islam, they claimed they were fighting for their faith when, in reality, they were indulging in straightforward slaughter and pillage...”
Dr.Koenraad Elst while while summarizing the Hindu losses at the hands of Muslim invaders concludes15- “There is no official estimate of the total death toll of Hindus at the hands of Islam. A first glance at important testimonies by Muslim chroniclers suggests that, over 13 centuries and a territory as vast as the Subcontinent, Muslim Holy Warriors easily killed more Hindus than the 6 million of the Holocaust. Ferishtha lists several occasions when the Bahmani sultans in central India (1347-1528) killed a hundred thousand Hindus, which they set as a minimum goal whenever they felt like "punishing" the Hindus; and they were only a third-rank provincial dynasty. The biggest slaughters took place during the raids of Mahmud Ghaznavi (ca. 1000 CE); during the actual conquest of North India by Mohammed Ghori and his lieutenants (1192 ff.); and under the Delhi Sultanate (1206-1526). The Moghuls (1526-1857), even Babar and Aurangzeb, were fairly restrained tyrants by comparison. Prof. K.S. Lal once estimated that the Indian population declined by 50 million under the Sultanate, but that would be hard to substantiate; research into the magnitude of the damage Islam did to India is yet to start in right earnest.”
From Mohamud Quasim to Tipu Sultan, every Mohammedan invader killed, converted, taken as slave or put Jiziya on Hindus. Entire cities were burnt down and the populations massacred, with hundreds of thousands killed in every campaign, and similar numbers deported as slaves. While describing the conquest of Kanauj, Utbi sums up the situation thus: “The Sultan[Ghazni] levelled to the ground every fort, and the inhabitants of them either accepted Islam, or took up arms against him. In short, those who submitted were also converted to Islam. In Baran (Bulandshahr) alone 10,000 persons were converted including the Raja”. The conquest of Afghanistan in the year 1000 was followed by the annihilation of the Hindu population; the region is still called the Hindu Kush, i.e. Hindu slaughter. The Bahmani sultans (1347-1480) in central India made it a rule to kill 100,000 captives in a single day, and many more on other occasions. The conquest of the Vijayanagar empire in 1564 left the capital plus large areas of Karnataka depopulated.
About the Conversion of Hindus to Islam, K.S.Lal observes- “The process of their conversion was hurried. All of a sudden the invader appeared in a city or a region, and in the midst of loot and murder, a dazed, shocked and enslaved people were given the choice between Islam and death. Those who were converted were deprived of their scalp-lock or choti and, if they happened to be caste people, also their sacred thread. Some were also circumcised. Their names were changed, although some might have retained their old names with new affixes. They were taught to recite the kalima and learnt to say the prescribed prayers”.16
When Mahmud Ghaznavi attacked Waihind in 1001-02, he took 500,000 persons of both sexes as captive[This figure is given by Abu Nasr Muhammad Utbi, the secretary and chronicler of Mahmud Gahzni] Next year from Thanesar, according to Farishtah, the Muhammadan army brought to Ghaznin 200,000 captives[Tarikh-i-Farishtah, I, 28]. When Mahmud returned to Ghazni in 1019, the booty was found to consist of (besides huge wealth) 53,000 captives. The Tarikh-i-Alfi adds that the fifth share due to the Saiyyads was 150,000 slaves, therefore the total number of captives comes to 750,000. In 1195 when Raja Bhim was attacked by Aibak 20,000 slaves were captured, and 50,000 at Kalinjar in 1202. Sultan Alauddin Khalji had 50,000 slave boys in his personal service and 70,000 slaves worked continuously on his buildings. In the words of Wassaf, the Muslim army in the sack of Somnath took captive a great number of handsome and elegant maidens, amounting to 20,000, and children of both sexes. Iltutmish, Muhammad Tughlaq and Firoz Tughlaq sent gifts of slaves to Khalifas outside India. To the Chinese emperor Muhammad Tughlaq sent, besides other presents, 100 Hindu slaves, 100 slave girls, accomplished in song and dance and another 15 young slaves. Firoz Tughlaq collected 180,000 slaves.17
About the destruction of Hindu Temples, Sita Ram Goel writes -“Mahmûd of Ghazni robbed and burnt down 1,000 temples at Mathura, and 10,000 in and around Kanauj. One of his successors, Ibrãhîm, demolished 1,000 temples each in Hindustan (Ganga-Yamuna Doab) and Malwa. Muhammad Ghûrî destroyed another 1,000 at Varanasi. Qutbu’d-Dîn Aibak employed elephants for pulling down 1,000 temples in Delhi. “Alî I ‘Ãdil Shãh of Bijapur destroyed 200 to 300 temples in Karnataka. A sufi, Qãyim Shãh, destroyed 12 temples at Tiruchirapalli. Such exact or approximate counts, however, are available only in a few cases. Most of the time we are informed that “many strong temples which would have remained unshaken even by the trumpets blown on the Day of Judgment, were levelled with the ground when swept by the wind of Islãm”.18
Some of the Temples converted into Mosques are19-
Epigraphic evidences-
1. Quwwat al-Islam Masjid, Qutb Minar, Delhi by Qutbud-Din Aibak in 1192 A.D.
2. Masjid at Manvi in the Raichur District of Karnataka, Firuz Shah Bahmani, 1406-07 A.D
3. Jami Masjid at Malan, Palanpur Taluka, Banaskantha District of Gujarat: ?The Jami Masjid was built? by Khan-I-Azam Ulugh Khan, The date of construction is mentioned as 1462 A.D. in the reign of Mahmud Shah I (Begada) of Gujarat.
4. Hammam Darwaza Masjid at Jaunpur in Uttar Pradesh, Its chronogram yields the year 1567 A.D. in the reign of Akbar, the Great Mughal
5. Jami Masjid at Ghoda in the Poona District of Maharashtra, The inscription is dated 1586 A.D. when the Poona region was ruled by the Nizam Shahi sultans of Ahmadnagar
6. Gachinala Masjid at Cumbum in the Kurnool District of Andhra Pradesh, The date of construction is mentioned as 1729-30 A.D. in the reign of the Mughal Emperor Muhammad Shah.

Literary evidences-
7. Jhain[name of the place], Jalalud-Din Firuz Khalji went to the place and ordered destruction of temples, mentioned in Miftah-ul-Futuh.
8. Devagiri, Alaud-Din Khalji destroyed the temples of the idolaters , , mentioned in Miftah-ul-Futuh.
9. Somanath, Ulugh Khan, mentioned in Tarikh-i-Alai
10 Delhi, , Alaud-Din Khalji , Tarikh-i-Alai
11. Ranthambhor, mentioned in Tarikh-i-Alai
12. Brahmastpuri (Chidambaram), Malik Kafur, Tarikh-i-Alai
13. Madura, mentioned in Tarikh-i-Alai
14. Fatan: (Pattan), mentioned in Ashiqa
15. Malabar: (Parts of South India), Tarikh-i-Alai
16 The Mosque at Jaunpur. This was built by Sultan Ibrahim Sharqi
17 The Mosque at Qanauj it was built by Ibrahim Sharqi
18 Jami (Masjid) at Etawah. it is one of the monuments of the Sharqi Sultans
19 Babri Masjid at Ayodhya . This mosque was constructed by Babar at Ayodhya
20 Mosques of Alamgir (Aurangzeb)

According to the reports of Archeological survey of India.

21 Tordi (Rajasthan)- early or middle part of the 15th century
22 Naraina (Rajasthan)- The mosque appears to have been built when Mujahid Khan, son of Shams Khan, took possession of Naraina in 1436 A.D
23 Chatsu (Rajasthan)- At Chatsu there is a Muhammadan tomb erected on the eastern embankment of the Golerava tank. The tomb which is known as Gurg Ali Shah’s chhatri is built out of the spoils of Hindu buildings. The inscription mention saint Gurg Ali (wolf of Ali) died a martyr on the first of Ramzan in 979 A.H. corresponding to Thursday, the 17th January, 1572 A.D.
24 SaheTh-MaheTh (Uttar Pradesh)
25 Sarnath (Uttar Pradesh)- the inscriptions found there extending to the twelfth century A.D
26 Vaishali (Bihar)
27 Gaur and Pandua (Bengal)- The oldest and the best known building at Gaur and Pandua is the Ãdîna Masjid at Pandua built by Sikandar Shãh, the son of Ilyãs Shãh. The date of its inscription may be read as either 776 or 770, which corresponds with 1374 or 1369 A.D? The materials employed consisted largely of the spoils of Hindu temples and many of the carvings from the temples have been used as facings of doors, arches and pillars
28 Devikot (Bengal)- The Dargah of Sultan Pir, The Dargah of Shah Ata are the Muhammadan shrines built on the site of an old Hindu temple
29 Tribeni (Bengal)

These whitewashing of history, the policy of “Suppresio Veri, Suggestio Falsi” followed by ‘Eminent Historians’ of India is not only dangerous to national integration but also the future of the entire nation. It is time that, the self interests are kept aside and the facts of history is made known to the masses.


1 Indian Express, January 15, 1989, quoted in book “Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 1” by Sita Ram Goel
2 For example, JNU historian Romilla Thapar.[Article titled “Romila Thapar Defends the Aryan Invasion Theory!” by Vishal Agarwal published here- ]
3 In letter published in The Times of India dated October 2, 1986, Romilla Thapar had stated that handing over of Sri Rama’s and Sri Krishna’s birthplaces to the Hindus, and of disused mosques to the Muslims raises the question of the limits to the logic of restoration of religious sites. How far back do we go? Can we push this to the restoration of Buddhist and Jain monuments destroyed by Hindus? Or of the pre-Hindu animist shrines? [ Quoted in book- Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 2
The Islamic Evidence by Sita Ram Goel]
4 In his book Medival India [NCERT 2000], Satish Chandra writes- “The raid into India (by Timur) was a plundering raid, and its motive was to seize the wealth accumulated by the sultans of Delhi over the last 200 years… Timur then entered Delhi and sacked it without mercy, large number of people, both Hindu and Muslim, as well as women and children losing their lives.”, but Timur repeatedly states in his memoirs, the Tuzuk-i-Timuri, that he had a two-fold objective in invading Hindustan. “The first was to war with the infidels,” and thereby acquire, “some claim to reward in the life to come.” The second motive was “that the army of Islam might gain something by plundering the wealth and valuables of the infidels.” He further says “Excepting the quarter of the saiyids, the ulema and other Musulmans, the whole city was sacked.”
5 Koenraad Elst, in “The Politics of the Aryan Invasion Debate”
6 “The Vedic Evidence - The Vedic Corpus Provides no Evidence for the so-called Aryan Invasion of India” by Koenraad Elst
7 Jim G. Shaffer, “The Indo-Aryan Invasions : Cultural Myth and Archaeological Reality,” in Michel Danino “The Indus-Sarasvati Civilization and its Bearing on the Aryan Question”
8 Kenneth A. R. Kennedy, “Have Aryans been identified in the prehistoric skeletal record from South Asia ?” in Michel Danino “The Indus-Sarasvati Civilization and its Bearing on the Aryan Question”
9 David Frawley, in “Myth of Aryan Invasion Theory of India”
10 Sita ram Goel, Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 2-
the Islamic Evidence
11 Sita ram Goel, Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 2 -
the Islamic Evidence
12 Will Durant in “Story of Civilization” observes- “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 precarious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace may at any time be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within.”
13 “Histoire de l' Inde” - By Alain Danielou; he notes- “"From the time Muslims started arriving, around 632 AD, the history of India becomes a long, monotonous series of murders, massacres, spoliations, and destructions. It is, as usual, in the name of 'a holy war' of their faith, of their sole God, that the barbarians have destroyed civilizations, wiped out entire races." Mahmoud Ghazni, continues Danielou, "was an early example of Muslim ruthlessness, burning in 1018 of the temples of Mathura, razing Kanauj to the ground and destroying the famous temple of Somnath, sacred to all Hindus. His successors were as ruthless as Ghazni: 103 temples in the holy city of Benaras were razed to the ground, its marvelous temples destroyed, its magnificent palaces wrecked." Indeed, the Muslim policy vis a vis India, concludes Danielou, seems to have been a conscious systematic destruction of everything that was beautiful, holy, refined."
14 Francois Gautier
15 Dr. Koenraad Elst in “Was There an Islamic "Genocide" of Hindus?”
16 K.S. Lal in “Indian Muslims Who Are They”
17 K.S. Lal in “Muslim Slave System in Medieval India”
18 Sita Ram Goel, in “Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 2
The Islamic Evidence”
19 It is taken from the large list of places documented by Sita Ram Goel in his magnum Opus “Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them Vol. 1- The Preliminary Survey”

Pandit Nehru, not Krishna Menon was the culprit

The news item in the Top stories titled “Nehru feared coup by Cariappa, claims book” (Pioneer,Nov 11), rightly notes that India's flawed China policy led to the Himalayan blunder.
But, it must be pointed out that, the flaw in India’s Foreign policy was due Pandit Nehru’s infatuation for Communism which had made him blind towards the designs Red China and Krishna Menon was just made a scapegoat.

If, we assume that Krishna Menon was really the reason, then it implies that Pandit Nehru was more dependent on his advisors judgments rather than his own. But, Pandit Nehru in his long political carrier has proved himself to be easily the most astute politician. Hence, it is very wrong to suggest that Nehru depended on others judgment or that he was powerless in front of Krishna Menon.Krishna Menon no doubts was a Communist. But, Pandit Nehru was himself a Communist, an admirer not only of the Soviet socio-political and economic system but also of the Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist ideology on which the Soviet system was based.

In his book “Soviet Russia: Some Random Sketches And Impressions” which is a compilation of series of articles by Pandit Nehru after his return from a visit to Moscow in November 1927, he writes “Russia thus interests us because it may help us to find some solution for the great problems which face the world today. It interests us specially because conditions there have not been, and are not even now, very dissimilar to conditions in India. Both are vast agricultural countries with only the beginnings of industrialization and both have to face poverty and illiteracy. If Russia finds a satisfactory solution for these, our work in India is made easier”1

In “Discovery of India” he writes- “"A study of Marx and Lenin produced a powerful effect on my mind and helped me to see history and current affairs in a new light. The long chain of history and of social development appeared to have some meaning, some sequence and the future lost some of its obscurity. The practical achievements of the Soviet Union were also tremendously impressive.”

These clearly show that Pandit Nehru was the real culprit behind Flawed India’s Foreign policy. Sita Ram Goel concludes- “If something is seriously wrong somewhere (In India’s Foreign policy), Pandit Nehru and not Krishna Menon is the real author of it. If we are in search of a culprit, we should get at Pandit Nehru and not at Krishna Menon”2