There is a saying on how to disseminate misinformation. It runs thus,’Suppressio veri,Suggestio Falsi
That is ‘ Supress the Truth ,Suggest Falsehood’
Classic example of this adage can be found in Indian history. Indian history being taught today is what the invaders wanted the subjugated to know. That is what is being studied in India right from School. The history would have one to believe that India had nothing before the arrival of Alexander!
Other side is suggestion of things not of Indian origin as Indian and subtle manipulation of facts, history , monuments,temples and the like,thereby you feel alien in your own backyard.
The manipulation is so great that one does not know he is being manipulated.
One such manipulation is Babri Masjid.
One would be shocked to find that the Babri Masjid was not built by Babur.
Please read the following to know our History.
‘Baqi Tashqandi, also known as Mir Baqi or Mir Banki, was a Mughal commander (beg) originally from Tashkent (in modern Uzbekistan) during the reign of the first Mughal emperor Babur. He is widely believed to have been made the governor of the province of Awadh. He was believed to have razed the Ram mandir and built Babri Mosque in Ayodhya in 1528.Baburnama(Chronicle of Babur) mentions a commander called Baqi Tashkindi (Baqi of Tashkent). His name also appears with other suffixes: Baqi Shaghawal, Baqi Beg (commander) or Baqi Mingbashi (commander of a thousand troops). However, the chronicle does not describe him as a Mir (prince or noble). Police officer-turned-scholar Kishore Kunal believes that the appellation “Mir Baqi” was constructed in 1813–1814 in a forged inscription on Babri Masjid for the benefit of the British surveyor Francis Buchanan, and there was in fact no prince called “Mir Baqi” in Babur’s regime.
also called Buchanan-Hamilton) did a survey of the Gorakhpur Division in 1813–14 on behalf of the British East India Company. Buchanan’s report, never published but available in the British Library archives, states that the Hindus generally attributed destruction of temples “to the furious zeal of Aurangzabe [Aurangzeb]”, but the large mosque at Ayodhya (now known as Babri Masjid) was ascertained to have been built by Babur by “an inscription on its walls”. Buchanan had the said inscription in Persian copied by a scribe and translated by a Maulvi friend. The translation however showed two inscriptions. The first inscription said that the mosque was constructed by ‘Mir Baqi’ in the year 935 AH or 923 AH. The second inscription narrated the genealogy of Aurangzeb.]The translator had a difficulty with the anagram for the date, because one of the words was missing, which would have resulted in a date of 923 AH rather than 935 AH. These incongruities and mismatches made no impression on Buchanan, who maintained that the mosque was built under the orders of Babur.
The Babri Masjid stands at a location believed by Hindus to be the birthplace of Rama. There are no records of a mosque at the site till 1672 and no known association with Babur or Mir Baqi prior to Buchanan’s discovery of these inscriptions in the 19th century. The Baburnama does not mention either the mosque or the destruction of a temple.The Ramcharit Manas of Tulsidas (AD 1574) and Ain-i Akbari of Abu’l-Fazl ibn Mubarak (AD 1598) made no mention of a mosque either’
Reference and citations.
- Noorani, A. G. (2003), The Babri Masjid Question, 1528-2003, Volume 1, Tulika Books, Introduction (p. xvii), ISBN
- ^ a b c Kunal, Ayodhya Revisited (2016), Chapter 6.
- ^ Kunal, Ayodhya Revisited (2016), pp. 142, 199.
- ^ a b c Kunal, Ayodhya Revisited (2016), Chapter 5.
- ^ K. Elst (1995). “The Ayodhya Debate”. In Gilbert Pollet (ed.). Indian Epic Values: Rāmāyaṇa and Its Impact. Peeters Publishers. pp. 28–29. ISBN 9789068317015.
- ^ Narain, The Ayodhya Temple Mosque Dispute (1993), p. 17.
- ^ Jain, Rama and Ayodhya (2013), pp. 165-166.
- ^ Jain, Rama and Ayodhya (2013), p. 9, 120, 164.
- ^ Kunal, Ayodhya Revisited (2016), p. xv.
- ^ Kunal, Ayodhya Revisited (2016), p. xxvii.
- ^ Jain, Rama and Ayodhya (2013), pp. 112-115.
- ^ Kunal, Ayodhya Revisited (2016), p.
3 responses to “Babri Masjid Not Built by Babur”
Good Thing Is That It’s No More
islamic calendar itself has added 3 centuries to antiquate itself along with the so called christian calendar [i have discovered discrepancies in middle east historical timelines]………923 AH is actually late 1700’s or early 1800…..also this https://www.facebook.com/505781099622414/posts/official-map-of-rama-janmabhumi-ayodhya-dated-1717-ce-now-in-city-palace-museum-/822807054586482/ ……..my own theory is that the shia mosque was named after nawab babar ali khan [a shia] as ayodhya has been under bihar instead of awadh in the past……..aurangzeb of 1600’s never existed as the real aurangzeb was a dakhini muslim ruler in maharashtra whose tomb is in aurangabad……..the rulers of delhi that surrendered to east india company in 1857 were not mughals but delhi sultanates last dynasty……..mahmud of gazna [not ghazni] was from the caliphate of baghdad/iraq who came via sea route not land and that too after 1300AD to attack somnath…..islamic history length in india before british rule started was at most only 400 years not 800 years as lying british historians claim and there never was a pan india encompassing mughal empire with some great benevolent ruler like akbar [the real akbar was delhi sultan in 1800’s]……also islamic expansion did not happen from north to south but from western and central india [sind, gujarat and deccan] to the rest of the country…..the biggest islamic kingdom in india in size was hyderabad/golconda not even the sultanate of delhi/so called mughals
[…] मूल लेख अंग्रेजी में […]