Read Book Online : http://www.archive.org/stream/sultanateofdelhi001929mbp#page/n5/mode/2up

Download pdf Book : http://ia700100.us.archive.org/1/items/sultanateofdelhi001929mbp/sultanateofdelhi001929mbp.pdf

But this above photograph is not from the Delhi Sultanate period. It is from the Delhi's Red Fort looking at the Naubat Khana. And Delhi's Red Fort belonged to the Mughal Period. Delhi Sultanate ended in 1526 with the defeat of Ibrahim Lodi at the hands of Babar - the 1st Great Mughal and founder of the Mughal Dynasty. What gives it away most significantly is the 9-cusped arch through which the naubat khana is framed. This 9-cusped arch came into being only in the time of Shahjahan the 5th Great Mughal and is credited to being his creation. One would not find this arch even in pre-Shahjahan Mughal buildings.

@pulin.... Were they realy great or we are making them great???

@Kamal: The first 6 were Great for different reasons. Babar was great as a warrior who won and lost Samarkand before he was 17, and finally founded the Mughal Empire in India - defeated 100,000 strong army of Ibrahim Lodi with his army of 15000 only at Panipat. Humayun was the weak link but he regained the lost empire in 1555. Brought back with him the liberalism of Shias from the court of Persia including 2 painters from Herat to start the Mughal Atelier - Fine arts. Akbar is acknowledged as Great by historians. He really stabilized the empire, was secular (which is rare in those days), Set up reforms and more humane Income tax laws, some of which have come down to us even now. Jahangir in whose time the art of Mughal Miniature paintings reached its zenith, and we all have heard stories about his love for justice - being just. Shahjahan the most spectacular Mughal of all, builder of The Taj, who built buildings like a titan but finished them like a jeweller embellishing the buildings with inlaying of semi-precious stones into marble. Aurangzeb who expanded the empire into Deccan and ruled with an iron hand. Above all during the period of these 6 Mughals, no one dared to attack them from outside as they were considered invicible. Also consider the fact that they did not take away the riches of Hindustan to their country but rather adopted this country as their own. It might surprise you to learn that Shahjahan was 3/4 Hindu and 1/4 Mughal. Now you decide, Kamal, if they were Great or not. What is the criteria for being Great?

Interesting poser... Pulin !

The greatness of the Mughals is subject to debate. Probably great is meant in the context of the first 6 rulers in comparison to the later Mughals! Actually more for Babur, Akbar and Shahjahan!

@ Sharda: That is what I meant. The first 6 are Great Mughals & the Balance 11 were mini Mughals. Please read my account given above.

Yes but ur post reached me after I had posted mine!

@Sharda: Aww.....

@RBSI: What is an interesting poser? The 9-cusped arch or criteria for being great. Later, I'd imagine.

Yes...the word 'great' is used almost casually in history and this evokes almost immediate endorsement or derision... depending on the way a person sees history. It might make greater sense to define what was great about a particular personality or a period... and put it into perspective.

Ya like a discussion on Mohamed Bin Tuglak elsewhere! Tipu Sultan also has highly contadictory descriptions in accounts. Even the tag attached to Alexander, Ashoka and Akbar- Why do they all start with A?

Babar was fighter who was thrown out of Samarkand and came to India to get a kingdom for himself..succeeded. Humayun was lucky...not great Jahangir was nothing without Noorjehan..SHE was the one who deserved the appellation. Akbar I think truly merits the 'Great' tag. Shahjahan, maybe yes, Aurangzeb, the destroyer of the Mughal Empire, certainly not. There, that is my two bits worth! :)

Thanks Sumedha for another point of view.

AKBAR WAS GREAT ??????? SORRY I BEG TO DISAGREE .... Very chosen few legends in Indian history had the privilege of being honored with the suffix ‘the Great’ or ‘Mahaan’ after their name. I recall only three – Alexander, Ashoka and Akbar. This great title does not come easily. One has to indeed display exemplary greatness to be called ‘great’.This great land has produced one legend after another – Vikramaditya, Prithviraj, Rana Pratap, Shivaji – to name a few. But none qualified to be called ‘the Great’ by our noble historians. This is because the criteria for being called ‘the Great’ are very tough. You have to be simply the best killer for times to come to be called ‘the Great’. 1.Vincent Smith starts his book with “Akbar was a foreigner in India. He had not a drop of Indian blood in his veins…Akbar was more of a Turk than Mogul.” And we proclaim him as an out-and-out Indian. 2.Here is his beauty as per Vincent Smith : “Akbar was of average height and walked with a limp in left leg. His head was tilted on right shoulder. His nose was small with protruding bone. His nostrils looked as if he is in anger. A wart of size of half a pea joined his lip to nostril. He was dark.” 3.Abul Fazl describes Harem of Akbar: “It had 5000 women and each woman had a separate home.” This is apart from more than 36 wives that he had.In Akbarnama, Abul Fazl writes: “Whenever a Beghum, or wives of courtiers or virgins wanted to be enjoyed, they were supposed to send an application to Harem in-charge. Then their application would reach the palace authorities. After that they were allowed to enter and stay in Harem for up to even one month.” 4.The first condition in treaty of Ranathambhor was that Rajputs should dispatch Dolis of women to Royal Harem in return of freeing of soldiers. No wonder, why Jauhar and death were so preferred by those upholding virtues of self-dignity. 5.Akbar had his mentor Bairam Khan killed and then he married his wife who became his favorite queen. Historians claim that Bairam Khan was curiously attacked by a group of old enemies on his way to Mecca after he was forced to go there due to differences with Akbar. Thus her son Abdur 6.Considered to be the most benevolent ruler to have ruled India, Akbar displayed his first symptom of kindness, in lines of his forefathers and progeny, when he was merely 14 year old. On 6 November, 1556, he was in war with Hemu in battle of Panipat. The Mughal forces were facing huge defeats when Hemu was suddenly hit by an arrow in his eye. He became unconscious and his soldiers scattered away assuming defeat. The unconscious Hemu was brought in front of our kind Akbar. Bairam Khan ordered Akbar to slay him so that he earns the title of ‘Ghazi’. Akbar cut the neck of his unconscious victim. His ranks followed the suit and butchered the corpse of Hemu. The head of Hemu was sent to Kabul and his body was hanged on Delhi gate for public demo of Akbar’s kindness.The old helpless father of Hemu was also butchered. Needless to say what happened with women. Akbar already had plans of a mega-capacity Harem! 7.As reported by Abul Fazl, to counter the rebellion of Khan Zaman, his loyal Mohammad Mirak was handcuffed and brought in front of an elephant. The elephant took him in his trunk and threw away. This process happened for 5 continuous days after which he was executed. Abul Fazl describes this with pride without a word of condemnation. 8.After capturing Chittod, Akbar ordered a massacre in which 30,000 people were killed. 9.On 2nd September, 1573, he had a pillar of more than 2000 cut-heads erected in Ahmedabad. This perhaps broke the record of highest pillar of cut-heads to be erected ever. (Earlier record was held by his grandfather Babur). 10.Once Akbar woke early in afternoon and saw a servant sleeping near his bed. He was angered by this and had him thrown away from top of a tower.[Not Sure about this one Though..] 11.Historians who bootlick Akbar fail to explain how and why both Maharana and Akbar could be great persons at the same time when they were most bitter enemies.Even Smith agrees that there was no valid reason why Akbar attacked Chittod except lust for conquest. Maharana was fighting for his nation and went to extent of uniting as many Rajputs as possible to stop having treaty or gifting their girls to foreign invaders. 12.Akbar had a whole line of his own trusted and less trusted people killed in suspicious manners: Bairam Khan, Zaman, Aasaf Khan (His finance minister), Shah Mansur, Mansingh, Son of Kamran, Makhdume Mulk, Shekh Abdurnabi, Fargundi, Muizul Mulk, Hazi Ibrahim and all those whom he disliked. This list has been given in Smith’s book. And then Jaimal whose wife he captured for his harem after killing him and then propagated that he saved her when she was committing Sati! Panchatantra aptly says that where the undeserving are worshipped and the deserving ones are sidelined, three threats always loom – death, anarchy and fear. Millions o

Read Indu Sundaresan's interesting take on Noorjehan and Mumtaz Mahal. Really good.

I know the extent of mughal empire stops at the door step of ASSAM. “LACHIT BARPHUKAN” emperor of ahom dynastry defeated the mughals 3 times after which they never stepped in this part . May be the forces used over LACHIT is tribe and furocious but its disgusting for sucha large mughal army to be defeated several times by a so small force.

Vikas Singh , agree with a lot of what you have said. Greatness is a matter of perspective after all. Akbar was as cruel as the rest of the Mughals. Although perhaps he repented in his later years? I like his concept of Din i Ilahi. But you are absolutely right about the myth making; reams of paper on the Mughals and on the British and not so much on other deserving candidates. BTW, a personal grouse. why have you left out Chandragupta Maurya from your list of national legends?! :)

Oops I m sorry about that...I know about your personal affinity with the Mauryan Dynasty :D

:) भूलना मत ! ( Oops I wonder if there are any language constraints on RBSI)

When the discussion generates more heat than light, guess it is time to go.

@Sumedha: Thanks again Sumedha for "Like" on my comment above.

@Phillipa: Thanks for the "Like" on two of my comments.

@RBSI: What else can one do. We are here to contribute what we know. At least I am not here to attack people who cannot come and defend themselves.

Pulin : Excellent quote ! But we are discussing about historical personalities we are no way related to. So, I guess we should learn to enjoy the warmth even when heat is generated. : )

Your comments are always enlightening Pulin...thanks. But if someone has a more aggressive viewpoint...then so be it. Since none of us have the complete knowledge of these historical events... may the most matured opinion win. : )

Point taken. But Vehemence is neither necessary nor desirable & I prefer to stay away from it.

Alright. Let's say I don't have to take/put up with aggresion in academic discussions.

Of course Pulin...you dont have to participate in a discussion in which you dont really agree with. But you have to understand...there is more than one viewpoint in such a varied and large group.

We are not talking about different point of views. We are talking about aggresiveness & vehemence.

I may be an intruder in the group who seem to be knowing one another closely. But I want to appreciate my appreciation for such a warm and educative exchange of points of view. I quite like the analysis of the word great which we always encounter in history and religious text. Same way powerful. Like what we define power as ? For some peace is power for others violence...

* I want to express my appreciation

Thanks Chaman Pincha !

@ RBSI: I am carrying on at other photos uploaded by you. Thanks.

I think Vikas raised it earlier but I just have to add this. History does tend to forget other greats east of the Ganges and South of the Narmada. All the Pallavas, Cholas, Krishnadeva Raya, Badami. Only one comment- socially the status of women in all these areas is much better than the erstwhile Mughal ruled areas!

From my part of the world ( the south) now they have started asking these questions. Why the northern History dominates history text books obscuring south Indian History? I am learning a lot from this discussion.

@ Sharada Do not know if I should lead this thread away to a consideration of gender issues but in response to your comment above: Have been reading a good deal of gender studies in the last few days in an attempt to understand gender specially in the context of religion and as a religious Hindu woman, which I am. Am veering around to the view that perhaps traditions in South India , specially the little , local traditions have a much more well defined and respected place for women. Will continue to study and understand the traditions with which I have grown up in North India ( very much the Mughal heartland which is called the cow belt now), too. Watch this space!

Thanks Shekhar for "Like" on my comment of 1st 6.

@ Chaman Pincha Just wanted to say that you are definitely not an intruder. Most of us did not know each other before interacting on this page( with a few exceptions); we have become friends on RBSI! So join the gang!! India has a complex history with tangled rights and wrongs, all we can try for is a tolerance for all view points although I must confess that emotions often get the better of me! There are some events which touch a deep rooted angst but that is part of being an Indian. @ SS Authoritative is not a word I am comfortable with, whose authority and why should we believe any authority instead of our own understanding and intelligence? Read, learn more and more and try and understand as much as you can is my own credo. Authorities too often have feet of clay and their own axes to grind. Far more genuine and interesting are the views of people on this forum who have no agenda and are only putting forward their own views to whatever effect.

@Sumedha Verma Ojha: I did not quote Mr. Vincent Smith as authority. I only point out what he actually says as compared to what he reportedly said. There is no history if there is no source material. And one should not distort the source.

It is useless to form and inform views without substance. Cutting off of arms. legs, crushing under the foot of an elephant, beheading using a canon, throwing a prisoner stuffed in a bag off a cliff, burying alive in a brickwall were the ways of all the players of those times. And all these players were vying for a piece of action in Delhi or some other minor seat of power.

Sumedha- yes I have been curious and I do find that regions fairly insulated from Mughal or Muslim rule fare better on the gender scale. In the south too(particularly the Deccan) there are regions similar to the cow belt in gender statistics. Waiting for ur analysis. Chaman, I ditto what Sumedha says- we have all met only here and I for sure am no historian- only a free thinker! Sumedha and I did go to the same college but we hardly interacted- right? Again there are enough cows in the south- so why call the north the cow belt?

Thank you all for this warm welcome. Coming to gender, my daughter 14 years, often ask me why history is so fully dominated with men and men only, and why we read only about wars( she is in 9th standard), where is the history of peace building? And yes, have dominant history ever been written from grassroots perspectives? I am thoroly enjoying this exchange between you all....

Well Sharada: We cannot choose our past it is there whether we like it or not.Just as we cannot choose our neighbours only learn to live with them. Mughal (at least Aurangzeb's) rule extended right upto the northern tip of Kerela and Tamil Nadu. I am a north-Indian and revel in north Indian history and how it has shaped our present.Maitreyi, Gargi, Razia Sultan, Meerabai ,Noor Jehan ,Begum Samroo, Rani Laxmibai,Begum Hazrat Mahal, three successive begums of Bhopal,Vijaylaxmi Pandit, Sarojini Naidu, Kasturba Gandhi ,Vijaylaxmi Pandit, Indira Gandhi, Maharani Gayatri devi and Vijayaraje Scindhia, Shahnaz Hussain, Kiran Bedi, etc. were all north indians who played a considerable role in patriarchal societies and changed the course of history by playing substancial roles in it.And what about scores of un-sung others. Isn't there an exhausted woman behind every successful man ? Cow belt is perhaps an answer to 'Madrasi' which the north Indians have been using erroneously to descibe residents of all the four southern states.For that matter all north Indian food and dress is now called Punjabi in restaurants etc much to the chagrin of all of us non-Punjabis ! Why have there been no great masters who were women ? How about music composers like Bach, Beethoven etc? How many women have in the last hundred years been decorated as nobel laureates? Why is the world of even cooking and fashion-designing also dominated by male chefs and male designers the world over? How about interior decoration ? Ok till the Industrial revolution women were a suppressed lot; what after that? Why have they not excelled and come even half-way near menfolk in the world of medicine,art, politics, physics,biology, chemistry , sciences , microbiology or space sciences? Is it because of men not allowing them to? West has modernised itself for over a hundred and fifty years now. Why can't we still see the changes even there ? Perhaps our being early birds has given us an edge ? All these attempts to break the glass cieling are admirable and welcome changes. India already has the largest work-force of women in service in both the organised and the un-organised sector. South Indian Womenfolk never enjoyed the kind of life that northeners did but strictly in confines of the purdah which for you all , I understand ,is an alien concept but that is how we have evolved.How many women have been hunting, drinking,smoking, swimming,horse-riding ,owning and inheriting estates in the south ? High class Womenfolk always enjoyed these past-times and privileges in the north even in the medieval times.There are miniature paintings which are a testimony to it.Howsoever miniscule the numbers but women actually had a reasonably good time. By the way scheming and plotting to get each other's foetuses killed was also an advanced art form orchestrated by women-folk from within the strict confines of the zenana. Purdah has since long outlived it's relevance and I am no advocator of it before you jump to any conclusion and brand me a MCP. As for the Islamic/Muslim angle let me tell you that the prophet's first wife Khadija was a sucessful businesswoman in 7th century Arabia. Islam was the first religion that allowed property and inheritance rights to women.It allowed the right to divorce a husband.Rest of the world had to legislate and bring about these changes. The paigaam for a marriage always goes from a man's house for it to be accepted. Islam allows a woman the right to say no to a marriage even on the day of marriage.A girl's father is not supposed to go hunting for a groom in Islam.So the provisions were all sound to begin with.The tribal and clannish natures of mankind made a mess of it all. @ Chaman : I wonder if you harbour aspirations like southern Sudan? For goodness sake you are ours and we are yours. There is a difference only in the mind about this north-south divide.The mangalsutra and idli-dosas are as much a part of North-Indian lives today as are the Shalwar Kameez and north Indian mithai in south-indian house-holds.

It is a very natural phenomena that communities upon becoming prosperous and after enjoying political power want their heros to be worshipped and revered and begin taking pride in their indiginous cultures distancing themselves from their earlier masters and begin projecting them as Ivan 'the terrible'. Every anti-establishment Tom Dick and Harry is a hero. (I know the Hindu brigade is going to descend upon me forgetting that I am one of them ) Sometimes it appears as if this forum is used to right the supposed wrongs of history.All the historians till date are wrong about Akbar it seems. I wonder what vested interest the western historians in projecting Akbar as great ???? @ Pulin: Lovely quote that you are not here to attack those who cannot defend themselves !!

Chaman : Why did you delete your comment ? I liked it. Please post it back.

Wise words Digvijay ~ "It is a very natural phenomena that communities upon becoming prosperous and after enjoying political power want their heros to be worshipped and revered and begin taking pride in their indiginous cultures distancing themselves from their... earlier masters and begin projecting them as Ivan 'the terrible'."...

<> had written a loooong comment lost by a careless click. Sob Sob. Can only try after some time now. :(

Well thanks Julian I just wrote what came to my mind. @ Sumedha: I suggest you use the notepad in the PC to type and later cntrl C and Cntrl V the same on the RBSI thread. That way nothing will be lost and you can actually save it all in a folder for future use. This is how I do too for my L O N G comments.

Excellent advice Digvijay...its all too risky and frustrating to start a typing a long comment and see it all disappear suddenly on FB. It has happened to me earlier.

@ Subbiah: Never learnt precis writing in school hence my long comments :)))

But then you write surprisingly interesting stuff...and quite consistently at that ! : )

:( You are very right DSK and i shall try to follow your advice in future except if I am led away by my enthusiasm and start typing feverishly before i realise where I am!

This thread has thrown up interesting issues of 'voices' in the historical discourse. @ Chaman Pincha Most though provoking comments. Your daughter is a bright and thinking girl who has raised very valid points. Surely , if half the world consists of women they could not have had as little to do with the course of events of human history as we read it now? The answer lies in the understanding of what history is and how it is presented. Feminist critiques and subaltern studies have, in recent years, tried to address these issues. A related issue is that of the ' voice' of the underclass, which would include, for example, apart from women, dalits or the conquered or colonised. DSK, perhaps the former underclass always had the same feelings towards its 'masters' but had no means of having its voice heard? It is only when a measure of political and economic power is gained that any voice makes itself heard, witness Mayawati in UP. Conquerors shape the narrative in their own image, the one which flatters them the most, which may not reflect events as they happened or as they affected the polity at large. This would be applicable to women, those conquered by the Mughals or the British, dalits, perhaps even the South as compared to the North if it feels slighted. Pulin Trivedi and DSK, I am sorry I find your comment about not attacking people who are not there to defend themselves paradoxical. History is all about dead and gone people and events, it will be ab initio impossible to discuss it if we want the people we are discussing to answer our critiques. From where do we summon Akbar ? His representatives in the form of the people who admire his policies or qualities are there to answer or explain issues which arise. The answer in dealing with all these contradictory opinions is to not to obfuscate anything, good or bad. It has all to be dealt with. The problem in India is the skewed discourse which was first in the hands of imperialists and for the past 60 odd years in the iron grip of the Left in India. What they did not like was given a deep burial. Romilla Thapar, and her ilk are too prone to ignore or explain away with platitudes inconvenient truths like Muslim atrocities in India. They must be dealt with and some kind of reconciliation arrived at otherwise we are forever stuck at the same place. Lies will not help. They only stoke anger and distrust.In the case of 'upper' caste exploitation of 'lower' castes the wrongs are not denied, the Indian state has derived methods, with some success, to deal with this issue. We have seen extreme turbulence in our 5000 year old history. The last 1000 years or more, especially, have been a story of looting, pillage, conquest with its various consequences. 60 years is a short time to come to terms with all these events. Voices , long suppressed will definitely flow specially with the platform and opportunity provided by the internet. Let a thousand flowers bloom!

Perhaps this was the first time that I didn't quote the source since some guys in here might feel "fanatic views" & "prejudices".OK Wait here is something important.Since this guy has did his bit of research,so even his mere speculations about the lady staffs [some of them might be receptionists or maybe accountants/MBA's huh? ],Hindu Kush as a battle zone could be right.But,since U ain't quoting the source he might just accuse U of stood upto their promises,carried women as war-booties he might just feel MORE comforted.I had heard about the marxists and other pseudo-intellectuals.Now,I have seen them right here on RBSI [plagiarism,would brand U as a racist,religious fanatics,fundamentalist or maybe even radicalist.But If U sing a song of praise for Mughals and other Islamic invaders ,or tell him that Hindu[& Indic Kings ]were coward who never for some RBSP] !!!I m NOT going to reply back to [some] spineless comments some guy with ZERO IQ in future on this page . P.S.-No need to quote your source in future because some X guy might crave in the source for U and just accuse U of plagiarism, masquerading. :D

Vikas Singh : Honestly...could not understand exactly what you were trying to convey here. But you are aware that personal insults are absolutely unwelcome on this forum. It would also be a good practice for all to quote the source if they post something controversial or if someone disagrees with them. You will understand RBSI has no favorites...Mughals or otherwise. I request only dignity and mutual respect between members.

@ Sumedha : Reading your posts is a delight for their refreshingly different take on stuff. You have a muktalif way of observation.A way in which we men never seem to normally look the world at. maybe men's brains percieve and process information differently ? :)))

@Sumedha Verma Ojha: I am in full agreement with the views expressed by except for the use of words : "atrocities perpetrated by Muslims". Once these are replaced by atrocities perpetrated by "so and so, ruler of "such and such" place, that would be the non-controversial way to discuss history. As you are aware and as it happens, committing atrocities was not the privilege enjoyed only by Muslim kings. Violence, exploitation, atrocities of all kinds are the hallmark of class societies from the Vedic times or the pre-biblical and pre-Quoranic times. These 'traditions' continue in our better informed and democratic times. The armies which happen to be the main arm of a state, especially the feudal State to enforce dominance, comprised of people of many religions (except Buddhists) and religions and nationalities. (I may be wrong here because I know countries where Buddhism thrived boast of powerful armies). As for Romilla Thapar and her ilk, I think all of us are prisoners of our own ideology and to each mind, some ideologies are more liberating than others. I think the key to engage in a meaningful dialogue on history is to put religion in its proper place ie subordinate to the State and the political power structure where it belongs, which people like Romilla Thapar describe as class structure. I do not necessarily disagree with you on the hold of the left in general but disagree to loosen that strangle hold we should adopt the opposite ideology. We have to realise that all that each one of us says may be unpalatable to someone or the other and one should be prepared to invite criticism and concede on weak or wrong arguments or facts or some times, views. A criticism can be effective only when it is frank, non-abusive and reasoned. We are not here to prosylitise; we are here to exchange ideas, views, opinions and facts. Let that exchange be spiced with humour and a well-derserved mutual respect.

Thanks, DSK! Maybe men' s brains process information differently or maybe I am just weird?! :) Shekhar Sathe You set out what to you was a reasonable framework for discussion but look at the irony..I will never be able to agree with your formulation that religion is subordinate to the state ! I have perhaps a very idealistic picture of the role of religion as an ethical and moral force ( may not be a reflection of reality at the moment). Again, there is no point in running away from the fact that there were Muslim atrocities committed in this country in the name of religion. How will it help if you keep trying to hide this fact under generalisations such as everyone does it and it was the order of the day, etc? You only fuel the anger of those who perceive it as rank hypocrisy. If only we could agree on a common framework as you say half the battle would be won but this is much easier said than done. On this forum, at least, perhaps we should work towards it. @ RBSI That is one of my favorite Vedic hymns! It the questioning and humble attitude of the Vedic and Upanishadic writers that I find most intellectually attractive. I have now moved to reading the Kenopnishad ( Admitting defeat by the Rig Veda. Will try again) and let me also refer to shlokas from the Dvitiya Khand to the effect that knowing and understanding as well as not knowing or understanding are both false: " The teacher said: If you think: "I know Brahman well," then surely you know but little of Its form; you know only Its form as conditioned by man or by the gods. Therefore Brahman, even now, is worthy of your inquiry. 2 The disciple said: I think I know Brahman. The disciple said: I do not think I know It well, nor do I think I do not know It. He among us who knows the meaning of "Neither do I not know, nor do I know"—knows Brahman. 3 He by whom Brahman is not known, knows It; he by whom It is known, knows It not. It is not known by those who know It; It is known by those who do not know It. " We can substitute Brahma with any form of 'knowing' and then 'know' our own limitations !

Subbiah: Fascinating, it indeed is. That is not the only cosmogony (theory of the origin of universe) contained in it. The cosmogony you described is "ex nihilo" .."being was born of non-being". But that is not the whole story.There is another cosmogony in Purusha Sukta - the ninetieth Hymn of the tenth mandala of the Rig Veda. There are 16 stanzas in this sukta. Creation here is ascribed to a being called Purusha. See below for what this says (taken from Muir's translation contained in Original Sanskrit Texts, Vol 1 p.9, quoted by BR Ambedkar in -"Who were the Shudras". The translation by Muir may leave a lot to desire but the substance is clear). 1. Purusha has a thousand heads, a thousand eyes, a thousand feet. On every side enveloping the earth he overpassed it by a space of ten fingers. 2. Purusha is tis whole universe, whatever has been and whatever shall be. He is the Lord of immortality when by food he expands. 3.Such is his greatness. Purusha is superior to all...............4.........5. From him was born Viraj and from Viraj, Purusha...... 6. When gods performed a sacrifice with Purusha as the oblation, the spring was its butter, the summer its fuel, and the autumn its accompanying offering. 7. This victim, Purusha, was born in the beginning, they immolated on the sacrificial grass. With him the gods, the Sadhyas and the rishis sacrificed. 8. From that universal sacrifice were created the curds and butter. It formed thse aerial creatures and animals, both wild and tame. 9. From the univeral sacrifice sprang the rik and sama verses, the metres of the Yajus. 10. From it sprang horses, and all animals with two rows of teeth; kine sprang from it; from it goats and sheep. (here comes the main part relating to the 4 varnas, the god given vedas defining how a human society is to be organised)) 11. When the gods divided Purusha, into how many parts did they cut him up? What was his mouth? What arms had he? What are said to have been his thighs and feet? 12. The brahman was his mouth. The Rajanya was made his arms. The being called Vaishya , he was his thighs; the Shudras sprang from his feet. ..... the sukta then describes the birth of the moon, sun, Indra, and agni, dishas, air etc from different parts of the body of Purusha up to the 16 th stanza. Subbiah, while beginning with brilliant and eloquent questions about the origins of the universe the sages provided the answers also, perhaps different rishis at different times. The answers may be circular but definitely expressed their speculation about the origin of the universe. Ambedkar has argued that the stanzas 11 and 12 appear to be added much later as a part of a design to establish the supremacy of the brahmins over the evolving social order. The new social order (of a form higher than the hunter-gatherer stage) was emerging from the struggle between different tribes and the heirarchies within a tribe as they competed for territory of pastures and arable land. By giving the vedas divine sanction, an endorsement was created for a new power structure. The aboriginals also wondered about the same issues that the rishis wondered about (as quoted by you). Iit was the brahamns who had the "answer" backed by the divine vedas written by themselves. A shepherd who wants to do pooja needs a brahman priest to perform it. There definitely was a vested interest in declaring vedas as apaurusheya and unalterable (Devdatta and nitya). I will look for a translation better than that quoted by Ambedkar. We however cannot forget that many scholars find large areas of the vedas obscure and akin to mumbling. This may not be without reason. While marveling at the prowess of language and philosophy of the rishis, one cannot lose sight of the unavoidable fact that they were humans and were quite capable of serving their own interests. The Indian scriptures and lore in this sense is very rich. (next time I will remember to follow advise given by Digvijay Singh Kushwaha to first write a comment in the note pad. My keyboard seems to eat up letters or I hide my shortcomings as a typist)

Oh no Sumedha you are perfectly sane. Pl keep delighting us all with your view-points.They are thought-provoking and make me think differently. The way Brahmm is handled in the Vedas is fascinating indeed.I remember the fables of Nachiketa and the reference that "Black cow produces white milk after having consumed green grass.This conversion of green grass into white milk is Brahmm".....among sevearl other examples which are cited about how difficult it is to percieve Brahmm much less understand HIM. I chose the path of devotion (Bhakti-Yoga) where under-standing HIM is not required but only un-conditional love towards HIM and his creation.It makes life so much more easier than attempting to make sense of it all. @ Shekhar: You have raised a very valid point about the caste system having religious sanction since it "supposedly' flows from the Vedas.It has served the selfish purpose of the upper castes very well indeed.The oppressed have been told to accept it as their lot as their 'niyati' or fate and as a punishment for deeds of their previous lives.The thought that we get a yoni as per our karma from previous lives is deeply ingrained in us and probably prevents us from thinking otherwise. Even if it was a grand design of the Brahmins ,well, it has stood the test of time all right. This appeasement of the Brahmins at every right of passage does appear selfish and hollow.That a Brahmin can never even be given death sentence (only desh-nikala or exile) howsoever grave his crime does appear difficult to swallow. My only humble submission is that if it were to have divine sanction and this (caste system) is the way of the world .Why did the rest of the world not evolve similarly ? When Arjun tells Krishna that it is a widely held belief that when sins increase on the planet , women become corrupt and 'varna-sankar' (child born to a mixed-marriage) is born.Varna-sankar is Kulghaati (one who is born to wreck havoc upon his family name and destoy the family forever).The ablutions and 'sharaadh karma' performed by him do not provide any succour to his ancestors. Krishna is strangely silent on it in the Bhagwad Gita.

There is an extraordinary disconnect in the Vedic Hindu scriptures. On the one hand , when you read the abstract ideas they are pure thought and there is no categorisation or hierarchy which creeps in, all souls are equal before Brahma. However, those same scriptures are , in practical terms, cruelly unfair to certain sections, dalits and women, for example and banish them from attaining moksha till they have reached the stage of being a twice born man after many cycles of death and rebirth and depending on their own good deeds. In the Puranas , of course, since they are more or less 'little tradition' writings there is not a vestige of equality of human beings. The disconnect arises, of course, because of religion and religious sanction being used a as a tool to maintain the organisation of society with the places being assigned to different groups being thought of as non negotiable , in the current life. The agricultural laborer toiling away in the field had the comfort or inspiration or hope of being reborn in the upper echelons of the hierarchy if he did his duty well ( or as a ant if he did them badly , of course!) DSK, not only is the Bhagwat Geeta silent on this ( although to be fair this kind of jarring shloka appears only a few times, most of the consideration is of the abstract) so are the commentators including some body who i think of as my spiritual Guru, Lokmanya Tilak. That is why perhaps revisionism is not such a bad word for me. I have to do it all the time because I do want to take in what is true and beautiful, what is शाश्वत and not reject it all because of some jarring notes.

I am not against religious thoughts. It is perfectly in order to seek answers to questions like "who am I, From where I come, whither I go? How was the universe born?" & etc. The problem lies with organised religion which is created to sustain a social order, to justify exploitation and to wield power over own people and others of different religions. The pundits are silent about this because the silence pays to perpetuate the power. Gita tried to resolve this issue by urging total surrender to the unifying divinity but still do the bidding of the power that be of the time.

Organised religion is an impediment to realise HIM.It only is an attempt to induce the masses to live a avirtuous life in harmony with each other.God is never in the scriptures anyway is HE ? "जैसी दृष्टि वैसी सृष्टि" और variously "जिसकी पहुँच जहाँ तक उससके लिए वहां पर तू " Shekhar: The fundamentel questions are indeed answered beautifully by sanatan Dharma. What is the purpose of existence ? Dharm, Arth, Kaam and Moksha ....and strictly in that order. :))

Here is a ghazal which would appeal to Sumedha and Shekhar (posting it with traslation for Subbiah) Falsafi ko behas ke andar Khuda milta nahi Dor ko suljha raha hai aur sira milta nai Howsoever much he tries the philosopher is unable to find God in his arguments / discussions, religious discourses and sermons. His search is like trying to locate the loose end in a horribly mixed/jumbled bundle/bunch of thread. Maarfat Khaliq ki aalam mein bahut dushwaar hai shehar-e-tan mein jab aap apna pata milta nahi Realising God in this world is a supremely difficult exercise when in the city-like body it is difficult to find even one's own self. Ghaafilon ke lutf ko kaafi hai duniyaavi khushi Aaqilo ko be gham e uqva mazaa milta nahi The un-initiated and the simpletons are happy with the richs and joys which the material world has to offer but the truly wise will settle for nothing but the ultimate. Kashti-e-dil ke ilaahi beher-e-hasti mein ho khair Na-khuda miltay hain lekin Ba-khuda milta nahi May God take care of my life-boat in this vast ocean of existance while i find several oarsmen through-out but not a single man of God. Zindagaani ka mazaa milta tha jinki bazm mein Aaj unki qabron ka bhi mujhay pata milta nahi Just observe the turn of fate today I am unable to locate even the graves of people whose company i used to crave and enjoy such a great deal. Sarf-e-zaahir ho gaya samaaya-e-zeb-o-safa kya ta 'ajjub hai ki baatin ba-safaa milta nahi All the cosmetic products have been utalisd to deck up the face and out-wardly appearance ,no wonder a person with a pure heart is so difficult to find. Pukhta tabbon par nahi hota hawaadis ka asar kohsaaro mein nishan-e-naksh-e-paa milta nahi People with really strong mental make-ups are not much affected by the twists and turns of fate and even calamities just as no foot-prints can ever be found on the hills.

Kyon is nacheejko beraham kuchla rahe ho? Jo sar se sire tak behad ulaz chuka hain Khuda dhoondu to khudai ke khandaron mein Berahami aur badinsaniyat ke siwa rakkha kya hain?

Thanks you for the excellent couplets. Were it nor for Man's idealism, it would be impossible to live long on this planet. Please excuse me if I have got some words or the metre wrong. My familiarity with Urdu is extremely limited and you have kindled my interest in the language which is India's most ignored heritage.

Thanks Digvijay...that was thoughtful of you ! : )

DSK Thanks so much for the ghazal, some of the couplets were familiar but could not place the shayar? I agree with you about organised religion, God is between the individual atma and paramatma but I guess the powers that be realised the efficacy of religion as a tool of control very early and put it into use with excellent results. The individual study of religious philosophy is very far from these efforts. Since Hinduism has not really been a very organised religion but an amalgam of many different strands their is an amazing amount of freedom to search.

@ Sumedha:The humility of the sha'yar is evident from the fact that he has not even added his takhallus (pen-name) to the master-piece that he has created. The poet is Akbar Allahabadi (d 1921) who is most noted for use of English and the element of wit in his ghazals. No one before him or since has attempted to do that in Urdu poetry.In this work of course there is no evidence of the aforementioned as it is more philosophical. The first couplet of this ghazal is used very frequently in sama mehfils and in qawwalis for it's profound meaning which exhorts people to search for the divine outside the realm of organised religion and 'men of god'. Bhakti marg as described in the Bhagwad Gita appeals to me personally the most or alternately tasawwuf in Islam which makes you experience HIM in your body right here on the planet.If you have noticed North is Bhakti pradhan while south is Gyan pradhan in our country. The greatest beauty of the Sanatan Dharma is that it does not restrict but liberates ,exhorting people to find their own path.It never says that this is the ONLY path. Hence Hindus are free to accept Gods from the non Hindu pantheon as well with ease and absorb all that appeals to them. Sanatan is shahshwat one which has no beginning and no end.It is constantly evolving and absorbing and desseminating it's own philosophies.

@Digvijay Singh Kushwaha: Isn't falsafi used for philosopher?

Akbar Allahabadi...No wonder. We have small literary evenings here in Geneva where we listen to Urdu shayari, Hindi kavita as well as whatever Indian language poetry members want to contribute and Akbar Allahabadi is a favorite on such occasions. That is why these were familiar! I couldn't agree more with what you have written in your comment above. ( Maybe I am not all that weird?!:) ज्ञान भक्ति युक्त कर्म योग जैसा की गीता के बारहवें अध्याय में वर्णित है .

@Shekhar: Yes it mean a 'daarshanik' literally. But urdu poetry is always about suggestivism so it also stands for all who are seekers of the truth / Divine. It actually exhorts you to shun 'shastraath' (religious discourse as they can never lead to consenses) and karam- kaand (ritualism) and chart your own course (mix and match what appeals to you) @Sumedha: BINGO

I also meant falsafi phonetically same as philosopher. I like the bit about charting your own course a lot. Banda akela aya, akela jayega. (Buddy comes alone, goes alone). Social discourse is quite another matter.

Oh Wow! I seemed to missed a lot, after I walked away from this page sensing unpleasantness. Must keep coming back to all pages again and again it seems.