[Reader-list] Iconoclasm in Kashmir-Motives and Magnitude-III

[Pawan Durani]

Hello Partha ,

We must apprecaite Rashneek who must have spent a huge time and countered an
attempt by "someone" to re-create history.Rashneek has bought to us the
reality which gives an indepth knowledge about Kashmirs hostory , which was
mis represented by "someone" with little knowledge of the particular issue.

Let us atleast be honest in admitting the facts .

Pawan


On 1/10/08, we wi <dhatr1i at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Dear Partha,
>
>               I saw and read your earlier remarks and comments over
> pawan,chanchal mails.    I feel happy(myself and of-course on behalf of
> Rashneek) if you would have directly responded to the 5 volumes of rashneek
> mails instead of responding this way. I am damn sure that  Rashneek will be
> more joyful for his efforts in bringing the tormented age old history point
> wise in front of the readers by eradicating the myths created because of
> ABCD reasons, provided you would have responded directly to his mails.  I
> would like to question you why don't you come-out on your own-way, instead
> of responding to somebody.
>
>
> Let me quote from rashneeks "Iconoclasm in Kashmir-Motives and
> Magnitude-III"
>
> "
> > when you are born in a certain land you learn so many things
> unwittingly."
>
> If I slightly change this ,
>
>    If you are born in a certain land and
>       1) You didn't learn few things at least(not so many) its your fault.
>       2)  Though you learn but kept aside again its your fault(you learned
> but kept them out
>            you wasted the time in learning them first and for not using
> them second).
>
>
> Though NALANDA and TAKSHASILA(TAXILA) universities burnt and literature
> ruined in places like Kashmir along with people, there are books kept at
> different places.  Rajatarangini is just a rain drop in the SANSKRIT
> LITERATURE OCEAN. Apart from the Vedas to Ramayana,Mahabharata,Bhagavat
> every thing is Sanskrit. If I start mentioning the great people,book names
> the list is so vast. VALMIKI,VYASA, ... to ADI
> SANKARA,PATANJALI,CHARAKA,JAIMINI,ARYABHATTA,CHANAKYA,BANA,
> GUNADYA,PANINI,KALIDAS,BHOJA,BHATRUHARI,KRISHNADEVARAYA... so many
> kings,poets,scholars. The reasons are different for these people to become
> poets and kings
> and so as their actions(Not the way so called historians noted and the
> people used the caste and religion and using still) irrespective or their
> caste and religion. When come to know about the reality and the motive one
> should feel a sorry for their anguish and illiteracy
> to understanding the things, but by the time the successfull destruction
> will be completed.
>
>
> If you read GURUCHARITRA (come to know about the stories at least) either
> Sanskrit/Devanagari or whatever language version, you come to know that
> MLECCHA is the term used in that book as well. Like that many words and
> idioms are just mingled in common peoples life imposed directly from
> Sanskrit.
>
> " >There are so many phrases and idioms in the language that tell us of
> our past,the >bedtime stories are a world of knowledge which no book of
> history can suffice for.The >vakhs and shrukhs that ordinary people on the
> street quote tell us about the socio-cultural >aspect of the age when that
> vakh/shrukh was written."
>
> I inspire for the above said lines because they are true and stand for all
> practical purposes.  Sanskrit ruled India irrespective of place. The
> regional languages are created either dumping the Sanskrit words and
> terminology used in those days fully or partially. If your 2nd language is
> either Sanskrit or your mother tongue then you can come to know about the
> things and of course you can gain knowledge outside as well (whether it is
> use full or not).
>
> --Next coming back to the argument,
>
> People ransacked India created new history and campaigning it in their own
> way feeling that they did best, but they fail to think and locate about the
> original preserved history and the exact meanings.
>
> Who is stopping you or anybody to participate in country development or
> Nation building in a CONSTRUCTIVE WAY? Does it really happening the answer
> is a definite no, rather the destruction is still going on in more worsen
> way.  You could not create a counter logic like the one you framed in this
> mail or any other mails to support whatever I don't wish to point them out
> repeatedly.
>
> Regards,
> Dhatri.
>
> Partha Dasgupta <parthaekka at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> 1.   'Mlechha' was a derogatory term to describe people who 'did not
>      follow Vedic principles' much as 'Firang' is used today for
> 'foreigners'.
>      It was also used to refer to Meat Eaters which covers a vast part of
>      the tribals who can not by any stretch of imagination be considered
>      foreigners.
>
> 2.  The usage of the word 'Turk' for Harsha was a distancing by the local
>     populace in those days to disassociate the King from the trend.
> However,
>     if 'foreigner;, 'outsider' and 'mlechha' are considered, then Harsha
> was by
>     birth and place certainly a Hindu and not a Turk. In fact, even as per
> the
>     Rajatarangini he ate pork and was not a full convert to Islam.
>
> 3.  Rashneek's debate is not about outsiders/foreigners. It is about the
> destruction
>     of religious structures - which Harsha as a Hindu ruler did to both
> Temples and
>     Buddhist monastries irrespective of what relegion they followed.
>
> 4.  Even if we reach a point where we accept conversion (thereby happily
> throwing
>     Harsha out of the 'Hindu' group and disowning his activities), it does
> not make
>     Muslims outsiders. Other than any one else who may have converted for
> whatever
>     reason, "the Turk king Harsha" as he's referred to in the
> Rajatarangini was certainly
>     a local and cannot be considered an outsider however his behaviour may
> have been.
>     We may want to disown him, but that does not change Harsha's origin.
>
> 5.  All that aside, let us for a moment agree that Islamic iconoclasts did
> despoil
>    some temples some decades or centuries back. Now what? Are we going to
> rebuild
>    all those temples after researching how many were destroyed and where?
> While we
>    are going about doing that will we remove the British and Portugese
> structures all over
>    India - including the North/South Blocks and a host of other buildings.
> That sounds
>    rather ridiculous to me and if that time & money is going to be spent I
> do hope it's
>    spent on education, hospitals, infrastructure and tons of other areas
> that this country
>    needs shoring up on.
>
> Rgds, Partha
> ................................
>
> On Jan 9, 2008 5:53 PM, we wi < dhatr1i at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hi Rashneek,
>
> This is really Great work and nice explanation on myths.  Not only the
> terms turk produces the meaning (outsiders/foreigners who were Muslims in
> this case) but also the term mleccha will also produce the same
> meaning(outsiders/foreigners who were Muslims in this case) widely used to
> refer in times.
>
> Regards,
> Dhatri.
>
>
> rashneek kher <rashneek at gmail.com> wrote:
> PART-III
>
>
>
> I am devoting this part to Harsha alone.This is because he has been
> pulled out of the historical wilderness time and again by the Marxist
> historians.This one example is used as a counterweight the huge
> historical evidence that we have to support religious persecution and
> Iconoclasm by hundreds of muslim rulers all over south Asia and not
> just Kashmir alone.
>
> It seems as if just because Harsha did what Muslim rulers followed as
> a matter of policy and an instrument of abuse we are to condone their
> acts.
>
>
>
> Harsha"The Iconoclast"
>
>
>
> Let us first see how Shudda looks at Kalhana especially in the context
> of the above discussion.
>
>
>
> My learned friend writes
>
>
>
> *"We know that Kalhana describes Sankaravarman as a destroyer of sixty
>
> four temples. But the motives for this destruction, which Kalhana
>
> attributes to greed alone, can be read differently"*
>
>
>
> This leaves me thoroughly confused for one hand Shudda questions
> Kalhana's un-biased view on History as you will read above he raises a
> question mark and says"*can be read differently"* while at the
> beginning of second series of his essay he says
>
>
>
> *Kalhana's importance for the understanding of early medieval history in
> **South Asia** is unquestionable. Especially because his writing embodies
> a
>
> singular and significant model for historiographic investigation and
>
> accounting, rare in the pre - Islamicate cultures of **South Asia**. He
>
> describes and lists the events that mark the reigns of rulers without
>
> favour or prejudice. He makes an effort at consistence and attempts to
>
> maintains a rigourous standard as far as chronology and the duration of
>
> reigns is concerned. His descriptions of everyday life, of the seasons,
>
> of customs, religious beliefs, rituals, war and political intrigue - all
>
> furnish valuable details about what life would have been like in
> **Kashmir**. He explicitly marks a distinction between the mythic and the
>
> historic phases of his narrative. He is especially important because
>
> reading Kalhana, one finds it impossible to state that iconoclasm and
>
> secterian strife was the special preserve of Muslim rulers in **South
>
> Asia**, as Hindutva apologists are wont to do.*
>
>
>
> Please read the last line carefully.I post it again for the benefit of
> the readers
>
>
>
> *He is especially important because
>
> reading Kalhana, one finds it impossible to state that iconoclasm and
>
> secterian strife was the special preserve of Muslim rulers in **South
>
> Asia**, as Hindutva apologists are wont to do.*
>
> * *
>
> *Now let Shudda show me a line wherein I have said that Iconoclasm and
> Secterian Strife was the preserve of Muslim Rulers alone*
>
>
>
> To make my point of view clear on this I am quoting myself from an
> article I wrote long back for Greater Kashmir(a separatist leaning
> newspaper published from Srinagar).This shall prove beyond doubt what
> my take is on the kings of Kashmir,irrespective of their religious
> leanings..
>
> * *
>
> *"Only when one looks back into the pages of history one realizes how
> unfortunate have we been. Except for three kings ie Lalitaditya Muktapida,
> Avantivarman and Sultan Zainulabidin in whose regimes we saw development
> and
> prosperity in Kashmir,we have mostly been ruled by cruel despots.Till the
> advent of Islam we have been ruled by kings who were more or less
> indigenous
> rulers except for Asoka and rulers of Kushana dynasty. With the advent of
> Islam, we had kings of foreign origin ruling us. However the uniting
> thread
> among all these kings was their cruelty and in dealing with their
> subjects."
> *
>
> * *
>
> *Romila Thapar and Harbans Mukhiya-Lies and Un-substantiated Claims*
>
>
>
> Let us examine what Romila Thapar,A L Basham and Mukhiya have to say
> about iconoclasm by Hindu kings in Kashmir in their various
> articles.Although I could not put my hands on all the articles which
> Shudda had referred to yet I did read enough to get a hang of what
> Romila Thapar(whose knowledge and erudition of Sanskrit has always
> been a question mark) and Mukhiya whose Marxist leftist credentials
> have never been under question.So we kind of know which side of their
> bread is buttered.We will try and understand what Basham says about
> "Harsha the Iconoclast".I am leaving Mukhiya alone but if need be ,we
> will discuss his understanding of Harsha as well.I will also like the
> forum to read through this piece of extremely unbiased work by an
> American Student.
>
> * *
>
> *Puzzling Dimensions and Theoretical Knots in my **Graduate**
> **School** Research By Yvette Claire Rosser, M.A., Ph.D. *
>
> * *
>
> *
> http://www.infinityfoundation.com/mandala/s_es/s_es_rosse_puzzle_frameset.htm*
>
> *A few days later I met with Professor Romila Thapar and told her Prof.
> Mukhia had told me that she could provide information substantiate the
> hypothesis that Hindu rulers in the past had regularly destroyed temples
> in
> neighboring kingdoms. She said that she had not written anything but that
> Richard Eaton, an American scholar had recently written about this
> phenomenon in the introduction of his latest book. *
>
> *A few months later in the December 9 and 16 editions of Frontline
> published
> by the Leftist leaning editor N. Ram of The Hindu newspaper Dr. Eaton did
> publish a long article in two parts that discussed in detail the
> destruction
> and desecration of various temples during the Medieval Period. In his
> article, Eaton attempted to prove the assertion made by Dr. Mukhia's and
> his
> colleagues. However it was argued, Eaton failed to understand the
> difference
> in scale and magnitude between the few times Hindus raided the temples of
> other kings, and the much more wide spread and architecturally devastating
> attacks from Muslim armies.*
>
> *I spoke with Professors Thapar and Mukhia and told them that I had heard
> about Harsha in **Kashmir**, recounted by the poet Kalhana in the
> 'Rajtarangini'. Harsha destroyed some temples and viharas, but most
> scholars
> consider Harsha's actions as exceptions to the usual practice. I pointed
> out
> that all of the literature indicates that Harsha was definitely only
> looting
> the temples for gold and riches, not desecrating them for ideological
> reasons. Though the result is the same, the temples were attacked, the
> intent and the scale of the destruction was very different. **I also
> mentioned that there seems to have been one or two instances in Rajasthan
> and **Gujarat** where competing Maharajas raided temples in the
> neighboring
> kingdom and stole a murti (consecrated statue) which was considered to be
> endowed with powerful attributes. Then, bringing it back to his own
> kingdom,
> the king erected a new and more fabulous temple for the murti. This type
> of
> vandalism is a very different case, the murti was removed as a trophy not
> as
> an unholy thing to be desecrated. In the accounts that I had heard, the
> king
> who had looted the temple of his adversary did not throw the captured
> statue
> in the roadway or bury it into the staircase of a religious structure in
> his
> kingdom to be trod upon, but, interestingly, he built an even grander
> temple
> and had it installed with fanfare. Though the actions may have
> similarities,
> the motivations were very different. *
>
> *I also suggested that these types of attacks on temples were not
> representative of usual practice, but in fact were very much the exception
> to the rule. Even after reading the Eaton article, I was not impressed by
> the meager evidence. Though the article very few verifiable examples
> offered
> to substantiate this often-repeated claim that Hindus were just a guilty
> as
> Muslims for breaking statues and destroying temples. I told suggested to
> several Leftist scholars in Indian that they should stop using that tact
> about the Hindus destroying temples, because hardly anyone in
> **India**really believes them. The
> evidence that Hindus were equally culpable for the destruction of temples
> and viharas, similar to the large scale destruction of Hindu temples by
> the
> various Muslim dynasties is simply untenable. Though the Marxist
> historians
> in **India** use the case of King Harsh in **Kashmir**, it is a rare
> historical exception, certainly not proof of a legacy of Hindu-driven
> carnage. Yet the historians who make these claims have failed to uncover
> any
> real evidence to substantiate their theory of Hindu aggression. *
>
> Let us move on to see what an independent Belgian Indologist Keonraad
> Elst has to say about claims made by Romila Thapar about Harsh's
> iconoclasm.Thapar's claims seem to have found favour with Shudda for
> they fall in line with his pre-determined understanding of Kalhana.* *
>
> *Kalhana's first-hand testimony:***
>
> *Now, let us look into the historical references cited by Romila Thapar.
> Of
> Banabhatta's Harshacharita, concerning Harsha of Kanauj (r.606-647), I
> have
> no copy available here, so I will keep that for another paper. Meanwhile,
> I
> have been able to consult both the Sanskrit original and the English
> translation of Kalhana's Rajatarangini, and that source provides a
> clinching
> testimony.*
>
> *Harsha or Harshadeva of **Kashmir** (r.1089-1111 ) has been called the
> "Nero
> of **Kashmir**", and this "because of his cruelty" (S.B. Bhattacherje:
> Encyclopaedia of Indian Events and Dates, Sterling Publ., Delhi 1995,
> p.A-20).
> He is described by Kalhana as having looted and desecrated most Hindu and
> Buddhist temples in **Kashmir**, partly through an office which he had
> created, viz. the "officer for despoiling god-temples". The general data
> on
> 11th-century **Kashmir** already militate against treating him as a
> typical
> Hindu king who did on purely Hindu grounds what Muslim kings also did,
> viz.
> to destroy the places of worship of rival religions. For, **Kashmir** had
> already been occupied by Masud Ghaznavi, son of Mahmud, in 1034, and
> Turkish
> troops were a permanent presence as mercenaries to the king.*
>
> *Harsha was a fellow-traveller: not yet a full convert to Islam (he still
> ate pork, as per Rajatarangini 7:1149), but quite adapted to the Islamic
> ways, for "he ever fostered with money the Turks, who were his centurions"
> (7:1149). There was nothing Hindu about his iconoclasm, which targeted
> Hindu
> temples, as if a Muslim king were to demolish mosques rather than temples.
> All temples in his kingdom except four (enumerated in 7:1096-1098, two of
> them Buddhist) were damaged. This behaviour was so un-Hindu and so
> characteristically Islamic that Kalhana reports: "In the village, the town
> or in Srinagara there was not one temple which was not despoiled by the
> Turk
> king Harsha." (7:1095)*
>
> *So there you have it: "the Turk king Harsha". Far from representing a
> separate Hindu tradition of iconoclasm, Harsha of **Kashmir** was a
> somewhat
> peculiar (viz. fellow-traveller) representative of the Islamic tradition
> of
> iconoclasm. Like Mahmud Ghaznavi and Aurangzeb, he despoiled and looted
> Hindu shrines, not non-Hindu ones. Influenced by the Muslims in his
> employ,
> he behaved like a Muslim.*
>
> *And this is said explicitly in the text which Romila Thapar cites as
> proving the existence of Hindu iconoclasm. If she herself has read it at
> all, she must be knowing that it doesn't support the claim she is making.
> Either she has just been bluffing, writing lies about Kalhana's testimony
> in
> the hope that her readers would be too inert to check the source. Or she
> simply hasn't read Kalhana's text in the first place. Either way, she has
> been caught in the act of making false claims about Kalhana's testimony
> even
> while denouncing others for not having checked with Kalhana. *
>
> *A.L.Basham*
>
> Thankfully I did get to read Basham's article titled*"Harsha of
> **Kashmir**and the Iconoclast Ascetics"
> *
>
> Basham writes and I quote"The dissolute king Harsha or Harshadeva(AD
> 1089-1101),when in financial straits,was advised by his evil counseller
> Lotsdhara to restore his fortunes by looting the temples and melting down
> the images of the gods"
>
> It is evident from the sentence that it was financial problems (due to
> various vices) that prompted him to resort to doing what he did.
>
> Although Basham contradicts himself later in the same article by saying
> that
> the motive could not be financial alone but he attributes it to King
> enjoying acts of heresy.He even contradicts Aurel Stein's explanation that
> King had been under the influence of turuska's or (Muslims or outsiders)
> who
> in this case happened to be Muslims.
> Even if we accept his explanation, there is nothing to prove that he
> destroyed temples to promote his faith or ideology (Hinduism) while the
> contrary can be proved by the following verse from Kalhana's Rajatarangni
> Book 7 verse 1095
>
> *"In the village, the town or in Srinagara there was not one temple which
> was not despoiled by the Turk king Harsha." *
>
> Kalhana calling him a turk (which was a synonym for
> Muslim/outsider/foreigner in Kalhana's vocabulary.At many places Kalhana
> uses the term turuska's to describe Muslims.We will discuss the word
> Turuska
> in detail when we analyse Shudda's references to Rajatarangni.
>
> Although I do not completely agree with either Basham or Keonard Elst,the
> reasons for which are the following.
>
> 1.Koenard Elst has got it wrong that Kashmir was conquered by Masud of
> Ghaznvi in 1034.There are no direct/indirect references or credible
> sources
> of history to prove that fact.I agree with Shudda when he says that
> Islamic
> rule was still some two centuries away.
>
> 2.Basham's assertion that we should look to Ajivikas as Harsh's source of
> his iconoclasm also seems to be a far fetched argument.Shudda himself
> concludes his argument by stating the following"Basham's argument,albeit
> speculative,is less reliant on conjecture than the automatic
> identification
> of Turuska with Muslim that bedevils the other efforts to wrestle with the
> complexity of his reign that I have referred to above"
>
> Irrespective of the arguments set forth by Romila Thapar,Basham,Elst and
> others it is conclusively proved in case of Harsha that although he did
> destroy temples and Viharas both but the reason was not to promote
> Hinduism
> or to subjugate Buddhism.What however can be argued is that he may be
> doing
> at the behest of whom Kalhana calls Turks(outsiders/foreigners who were
> Muslims in this case) what later Muslim kings did.ie.Try and Destroy the
> very root of Hinduism in Sarada Desha.
>
>
> --
> Rashneek Kher
> http://www.nietzschereborn.blogspot.com
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
>
>
> List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Never miss a thing.   Make Yahoo your homepage.
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
>
> List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>
>
>
>
> --
> Partha Dasgupta
> +919811047132
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Looking for last minute shopping deals?  Find them fast with Yahoo!
> Search.
>
> ---------------------------------
> Never miss a thing.   Make Yahoo your homepage.
> _________________________________________
> reader-list: an open discussion list on media and the city.
> Critiques & Collaborations
> To subscribe: send an email to reader-list-request at sarai.net with
> subscribe in the subject header.
> To unsubscribe: https://mail.sarai.net/mailman/listinfo/reader-list
> List archive: <https://mail.sarai.net/pipermail/reader-list/>