THE THREAT OF DIVORCE

Those of you who are unaware, Quran is the religious scriptures of Muslims. It contains what Allah dictated to Mohammad (the prophet of Islam) through a farishta Jibril (जिब्रील, referred to as Gabriel in Bible). The process was, only Mohammad could see and hear Jibril and would repeat what Jibril told Mohammad. These utterings of Mohammad are collected in Quran.

In this post, I will try to describe chapter 66 of this book.I have taken the extract from two of the most circulated translations of Quran. The one by Hilali and Khan is gifted to Haj pilgrims by the Saudi govt, so its authenticity can not be questioned. Lest someone accuse me of tinkering with the text, the content in parenthesis is also from the original translations and not from my side. The Hindi translation is by Farooq Khan and Nadwi.

A brief background will help the uninitiated. The prophet had married at least nine women in the last decade of his life, after the death of his first wife, Khandija. All of them had their separate houses adjoining each other. Mohammad devised a rota system under which, he used to visit one wife in one day. Thus, the residents of Madina used to refer the days as 'day of Aisha', 'day of Zainab' and so on. On the day when the chapter 66 was revealed to him, he was to spend his day with his teen aged wife Aisha. Another wife, Hafsa, had gone to meet her father, who lived nearby. When she came back, she saw that Mohammad was busy with  one of his concubines, Maria in the bed of Hafsa.

She lost her temper. Mohammad realized that it might become a scandal, so he apologized to her. It is explained by one of the most authentic biographies of Mohammad, 'The life of Mahomet', written by William Muir. This is what he tells us.

She reproached her lord bitterly, and threatened to make the occurrence known to the whole sisterhood. Afraid of the exposure, and anxious to appease his offended wife, Mahomet begged of her to keep the matter quiet, and promised to forego the company of Mary altogether. Haphsa, however, did not care to hide her wrong. She told it all to Ayesha, who boiled with indignation at the tale. The scandal throughout the harem spread apace, and Mahomet soon found himself received by his wives with coldness and reserve.

Life of Mahomet, pp 413

It was at this juncture that the following chapter of Quran was revealed to Mohammad.

[66:1] Hilali & Khan

O Prophet! Why do you ban (for yourself) that which Allah has made lawful to you, seeking to please your wives? And Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. 

फ़ारूक़ ख़ान & नदवी

ऐ रसूल जो चीज़ ख़ुदा ने तुम्हारे लिए हलाल की है तुम उससे अपनी बीवियों की ख़ुशनूदी के लिए क्यों किनारा कशी करो और ख़ुदा तो बड़ा बख्शने वाला मेहरबान है

What it means is that Allah has given his sanction to have relation with Mary and Allah's wish should not be given secondary importance, just to please wives. Then,

[66:2] Hilali & Khan

Allah has already ordained for you (O men), the dissolution of your oaths. And Allah is your Maula (Lord, or Master, or Protector, etc.) and He is the All-Knower, the All-Wise. 

फ़ारूक़ ख़ान & नदवी

ख़ुदा ने तुम लोगों के लिए क़समों को तोड़ डालने का कफ्फ़ार मुक़र्रर कर दिया है और ख़ुदा ही तुम्हारा कारसाज़ है और वही वाक़िफ़कार हिकमत वाला है

In this second verse, Allah sanctions Mohammad to break his oath of severing his relation with beautiful concubine Mary.

[66:3] Hilali & Khan

And (remember) when the Prophet (SAW) disclosed a matter in confidence to one of his wives (Hafsah), so when she told it (to another i.e. 'Aishah), and Allah made it known to him, he informed part thereof and left a part. Then when he told her (Hafsah) thereof, she said: "Who told you this?" He said: "The All-Knower, the All-Aware (Allah) has told me". 

फ़ारूक़ ख़ान & नदवी

और जब पैग़म्बर ने अपनी बाज़ बीवी (हफ़सा) से चुपके से कोई बात कही फिर जब उसने (बावजूद मुमानियत) उस बात की (आयशा को) ख़बर दे दी और ख़ुदा ने इस अम्र को रसूल पर ज़ाहिर कर दिया तो रसूल ने (आयशा को) बाज़ बात (किस्सा मारिया) जता दी और बाज़ बात (किस्साए यहद) टाल दी ग़रज़ जब रसूल ने इस वाक़िये (हफ़सा के अफ़शाए राज़) कि उस (आयशा) को ख़बर दी तो हैरत से बोल उठीं आपको इस बात (अफ़शाए राज़) की किसने ख़बर दी रसूल ने कहा मुझे बड़े वाक़िफ़कार ख़बरदार (ख़ुदा) ने बता दिया

This verse means that Allah told Mohammad that Hafsa had informed Aisha about the incident.

[66:4] Hilali & Khan

If you two (wives of the Prophet SAW, namely 'Aishah and Hafsah) turn in repentance to Allah, (it will be better for you), your hearts are indeed so inclined (to oppose what the Prophet SAW likes), but if you help one another against him (Muhammad SAW), then verily, Allah is his Maula (Lord, or Master, or Protector, etc.), and Jibrael (Gabriel), and the righteous among the believers, and furthermore, the angels are his helpers. 

फ़ारूक़ ख़ान & नदवी

(तो ऐ हफ़सा व आयशा) अगर तुम दोनों (इस हरकत से) तौबा करो तो ख़ैर क्योंकि तुम दोनों के दिल टेढ़े हैं और अगर तुम दोनों रसूल की मुख़ालेफ़त में एक दूसरे की अयानत करती रहोगी तो कुछ परवा नहीं (क्यों कि) ख़ुदा और जिबरील और तमाम ईमानदारों में नेक शख़्श उनके मददगार हैं और उनके अलावा कुल फरिश्ते मददगार हैं

In the above verse, Allah is warning the two wives about helping each other. The oblique threat is that Mohammad has the support of Allah, Jibril, Angels and Muslims.

The oblique threat becomes even more deadly in the very next verse.

[66:5] Hilali & Khan

It may be if he divorced you (all) that his Lord will give him instead of you, wives better than you, Muslims (who submit to Allah), believers, obedient to Allah, turning to Allah in repentance, worshipping Allah sincerely, fasting or emigrants (for Allah's sake), previously married and virgins. 

फ़ारूक़ ख़ान & नदवी

अगर रसूल तुम लोगों को तलाक़ दे दे तो अनक़रीब ही उनका परवरदिगार तुम्हारे बदले उनको तुमसे अच्छी बीवियाँ अता करे जो फ़रमाबरदार ईमानदार ख़ुदा रसूल की मुतीय (गुनाहों से) तौबा करने वालियाँ इबादत गुज़ार रोज़ा रखने वालियाँ ब्याही हुई

Hmmm. So, if Mohammad divorces his wives, Allah will provide virgins, as well as married and obedient wives to Mohammad. Now, why would Allah, creator of the entire universe be interested in the extra curricular activities of Mohammad. This must have scared the hell out of the wives.

[66:6] Hilali & Khan

O you who believe! Ward off from yourselves and your families a Fire (Hell) whose fuel is men and stones, over which are (appointed) angels stern (and) severe, who disobey not, (from executing) the Commands they receive from Allah, but do that which they are commanded. 

फ़ारूक़ ख़ान & नदवी

और बिन ब्याही कुंवारियाँ हो ऐ ईमानदारों अपने आपको और अपने लड़के बालों को (जहन्नुम की) आग से बचाओ जिसके इंधन आदमी और पत्थर होंगे उन पर वह तन्दख़ू सख्त मिजाज़ फ़रिश्ते (मुक़र्रर) हैं कि ख़ुदा जिस बात का हुक्म देता है उसकी नाफरमानी नहीं करते और जो हुक्म उन्हें मिलता है उसे बजा लाते हैं

After these six verses, which provide divine sanction of no less then Allah, for Mohammad to break his oath and continue his activities with concubines, Allah suddenly switches his ire against Kuffar (plural of Kaafir). Sample this:

[66:7] Hilali & Khan

(It will be said in the Hereafter) O you who disbelieve (in the Oneness of Allah - Islamic Monotheism)! Make no excuses this Day! You are being requited only for what you used to do. 

[66:7] फ़ारूक़ ख़ान & नदवी

(जब कुफ्फ़ार दोज़ख़ के सामने आएँगे तो कहा जाएगा) काफ़िरों आज बहाने न ढूँढो जो कुछ तुम करते थे तुम्हें उसकी सज़ा दी जाएगी 

Thus, in this seventh verse, the focus shifts to Kaafirs, who will be punished by Allah for worshiping others then Allah.

In the next verse, Allah tells about the benefit of worshiping him. The faithful Muslims will enter paradise where rivers flow.

[66:8] Hilali & Khan

O you who believe! Turn to Allah with sincere repentance! It may be that your Lord will remit from you your sins, and admit you into Gardens under which rivers flow (Paradise) the Day that Allah will not disgrace the Prophet (Muhammad SAW) and those who believe with him, their Light will run forward before them and with (their Records Books of deeds) in their right hands they will say: "Our Lord! Keep perfect our Light for us [and do not put it off till we cross over the Sirat (a slippery bridge over the Hell) safely] and grant us forgiveness. Verily, You are Able to do all things." 

फ़ारूक़ ख़ान & नदवी

ऐ ईमानदारों ख़ुदा की बारगाह में साफ़ ख़ालिस दिल से तौबा करो तो (उसकी वजह से) उम्मीद है कि तुम्हारा परवरदिगार तुमसे तुम्हारे गुनाह दूर कर दे और तुमको (बेहिश्त के) उन बाग़ों में दाखिल करे जिनके नीचे नहरें जारी हैं उस दिन जब ख़ुदा रसूल को और उन लोगों को जो उनके साथ ईमान लाए हैं रूसवा नहीं करेगा (बल्कि) उनका नूर उनके आगे आगे और उनके दाहिने तरफ़ (रौशनी करता) चल रहा होगा और ये लोग ये दुआ करते होंगे परवरदिगार हमारे लिए हमारा नूर पूरा कर और हमें बख्य दे बेशक तू हर चीज़ पर कादिर है

In the ninth verse, Allah instigates Mohammad to give a severe treatment to Kaafirs (the term disbelievers used in english translation gives the impression of atheists but the Hindi versions will clear the doubts), and Hypocrites (Munafiq is a term that is used for those Muslims who do not participate in Jihad). They are reviled by faithful Muslims and have a status even lower than that of Kaafirs. That is why the Muslims killed in Jihadi explosions are not considered to be a loss of Islam. 

[66:9] Hilali & Khan

O Prophet (Muhammad SAW)! Strive hard against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be severe against them, their abode will be Hell, and worst indeed is that destination. 

[66:9] फ़ारूक़ ख़ान & नदवी

ऐ रसूल काफ़िरों और मुनाफ़िकों से जेहाद करो और उन पर सख्ती करो और उनका ठिकाना जहन्नुम है और वह क्या बुरा ठिकाना है

Does that clear your doubts? Quran sanctions the Jihad and here it is clear that it is not a fight with the evil inside a man but against Kaafirs as well as those who say that they are Muslims but do not obey Quran and prophet. Incidentally, Mohammad killed thousands of Kaafirs, married some of their wives and kept some as his concubines. Next time you see some media savvy liar telling you that religion has nothing to do with Jihad, you will know that he is hoodwinking you. 

After these verses about Kaafirs and Jihad, Allah again addresses the issue of wives of Mohammad. In the tenth verse, he tells about the terrible fate that awaits those wives, who do not believe in Allah.

[66:10] Hilali & Khan

Allah sets forth an example for those who disbelieve, the wife of Nuh (Noah) and the wife of Lout (Lot). They were under two of our righteous slaves, but they both betrayed their (husbands by rejecting their doctrine) so they [Nuh (Noah) and Lout (Lot)] benefited them (their respective wives) not, against Allah, and it was said: "Enter the Fire along with those who enter!" 

फ़ारूक़ ख़ान & नदवी

ख़ुदा ने काफिरों (की इबरत) के वास्ते नूह की बीवी (वाएला) और लूत की बीवी (वाहेला) की मसल बयान की है कि ये दोनो हमारे बन्दों के तसर्रुफ़ थीं तो दोनों ने अपने शौहरों से दगा की तो उनके शौहर ख़ुदा के मुक़ाबले में उनके कुछ भी काम न आए और उनको हुक्म दिया गया कि और जाने वालों के साथ जहन्नुम में तुम दोनों भी दाखिल हो जाओ

The meaning of the verse is that the wives of Noah and Lot, although were wives of believers, could not enter paradise but were thrown into the fire of hell because they did not believe and obey Allah.

In the next two verses, Allah tells the wives of Mohammad about the women who were taken into paradise because they obeyed Allah, although their husbands were Kaafir.

[66:11] Hilali & Khan

And Allah has set forth an example for those who believe, the wife of Fir'aun (Pharaoh), when she said: "My Lord! Build for me a home with You in Paradise, and save me from Fir'aun (Pharaoh) and his work, and save me from the people who are Zalimun (polytheists, wrong-doers and disbelievers in Allah). 

[66:11] फ़ारूक़ ख़ान & नदवी

और ख़ुदा ने मोमिनीन (की तसल्ली) के लिए फिरऔन की बीवी (आसिया) की मिसाल बयान फ़रमायी है कि जब उसने दुआ की परवरदिगार मेरे लिए अपने यहाँ बेहिश्त में एक घर बना और मुझे फिरऔन और उसकी कारस्तानी से नजात दे और मुझे ज़ालिम लोगो (के हाथ) से छुटकारा अता फ़रमा

[66:12] Hilali & Khan

And Maryam (Mary), the daughter of 'Imran who guarded her chastity; and We breathed into (the sleeve of her shirt or her garment) through Our Ruh [i.e. Jibrael (Gabriel)], and she testified to the truth of the Words of her Lord [i.e. believed in the Words of Allah: "Be!" and he was; that is 'Iesa (Jesus) - son of Maryam (Mary); as a Messenger of Allah], and (also believed in) His Scriptures, and she was of the Qanitin (i.e. obedient to Allah). 

[66:12] फ़ारूक़ ख़ान & नदवी

और (दूसरी मिसाल) इमरान की बेटी मरियम जिसने अपनी शर्मगाह को महफूज़ रखा तो हमने उसमें रूह फूंक दी और उसने अपने परवरदिगार की बातों और उसकी किताबों की तस्दीक़ की और फरमाबरदारों में थी

Now, since Allah had permitted Mohammad to break his oath given to his wife Hafza that he will have no relations with Mary, Mohammad left his wives and started living with Mary.  She was about twenty years of age and he was about sixty. Mohammad lived with her for about a month, during which time the stalemate continued. 

This was a matter of grave concern for the fathers of both, Aisha and Hafza. They were close aides of Mohammad. It was on their repeated pleadings to Mohammad and chastisement to their daughters that Mohammad relented. This is how William Muir puts it:

At length Mahomet, unwilling longer to continue the disgrace of his wives, or impatient at his self-imposed seclusion from them, listened to their prayer. Gabriel, he said, had spoken well of Haphsa, the chief offender, and desired that he should take her back again. So he forgave them all and returned to their apartments as before.

The concubine, Mary, gave birth to a son of Mohammad who was named Ibrahim. He died in his infancy due to some disease.

Now, let me drive home some important points. 

Quran is considered to be the supreme scripture of Islam. Supreme. Anyone, who does not believe in Quran is not a Muslim. Anyone who does not show respect to Quran is not a Muslim. 

Secondly, anyone who does not believe that Mohammad was the messenger of Allah is not a Muslim. No disrespect is to be shown towards Mohammad. In fact, he is the role model of all Muslims and thus has to be emulated. Quran is absolutely clear on this front also.

[33:21] Hilali & Khan

Indeed in the Messenger of Allah (Muhammad SAW) you have a good example to follow for him who hopes in (the Meeting with) Allah and the Last Day and remembers Allah much. 

When a Muslim is dyeing his beard with henna, shaving his moustaches and keeping his beard or wearing a short of length pyjama, he is following the 'good example' of the 'messenger of Allah'.

The extent of protectionism for the prophet is that, in Pakistan, there is a law called 'Tauheen e rasool' or 'Tauheen e risaalat', i.e. disrespect of messenger. Under this law, if anyone shows disrespect for Mohammad, he/she is to be killed. Period. One of the Maulavis, who helped the court in framing the law, brags about it:

The law of Tauheene Risalat was enforced in 1986 so that stringent action could be taken against all those who speak out and pen down disrespectful sentences against Rasulullah (Sallallaho alaihe wasalIam). Under this law Hadd of Irtidad which is death punishment was prescribed for anyone who disrespects, taunts or insults the Muqaddas name of Raulullah (SAW) either verbally or in writing or by means of obvious gesture, directly or indirectly. Afterwards, the Federal Shari’at Court was approached for scrutinizing the above law in the light of Holy Qurtaan and Sunnah. On 30th October, 1990, the full bench under Chief Justice Gul Mohammad Khan passed a detailed judgement and clarified further that the punishment of death is the only sentence for one who disrespects and commits insult of Rasulullah (SAW).

Rest of his brags are here.

Currently, a woman called Asia bibi is incarcerated in a Paki jail, awaiting her execution. She has been convicted under the law 'Tauheen e risaalat', which is being tom tommed in India as 'ईश निंदा', to give an impression as if someone has insulted ईश्वर and not a prophet. Salman Taseer, the progressive governor of Punjab, Pakistan was killed, a few months ago, by his guard. The guard said that he killed Taseer because Taseer said that 'Tauheen e Risaalat' was a 'black law' and was also trying to protect  the woman Asia bibi.

On second thoughts it seems normal. Any society that stifles free thinking is bound to produce such psycho killers.

I wonder if progressive Muslims really know the kind of man the prophet was and how he treated women in general and his wives in particular. May be Salman Taseer knew.
The laws devised on the basis of sayings and teachings of Mohammad, called Sharia, provide Muslim men, absolute power over their women. The threat of Talaaq, hanging on the heads of Muslim women is almost as old as Islam. 
Not surprisingly, there is no word for Talaaq or divorce in Hindi or Sanskrit. Like there is no word for 'Yog' in Arabic or English.
Regarding this particular chapter, the famous biographer of Mohammad, William Muir says:

There is surely no grotesquer utterance than this in the ' Sacred Books of the East '; and yet it has been gravely read all these ages, and is still read, by the Moslem, both in public and private, as part of the ' eternal ' Coran.

Wonder how educated Muslims will react to his words.

Get ready: Houris are waiting

According to Bible, God created the first man called Adam and then from his rib, created the first woman, Eve. Although the idea defies the laws of nature, evolutionary science and common sense, but nonetheless, it is stated in the Bible. The following extract is from Genesis 2 of Bible:

2:21 And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof

2.22 And the rib, which the Lord God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man

2.23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of man.

Here we will not discuss the correctness of the story of creation but will limit to what it led to.

In the seventh century, Mohammad, the prophet of Islam, borrowed generously from Bible, thus Quran also contains some parts of Bible.

O people! Be dutiful to your Lord, Who created you from a single person (Adam), and from him (Adam) He created his wife [Hawwa (Eve)], and from them both He created many men and women and fear Allah through Whom you demand your mutual (rights), and (do not cut the relations of) the wombs (kinship). Surely, Allah is Ever an All-Watcher over you.

Quran - 4:1

The actions and sayings of Mohammad, which are not contained in Quran, are collected in numerous books called 'Hadiths', which means 'traditions'. One of the Hadiths talks about Mohammad saying:

Woman has been created from a rib which is twisted. If you try to straighten it, you will break it. It is desirable to make the best use of it as it is.

Hadith Tirmzi, Vol. 1, pp 440

That gives us some insight into the thoughts of Mohammad, who is considered to be one of the most followed persons in the world. And also the most documented. And also the most emulated. Every pious Muslim tries to follow him as an ideal example. Whether it be sporting beard without mustache, dyeing hair with henna or wearing pyjama above ankles height. It is not only his outer appearance, that is to be emulated but his entire life is considered to be an ideal example for the faithful Muslims.

According to Anwar Sheikh, Mohammad devised his religion so that women are completely dominated to satisfy the 'dominance urge' of man.

Thus, woman is nothing but the source of pleasure to man. However, it implies that, in return for being the provider of delight, she is entitled to love and reverence as her fundamental rights. In fact, every woman is conscious of it and wants to be treated respectfully, but Islam, in line with Semitic philosophy, which states that man must have sexual pleasure by command, opposes this attitude. This is why there is no concept of consent in sexual intercourse.

Islam pp 32

Some apologists say that some of the acts were meant only for the era in which Islam was formed and are obsolete now. Nothing could be farther from truth. The official site of Darul Uloom, Deobandh, considered the highest seat of learning of Islam in our nation talks about the same treatment to women even today. Read the rights of husband, as mentioned by, none other than, Maulan Ashraf Ali Thanvi Rahmatullah Allaihi. Sample this:

Allah TaAla has given great rights to the husband and has attached a lot of virtue to him. Pleasing the husband and keeping him happy is a great act of ‘ibadah and displeasing him or keeping him unhappy is a major sin.

1. Rasulullah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam said:  "The woman who offers her five times salat, fasts in the month of Ramadan, protects her honour and respect, and obeys her husband has the choice of entering jannah from whichever door she wishes to enter from." This means that from the eight doors of jannah she can enter through whichever door she wishes without even having to knock on that door.

2. Rasulullah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam said:  "The woman who passes away in such a state that her husband is pleased with her will enter jannah."

3. Rasulullah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam said:  "Were I to command anyone to prostrate to anyone other than Allah, I would have commanded the woman to prostrate to her husband. If the husband orders his wife to carry the boulders of one mountain to the next mountain, and the boulders of the next mountain to a third mountain, she will have to do this."

4. Rasulullah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam said:  "When the husband calls his wife, she should go immediately to him even if she is busy at her stove." In other words, no matter how important a task she may be busy with, she should leave it and go to him.

5. Rasulullah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam said:  "When a man calls his wife to engage in sexual intercourse with him and she does not go and because of this he sleeps away angrily, the angels continue cursing this woman till the morning."

6. Rasulullah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam said:  "When a woman troubles or displeases her husband in this world, the hûr of jannah that has been set aside for him says:  "May Allah curse you! Do not trouble him. He is your guest for a few days. Soon he will leave you and come to me."

7. Rasulullah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam said:  "There are three types of people whose salat is not accepted, nor is any other good act of theirs accepted. One is a slave who runs away from his master. The second is a woman whose husband is displeased with her. The third is a person who is in a state of intoxication."

8. A person asked:  "Who is the best woman?" Rasulullah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam replied:  "The best woman is one who pleases her husband when he looks at her, when he asks her to do something she obeys him, and she does not do anything that may displease him with regard to his wealth and honour."

One of the rights of the husband is that the wife should not keep any optional fasts nor offer any optional salat in his presence without his permission. Among the rights of the husband is that she should not remain in an untidy, dishevelled state. Instead, she should always remain clean and beautiful for her husband. In fact, if she remains untidy and dishevelled despite her husband ordering her to remain clean, he has the right of beating her (lightly) in order that she may obey him. Another right of the husband is that she should not leave the house without his permission irrespective of whether it be the house of a friend, relative or anyone else.

The Maulana has not devised these 'rights of Husbands' by his own whims and fancies. They come direct from the prophet Mohammad who was a lot more explicit regarding male supremacy. Islam is also called Mohammedanism because it derives all its aspects from the life of Mohammad. Therefore, to understand Islam, one has to understand Mohammad. Here is one more Hadith

If a man is in a mood to have sexual intercourse, the wife must come immediately even if she is baking bread at a communal oven.

Tirmzi Vol. 1, pp 428

Then again:

A woman cannot discharge her duty towards Allah until she has discharged her duty towards her husband: if she is riding a camel and her husband expresses his desire, she must not refuse.

Ibn-e-majah, Vol. 1,chapter 592 pp520

It does not need a genius to imagine the kind of desire, she is supposed to fulfill, riding a camel.

But if you believe our secularists, marxists and Mullahs, they will tell you that women are given equal rights in Islam. Then they can quote a verse from Quran. Here it is:

And divorced women shall restrain themselves for three menstrual periods; and it is not lawful for them to conceal what Allah has created in their wombs if they believe in Allah and the Last Day; and their husbands have the right to take them back, during this time, if they desire reconciliation; and the women also have rights similar to those of men over them, in accordance with Islamic law – and men have superiority over them; and Allah is Almighty, Wise. 

Quran 2:228 - Translated by Maulana Ahmed Raza Khan, one of the most respected scholars of Islam.

Look at the red part of the verse. It gives an impression that women have rights, equivalent to those of men. Isn't it?

Wait. Now, look at the bold part. The rights are in accordance with the Islamic law. For this again, we have to look at a Hadith or tradition derived out of the life of Mohammad.

If women comply with your commands, do not molest them.... listen carefully, they have a right over you that you take care of their food and wear.

Ibn - e - Majah, Voll. 1, pp 519

The rights of women are limited to food and clothes with a rider that they comply with commands of the hubby dear.

Mohammad, at the time of his death had nine wives and two concubines, Coptic Christian Maria (who was gifted to him by a Christian governor) and Jewish Rehana whom he acquired by killing all the men folk of her family.

When Mohammedans conquered our motherland, Hindu women prefered to die  in Jauhar or Sati rituals, then be caught by invaders to be kept as concubines. Those who were unlucky enough, landed in the Harems of the monsters. Akbar had 5000 women in his harem and his son Jahangir, who is portrayed as a romantic and caring soul by marxist historians had 6000 women in his harem.
The plunder of Hindu women had started in 712 with Mohammad bin Qasim. About three centuries later, when Mahmud Ghazni attacked Hind and Waisind, according to his chronicler Utbi, he took with him 5,00,000 'beautiful prisoners'.
One example of slave capturing during the rein of Muhammad bin Tughlaq in our country should suffice.

Ibn Battutah’s eye-witness account of the Sultan’s gifting captured slave girls to nobles or arranging their marriages with Muslims on a large scale on the occasion of the two Ids, corroborates the statement of Abbas. Ibn Battutah writes that during the celebrations in connection with the two Ids in the court of Muhammad bin Tughlaq, daughters of Hindu Rajas and those of commoners, captured during the course of the year were distributed among nobles, officers and important foreign slaves. “On the fourth day men slaves are married and on the fifth slave-girls. On the sixth day men and women slaves are married off

 Muslim slave system in Medieval India by Eminent historian K.S.Lal

There is no limit to the number of concubines that a Muslim brother can have, apart from his four wives, that is. Muslim men are permitted four wives at a time. It means that he can have four wives at a time. So, if a Muslim brother has four wives today and can afford to marry four other ones, he just has to utter triple talaaq to his present wives and voila! he is free for the next bunch of four beauties. 

And if you wish to change one wife for another and you have given her heaps of treasure, do not take back anything from it; will you take it back by slander and open sin?And if you wish to change one wife for another and you have given her heaps of treasure, do not take back anything from it; will you take it back by slander and open sin?

Quran 4:20 Translation by Ahmed Raza Khan, respected Islamic scholar

 How about Muslim women?

They have to obey the commands of their hubby. No multiple husbands for them. Sounds a little bit harsh. No.

Ok. What if some Muslim woman, envious of the fun that his man can have, commits adultery?

And take testimony from four chosen men amongst you, against the women among you who commit adultery; and if they testify, confine those women in the houses until death takes them away or Allah creates a solution for them. 

Quran 4:15 Translation by Ahmed Raza Khan, respected Islamic scholar

Yep. Confine them until they die. This can not be real. It must be ancient history. Maybe. But there is a novel by Jean Sasson by the title 'Princess' in which she gives us real life accounts of girls being killed by their fathers for flirting with men, in present day Islamic world.
How else can the pleasure be removed from the lives of women?
The answer is genital mutilation.

Can you think of anything more barbaric

According to UNICEF, 30,00,000 muslim girls are mutiliated every year. How and when this tradition started, I have no idea.

Incidentally, the text books of class V in West Bengal, the citadel of Communists, says that

Islam and Christianity are the only religions which treated man with honor and equality

The irony is that a case in under way in our Supreme court titled Aruna Roy and others vs. Union government of India, in which Aruna Roy and some others are defending the above mentioned quote and many others which are derogatory to freedom fighters like Shivaji and Khudi Ram Bose. This Aruna Roy is a member of Antonia Maino a.k.a. Sonia Gandhi's 'National Integration Council'. Just imagine the kind of integration she will bring.
Back to our topic. Let us see how prophet Mohammad viewed women. During the last 10-12 years of his life, he raided many Jewish and Pagan tribes, killed many men, married their women, sold their children and women as slaves to buy weapons and horses. Those who did not convert to Islam were kept by him as his concubines. During one such raid on a tribe called Banu Mustaliq, they captured many beautiful women. Here is the Hadith:

I entered the Mosque and saw Abu Said Al-Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about Al-Azl (i.e. coitus interruptus). Abu Said said, "We went out with Allah's Apostle for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. So when we intended to do coitus interrupt us, we said, 'How can we do coitus interruptus before asking Allah's Apostle who is present among us?" We asked (him) about it and he said, 'It is better for you not to do so, for if any soul (till the Day of Resurrection) is predestined to exist, it will exist.

Sahih Bukhari - Volume 5, Book 59, Number 459

So, the apostle permitted rape of the hapless women. It was a mundane task for these people. Then, appeared a verse of Quran to justify this behaviour:

और शौहरदार औरतें मगर वह औरतें जो (जिहाद में कुफ्फ़ार से) तुम्हारे कब्ज़े में आ जाएं हराम नहीं (ये) ख़ुदा का तहरीरी हुक्म (है जो) तुमपर (फ़र्ज़ किया गया) है

So, acquiring and raping women is considered a pious task. It is sanctioned by Allah also. This turned out to be a lucrative inducement and most of the brigands joined Islam, swelling the numbers rapidly. The motivator and organizer that Mohamad was par excellence, he promised choicest sex during life and even after death. Look at the Jannat for those who wage Jihad, die and reach there:

(They shall be) reclining on couches ranged in rows and We shall wed them to houris (virgins of Paradise) with large wide eyes. We shall give them fruits and meat as they desire. 

What else can one ask for. Women, money and property of others during life and  virgins after death. Of course one has to be a frustrated and crazed lunatic for such desire and unfortunately such specimen are not in short supply.
Mohammad married a girl called Aisha when he was about 54 years of age and she was six years old. The marriage was consummated when she was nine years old. Aisha tells us about this in the following Hadith:

Narrated 'Aisha:

I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah's Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for 'Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13) 

Hadis Bukhari - Volume 8, Book 73, Number 151:

So, she used to play with dolls when the marriage was consummated. But that happened about thirteen centuries ago. Right. So, can it have any effect now. 

Indeed in the Messenger of Allah, you have a good example to follow for him who hopes in (the Meeting with) Allah and the Last Day and remembers Allah much. 

Quran 33:21

The above picture, when I first saw, I thought it is some fancy dress competition and fathers are taking their daughters for a show. Then the reality sank in. It is for real.

Can we imagine the mental suffering that is in store for these little dolls? Look at their innocent faces. Can they even imagine the gravity of their own fate?

Just Wondering!

Tulsi and converted Christians

Take a look at the following paragraph

Tulsi in Sanskrit means "the incomparable one" and its been taken like this since ancient times...There are certain benefits of this plant and it also proves the position of Hinduism and Christianity being based on scientific methods. And the english name is beacuse...the holy basil, is said to have grown at the site of Christ’s crucifixion and is associated with St. Basil’s feast, a day celebrated in Greece on January 1.

I have never read a more hilarious scientific reason. This snatch has been taken from this blog. From the looks of the blogger, he is a converted Christian and a willing or gullible instrument of wicked missionaries. 

Before we even discuss the sheer stupidity of the claim, let me share with you the reason for which I found it funny and macabre at the same time is that his post reminded me of an order issued by the church and its henchmen on the Hindu population when the church did not need such sugar coated approach.

Christianity's dark secret regarding Tulsi

As Christianity is an imperialistic and predatory creed, it mastered the mind games very early. When Francis Xavier, promoted as a saint, asked for installing the dreaded 'Inquisition' on Hindus, one of the first things they did was to institute a commission for the purpose of uprooting Hinduism. It was called 'Goa inquiry commission'. Based on its findings, a religious order or fatwa was declared on Hindus.

 "...Hereby we declare the decision that the conventions mentioned in the preamble of the fatva as stated below are permanently declared as useless, and therefore prohibited." 

The list of prohibitions was very long. For this post, I am referring only to the one related to Tulsi.

They should not plant Tulsi in their houses, compounds, gardens or any other place.

So much so for Christianity's link with Tulsi. May be our Sammy has rewritten the entire Bible to make it scientific. 

Respecting Science: Church Style

The scientific Christianity was responsible for publicly burning the famous scientist 'Giardiano Bruno' and arresting Galileo. The scientific holy fathers did not look through the telescope when requested by a hapless Galileo because they considered it to be an instrument of 'Satan'. The scientific church, publicly burnt at stake, thousands of women who used herbal remedies by branding them as witches.

That was the funny part. Now, the macabre part.

Many of you will have the first reaction on the lines of 'so what. at least they are appreciating Hinduism.' That is because we are unable to fathom the level of depravity upto which missionaries can fall.

The Missionary motive
 

The church through its massive funds and the Christian education system working in our country has been working to 'harvest our souls'. One part of the plan is to first 'secularize' Hinduism and then plant Christianity in our nation. It is not my theory. They are working on it and have secularized a large section of the urban populace.

One of their most successful missionaries has been 'father Bede Griffith'. Here are his rants:

"It is a remarkable fact, that the Church has been present in India for over fifteen hundred years and has had for the most part everything in its favour, and yet in all this time hardly two in a hundred of the people has been converted to the christian faith. The position is, indeed, worse even than this figure would suggest, as the vast majority of Christians are concentrated in a very few small areas and in the greater part of India the mass of people remains today untouched except in a very general way by the christian faith. It is necessary to go even further than this and to say that for the immense majority of the Indian people Christianity still appears as a foreign religion imported from the West and the soul of India remains obstinately (it is not respectfully but obstinately) attached to its ancient religion. It is not simply a matter of ignorance. This may have been true in the past, but in recent times there has been a remarkable revival of Hinduism, which is more or less consciously opposed to Christianity, and the educated Hindu regards his religion as definitely superior to Christianity

For a missionary, revival of Hinduism is dangerous. They are not sages or spiritual men and women, who can appreciate that Hindu religion is far more superior than hollow creeds. To his mind, it is not a spiritual matter but an occupational hazard. Thus a missionary will praise a different religion for his ulterior motives only but never accept it superior then Christianity (remember Tulsi).

Example from destruction of Greek Civilization

Another proselytizer R.H.S.Boyd has this to say:

"As we reflect on the process, by which Christianity in the earlier centuries became acclimatised in the Greek world, and by which it made use of certain categories of Greek thought, we are struck by the double face of its acceptance of 'secularised' Greek philosophy and philosophical terminology, and its complete rejection of Greek religion and mythology. Greek religion was gradually secularised. Philosophy was separated from what had been a religio-philosophic unity. The religious content - which had already been deeply influenced by secularisation right from the time of Aristophanes and Euripides - developed into a cultural, literary, artistic entity 'incapsulated' and isolated, except in the Orphic and mystery traditions, from that living, existential faith which transforms men's lives."

Look at the words; 'made use of'. There is not even an iota of respect for Hindu religion. IT has to be 'made use of'. Does that explain the appreciation of Tulsi and hijacking it on frivolous and funny reasons towards Christianity. 

What he is not stating is that this secularisation of Greek religion was manipulated by Church. The pagan schools were closed, their rites banned and temples were destroyed to secularise them.

Have we noticed that students are fined in schools run in our country for talking in Hindi? They are forced to wear ties and skirts, which are absolutely alien to our religion and culture. The very fact that we have accepted it as a part of our life is a pointer towards the successful planning of the church.

Brood Parasitism

Bigger egg is of parasitic cuckoo

Let us try to understand the effect of fraudulent conversions and converts on Hindu religion. The adjoining picture shows a nest having three eggs. Although the pattern is almost similar but one egg is much larger then the other two. This larger egg belongs to one of the best fraudsters in nature. It belongs to a cuckoo bird. The female cuckoo has laid her egg in the nest of a sparrow to save herself from the trouble of hatching and rearing her off spring. 
The host female will hatch the eggs and when the chicks will come out, the aggressive cuckoo chick will push out the host chicks. That will eliminate its competitors for food and the host parents will feed this parasite, believing it to be their own off spring.

The unsuspecting parents keep on feeding the murderer of their own off springs. Thus they feed a parasite with the belief that it is their own off spring. Look at the size of the chick. It is still an infant but much bigger then its feeders.

Poor sparrow feeding the murderer of her own chicks

The Hindu take

As far as Hindu respect for science and tulsi is concerned, it states;

यन्मूले सर्वतीर्थानि,यन्मध्ये सर्वदेवता:।यदग्रे सर्ववेदाश्च,तुलसित्वां नमाम्तयतम्

अर्थात - जिसके मूल में सभी तीर्थ समाहित हैं जिसके मध्य भाग में सभी देवताओं का वास है, जिसके पत्ते वेदस्वरूप हैं, उस तुलसी माँ को मेरा बारंबार नमन है
This respect for the plant is due to its medicinal properties and not a mere superstition. I am not going to discuss the various beneficial aspects of Tulsi, for them just search the net and you will find it out.

Claims of a Wind Bag

Now for the hilarious justification given by our desi Christian;

 the holy basil, is said to have grown at the site of Christ’s crucifixion

Notice the inconclusive word 'said' to have grown. Who said it? May be saint sammy. Or saint Hitler. That is how scientific the religion is. The books of Copernicus were banned by the church. Of course the best scientists are the holy fathers who devised Inquisition.

What a stark contrast between the two religions?

One which respects nature and its scientific bounty, the other has no place of nature in its scheme of things. Still Nehru and his comrades want us to believe that all the religions are same.

The Muslim Behaviour during dark ages

Unfortunately, this reverence of the plants and nature attracted the ire of not only Christians but also Muslims. The Muslim invaders, who had come to this land in order to finish off Hinduism showed the same intolerance towards Tulsi. Sample this:

Chaitanya-mangala, a biography of the great Vaishnava saint of medieval India, presents the plight of the Hindus in Navadvip (नवद्वीप) on the eve of the saint's birth in 1484 CE. The author Jayananda writes 

"...The king plunders the houses of those who wear sacred threads on the shoulder and put sacred marks on the forehead, and then binds them. He breaks the temples and uproots tulsi plants... The bathing in Ganga is prohibited..."

These actions were intended to hurt the sentiments of the Hindus. It is the inherent intolerance in Semitic religions which forces such conduct.

Isana Nagara describes the condition of the Hindus under Husain Shah as follows:

The wicked mlecchhas (धूर्त म्लेच्छ) urinate like dogs on the tulsi plant and deliberately pass faeces in the Hindu temples. They throw water from their mouths on the Hindus engaged in worship, and harass the Hindu saints...  

Is it the story of a tulsi plant? or science? or intolerance?

Just Wondering!

If you liked it, then this might interest you.

Sati Pratha: Whose fault?

CAUTION - LONG POST

Hindu dharm has been tarnished, time and again, by vested interests with the accusation that Hindu religion has been unfair to its women due to the practice of 'Sati pratha' (सती प्रथा).

The aim of this post is to refute that this practice was a blot on Hindu religion. In this post, I am presenting some facts from the voluminous work by British historians Elliot and Dowson, titled 'History of India as told by its own Historians'. As the title indicates, they have compiled and translated the records of various historians and invaders. These works constitute the most authentic history of the medieval period or dark ages of our history. All these references have been taken from Muslim chroniclers, who have left these records for posterity.

First of all, no Hindu scripture i.e. Veds or Bhagwad Geeta prescribe sati. Therefore, if it was an evil (which we will find that it was not), then it was a social evil and not an evil sanctioned by Hindu religion.
Secondly, there is no indirect evidence of such practice. Remember the wives of Dashrath or Raavan in Ramaayan or Kunti, Amba, Ambika and Ambaalika in Mahabhaarat. Had 'sati' been a 'pratha' or practice, all these would have burnt themselves on the pyre. Thus using the word 'pratha' in itself is a misnomer.

So, neither the scriptures nor the sequence of events favors prevalence of this practice in ancient Hindu lands or societies. But then, we have so many temples throughout our great nation, built in reverence of some 'sati'. After all, there is no smoke without a fire.
These numerous temples or memorial sites bear testimony to the fact that indeed a large number of women were burnt on pyres with the dead bodies of their husbands or without their husbands. Almost all of these temples came up in the period after 712. This time period is called dark age in Europe and it coincides with the dark age in our history also. What forced these women on their pyres?

To find out the truth, let us look at another religion that started in seventh century. It was started by Mohammad (570 - 632).

During the life time of Mohammad, the founder of Islam, Islamic armies had not attacked Bhaaratvarsh. The six attacks by Arabs from 636 to 712, on Hindustan resulted in defeat of Islamic invaders with death of the commanders at the hands of Hindu warriors. The ethics of Hindu warriors forbade them to occupy the territories of the invaders. They were satisfied  by defending their kingdom. 

The first victory on the land of Hindustan, by Arabs was effected by Mohammad bin Qasim when he defeated King Dahir in Sind.

When these rabid Arab armies fanned in all the directions, they had very simple motive. Loot, plunder and rape. Unlike Hindu Kshatriyas, they had no ethics like not attacking the civilians, not molesting women and no attack after sunset.

Since the time of Mohammad the standard practice had been to kill menfolk, sell women and children as slaves. The Hindu women were not prepared to lead such wretched lives where strangers would touch them.

When the sister of King Dahir realized that their fort has been surrounded by Arabs, this is what she did.

The sister of King Dahir assembled all her women and said,

Jaisiya is separated from us and Mohammad Kasim has come. God forbid that we should owe our liberty to these outcast cow eaters (म्लेच्छ गोमांस भक्षक)! Our honor would be lost. Our respite is at end, and there is no hope of any escape.; let us collect wood, cotton and oil, for I think we should burn ourselves and go to meet our husbands. If any wish to save herself, she may.

So, they went into a house and set it on fire, and burnt themselves. Mohammad took the fort and stayed there for two or three days. He put six thousand fighting men, who were in the fort, to the sword, and shot some with arrows. The other dependents and servants were taken prisoners, with their wives and children.

When the number of prisoners was calculated, it was found to amount to thirty thousand persons, amongst whom thirty were the daughters of chiefs, and one of them was King Dahir's sister's daughter, whose name was Jaisiya.' They were sent to Hajjaj. The head of Dahir and the fifth part of the prisoners were forwarded in charge of K'ab, son of Maharat. When the head of Dahir, the women, and the property all reached Hajjaj, he prostrated himself before God, (read Allah) offered thanksgivings and praises, for, he said, he had in reality obtained all the wealth and treasures and dominions of the world.

Hajjaj then forwarded the head, the umbrellas, and wealth, and the prisoners to "Walid the Khalifa. When the Khalifa of the time had read the letter, he praised Almighty God. He sold some of those daughters of the chiefs, and some he granted as rewards. When he saw the daughter of Rai Dahir's sister, he was much struck with her beauty and charms, and began to bite his finger with astonishment. 'Abdu-Uah bin 'Abbas desired to take her, but the Khalifa said, " O my nephew ! I exceedingly admire this girl, and am so enamoured of her, that I wish to keep her for myself. Nevertheless, it is better that you should take her to be the mother of your children." By his permission, therefore, 'Abdu-Uah took her.
She lived a long time with him, but no child was born from her. Afterwards, another letter was received about the capture of the fort of Kawar. It is said that after the conquest was effected, and the affairs of the country were settled and the report of the conquest had reached Hajjaj, he sent a reply to the following effect. "O my cousin; I received your life-inspiring letter. I was much pleased and overjoyed when it reached me. The events were recounted in an excellent and beautiful style, and I learnt that the ways and rules you follow are conformable to the Law. Except that you give protection to all, great and small alike, and make no difference between enemy and friend. God says,—Give no quarter to Infidels, but cut their throats." " Then know that this is the command of the great God.

Chach-nama, Eliot and Dowson, Vol. 1, pp 152

So, the Hindu women killed themselves to save themselves from being paraded naked amongst the worst of scoundrels. The scoundrels who treated women as objects, slaves and properties. Try to imagine women captured after killing their menfolk, stripped naked and paraded in front of lecherous monsters. Monsters who would inspect them from every angle to evaluate their price. One has to use imagination to understand the kind of scrutiny these hapless women were subjected to in slave markets.

The victory of Mohammad bin Qasim did not last very long and we find that in the year 1000, very small portion of Sind was under Muslim rule. The five hundred years from 636 to 1206 saw one of the bloodiest and most inspired resistance to Islamic armies, in which millions of Hindu warriors perished but did not give in meekly to invaders. For the Heroic Hindu resistance, which has been wiped out of our history text books, read here.
The pride of Hindu men and women had not dented six centuries later when Khilji dynasty was calling the shots.

In 1301 july, Allauddin Khilji attacked the king of Ranthambor and surrounded his fort from all the sides. His actions have been recorded by Amir Khusro as recorded in Tarikh - e - Alai, also called Khazan ul fateh. It is pertinent to mention that Amir Khusro is considered to be a moderate and Hindi loving Muslim but his writings are full of bigotry.

"No provisions remained in the fort, and famine prevailed to such an extent, that a grain of rice was purchased for two grains of gold." One night the Rai lit a fire at the top of the hill, and threw his women and family into the flames, and rushing on the enemy with a few devoted adherents, they sacrificed their lives in despair. " On the fortunate date of the 3rd of Zi-1 ka'da a.h. 700 (July, 1301 a.d.), this strong fort was taken by the slaughter of the stinking Rai."

 Jhain was also captured, "an iron fort, an ancient abode of idolatry, and a new city of the people of the faith arose." The temple of Dahir Deo, and the temples of other gods, were all razed to the ground.

These were not ordinary raids or fights between warring kings. This was Islamic Jehad, the aim was to uproot idolatory and implant the 'true faith' of Islam. The women were to be captured, raped and sold as slaves.
The Tughlak dynasty was equally fanatical. During the reign of Sultan Tughlak, the incidence of Rai of Kambila (काम्पिल्य?) is recorded as:

This prince had territories situated among inaccessible mountains, and was one of the chief princes of the infidels. When Bahau-d din made his escape to this prince, he was pursued by the soldiers of the Sultan of India, who surrounded the Rai's territories. The infidel saw his danger, for his stores of grain were exhausted, and his great fear was that the enemy would carry off; his person by force; so he said to Bahau-d'din, "Thou seest how we are situated. I am resolved to die with my family, and with all

who will imitate me. Go to such and such a prince (naming a Hindu prince), and stay with him ; he will defend thee." He sent some one to conduct him thither. Then he commanded a great fire to be prepared and lighted. Then he burned his furniture, and said to his wives and daughters, " I am going to die, and such of you as prefer it, do the same." Then it was seen that each one of these women washed herself, rubbed her body with sandal-wood, kissed the ground before the rai of Kambila, and threw  herself upon the pile. All perished. The wives of his nobles, ministers, and chief men imitated them, and other women also did the same.

The Rai, in his turn, washed, rubbed himself with sandal, and took his arms, but did not put on his breastplate. Those of his men who resolved to die with him followed his example. They sallied forth to meet the troops of the Sultan, and fought till every one of them fell dead. The town was taken, its inhabitants were made prisoners, and eleven sons of the rai were made prisoners and carried to the Sultan, who made them all Musulmans.

Two centuries later, another Islamic bigot, Baabar witnesses the pride and bravery of Hindu warriors. In 1527-28, Baabar tells about his taking of the fort of Chanderi, which he had surrounded from all sides.

Though the Pagans exerted themselves to the utmost, hurling down stones from above, and throwing over flaming substances on their heads, the troops nevertheless persevered, and at length Shaham Nur Beg mounted, where the wall of the outer fort joined the wall of the projecting bastion. The troops, likewise, about the same time, scaled the walls in two or three other places. The Pagans, who were stationed in the covered way, took to flight, and that part of the works was taken. They did not defend the upper fort with so much obstinacy, and were quickly put to flight ; the assailants climbed up and entered the upper fort by storm. In a short time the Pagans, in a state of. complete nudity, rushed out to attack us, put numbers of my people to flight, and leaped over the ramparts. Some of our troops were attacked furiously, and put to the sword. The reason of this desperate sally from their works was, that, on giving up the place for lost, they had put to death the whole of their wives and women, and, having resolved to perish, had stripped themselves naked, in which condition they had rushed out to the fight ; and, engaging with ungovernable desperation, drove our people along the ramparts.Two or three hundred Pagans had entered Medini Rao's house, where numbers of them slew each other, in the following manner : One person took his stand with a sword in his hand, while the others, one by one, crowded inland stretched out their necks eager to die. In this way many went to hell

Elliot and Dowson - Vol.4, TUZAK I BABRI, pp 275- 277

In 1540, According to Tarikh -e - Sher Shahi written by Abbas Khan

Sher Shah ordered that at sunrise they should surround the tents of Bhaia Puran Mal. Puran Mal was told that they were surrounding his encampment, and going into the tent of his beloved wife Ratnavali,
who sang Hindi melodies very sweetly, he cut off her head, and coming out said to his companions : " I have done this do you also slay your wives and families." While the Hindus were employed in putting their women and families to death, the Afghans on all sides commenced the slaughter of the Hindus, Puran Mal and his companions, like hogs at bay, failed not to exhibit valour and gallantry, but in the twinkling of an eye all were slain. Such of their wives and families as were not slain were captured. One daughter of Puran Mai and three sons of his elder brother were taken alive, the rest were all killed. Sher Khan gave the daughter of Puran Mal to some itinerant minstrels (bazigaran), that they might make her dance in the bazars, and ordered the boys to be castrated, that the race of the oppressor might not increase.

Elliot and Dowson, Vol. 4, Tarikh-e-Sher Shahi, pp 403

Describing a war between Islam Khan and his generals with Rajputs, in which one Shujahat Khan was killed, it is recorded as:

The next day, the Hindus being defeated by the other two generals, performed the jauhar, when one thousand women became victims in that sacrifice.

Elliot and Dowson, Vol. 4, Appendix, pp534

In Badshahnama written by Abdul Hamid Lahori, the instance of a chase of Hindus by Muslims is given as:

At length the pursuers came in sight of the rebels. Khan dauran then sent his eldest son, Saiyid Muhammad, and some other officers with 500 horse, to advance with all speed against them. The hot pursuit allowed the rebels no time to perform the rite of Jauhar, which is one of the benighted practices of Hindustan. In their despair they inflicted two wounds with a dagger on Eani Parbati, the chief wife of Eija Nar Singh Deo, and having stabbed the other women and children with swords and daggers, they were about to make ofi", when the pursuers came up and put many of them to the sword. Khan-dauran then arrived, and slew many who were endeavouring to escape. Durgbahan, son of Jajhar, and Durjan Sal, son of Bikramajit, were made prisoners. Under the direction of Khan-dauran, Rani Parbati and the other wounded women were raised from the ground and carried to Firoz Jang.

Rani Parbati, being severely wounded, was passed over ; the other women were sent to attend upon the ladies of the Imperial palace.

Elliot & Dowson, Vol. 7, pp50

These examples, spread over different parts of our mother land and spanning more then ten centuries tell us about the gruesome circumstances which the Hindu women faced. If someone has to be blamed for suicides commited by these brave men and women, then it is the slave system which is ingrained in Islam. The precedent was set by Mohammad, the founder of Islam. One example would suffice; When he ordered slaughter of about 800 men of a jewish tribe on a single day, took a Jewish beauty Rehana as her concubine and sold women and children into slavery to build his own cavalry.
Unfortunately, the atrocities committed on Hindu women far exceed any other race or nation. According to historians, Akbar had 5000 women in his harem and his son Jehangeer, who is portrayed as a romantic by secularists had 6000 women in his harem. These women would not have come willingly.
The instances I have mentioned are the proverbial tip of the iceberg. These examples are related to the ruler class. The common women were far more susceptible to being kidnapped and raped, especially if she was a widow. The invaders had no qualms about this inhuman act because they were following the teachings of Quran.

Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those (captives and slaves) whom your right hands possess.

 Chapter 4, verse 24. Hilali and Khan. This is the largest selling translation of Quran, also given to Haj travelers by Saudi Arabian Govt.

The 'sati mata' or 'sati mata mandir' that we encounter today tell us the tale of thousands of nameless women who preferred to die honorably instead of living with dishonor as the chattels of men who were devoid of any ethics or decency. For them, women is an object to be used as a sex toy and commanded.

I hope that those of you who still have an independent brain will be able to understand that a tradition, which was an interim solution against a far more organized and cruel enemy has been portrayed as an evil of Hindu dharm.

Still some of you might not be convinced. That is understandable. We as a nation have been brainwashed. Not only by the textbooks but also the overall environment, which includes media and movies.

Think of it from another angle. Let us for a moment accept that it was a practice and women were forced to burn on the pyre of their husbands, just as the secularists and missionary schools feed into us. Ask yourself a question.
Who benefits from this ritual?
Definitely, no Hindu benefits from it or would have benefited from it. Then why would someone insist on such a ritual which is not even sanctioned in religious texts? I hope you get the picture.

The only beneficiaries of the bogey of 'sati pratha' are the other predatory religions and communism. Ever since the introduction of the present Christian system of education on our nation, we have been systematically befooled into believing that Hindu religion is full of fallacies and one of them is 'sati pratha'.
Maybe some women did not want to burn themselves on the pyre. If they were forcibly led to do so, today, we can say that it was an inhuman act. In such cases, we can say that human rights of those women were violated. But. BUT  blaming the Hindu religion is the height of intellectual dishonesty, which comes naturally to marxists and other such secularists.

But then why is such perversion continuously being propagated in our country?
This brainwashing started in 1835, when a missionary named Thomas Babbington Macaulay devised an education system meant to produce clerks, or in Macaulay's words:

We must at present do our best to form a class who may be interpreters between us and the millions whom we govern; a class of persons, Indian in blood and colour, but English in taste, in opinions, in morals, and in intellect.

When the Christians (I am saying Christians and not British because these subtle deviations have resulted in the present morass) left our country, they had a lot at stake. They had a golden goose in the form of a vast market for their products. And more importantly, they had to wipe out paganism at the order of the Biblical God, so that souls may be harvested. Thus they planted a stooge on the pagans.

If the above pictures do not make you puke, then sample his views:

By education I am an Englishman, by views an internationalist, by culture a Muslim, and I am a Hindu only by accident of birth. The ideology of Hindu Dharma is completely out of tune with the present times and if it took root in India, it would smash the country to pieces.

Now, match the sentence of Macaulay and Nehru. You will know the efficiency of Missionary education system. It had and still is creating such specimen, who find everything wrong with Hindu dharm, in short, 'Indian in blood and color' but 'English in taste'. Most of them are not even aware that they are pawns in a plan implemented 176 years ago. They take pride in being internationalists or secularist but not in being Hindu.
'Sati pratha' is only one of the bogeys raised by Nehruvian liars. NCERT has been virtually under the control of Muslims or Hindu baiters. They have created other such hoaxes like 'Aryan Dravidian conflict', 'Bhagat Singh and his companions were terrorists', 'Shivaji and Maharana Pratap were misguided persons', 'Amir Khusro and Aurangzeb were secular', 'Islam and Christianity are the only egalitarian religions'.

 When Swami Vivekanand gave the call

गर्व से कहो हम हिन्दू हैं

perhaps he had underestimated the missionary propaganda.

I salute those brave men and women who had the courage to look at the death in its face and the conviction that their religion and way of life is the best.
Here, the disclaimer is needed thus; I do not endorse 'sati' in the present times because the social conditions have changed.

Today, if there is any religion in the world which gives respect to women, it is the Hindu dharm. It is the only religion which represents women as 'shakti', where as others either put her behind a shapeless garment or force her to keep quiet because she is labeled as the temptress.