In the grand tapestry of the Indian subcontinent’s history, there is a persistent tension between the “history of the sword” and the “history of the heart.” While the 12th and 13th centuries are often remembered for the thundering hooves of Central Asian cavalry, the true civilizational shift was occurring in the quiet, mud-walled Khanqahs (hospices) of the Sufis. At the center of this spiritual revolution stood Hazrat Qutbuddin Bakhtiar Kaki (RA).

The premier disciple of Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti, Bakhtiar Kaki did not just bring a religion to Delhi; he brought a set of Superior Values—independence, radical poverty, and ecstatic love—that proved more enduring than any dynasty.

The Man of the “Bread of Grace”

Born in Osh (modern-day Kyrgyzstan), Bakhtiar Kaki’s life was defined by the concept of Tawakkul (absolute trust in the Divine). His title, “Kaki,” stems from a narrative of profound dignity in the face of poverty.

Legend tells of a time when his family faced starvation because they refused to accept stipends from the Sultan. When his wife was taunted for her poverty by a local baker, the Khwaja pointed to a corner of his house, telling her to take what she needed. From that corner, hot cakes (Kak) miraculously appeared.

The Conclusion for the Modern Reader: This miracle wasn’t just about magic; it was a political statement. By refusing to “eat the bread of the state,” the Chishtis established themselves as a third pole of power—independent of the king and the military. This gave them the moral authority to speak for the common man.

The Refusal of the “Sheikh-ul-Islam”

When Sultan Iltutmish—himself a man of deep faith—begged the Khwaja to accept the official title of Sheikh-ul-Islam, the saint declined. He understood a truth that the “nomadic warlords” did not: Divine authority cannot be legislated; it must be earned.

While the Sultans built fortresses to keep people out, Bakhtiar Kaki kept his doors open to everyone—the pompous Rajput warrior, the disenfranchised laborer, and the curious seeker. He demonstrated that Islamic egalitarianism wasn’t a theory found in books, but a lived reality where the prince and the pauper shared the same meal.

The Miracle of Gandhak ki Baoli

The “superiority” of the Sufi path was often demonstrated through service (Khidmat). When Delhi faced a crippling water crisis, it was the Khwaja’s spiritual intervention that led to the discovery of a fresh spring. The resulting Gandhak ki Baoli (Sulphur Stepwell) was more than an engineering feat; it was a symbol of the Sufi as a provider for the community.

The Martyrdom of Love

The most striking aspect of Bakhtiar Kaki’s persona was his devotion to Sama (devotional music). His end came not on a battlefield, but in a state of spiritual ecstasy. While listening to a verse about “surrendering to the dagger of God’s will,” he entered a trance so deep that his soul departed his body.

This “Martyrdom of Love” offered the warrior clans of India—the Rajputs, Janjuas, and Bhattis—a new archetype of heroism. They saw a man who had more courage in his silence and prayer than a general had in his army.

Why He Matters to Our Collective Conscience

As we reflect on “A Tale of a Thousand Years,” we must conclude that the conversion of the Indian warrior tribes was not a “surrender to an invader,” but an alignment with a higher moral code. Hazrat Qutbuddin Bakhtiar Kaki remains the “Qutub” (Pole Star) of Delhi because he represented the best of Islamic values:

• Austerity over Greed.

• Mercy over Vengeance.

• Spiritual Sovereignty over Political Subjugation.

His legacy reminds us that while the sword may change the name of the ruler, it is the spirit of the saint that changes the identity of the people.

Key Fact Sheet for Post Summary:

• Order: Chishtiyya (The first to establish a major presence in Delhi).

• Era: Early 13th Century (Reign of Sultan Iltutmish).

• Spiritual Master: Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti of Ajmer.

• Most Notable Successor: Baba Farid Ganjshakar of Pakpattan.

• Core Philosophy: Sulh-e-Kul (Peace with All) and Faqr (Voluntary Poverty).

I have written quite a lot about the rather messed-up human history. To this end, I have written extensively about the often-bad role of medieval Muslim nomadic warriors in Asia. I have argued against the conquests of the Iberian Peninsula and India. I have been thinking for a long time about writing about the role of Sufism in transforming India. This is the first article in that spirit. I would like to acknowledge that parts of the following text was generated by Google’s Gemini after various interactions with it. I have also now arranged all the articles of the journey to Jerusalem series under a common tag of this name. If you are looking for a particular article in this series, or what is in this series at all, please go to the tag cloud on my website and look for Journey to Jerusalem. My overall ambition is that warfare and conquering other peoples countries is a bad idea and it can never lead to peace. And a tolerance and acceptance of others is much better, along with intercommunal and interfaith harmony. I personally prefer the Sufi path. And I am sure if you read enough about it, you will begin to love it too. It is a path of love of God and love of humanity. This is what we need in our turmoiled world.

This is the best of the times, this is the worst of the times. Isn’t it? Indeed, it is. We have never lived in such times before. We have fun, we have war. We have entertainment. We have tragedies. Lives are long, problems are fewer, yet there is the fear of the unprecedented. We live in an era where advanced countries care about human rights. Yet, organised rings for rapes of minors, child abuse and infant eating are being exposed. Geopolitical pundits are warning us about the eruption of the Third World War. Indeed, American armadas have surrounded Persia from all sides. Air bases have been filled with stealth planes. Negotiations are happening to avert this. Rhetorics are belligerent. Aspirations for underhanded dealmaking are high.

Over the past couple of years, I have been writing about certain historical matters that I hope will help heal humanity’s collective conscience. I have tried to be objective. As a Muslim person, I have criticised the many conquests of the so-called Mulim forces of the medieval era. I have argued that the conquests of Spain and India by nomadic Mulim warlords were wrong. One of my previous articles in the journey to Jerusalem series was a chronological critique of the conquests of the Indian subcontinent. And I am committed to all that.

My today’s article has a slightly different spirit. In this, I would like to reflect on the various groups and clans of India that converted to Islam over more than a thousand years. To be more precise, I want to reflect on the groups or clans of India that came in conflict with those Muslim warlords and they later converted to Islam. This is a long list victors and loosers, and it is interesting because it also contains the former category of clans.

India is a caste-based society. Muslims confronted various caste groups in the subcontinent from 712 AD till the middle of the nineteenth century. Let’s begin with Raja Daahir. He was the first one to bear the siege by Arabs. I have written about him. He stood firm against the Arabs as any brave king would. And he tried to defend Sindh to the best of his abilities. It is a pity that he lost. However, his progeny or tribe still live in Sindh and they embraced Shia Islam.

If you read my article on the conquests of India by the Muslims, the second clash I mention there was between Sultan Mahmood of Ghazni and the Northern Indian king Jaya Pala. Jaya Pala was a Rajput from the famous Janjua clan that is still based in the salt range of Pakistan. Jaya Pala lost the battle of Peshawar and later committed suicide. Almost all Janjuas are Muslims, and many of them acquired notable sociopolitical positions in Pakistan.

Sultan Mahmood is famous for his seventeen attacks on India. During his last attack, he was pursued by a local Indian king, Raja Bhoj. Bhoj belonged to the Paanwar Rajput tribe and was famous for his ferocity, among other qualities. Many Paanwars converted to Islam, and they also migrated to Pakistan after 1947. They acquired notable positions in various services in Pakistan. A sub-tribe of Paanwars is Naarma. All of it is Muslim, and they live in Pakistan.

During his campaigns, he also invaded the region of Sindh. Jaats of Sindh drove him out of Sindh. Almost all Jaats in SIndh are Muslims.

Then comes the turn of the clash between Sultan Muhammad of Ghaur and Prithvi Raj Chohan. Although I have argued that the clash between Mehmood of Ghazni and Jaya Pala was a fair game on the part of the erstwhile, I would assert that Sultan Muhammad of Ghauri beat Prithvi Raj Chohan with deception. Chohans are also Rajputs of India. Many of them are settled in Pakistan. And among the many who are in Pakistan are devout Muslims. Later, Sultan Muhammad was ambushed and assassinated by another northern Indian clan called Khokhars. Khokhars also identify themselves as Rajputs. The ones from northern India have historically lived in the salt range of Pakistan and they are largley Muslim. Legend has it that Raja Porus, who clashed with Alexander the Great in the fourth century BC in the famous battle of Hydaspes, was also a Khokhar.

When Babar invaded India, he made a fiery speech in Sohawa (a town in Northern Punjab, Pakistan). He mustered the support of local Gujjars and took them along with their military to invade Delhi. Gujjar is a scheduled caste of India. Almost every Gujjar who lives in Pakistan (including Sohawa and its suburbs) is a Muslim. Legend has it that much of the victory of the throne of India can be attributed to the support lent to Babar by the Gujjars.

Akbar made political alliances with Indians through marriages. He married in a Rajput clan, and hence the later progeny of Mughals had Rajput genetic code in them.

Maharaja Ranjit Singh established the SIkh dynasty in Northern India. He and his army were known for their ferocity. Afghans used to fear Hari Singh Nalwa for a long time. Ranjit belonged to the Sainsi subtribe of the Bhatti Rajputs. He was from Gujranwala. Sainsi Bhattis can still live there. They are all Muslims.

It is interesting to note that almost all the local Indian clans who came into conflict with Muslims converted to Islam, irrespective of whether they won or lost against them. This fact is additionally noteworthy because there is a notion that Muslim nomads subjugated the local populations and forced them to convert. I am not denying this. However, my position is that even the victors converted to Islam.

Why did this happen? Conquering other peoples land is bad unless there is a noble purpose behind it. And I have already argued that conquest of India by nomadic Muslims was bad.. This is my very firm position and it is one of the important theses of my life. Not only that, I am also against the conquest of Spain, Sicily, Central Asia and other places. Actually there is a strong argument that when various Arab factions conspired against the household of Prophet Muhammad PBUH, and litterally assassinated son upon son of noble Imams, to divert peoples’ attention from their heinous deeds, they started a new project of conquest of the known world as a noble cause. I have argued about this in several of my previous articles. My question is that how was it possible that the defenders of India, who were hostile to Muslim warlords, converted to Islam irrespective of whether they lost or won against a certain campaigner.

Islam has a strong epistemology. The Holy Quran and the Hadith of Prophet Muhammad PBUH speak about the past Prophets and try to straighten human view of them. Especially, much of the Holy Quran revolves around setting the status of Jesus Christ PBUH straight. In the Middle East, he was either loved and revered to the extent of worship or loathed. And the haters had the excuse to do so because he was worshipped. Monotheists couldn’t agree with him, and hence they would strip him off of his divine title as the Christ. Chapters of the Holy Quran and Hadith of Prophet Muhammad PBUH set his status right in the conscience of the common man. The Holy Quran asserts that he was not the son of God, but a Holy Prophet. In doing this, God also eliminates any excuse to loathe him.

Apart from this, Islamic prophecies about the future of mankind are also strong. Moreover, the Islamic values are quite commendable. The ideas of human equality and justice in Islam are indeed universal. But above all, it was the arrival of Sufi Saints that changed human hearts in Islam. Rajputs of India are not an easy bunch to succumb to any threat or domineering entity. Actually, the Rajput caste in India crystallised with the advent of the Islamic invaders in India. They stood up to defend India against Muslim invasion. And many of them were quite successful in their assignments. However, Sufi saints moulded hearts. It is said that one of the sons of Prithviraj Chohan converted to Islam at the hands of Hazrat Khawaja Moin ud Din Chishti RA. He is considered the patron saint of India. Around half a million Rajputs converted to Islam on the hands of Hazrat Bahaudin Zakriya RA. And there is no chance that all of these millions of people will convert to any other religion, even if given any choice. So if a future clash between India and Pakistan happens (God forbid), it will be mostly between local Hindus and Muslims of Indian origin.

Swayamvar has been an old Indian tradition. In this, when a princess had to be married, princes would be invited to view the princess from far flung Indian territories. The princess instead would review the princes. She would select one and reject the rest. Rest of the disheartened princes would get against the state of the princess. This would lead to political conflicts between different states, leading to disloyalties, animosities and war. Most of the invaders of India were helped by local Indians. And many local Indians also converted to Islam due to the universal ideas of human egalitarianism and justice. 

While the sword may have changed the political boundaries and the ruling elite, it was the Sufi influence and social values of Islam coupled with the fragmented Indian society that actually converted the populace and sustained the faith over centuries. Military force often breeds resentment rather than genuine belief. The sword could demand taxes or submission, but it couldn’t necessarily mould hearts. In a highly stratified, caste-based society, the Islamic concepts of egalitarianism and divine justice offered a radical alternative. The superior values acted as a psychological and social pull factor, especially for those looking for a sense of human equality that was historically denied to them.

This is where the victors and losers both converting becomes most relevant. Sufi saints often lived outside the royal courts and reached out to the common people, including the warrior classes (Rajputs, Khokhars, etc.). Sufis often used local idioms, music, and poetry, making the transition to Islam feel less like a foreign imposition and more like a spiritual evolution.

The post A Tale of a Thousand Years first appeared on Psyops Prime.]]> https://psyopsprime.com/consciousness/a-tale-of-a-thousand-years/feed/ 0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ 2693 https://psyopsprime.com/consciousness/one-hundred-years-of-turpitude/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=one-hundred-years-of-turpitude https://psyopsprime.com/consciousness/one-hundred-years-of-turpitude/#respond Thu, 24 Jul 2025 11:58:05 +0000 https://psyopsprime.com/?p=2560 The reign of the Banu Umayya is rarely discussed in Muslim gatherings. Sunni lecturers can give a passing reference to this era that spanned almost

The reign of the Banu Umayya is rarely discussed in Muslim gatherings. Sunni lecturers can give a passing reference to this era that spanned almost a hundred years. Shia talk about this, although only in the context of what they did to the Ahl-e-Bait, the progeny of Prophet Muhammad PBUH and Hazrat Ali bin Abi Taalib. The machinations and nefarious deeds of the Umayyads were much greater than that and spanned almost all of Asia. Today I am going to write about that.

Sunnis do hold Yazid bin Muawiya in a bad light. As in, they consider him a villain. And a villain he was. But they consider Muawiyya a companion of the Holy Prophet PBUH and revere him as a scribe of the divine revelation that is the Holy Quran. If you read Sunni literature such as Taareekh ibne Kaseer, or Khillafat aur Malookiyat, Muaawiyya’s bad deeds are mentioned, but the salutation Hazrat is prefixed to his name. One wonders how such a Machiavellian person earns so much respect in Islam. Sunnis normally don’t discuss the many acts of this person in which he opposed Hazrat Ali RA. The latter even sacked him from the governorship of Syria, and he (the former) refused to obey his command. Nahj-ul-Balaagha, a compilation of sermons, letters, and other essays by Hazrat Ali RA is full of incidents in which he addressed Muaawiya in a way that will make you think that he was not a good person at all. Besides, there are so many other incidents that are listed in historical accounts that will make anybody think that he was not a noble person at all. For instance, consider the assassination of Maalik-e-Ashtar. He was poisoned on his way to Egypt, when he was sent there as a governor by Hazrat Ali. The way he was poisoned is a masterpiece in crime stories of any human era. If you want to learn how crime works, read this person’s life.

My purpose today is not to discuss Muaawiya, although books can be written about him. I want to talk about the rest of the almost dozen Umayyad caliphs, too. And I want to argue why criticizing them is extremely necessary in today’s day and age. Shias do talk about Umayyads. But they consider them bad only because of what they did to the Ahl-e-Bait. Yes, they literally killed generations of Imam Ali RA. But their crimes were more than that. And this is something the whole world, including Muslims and non-Muslims should know.

We are still in the month of Muharram. This is a month of mourning in Islam. This month, Hazrat Imam Hussain RA was martyred in Karbala. The battle of Karbala is the genocide of the family of the Prophet Muhammad PBUH. If you spare precious time out of your life and listen to the events that led to the battle, the geopolitical situation of its time, and the account of this battle itself, you will realize that this is the biggest genocide in the history of mankind. It will make you so sombre and so sad that you will literally need a lot of time to come out of the grief. How a person upon a person in the camp of Imam Hussain RA was brutally murdered. How the arms of Hazrat Abbas RA were cut off. How Hazrat Ali Asghar RA, the youngest son of Hazrat Imam Hussain RA, was martyred by an arrow while he was in his arms. How Hazrat Ali Akbar RA was killed. How Shimar used to slap Bibi Sakeena RA on her cheeks. How she said farewell to Imam Hussain RA while he mounted his horse to go to the battlefield alone. How Imam Hussain RA asked Jawn (or John) bin Huwai, a Christian Freedman, on the night before the day of the battle to go home, and how he refused to do so, and how he embraced martyrdom on that day. How Imam Hussain fought like a lion. How he gathered corpses of his loved ones one by one. And how he was eventually martyred by the notorious cronies of Yazid. It is said that a group of Hussaini Brahmins of India witnessed the battle. When they saw the decapitation of the Imam, they slit their own throats open too. What is reported to happen after that is a miracle.

Yazid did not last for long and after a couple of Caliphs after him, Abdul Maalik bin Marwan became the so-called Caliph of the Muslims. In an earlier post, I wrote that Marwaan had tried to assassinate the Prophet Muhammad PBUH. The latter expelled him from Madina too. I also wrote in the past that Walid bin Abdul Maalik became the Caliph after him. I also wrote about the five events that happened in the year 712 that shaped the world in a way that influences us all in bad ways even today. I wrote about how he conquered Spain, India, and Central Asia this year. I also wrote that he martyred Hazrat Imam Zain ul Abideen RA, and that he built the Dome of the Rock over the second temple of Solomon. I argue that he shouldn’t have done that.

Walid was followed by Suleiman, and he was followed by Umar II. All Ummayads here except Umar II are largely considered corrupt, treacherous, and amoral by Muslim historians. Hisham is considered to have martyred both Hazrat Imam Baaqir and Hazrat Zaid. Both were sons of Hazrat Imam Zain ul Abideen. Hazrat Imam Jaffar As Saadiq RA is considered to have lived a difficult life under whatever remained of the Umayyad rule.

So all in all, this nefarious reign of Umayyads lasted more or less a hundred years, starting with the governorship of Syria of Muawiyya in the 640s and ending with the overtake of Abbasids in 750 AD. The huge landmasses they confiscated in the name of Islam would provide them ample free wealth to build palaces in Damascus. Islam as a religion is not about this.

Do you know that Umayyads even tried to conquer China? Prophet Muhammad PBUH never recommended that. Instead, there is a Hadith in which he says that seek knowledge even if you have to go as far as China. So China is taken in high esteem here. But its conquest was never foretold or recommended.

Similarly, Prophet Muhammad PBUH never talked about the conquest of Spain. Nor does the Holy Quran mention Spain even once. On the contrary, there are Hadith of Prophet Muhammad PBUH is which he says to leave the Ethiopians on their own. Or to leave the Turks on their own, meaning not to invade them. Muslims never invaded Ethiopia in respect for hosting the first batch of immigrants of Islam.

I urge everyone to read the Ashtiname of Prophet Muhammad PBUH which is a covenant of him to the Muslims for Christians. According to this, it is a sin to hurt a Christian or to confiscate their property or Churches. Modern scholarship has also extended this to Jews and Hindus, and I like this. I posted it in a comment on social media the other day, and a person commented that this is not an authentic document. I argue that it may as well not be authentic, but how is it authentic to inavde other countries? There is no mention of invasion in the Quran or the Hadith altogether.

Imam Hussian’s sister-in-law Mehrbaanu was married to an Indian King Chandragupta. The Imam was happy to migrate to India and the Indians were happy to assimilate him. However, Yazid’s cronies did not let him go. Later they invaded India only for the crime that she had given sanctuary to Bibi Ruqayya Bin-e-Ali. How tragic this is.

A large number of Muslims miss the Islamic rule in Spain. An argument is that Muslims were ruthlessly removed from Spain, and something to an extent of a genocide was done to them. My argument is that what were Muslims doing there for 780 years in the first place? Spain was a Christian country, and its inhabitants, the Spanish people, eventually took it back from them. What is bad about that? Similarly, in my previous post, I wrote that India has been a host to numerous invasions by warriors in the name of Islam for so many centuries.

Why do I write all of this, and why do I emphasize that Muslims should learn to disown and condemn the acts of the Umayyads? Muslims take pride in the glorious past of Islam as an enterprise that spanned large land masses. However, there is a number of problems with this. First of all, this is not nice to conquer other peoples countries unless there are gross human rights violations there. Secondly, even if there was evidence of human rights violations in Spain or India, a major problem is that the Umayyads did not have the legal or divine mandate to fix these issues. They were themselves guilty of human rights violations and murder against the family of Prophet Muhammad PBUH.

Muslims argue that past Muslims brought civilization and cultural development to these countries. The argument here is that these places were not deserted. Spain was privy of civilization before that, and it was a thriving country. If Muslims meant any good to them, they could help these countries by donating them grain, just like what the Ottomans did during the famine in Ireland. Even if a country has to be occupied, wouldn’t it be nice to return the country to its inhabitants when the internal threat has been removed?

Today, Spain is one of the few countries that stands at the forefront of diplomacy to condemn the genocide in Gaza. Wouldn’t it be a great idea to thank Spain for this and apologize to them for having occupied their country for so long? Same for Indians, we could extend some respect to them for being an immigrant-friendly country for so long.

Why is it important to criticize these aspects of the Umayyads in our day and age? I believe that it is extremely important for a number of reasons. Firstly, Prophet Muhammad PBUH was a guide for all humanity. By martyring his whole family generation after generation, the Umayyads highjacked the religion of Islam. Moreover, they institutionalized Islam just like the Roman Empire did with Christianity to control human beings. They did things apart from debauchery that are extremely opposed to the teachings of Islam. For instance, Islam would be against building huge palaces as much of the teachings of Islam, just like Christianity, are focused on the afterlife, and not on this worldly life on planet earth.

It is also very important to criticize the Umayyads because what is mostly being practiced today in the Muslim world is a shadow of that image. Much of the political practices in Pakistan and Arab countries are a reflection of that. Bribery is rampant in our countries. Prophet Muhammad PUBH said that both the taker and the giver of bribery belong to hell. Muawiya, however, used to bribe people to gain their favors. Nepotism is rampant in our culture. Arabs have huge piles of money. But their indulgence in debauchery just reminds us of the Umayyads. Moreover, the Indians just hate the ordinary Muslims as undesirable intruders.

The post One Hundred Years of Turpitude first appeared on Psyops Prime.]]> https://psyopsprime.com/consciousness/one-hundred-years-of-turpitude/feed/ 0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ 2560 https://psyopsprime.com/consciousness/journey-to-jerusalem-conquest-upon-conquest/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=journey-to-jerusalem-conquest-upon-conquest https://psyopsprime.com/consciousness/journey-to-jerusalem-conquest-upon-conquest/#respond Tue, 29 Apr 2025 16:14:34 +0000 https://psyopsprime.com/?p=2536 My last Journey to Jerusalem article was partly focused on reflecting on events surrounding the year 712 AD and the conquest of SIndh by the

The post Journey to Jerusalem: Conquest Upon Conquest first appeared on Psyops Prime.]]>

My last Journey to Jerusalem article was partly focused on reflecting on events surrounding the year 712 AD and the conquest of SIndh by the Arabs. Before that, I also wrote about why the Dome of Rock is a misplaced monument and that it should not have been built. I have been thinking about this article for a long time, but I could not write it due to certain obligations. My theme is to write about the conquest of India by Muslim invaders over the past thirteen hundred years. This is a critical topic that I believe must be understood by Muslims, Indians, and the rest of the world too. The reason is that most of the things are misunderstood by most human communities, and that confusion can be misleading.

By the way, Arabs invaded India only once. As I wrote earlier, this happened in 712 AD. I also wrote that Walid bin Abdul Malik ordered this invasion to persecute the fleeing daughter of Imam Ali bin Abi Taalib (RA). This is extremely important to understand. Most Muslims consider Sindh as the door of Islam to India, as Islam arrived here through this invasion. However, the truth is that Walid belonged to a murderous clan that was against the family of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) himself. Rest of the story can be found in my previous article.

After this eighth century attack of Arabs on India from the Arabian sea till the end of the tenth century, there was a lull of Muslim attacks. By the beginning of the eleventh century, the famous battle of Peshawar happened between Indians and Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni. An interesting aspect about this person is that he is a very controversial person in Pakistan. Many consider him as a hero. However, among the highly educated echelons of Pakistan, he is considered as a plunderer. When I was a child I read about some literature about him in which he was taken in a very high esteem. In my point of view the truth of the established history is that his father was provoked by the Maharaja Jayapala of North India who had started becoming insecure of the growing power of Sabuktigin in Ghazni. By preemptively attacking him the Raja literally stirred the hornet’s nest so much so that the severity of the retaliatory invasions led him to commit suicide. On a personal level, I only consider this man to be a justifiable conqueror of India. After all, this was the protocol of medieval times; you provoke someone and then it really depends if you can sustain the retaliation or not. I think that this is a timeless law of nature. Sabuktigin was a slave who had elevated to the status of a ruler. He was of Turkic origin.

After this came the turn of the Ghauris, who are much despised in India to this day. Ghauris originated from somewhere in Persia. They were literally nomadic people who had converted to Islam at some stage. Initially, they advanced to Ghazni and sacked the Ghaznavi sultanate. They torched Kabul and the city literally burned for seven days and seven nights. Later on they marched to Delhi, conquered it and made it their capital. I personally find it very problematic to defend this invasion. Delhi sulatane was formed at this time. This was followed by the slave dynasty’s rule in northern India. Mostly these rulers were of either Persian or Turkic origins.

Later on came the era of two very famous expansionist imperialists. One of them was Genghis Khan. He remains a famous person to this day. I read an article on geopolitics a few years ago in which it was stated that one in every eighth person in Asia happens to be his descendant. His name needs no mention. And his barbarity needs no advertisement. His reputation has always remained two steps ahead of him to this day. He belonged to Mangolia.

The second was Tamerlane. He is also a very famous warrior. He was was Turkicized Mongol who also descended from an extremely ferocious general of Genghis Khan. Legend has it that he was a memorizer of the Holy Quran too. From an early age he had a personal ambition to conquer the world. He plundered Asia multiple times from the East to the West of Asia. In the East he clashed with the Delhi Sultanate and in the West with the Ottoman empire. He was driven by an ambition to conquer the world. After him the Delhi sultanate was restored in India. His cruelty, barbarity, and brutality were second only to Genghis Khan.

Then came the famous king Babur who set the stage for the Mughal empire in India. He was a descendant of Tamerlane and Genghis Khan from his father’s and mother’s sides, respectively. He was surely a Mongol, and hence the name Mughal. In the name of God he clashed with Ibrahim Lodhi, the last Sultan of the Delhi Sultanate. As a matter of fact, he mustered support from Gujjars, a scheduled caste of the Indian subcontinent, of Sohawa (a town now in Northern Punjab in Pakistan). He made a fiery religious speech to them before he attacked Delhi. It is needless to mention that Ibrahim was already a Muslim.

Babur’s son Humayun became the king after the demise of his father. He was later overthrown by Sher Shah Suri in the name of God. And eventually, Sher Shah was overthrown by Akbar in the name of God, too. Akbar lived to become one of the greatest emperors in human history. He ruled India for over fifty years. Among the many good things he did for India, he did so many bad things too, including introducing a new religion which was a mixture of Hinduism and Islam. It is highly forbidden in Islam to make innovations in the religion of God. However, Akbar was largely inspired by his desire to rule. After Akbar, his son Jehangir came to the throne. He was followed by his son Shahjehan, who is also the founder of the famous Taj Mahal.

Shahjehan’s son Aurangzeb incarcerated his father and had his elder brother Dara Shikoh assassinated. Daara was the heir apparent to the throne. Aurangzeb ruled India for another fifty years too. But by the end of his tenure, the Mughal empire was already in decline. There were a few more Mughal kings and then the British took over India and colonized it for around ninety years. This brought an end to the conquests of Muslims in India.

Reading this tale of plunder and murders, one should wonder that what was wrong with each of the murdered kings (who were also Muslim) that the murderer killed him or put him in the jail in the name of God. What were their differences that they could not decide through dialogue or diplomacy? And why should they have fought with each other due to personal differences, as a Muslim person is not supposed to live a life for personal goals and ambitions but as a duty to God. I am leaving the Hindu inhabitants of India aside for a moment. I am talking about the nature of conflicts between the Muslim warriors only.

This is a well-known story of the conquests of Muslim warriors in India. They were killing each other in the name of God. And they were doing these excursions in somebody else’s country. This is what the normal Muslims do not understand. This is what they must appreciate. And this is why I have written this article.

No matter what the beliefs of Indian people, and no matter how inhumane or inhygienic their rituals, the truth is that India is the country of the Indian people. Moreover, India is not mentioned anywhere in the Holy Quran, let alone its conquests. India was also a friendly country towards emigrants. Once upon a time, Jews and Christians had migrated to India. Later on, persecuted Muslims, especially from the progeny of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and his household, had moved to India. Normally, it was people fleeing from their hostile origins who would come to India. Imam Hussain was considering moving to India. Imam Hussain was married to a Persian princess whose sister was married to an a prince of an Indian state. Indians were happy to host Imam Hussain (RA).

Moreover, Islam was already becoming comfortable in India due to the advent of Sufi saints. As early as the eleventh century, famous Sufi saints had started settling in India. Sufis would come alone to India, without any armies or armaments. They would start living in India like common people. Their conduct and behavior was sufficient to motivate Indians to convert to Islam. Around half a million Rajputs are considered to have converted to Islam due to the peaceful company of Hazrat Baha ud Din Zakariya (RA). Khawaja Ghulam Mohi ud Din Chishti (RA) settled in Ajmer, that was the traditional house of Rajputs, the foremost warrior class of India.

The message of the sufis was always love of God and the love of humanity. There is a central concept in Islam that a person owes two types of rights. One is the rights of God. The other type is the rights of human beings. It is said that God can forgive the rights of Himself, but not of human beings. And the rights of human beings revolve around care and compassion, not subjugation and murder.

Conquests were not only not required, they were quite evil. They have had a very negative effect on the Indian psyche. It does not matter that India is a racist society, or that all Indian people are not equal, or that it was already an occupation of Indo-Aryan over Dalits. These are widespread notions that can be found in common chit chat to academic literature. But it does not matter. The real ingredient required to mold human hearts is love. With love humans can be molded to good. Subjugation was a bad idea.

The post Journey to Jerusalem: Conquest Upon Conquest first appeared on Psyops Prime.]]> https://psyopsprime.com/consciousness/journey-to-jerusalem-conquest-upon-conquest/feed/ 0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ 2536 https://psyopsprime.com/consciousness/journey-to-jerusalem-from-indus-or-nile/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=journey-to-jerusalem-from-indus-or-nile https://psyopsprime.com/consciousness/journey-to-jerusalem-from-indus-or-nile/#respond Mon, 14 Oct 2024 11:21:05 +0000 https://psyopsprime.com/?p=2497 I have written a bunch of articles on this theme about journey to Jerusalem by now. Sometimes I think that Jerusalem is the center of

The post Journey to Jerusalem: From Indus or Nile first appeared on Psyops Prime.]]>

I have written a bunch of articles on this theme about journey to Jerusalem by now. Sometimes I think that Jerusalem is the center of gravity of our world. There is a strange mystique about this town. And there is something about this place that has intrigued human generations over the millennia. Wars have been fought over it. And I don’t know how much more will be lost before something is gained about it. Anyhow, my argument has always been that Jerusalem, and the country that surrounds it, belongs equally to Jews, Muslims, and Christians. In saying that, I don’t take end-times prophecies into account, as when the time comes, Christ will reclaim the country for himself. My argument is that till the time (Jesus) Christ comes back, the job of us ordinary human beings should not be to turn every prophecy into a self-fulfilling prophecy. And if we have to live peacefully, we have to behave and embrace plurality. I like to say this to anybody who belongs to one of these Abrahamic religions. People who do not belong to one of these religions, Jerusalem is not dear to them, and they should not worry about associating it with it as such.

Every religion has its epistemology, and that of Islam is quite profound. Nonetheless, when early Muslims seized Jerusalem and its country from the Roman Empire, they peacefully and respectfully settled Jews and Christians around it. This is not only cool, it is also a yardstick for how to come to terms with the future of the country in terms of Muslims. This is to say that Muslims should make room for this idea in their psyche that this is a shared country. Other parties, who will not embrace this idea of plurality, shall do this to their own peril.

Speaking of epistemology, Islam, like all other religions, purports itself to be the one true religion of God. This is backed by a strong epistemology to the extent that when newly converted Muslims from Western countries convert to Islam, and when they look at the glorious history of the religion, they rationalize the many conquests Muslim conquerors have made around the Eurasian landmass in medieval times. This is fine. But my purpose in writing this post is that those conquests sometimes did have nefarious motives. Actually, a long list of conquests can be made in which one can argue that they were all nefarious. So, the belief or impression that Muslims were conquering the world to spread Islam is not true.

For instance, in 712 AD, Walid Bin Abdul Malik sent an army to conquer India. When I was a child, I was sold this story that there was an Arab cargo ship that was sailing between Sri Lanka and the Arab lands, and was looted by pirates near what is now Karachi. Deebal was the name of the port back in the day. Walid, as the commander of the faithful, sent an army to Sindh to fight with the local king, Raja Daahir. This is absolutely the wrong version of the story, as it is also not mentioned like this in Chachnaama, a chronicle of the history of SIndh from the times Muslims started invading it.

The truth, as it is written in Chachnaama and elsewhere, is that the daughter of Imam Ali (RA), Ruqayya-bint-e-Ali (RA), had fled to India while trying to escape from the persecution of the blood-thirsty Banu Umayya. Walid (the Umayyad caliph) had asked through a letter to Raja Daahir to return her to his men, or else be prepared for an invasion. The brave Raja stood his ground and did not return. Upon this, he was invaded. This happened in 712 AD. This is the same year in which he sent an army to Spain and conquered it. Muslims ruled over there for 700 years, and the Spanish people still hate us. So much so that we lament the loss of our lost glory, even though Spain belonged to the Spanish people in the first place. There is no mention in the Quran or the Hadith about Spain, let alone its conquest. And Walid had no legal mandate to conquer Spain. He was an illegitimate ruler whose grip on the driving seat of Islam had crystallized due to three generations of his family’s machinations against the family and companions of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). This is a well-known fact in Islamic history. Both Shia and Sunnis know this, and this is largely the cause of their rifts, too. So why don’t they speak up against it? By the way, this was the same year that Walid the moron conquered Central Asia, all in the name of Islam. He was a debauch who would amass the wealth coming from these territories to build palaces for himself and his kin in Damascus and elsewhere where his relatives were. Back in the day, many companions of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) were against the extravagant lifestyle of the Umayyads, as this is not what Islam is about. Moreover, with that stolen money, he built the Dome of the Rock in 712 AD. So you see that this year in human history is almost like the year 1492, but in which many wrongs were done. I argued in a previous article that the Dome of the Rock is misplaced and shouldn’t have been built on the site of the Temple of Solomon (although I also argue that since it is there now, other faiths should kindly respect it as a gesture of goodwill).

So why do I write about all of this? I am a fifteenth-generation Muslim myself. My own ancestors were proud Hindus. But as an intelligent species that humans are, it is our job to come to the truth. Early Muslims were not necessarily expansionist. Agreed that they clashed with the Roman and the Persian empires. But these clashes were foretold, for one thing, and were with largely agnostic empires, for the other. The result of these clashes was that liberation followed for Christians and Jews. They could live freely in the country of Jerusalem. But Hazrat Umar (RA), who seized all of the Middle East from the Roman empire, did not expand further north of Syria, although he could have done that. Similarly, Iman Ali (RA) had a law that Muslim soldiers could not buy lands in foreign countries where they served. His argument was that the land belonged to the local people. And that Muslim soldiers should just do their job (i.e., maintain law and order) and get the hell out of the country when their tenure is finished. This is what makes Islam a charming enterprise and not the possibility of conquests.

The post Journey to Jerusalem: From Indus or Nile first appeared on Psyops Prime.]]> https://psyopsprime.com/consciousness/journey-to-jerusalem-from-indus-or-nile/feed/ 0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ 2497

I have watched the Schindler’s list twice in my life. When I watched it for the first time, it was more than twenty years ago. The second time I watched it three years ago, with a critical eye. I like to look at films from the point of view of direction. I think that many people might do this. But normally in our part of the world, people just like to watch a movie normally.

I remember a scene where innocent people, men and women, were being brought into a huge room that is called a gas chamber. They are unaware of their terminal fate. They are brought in and the doors are closed. They are standing in that room while holding the long metallic bars that run over their heads, such as in buses and trains. They are mostly naked.  And then some gas is opened into the huge room. People don’t know what is this meant for. The only thing is that it stifles their breathing initially. Eventually as they struggle to breath more fresh air, which is dwindling in the room every moment, their breathing gets heavy. They cough for a while. Slowly their grips on the metallic bars tend to loosen up. They cough vehemently. They start falling on the floor and they start dying.

I normally like to hide my fears. I mean if I could afford the opportunity, I wouldn’t ever want to come across as a scared person. There were a few other watchers in the room. As they starred at the LCD screen of my newly bought TV, I sat behind them with my legs folded as I watched the scene, aghast. This was one of the very horrible scenes I ever watched.

Jews and Christians have lived in Europe together for a good few centuries. I am really not sure what really led up to the holocaust. There are different stories. Antisemitism is a suitcase term that is normally blamed upon. But one thing is for sure that there is something terribly wrong with preaching models of various faiths that leads up to bigotry and organized violence.

People have to learn that they cannot coexist if they disrespect each other. Abusing another person’s religion is tantamount to abusing one’s own. This reminds me of a Hadith of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). While sitting once with his companions (RA) he said that no person should ever abuse their own parents. The companions asked in awe that how is it possible that person abuses his/her own parents. The Prophet said, that by abusing another person’s parents and they abuse his/her parents in return. My intention is not to revert to preaching. But this is a beautiful Hadith with a lot of wisdom in it.

My real intention was to write something a new episode of my Journey to Jerusalem articles. The crux of what I wrote was that when the early Muslims seized Jerusalem, and the country surrounding it, they took it from none other but the Roman empire. Secondly, they were tolerant to an extent that they respected the Holy sites of worship of Christians and Jews. Calpih Umar (RA) is the most noteworthy figure in all of this, as he brokered peace. For instance, I wrote that when the Bishop Sophronius requested him to pray inside the Basilica of the Holy Sepulchre, the calpih refused to do so. The rationale he presented was that if he, as the chief of Muslims, prayed in the perimeter of the Basilica on that day and occasion, later generations of Muslims would make it a precedent and convert the Basilica to a mosque. As I mentioned then, and I am reiterating, I have personally found this story extremely touching always. I literally found his foresight and concern for the Christian faith absolutely humbling. Muslims were supposed to uphold this tradition of inter-faith tolerance.

Religious tolerance is extremely important and cool. Without religious tolerance, well meaning people can loose faith in religious ideas. I had a friend from Sweden with whom I spent a good bit of time many years ago. We played badminton together and worked together as we were in the same lab. We had many conversations with each other. She was a nice girl too. Living in Europe for quite a while, I have always wondered why people are so nice. Out of habit, or let’s say naivete, I used to find it hard not to broach up a topic about religion. I asked her a few times why she wasn’t religious. Then she finally told me the primary reason she had no faith in faith. The primary reason for her was the possibility of barbarity of the religious folks. She particularly quoted the example of crusades that why did so many people have to fight and kill each other to triumph over one another.

I know that many well meaning Christians blame the crusaders for barbarity. To me even this shows their propensity for peace. But such stories of brutality have moved them away largely from their religion. And this was my purpose behind writing today’s post.

Contrary to the popular belief, Christians did not start the crusades. Christians of Europe were living well in the European continent when a Fatimid Calpih of Egypt destroyed the Basilica of Holy Sepulchre. This was a part of his larger campaign to destroy other places of worship of Christians across the country of Palestine. This was not supposed to happen. Muslims were not only supposed to respect this, they were supposed to protect this. After all, there are covenants of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) himself for the Muslims viz a viz the protection of religious sites of, especially, Christians. What the caliph did was an absolutely despicable act of ignorance and despotism. It was this event that brought Christians to the Holy land. Shocked Christians of Europe arrived there to avenge that.

Of course, even as the Western historical literature states that, the crusaders eventually turned to brutality too. Saladin rose as a result. And we know the rest of the story that crusades happened and Saladin drove Christians out of the country. After this, Saladin also rebuilt the Spelchre. I find this part of the story also very touching. And it is also due to this reason that I have immense respect for Saladin.

What is my purpose of writing all of this? I have had for a good few months on my agenda to write about this. Other matters of life prevented me from writing it. But Jerusalem is a very important matter. I think it is going to become the most important matter in years to come. Actually, sometimes I think that it has always been about Jerusalem. It is the center of gravity of our planet. There is a lot of prophecies about it in all Abrahamic faiths. And this is a place where Holy Prophets lived.

Take home messaged in this according to me are that:

1. Muslims should always respect places of worship of other faiths. They should refrain from plundering other peoples’ property in all circumstances. Islam is a religion of peace. And peace should show from our conduct.
2. Christians should not despise Christianity because of the possibility of brutality. It is not a brutal faith, as even some high profile scholars such as Bertrand Russell have noted.
3. Religious preaching models of all faiths should teach their adherents that peace and respect run through a two-way street. What you throw at others you get it back.

War in the Middle East, Gaza, is not coming to an end. A few months ago, I wrote a couple of articles about the history of Jerusalem, particularly close to the era when early Muslims conquered the city from Heraclius, the Caesar of the Roman Empire, back in those days. One can only hope that peace will follow. Much has happened since then. The whole Gaza Strip has almost been destroyed. Rafa has been plundered. All the infrastructure is now ruined, with hospitals and schools demolished. Thousands of additional innocent people have been killed since then. My argument in my first article was that the early Muslims, who were largely the companions of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), ceased Jerusalem nor from Christians and neither from Jews, but from the Roman Empire. This idea is important for me, at least. For a long time, I used to think that Muslims took the city from the Jews. Later, for the past twelve years at least, I used to believe that the city was taken from the Christians. However, a more recent, profound, and careful study of history revealed that not only did Muslims take the whole country of Palestine/Israel from the Roman Empire, but they also took almost the entire Middle East from the latter. Syria, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Palestine, and western Mesopotamia were won from the Roman Empire. The eastern Mesopotamia and Persia were acquired from the Persian Empire. I am personally against a country invading and conquering another country. But these countries were already occupied by two major world powers of the time, and they were also quite notorious.

In my second article I wrote that the whole region of Palestine/Israel would be much better off if it were a one-state democratic country overseen by international peacekeeping forces and existing under security guarantees. I also wrote that if Jews wished to have homelands of their own, other world powers should get together and provide them with lands in all the major continents. Although this idea may seem fantastic and unrealistic, if Israel can be given billions of US dollars in aid and deadly weaponry to murder Palestinian civilians, why can’t new countries be achieved? It only takes sincerity with the Jewish people to do so.

In the first article, I wrote that the acquisition of Jerusalem by the Muslims was a peaceful affair. I wrote that when Sophronius, the Bishop of the church of the Holy Sepulchre, offered the Muslim Caliph the opportunity to pray inside the church, the latter refused to do so. His concern was that later generations of Muslims would make it a precedent to convert it into a mosque on the pretext that their Caliph prayed inside the church. This is a very touching and epic story for me about religious tolerance in Islam. I ended the article at this point, although the story continued for the rest of the day.

After the prayers, Calpih Umar (RA) went to the Temple Mount. He was accompanied by Sophronius and some of the companions of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). One of the companions was Hazrat Kaab bin Ahbaar (RA). Hazrat Kaab (RA) was a Jewish Rabbi from Yemen before he converted to Islam. He is a key figure in the remains of the day. There, he was requested by Sophronius not to settle Jews in the city. Contrary to his request, the Caliph settled Jews in the city, who had been repeatedly expelled from the Holy Land by the Romans for centuries. He then asked Hazrat Kaab (RA) as to where to settle the Jews. Hazrat Kaab (RA) mentioned a place in the west of the Temple Mount that is known as the Jewish quarter to this day. Then he went to the site of the second temple (or the Temple of Solomon) too. This site is Holy for both Christians and Jews. This is also sacrosanct for Muslims as it is mentioned as Masjid Al-Aqsa in the Holy Quran, and it is the place from which the Holy Prophet (PBUH) is mentioned and believed to have ascended to heavens. Caliph Umar (RA) wanted to build a mosque on this site. However, he refrained from doing this because of the importance of the place for Jews and Christians. Instead, he chose a spot on the Temple Mount just south of the old temple. Masjid Al-Aqsa was built on this spot. This is another very epic story for me that raises the image of Caliph Umar (RA) in very high esteem in my view. This makes me quite proud. How much concern he had for the feelings of Jews and Christians that he did not build a mosque on the site of the old temple. This is quite wonderful.

At this point, I would like to urge you to understand the personality of Hazrat Umar RA, a key companion of Prophet Muhammad PBUH. His story of conversion to Islam in itself is quite remarkable. Initially, he would not convert to Islam because he thought that the religion the Prophet Muhammad PBUH preached was dividing people. On the day on which he converted to Islam, he actually embarked from his home to assassinate him after consultation with the polytheist tribes of Quraish of Makkah. It was upon his listening to some verses of the Holy Quran that changed his mind forever, and he converted to Islam in an instant. The rest is history. Faith literacy is a good thing. You will find the following lecture very inspiring on the life and personality of Hazrat Umar RA. It is nice to know why such a headstrong person eventually converted to Islam.

Where did the second temple go then? The Dome of the Rock was built on the site of the Second Temple. Who built that? Abdul Malik bin Marwan, when he became a Caliph. Who was he? Much can be said and must be said about this character and his progeny. In short, I would say that these were dynastic politicians who had created an empire on the blood of the descendants of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) himself. They belonged to the Banu Umayyah clan of the Quraysh, who had a generations-old rivalry with the family and household of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). In the name of God, they were conquering the rest of the world that they should not have. Just as in the name of God they were killing the grandchildren of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) that they should not have.

After Abdul Malik, his son Walid bin Abdul Malik became the Caliph, the Commander of the faithful. He rebuilt the dome just as he conquered Spain, India, and central Asia, and just as he kept martyring more grandsons of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). I will write in more detail someday about the conquest of these countries and lands. But today, just as educated people can have an aversion to Islam due to its expansionist past, we have the problem of the Dome of the Rock. This is built on the second temple, and we have a real problem. Jews, if nobody else, need access to it.

By the way, having highlighted the problem of the dome, I would just like to share some thoughts about how to resolve the problem. This is important for people of all Abrahamic faiths to understand.

I think that Muslims worldwide should agree to open the dome for people of all faiths. And I expect that people of all faiths to respect it as some reconstruction of the second temple. Construction of the second temple was funded and supported by Cyrus the Great after all. So this reconstruction could be considered a gift by the Muslims. What is bad about this? And people of the world could be saved from a lot of conflict. The Al-Aqsa mosque in the south could be retained by Muslims, and the church of the Holy Speluchre by the Christians. The same status could be maintained for the rest of the Holy sites in the Holy Land, including all the synagogues. The world could be a happy place again.

The post Journey to Jerusalem: The Misplaced Dome first appeared on Psyops Prime.]]> https://psyopsprime.com/consciousness/journey-to-jerusalem-the-misplaced-dome/feed/ 0 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ 2418 https://psyopsprime.com/consciousness/the-most-hypnotic-chants/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=the-most-hypnotic-chants https://psyopsprime.com/consciousness/the-most-hypnotic-chants/#respond Tue, 19 Dec 2023 10:26:22 +0000 https://psyopsprime.com/?p=2310 In recent years, I began listening to Ustad Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan (NFAK) quite a lot. I remember that during the Christmas of 2018, I

In recent years, I began listening to Ustad Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan (NFAK) quite a lot. I remember that during the Christmas of 2018, I was alone and I came across his Paris show. I listened to that in a loop and I kept on listening to all the tracks again and again. Over time, I developed a personal playlist of his various qawwaali tracks on YouTube. I really wanted to share this playlist. I am sure that you are going to love these as well. Mostly, these are from his Paris show as well as from some other performances in Western countries as well as London.

«

Prev

1

/

2

Next

»

Naseeb Mera Jaga Diya - Ustad Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan - OSA Official HD Video

Ya Nabi Noor Ho Tum (Naat) - Ustad Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan - OSA Official HD Video

Ni Mein Jana Jogi De Naal - Ustad Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan - OSA Official HD Video

Ya Mustafa Nurul Khuda - Ustad Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan - OSA Official HD Video

Ya Hayyo Ya Qayyum - Ustad Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan - OSA Official HD Video

Kamli Wale Muhammad Toon Sadqe Main (Naat) - Ustad Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan - OSA Official HD Video

Deleted video

Deleted video

Khwaja E Khwajgan

Kamli Wale Nigahe Karam Ho Agar (Complete Original Version)

Nami Danam - Ustad Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan - OSA Official HD Video

Yaad-e-Nabi Ka Gulshan Mehka

Tere hundiya sundiya Mehbooba Beautiful kalam by Ustad Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan

Ho Nigha e Karam Ya Muhammad - Ustad Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan - OSA Official HD Video

Ali Ali Maula Ali Ali Haq -Ustad Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan - OSA Official HD Video

«

Prev

1

/

2

Next

»

The post The Most Hypnotic Chants first appeared on Psyops Prime.]]>

I have held a personal view about this matter for a long time, that I will share here today. I believe that a solution for peace based on the creation of two states can never be long-lasting. The two-state solution tries to mend the many problems that happened in the region between 1948 till now. Most proponents of the solution argue that Israel should revert to the status quo ante of 1967 borders. Based on those borderlines, two states should be created, one for the Jews and the other for the Palestinians. The latter are predominantly Muslims, in a demographic sense.

And here lies the biggest problem with the idea. No matter how the boundaries shall be carved for such a solution, a basic issue that the proposal forgets is that Christians also live in the region. The whole land of Israel/Palestine is somehow sacrosanct to Jews, Christians, and Muslims. People belonging to these faiths have been living there for centuries. Each city or town has a religious emblem that belongs to either of the religions. There is either an ancient synagogue, a historical church, or a beautiful mosque present in every town of the country. The religious heritage of all of these entities is so intertwined that it is indeed quite cruel to take it apart. Similarly, Jewish, Christian, and Muslim lives were also tightly woven into each other throughout the country for so many centuries.

Jews of the present day profess that they must own almost the whole country for themselves because she belonged to their kings and prophets. They claim that historically it is their land for thousands of years. And despite the fact that many of the Jewish people in Israel’s political administration are Ashkenazi Jews, their demand does make a lot of sense. Why should it matter that Ashkenazi Jews are indeed not descendants of Israelites, and hence Semetic, but belong to a different branch of the progeny of Prophet Noah i.e. Japheth? If they are Jewish and they want to live in the land of Israel/Palestine, why shouldn’t they be able to do so?

Palestinian Muslims also have a very compelling argument. They claim that they are the Israelites whose ancestors used to be Jews or Christians once upon a time. They converted to Islam at some stage are natural heirs of the land. Hashim, who was the great-grandfather of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is buried in Gaza. Although not an Israelite, he was still Semetic as he descended from Prophet Ishmael (PBUH). Prophet Abraham (PBUH) descended from Sam, the son of Prophet Noah (PBUH), and he is considered the forefather of the Semitic people. Palestinian Muslims also argue that they could still keep on living in peace with Jews and Christians the way they had been living for centuries before 1948. And why shouldn’t they profess to coexist peacefully? There is no reason for that.

Christians, Palestinian and worldwide, are either quiet on this matter or they tend to side with the Palestinians in the sense that they do advocate the creation of a sovereign Christian state for the Palestinians, who, as I argued before, are largely Muslim demographically. They do not speak much about the creation of a Christian state. At least from the rallies, campaigns and protests that are going on around the Western world weekly, there is no shout about the creation of a Christian state. They only talk about freeing Palestine.

But we must remember that an affinity for Jerusalem and the Holy sites brought Christendom to the Crusades around a millennium ago. This was also a very gory affair. I will write my thoughts about it in a different post. My point at present is that even if the present generation of Christians is not very worried about claiming a part of the land of Israel/Palestine for themselves, their latter generations may not choose to abandon their claim in the long run. Hence, what we may see a few hundred years from now could be another series of crusades on the two-state solution.

So we need a more prudent and long-lasting solution to the conflict that has been going on for exactly three quarters of a century. What could be that? Creation of a three-state solution? A separate state for each of the three major historical faiths of the land? A three-state solution is going to divide the country so badly that it will almost entirely erase the historical heritage. Moreover, there will then be the question of who is going to get what. Clearly, all portions of the landmass of Israel are not equal to each other in their value. There are coasts, deserts, arid and arable pieces of land. How shall a fair division come about?

The three-state solution is not a viable one at least for me. I personally believe that any fair solution should be based on creating a one-state. This one state-country should be democratic. Hence, what they might settle for is that, let’s say, they could agree on something like having a Christian president, a Muslim prime minister, and a Christian chief justice. Or they may choose to have a political hierarchy that is somewhat like that. They could have a law that treats Jews, Christians and Muslims according to their respective religious laws. And they could have their due religious freedoms. They could have the right to grow and prosper. They could have the right of being happy, but not at the expense of any other party’s misery. This could be a great country.

Many times nowadays in talk shows, when people try to say a word about the massive mistreatment of Palestinians, the talk show host asks this shunning question: But do you condemn Hamas? Or there is a school of thought that if Hamas were to lay their weapons, everything could be sorted out.

The democratic one-state should observe the complete disarmament of Hamas as well as Israel. Everyone should live under security guarantees provided by the major world powers as well as Middle Eastern countries. USA could be a natural guarantor, combined with Saudi Arabia, UAE, and even Pakistan. Ireland could be a very credible country to provide security guarantees, as the people of this country at large have a very clear conscience. Moreover, I propose to maintain a peacekeeping military force in the region. This force could be led by Ireland and every major country in the world could provide battalions to it, including the Saudis and Pakistan. By the way, I prefer Ireland because of her credibility. And given her past of being a country that had been colonized for almost a millennium, I believe that it will also stand with the oppressed.

I read some time ago a very logical argument that Christians and Muslims all have many countries in the world, and Jews have only one. And that Muslims are hellbent on destroying even that one country. That need not be the case. What I propose is that even apart from a democratic Israel/Palestine, the world powers should lobby to create a number Jewish states in multiple parts of the world. For instance, one of my thoughts is to have an exclusively Jewish country in every major continent including America, Asia, Africa, and Europe.

And why should it be a bad proposal? Muslims should not have a problem with this. After all, when early Muslims acquired the country from the Roman Empire, they happily settled Jews and Christians in it. Christians should not have a problem with it, as it will only enable easy access to their pilgrimage sites, which they are not talking about presently. Jews should also not have a problem with this, as in addition to having a democratic country of their own, they additionally have the possibility of achieving a few more countries in different parts of the world. The only requisite is to have a political will. And why should there be a shortage of political will on the part of major political powers of the world who spend billions of dollars to ensure a debilitating destruction of the Palestinians so that they might not pose a threat to Israel?