Tweet
Here's a hypothetical situation for you to ponder .
Imagine that Adi Shankar's ( he was a contemporary of Mohammed ) revival of Hinduism in India had led to a Hindu/Arab expansionist-imperialist urge ( he preached nothing of the sort - I'm just speculating ) . Indian armies would have been united under one of the mahajanapadas and embarked on a march of world conquest , much like the Arabs .
In the confrontation that followed between the imperialist Hindus and imperialist Muslims , imagine for a moment that the Hindus would have won , and conquered Mecca . Being imperialists , the Hindus would them have proceeded to desecrate the Kaaba and bury it in very place it stood and buidl a Hindu temple on top of it , just as a mark of their imperialist victory .
Now , the Hindus would have ruled Arabia for around seven to eight hundred years , and would have treated the Muslism of Arabia very cruelly throughout their rule , reducing them to the class of second-class citizens . Now imagine that Arabia would still remain overwhelmingly Muslim , with only a few ( say 10 % ) of the people converting to Hinduism in this time of Hindu rule .
With the coming of the European imperialists , the Hindus would have been displaced from their position of prominence and the European powers would have gained control of Arabia .
With the coming of the rise of regional nationalism movements all over the world , Arabia would have gained its independence from European rule at around the time of 1950 .
From years before independence , that temple would not have been in use for centuries - because it was not really meant for worship , only as a mark of Hindu dominanace . Imagine that it was not being used even after independence . Imagine that it is now forty years after independence .
At such a time , would the Muslims of Arabia be justified in demanding that the temple which built on their Kaba be destroyed ( or shifted to another place ) , and that a mosque be built on that place ? Would they be justified in demolishing it by force ?
Note : If someone has guessed what historical incident I'm referring to , I'd request them not to reveal it , as I don't want people to be biased when they vote in the poll , I want it to be honest .
Note to voters : Please don't read the thread before voting , and please don't try to look this up , I want an unbiased vote .
Imagine that Adi Shankar's ( he was a contemporary of Mohammed ) revival of Hinduism in India had led to a Hindu/Arab expansionist-imperialist urge ( he preached nothing of the sort - I'm just speculating ) . Indian armies would have been united under one of the mahajanapadas and embarked on a march of world conquest , much like the Arabs .
In the confrontation that followed between the imperialist Hindus and imperialist Muslims , imagine for a moment that the Hindus would have won , and conquered Mecca . Being imperialists , the Hindus would them have proceeded to desecrate the Kaaba and bury it in very place it stood and buidl a Hindu temple on top of it , just as a mark of their imperialist victory .
Now , the Hindus would have ruled Arabia for around seven to eight hundred years , and would have treated the Muslism of Arabia very cruelly throughout their rule , reducing them to the class of second-class citizens . Now imagine that Arabia would still remain overwhelmingly Muslim , with only a few ( say 10 % ) of the people converting to Hinduism in this time of Hindu rule .
With the coming of the European imperialists , the Hindus would have been displaced from their position of prominence and the European powers would have gained control of Arabia .
With the coming of the rise of regional nationalism movements all over the world , Arabia would have gained its independence from European rule at around the time of 1950 .
From years before independence , that temple would not have been in use for centuries - because it was not really meant for worship , only as a mark of Hindu dominanace . Imagine that it was not being used even after independence . Imagine that it is now forty years after independence .
At such a time , would the Muslims of Arabia be justified in demanding that the temple which built on their Kaba be destroyed ( or shifted to another place ) , and that a mosque be built on that place ? Would they be justified in demolishing it by force ?
Note : If someone has guessed what historical incident I'm referring to , I'd request them not to reveal it , as I don't want people to be biased when they vote in the poll , I want it to be honest .
Note to voters : Please don't read the thread before voting , and please don't try to look this up , I want an unbiased vote .
Comment