This is what Brother Taleemat Islam, after challenging me to find anything wrong in the Quran, has quoted:
“Brother why not start with your scriptures …
Pratisarg Parv 3; Khand 3; Adhyaai 3; Shlokas 5 to 27
its translation:At that time a spiritual teacher (Acharya) known as Mahamad (Muhammad) appeared amongst the Mlecchas (non Indians/non Aryans), along with his companions/disciples. The King after giving this Mahaa Deva (of angelic disposition) dweller of the desert (Marusthal Nivasi), a bath in the Panchgavya and the Ganges water (meaning honouring and praising him) offered him presents and showing him all reverence said: “I pay obeisance to you (Namaste) O Pride of Humanity (Girija Nath) dweller of the desert (Marusthal Nivaasi/Arabian dweller). You are the destroyer of the Devil (Tripurasur Naashaaya) who propagates deceit. You have been protected by fellow Mlecchas, and you are the embodiment of Divine Qualities (Sacchidanand Roopine). I am a your servant, and have come seeking your refuge.
and in many more places in the vedas.
Taleemat e Islam , commenting on Good Faith and famous astronauts.
This fantastic idea certainly came from that well-known scavenger of religious scriptures, Zakir Naik who claims the he had “proved” that all the religions apart from Islam had prophesied the coming of Muhammad as the last Prophet. Naik is an avowed expert (as are most Christian preachers and Hindu Babas) at twisting phrases and delivering exactly the opposite meaning of what was intended by the passage he quotes.
I have shown you in the previous part of this blog how he interprets “I have spread out the earth like a carpet for you” to mean the finding of 1927 by Edwin Hubble – that the universe is continually expanding. Hubble’s path-breaking discovery made Einstein regret his invention of a ‘cosmological constant’ to explain why the galaxies did not collapse into each other due to gravity. It also made the cosmologists to work backward in time to arrive at the Big Bang that they prove mathematically had taken place some 13.7 billion years ago, not 6000 years ago as stated in the “Book” that Quran quotes with reverence often enough.
The passages you quoted, Brother Taleemat, presumably came from Zakir Naik because the numbering of the verses (and the title of the section of the Purana) you quote exactly repeats the errors in Naik’s quotes. The actual verses that appeared in print I give in subsequent paragraphs. It is significant that the Bhavishya Purana (which means epic of the future) in vogue has never been seen found recorded in palm leaves which is how all original scriptures or their tenth or twentieth copies of – Vedas, Upanishads, Puranas and Brahmanas – had been found before they were transferred to scrolls or paper.
By the way, if you accept that Bhavishya Purana as one of the scriptures of Hindus, and its prophesies regarding Muahmmad are correct, then you must admit that this scripture and the others – like the Vedas which also mentions Allah (as per Naik) several centuries before Quran came into being must surely be superior to what came later – the Bible or Quran?
To me, all those works are of men of some intellect, but little data regarding life, and the scientific theories that were to come centuries later. Unlike the Quran, or the Gita, or the Bible, science never claims that they have found everything that is to be known or that everything they say is perfect.
That said, let us continue. .
This Bhavishya Purana from which you have innocently quoted has four sections – in Sansrkrit, Parvas. This Parva contains a critical review of Manusmriti (Memorable laws of Manu). It decries the caste-ridden laws propounded by Manu ,just as Buddha does, and has odes to the sun, and what is considered to be Zoroastrian views of religion. Zoroastrianism originated in Iran, or Persia and thrived until the invasion by the Jihadis of the time made life unbearable for its followers who migrated en masse to India towards the end of 7th century and continued to migrate in the subsequent years when the persecution of their people and destruction of their culture, libraries and conversion of their fire temples to mosques continued in spite of their paying a jizya or non-bekevers’ tax to the conquerors. Hardly any prophesy to be seen in this section which probably was written, or at least interpolated, after the lifetime of Prophet Muhammad,
The second is Madhyaparva or the Middle Section, somewhat like the Atharva Veda, it relates to Tantrik (witchcraft- good and bad) concepts.
It is the third book, named Pratisargaparva, from which you have quoted a minuscule fraction of its entirety with the interpretation that is most probably bya European Indologist with an eye on proselytization. Later a Muslim writer with some knowledge of Sanskrit, like Zakir Naik, found a new meaning in it to suit his ideology that everything is Islam. The Christian who interpreted Mahamada to mean Muhammad had the sole intention of putting Islam to ridicule and to praise his own alleged Savior, Jesus (whom the Bhavishyapurana called the Son of ‘Isha’)
The Portugese, Italian and Irish Jesuits came to India in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries and learnt – to their surprise – that daily baths don’t make people crazy. Indians called the European visitors Mlechhas – the unwashed. The East India Company did not encourage their own preachers , but American and European preachers paraded in nonetheless. They did not find a primitive people that they expected, but an intelligent race, adept in science and mathematics, with a huge bulk of literature in Sanskrit and vernacular, rule of law and undoubtedly some strange customs.There was Sati, in parts of Northern India to match the witch-burning practice in Europe. So the worst among them, defeated in their debates with the well-read Brahmins, went home to spread falsehood and partial truth about Indian culture. One of the preachers, as quoted by Katherine Mayo, spread the belief that Indian mothers masturbated their children to put them to sleep!. They wrote disparagingly (and quite correctly) against India’s caste system while forgetting the much worse slavery practised by themselves..
Muslim scholars like Darah Shiko (the assassinated by and elder brother to Aurangzeb) translated the Hindu scriptures to Arabic; Persian and Arabian scholars took them to the West. Some of the European priests came to learn the scriptures with a view to ridicule the local religion, but quite a few, aghast at the philosophical and logical contents in some of the earlier works of Hindus got themselves converted to Hinduism. The strenuous work of Max Mueller and Ralph Griffith, not to forget the pioneering and suicidal efforts of a handful of men like Darah Sikho, opened a world of Hindu civilization and culture, along with their Vedas, Upanishads, Epics and Brahmanas to the Western world. Dr. Annie Besant became a more ardent and unapologetic Hindu than any Hindus of the time and, to my mind, of any time. Some others, who learnt Sanskrit for the purpose of criticizing and ridicule, made interpolations into the ancient purana to prove that Jesus Christ was predicted by the wise men of ancient India – presumably because Indian soothsayers were thought to be terrific in astrology and hence adept at prophesies.
The third Parva of Bhavishyapurana was fudged, corrupted and misinterpreted by the same writers to slight Buddhism and Jainism whose philosophies far outweighed the turn-the-other-cheek pacifism of Jesus Christ, and to denigrate Islam, because Muslim Rulers of the time proved to be formidable enemies. The language used for interpolation is a relatively recent version of Sanskrit, as came to be written by Kalidasa in the 4th Century AD and the subsequent writers like Aryabhata, Varahamihira, Adi Shankara and Jayadeva. If my Sanskrit Munshi were to write those stanzas in the nineteen-sixties, they would have sounded nearly the same as in the third Parva from which you quoted.
The passages quoted by you, presuming you are from India and had learnt Hindi (which adopted the same Devanagari script as Sanskrit), go thus:
एतस्मिप्रन्तरेम्लेच्छ आचार्येण समन्वित:
महामद इति ख्यात: शिष्यशाखासमन्वित: ११५
नृपश्चैव महादेव॑ मरुस्थान निवासिन॑
ग॑गाजलैश्च स॑स्नाप्य प॑च गव्य समन्वितै: ११६
This verse is conveniently translated thus by the cunning evangelist and taken up by the unsuspecting Muslim ‘scholar’ (or by all-knowing Zakir Naik himself)::
At that time a spiritual teacher (Acharya) known as Mahamad (Muhammad) appeared amongst the Mlecchas (non Indians/non Aryans), along with his companions/disciples.
You must understand that in Sanskrit, unlike in Hindi or Urdu (and possibly Arabic), a consonant is pronounced as a whole syllable. Thus a the consonant d at the end of a word would be read as ‘da’ ; if a masculine pronoun was intended, it would end with two dots in which case it would be read as dah or (da-ha); in Devanagari script, (महामद:).
Thus महामद (mahamad) would be read as Mahaa-mada where da is a full syllable, not a stand-alone consonant, and not as Mahammad or Muhammad. If the word was intended as a pronoun and not as an adjective, it would be written as Mahamada: and read as Mahamada-ha.
It stands to common sense that the word Mlechha (untouchable, unwashed low-caste or a white man) was inserted here to replace the correct word Shreshta, which meant great or of a higher level.
Without splitting hairs, the correct translation would be more like this:
A this time, the king, accompanied by his great Acharya (Guru – a king always was accompanied by his spiritual teacher (called Raja guru or Acharya) and a section of his greatly overjoyed disciples, went to the desert-residing Shiva and showered him (the deity) in the five cow-products and water from the Ganges
The five products of the cow – milk. butter, yogurt, urine and dung are considered sacred by devout Hindus till today. The Hindu Mahasabha and Yoga Guru Ramdev still promote their usage in the 21st century as purifiers as well as medicine and toiletries. Showering the images of a deity with these ‘sacred’ items is common – in fact obligatory – practice . It is doubtful if the Prophet of Islam would stand company for such an offering.
Each image of a Hindu deity residing in a particular place is believed to have his unique power apart from the god whom the image represents. Thus you have the all-forgiving Kashi Vishwanath (Shiva resident of Kashi or Benaras), Dwaraka-Vasi Krishna (who resides in Dwarka), Mathura- Meenakshi (lotus-eyed goddess of Mathura), Vishnu of the seven hills (Tirupati) , and Child Krishna of Guruvayoor (a place in South India) and Palani Subramanam (The god who resides in Palani, a hill in Tamil Nadu) to cite only a few. Catholics also have Our Lady of Lourdes, (Virgin Mary whose image is situated in Lourdes in France) and The Lady of Velankani (again, Mary, Mother of Christ who is supposed to be present in Velankani in South India). Thus a Shiva’s deity in Thar Desert would be described as desert-resident Shiva.
As an alternative let us, nonetheless, say Mahamad is meant to denote Muhammad and examine the translation that you were palmed off with:
At that time a spiritual teacher (Acharya) known as Mahamad (Muhammad) appeared amongst the Mlecchas (non Indians/non Aryans), along with his companions/disciples. The King after giving this Mahaa Deva (of angelic disposition) dweller of the desert (Marusthal Nivasi), a bath in the Panchgavya and the Ganges water (meaning honouring and praising him)
Mlechha does not mean non-Aryan. Ravana is a non-Aryan (described as demon, enemy of Aryas) but is not a Mlechha. So is Hanuman from a race called the monkey-race by Aryans, but not a Mlechha. The derisive term means the unwashed, untouchable. The so-called low-castes who were denied access to local wells were Mlechhas, The British were described as Mlechhas for the reason they were known to wipe rather than wash, but Muslims are not called Mlecchas because they use water for their ablution. (Hindus were not aware that a Hadith allowed them to use three stones if water was hard to come by in the desert).
Mahadeva definitely does not mean “ of angelic disposition.” Maha = Great; Deva=God. Mahadeva is a name reserved for Shiva, because he was the greatest of all gods. The other two of the Trinity (Brahma and Vishnu) are not called Mahadeva, and certainly no other lower gods were so praised. Hindus’ common clarion call, Jay-jay Mahadev is a call for victory in the name of Shiva (who is also a god of war with trident in his hand and an all-destroying nuclear missile in his third eye).
Marusthala Nivasi certainly means resident of the desert. However, Marusthala does not mean Arabia. There is no mention of Muhammad travelling towards the East past Persia or even Persia. India, where Muslims found a haven after the tenth century, does not figure anywhere in the Quran, ancient Hadith or Sunnah. It was much later that Indian Mullahs began to issue fatwas after establishing themselves in the subcontinent.
One suggestion of Islamic enthusiasts is that this verse is describing a dream of the king of Bhoj. Sadly, there is no mention of a dream anywhere in this section of the scripture.
Pancha= Five. Gavya = of the cow; or products of the cow (gow in Sanskrit is cow, the sacred animal ). Panchagavya is a common term for the five products of the cow It is customary among Hindus even today to worship their deities with the five products of the cow.
Ganga Jal means the water from River Ganga, the sacred water used in rituals by Hindus. Most Hindus (except a few prodigals like myself) store cans of Ganges water for such occasions. Those who cannot afford to go to the shores of Ganges to collect that sacred liquid, request friends and relatives to get them some. A bottle of water from the Ganges is considered a precious gift.
None of these interpretations are from my imagination (I do not worship Shiva and certainly not Allah or Jesus). Any Muslim in India with Hindu neighbours would know that my assertions in this regard are true.
Next Stanza:
भोजराज उवाच:
नमस्ते गिरिजा नाथ मरुस्थान निवासिने
त्रिपुरासुर नामाय बहुमायाप्रवर्तिने ११७
म्लेच्छैर्गुप्ताय (नेत्रगुप्ताय) सच्चिदानन्द रूपिणे
त्व॑मा॑ हिकिङ्कर॑ विद्धि शरणार्थमुपागत॑ ११८
To cut short, let me give you the correct translation
The King of Bhoj kingdom said:
Namaste: Reverential greetings to you (this is a translation by Naik himself)
Girijanatha = Husband of the daughter of the mountain (Giri = mountain or hill; ja= born to) and definitely not “Pride pf humanity”; Hindu legend has it that Parvati was born to the Himalaya mountain. In the poem “One Thousand Odes to the Goddess”, Girija is one of the names of Parvati who is the second and permanent wife of Shiva. (She is also a re-incarnation of Sati, his first wife).
Tripurasura namaya bahumaya pravartini mlechherguptaya
The one who destroyed the untouchable great illusionist (more correctly, netrer guptaya invisible to the eyes) demon of Tripura
Twam he kingaram vidhi sharanartham upagatham
(To you this servant has come seeking refuge.)
However, the clever Christian evangelist, presumably not a Muslim Maulvi, who interpreted Mahamada as Muhammad, twisted words of this so-called Book of Prophesies to interpret the later verses to read as thus in English:
“Hearing this (words of Lord Shiva) the king came back to his country and Mahamada came back with him to the bank of river Sindhu. He was an expert in creating illusions and a mlechha, so he said to the king in a pleasing voice: “ Oh great king, your god has become my servant. He has eaten my left-overs. Look at this.” The king became peeved when he saw this before him, but Kalidasa scolded Mahamada and said: “You cheat, you have created this illusion to mislead the king. You low-caste, I will destroy you.:” (Interestingly, Kalidasa was a great poet who lived in the fourth century AD while Muhammad did not appear till the 7th).
…Mahamada (Muhammad) appeared before King Bhojraja in the night and said: Your religion is supposed to be the best, but I will show you a better religion in accordance with the orders of the Lord. My followers will have the following signs : their genitals will be partly sliced, they will sport beard in place of the shikha (or bundle of hair Hindus used to sport on their head) , they will be cruel and eat everything (flesh) and make loud noise (The muezzin’s call). They will carry out their rituals (and ablution) with a Musssala instead of the Kusha grass that you use. Hence they will be known as Mussalman. Thus I will found an unrighteous religion.”
Would you like that part of the ‘prophesy? The Christian evangelist did not learn Sanskrit just to ridicule Islam who ruled much of India before them and gave the British much headache. He had to prove that Christ was prophesied earlier. Thus :
Here are the significant parts of the verses from the same book that you quote as they appear which, to save space and time, I reproduce in English:
(23, 24 and 25)
The king Vikramaditya asked, “Who are you, Sir?”
And he replied cheerfully : “You should know that I am Isha putra, the son of god, and I am born of a virgin”.
“I am the expounder of the religion of the Mlecchas and I strictly adhere to the Absolute Truth.’
And so on.
The conversation is supposed to have taken place in Hun country. A website interprets Hun as a place in the Himalayas, but historian Professor Harrison is of the view that Hun is Irann. That this meeting of the king and Christ would happen is supposed to have been prophesied before Christ. Otherwise, where is the merit in the prophesy?.
There are claims that Bible mentions the name Allah. It doesn’t. Bible only mentions God (Yehweh) or the Lord. That Bible prophesies the coming of the last Prophet, which is Muhammad. Which is not true. Actually, Bible only prophesies the return of Christ (in John’s Revelations, as a sheep with several horns and a sword in his mouth) to finally destroy the sinners and to take his own believers to heaven to live in the company of God. In other words, what was intended was the judgment day, not the coming of Muhammad. That what is mentioned in Quran is also mentioned in Bible (except the names like Allah and Muhammad) is no miracle. Quran calls Bible ‘The Book’ in which the Jews and Christians have made some changes, but since they are people of the ‘Book’, like Muslims, they will still find salivation with God if they do the right things. But polytheist Hindus won’t, however they my try to be good. Quran permits men to marry Christian or Jewish women, but not pagans like Hindus and Buddhists. Shah Rukh Khan, though much praised by Zakir Naik, and Aamir Khan, much maligned by Hindu bigots – both married to Hindu women – are doomed despite their charitable work.
Let us however agree that Bhavishya Purana foresees several centuries before Christ the coming of Muhammad. There is also a suggestion that the incarnation of Kalki (on a white horse) mentioned in Vishnupurana and other Hindu scriptures foretells the coming of Prophet Muhammad several centuries later. Zakir Naik claims that Allah is mentioned in the Vedas, as Elah. In effect, he is arguing (as you are ) that Vedas and the Bhavishyapurana are far-sighted works powerful enough to see into the future – which is omniscient God’s job. The same Purana mentions Jesus as another Saviour, born of an unmarried woman (Mariam in the Quran). So these marvelous scriptures should be right when they look into the future and correctly predict the coming of both the Prophets, surely then they cannot be wrong about their gods?
On the other hand, Quran does not mention (never mind making a prophesy) any of the Hindu Puranas, had never heard of them and hence never named them, but always believed that polytheists were those who resided in Mecca. Muhammad is not known to have moved out of the Arabian peninsula. Quran predicts the victory of Islam, but not the massive genocide of Muslims -civilian men women and children – in the name of Allah the Greatest and Muhammad, his Prophet – by those who claim to be real Muslims . .Predictions in Hindu scriptures of which you boast, then you should see in a superior divine light.
So, Brother Taleemat, When are you going to convert?
Vishumenon's Blog 