Choothia Akbar

Shameful Hindus who throng to watch Jodhaa-Akbar, a film which glorifies Hindu
hater Cruel Akbar, are worthy of getting killed by Terrorists! Hindus boycott 'Jodha
Akabar' Movie

Even historians have not realized piety signified in ‘marriage’ ceremony To show
historians’

Failure to understand the word ‘marriage’ mentioned in Islamic chronicle, Shri. Oak
writes, “Shrivastava says that King Raval Hariraya of Jaisalmer married his daughter to
Akbar. Here, he never realized that the word ‘marriage’ used by him is most
inappropriate.”

Raja Bhagawandas went to Jaisalmer to bring his daughter. He took this helpless princess
to harem of Akbar. This shows that nobody from Jaisalmer’s royal family took her to
Akbar. It was like sending a man and a cartful of food for demon Bakasur to eat
everyday. Every Hindu or Muslim king or Nawab had to offer his daughter to Akbar
irrespective of his surrendering to or giving a fight to Akbar since Akbar was extremely
lascivious. Kings like Bhagawandas and Mansingh, who had surrendered to Akbar, used
to advise other Rajputs that it was better to provide Akbar with their women and wealth
rather than fight with the powerful Emperor. As per their advice, except Maharana of
Udaypur, all the other kings and princes had surrendered to Akbar either by giving a fight
or without fight. After their surrender, they did not get away with sending just one
princess; but they had to send a carriage-full of women. How in a wedding, presents are
distributed to the people from one’s family as per their status, these Hindu women used to
be sent to army personnel of Akbar as gifts. Children of these Hindu women used to get
grow up hating Hindus since very young age and after growing up, they used to carry on
the legacy of killing Hindus, converting them and raping Hindu women.

On page 213-215, Shri. Shrivastava says, “King Ravalpratap of Banswada and King
Raval Asakarna of Dongarpur were induced to surrender to Akbar and since then, they
were known as subjugates of Akbar. The princess of Dongarpur was sent to the harem of
Akbar. Lunkarna and Birbal induced both the kings to conciliate with Akbar. Both the
kings brought princess of Dongarpur to Akbar’s camp. Akbar was on his way to
Fattehpur Sikri. Even during the journey, Hindu ladies from royal families were supplied
to satiate Akbar’s sexual desires. The princess of Dongarpur was taken to Akbar from her
father’s shelter to Akbar’s camp. In Hinduism, ‘marriage’ is a rite, however, Akbar
destroyed the sanctity of marriage.

Akbar used to demand Hindu women for providing to relatives and friends

Shri. Oak has shown how to surmise the descriptions written by fanatic chronologists
who were refugees of Akbar and who believed in keeping him happy. Shri. Oak writes,
“Akbar used to ask for women belonging to his enemies’ families defeated by him and he
used to call for Hindu women even for his relatives and friends, e.g. the ruler of Tibet was
asked to send his daughter for Akbar’s son Shahajada Salim (Jahangir). Accordingly, she
went to the harem in Lahore on 1st January 1572. Who will be ready to send his daughter
willingly to a dissipated lustful Mughal king? This shows that the king of Tibet could not
have sent his daughter along with his wealth unless he was threatened of getting his
kingdom destroyed. He had to therefore, sacrifice his daughter.

On 26th June 1586 daughter of Rayasinh of Bikaner too entered the harem of Salim
(Jehangir). Historians are describing these incidents as marriages which is totally wrong.
Had it been ‘marriage’, the ceremony would have taken place in the palace of Bikaner.
Whole of Bikaner would have strongly condemned if such ceremony would have taken
place in there.

There is a reference of Akbar marrying two Hindu princesses to Salim (Jahangir) in a

book authored by Shallot. He says in the book that on 2nd February 1584, there was a
grand celebration of Salim’s wedding with daughter of King Bhagawandas in Lahore and
in the year 1596, Salim was wedded to the daughter of Rayasinh. It was natural to
celebrate for Muslims as it was their policy to defile Hindu princesses; but it was a matter
of grief for Hindus. It was a hell for Hindu women to spend the rest of their lives in dark
prison like harems along with their co-wives with such dissipated and immoral Muslim
husbands. Moreover, Hindu princesses had to even take abuses hurled at them for being
Hindus as Hindus were treated inferior.

Bhagawandas and Mansinh, the two princes became agents of Akbar and they used
mediate and send other Rajput princesses to Mughal harems. It used to be deathly for the
parents of such girls to sacrifice their daughters to Mughals; therefore, they used to avoid
going and used to send their daughters through Bhagawandas and Mansinh with a little
satisfaction that their daughter was sent (to hell) through a Hindu Rajput so that the
daughters would be able to hear at least a few Hindu words in that hell.

On Jodhbai’s death, Rajputs refused to perform ‘kshour’ rites

Now we shall study an incident that took place after Jodhabai’s death from the book
written by Shri. Oak. It is given in the book titled ‘Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan’
(Part 2, page 385) by Colonel James Todd that Akbar ordered all Rajputs to perform
‘kshour (cut hair and beard)’ after Jodhbai’s death. When the barbers reached the camp of
Hada Rajput, they refused to get their hair cut and beat up the barbers. Among the
protesters, there was Raja Bhoj. He was the son of Rao Surajan whose capital was Fort
Ranathambore. Those against Raja Bhoj, informed Akbar about the incident that the
barbers sent by him were beaten up by Hada Rajput and they refused to observe
mourning for Jodhabai.

Bhoj Raja was a valiant king. He had no other option but to stay in the camp along with
other Hindu Rajaput as a hostage. As Akbar heard about Bhoj’s resistance, he ordered that
Raja Bhoj should be fettered and his mustache should be cut.

The news reached Hada camp and all the occupants were enraged. They took out their
swords and planned to revolt. Finally, Akbar had to personally go there and made peace
with them; even he did not dare to touch a hair of Rajputs.

The crux in this incident was that Jodhabai was from Jaipur’s royal family. Her name was
written off by Rajput since she was taken to his harem by Akbar and as such she was
ostracized by the Rajputs and they felt that she was not a Rajput and did not deserve to be
honoured in any manner. Therefore, Rajputs were not ready to perform rites even after
her death or observe mourning. King Bhoj thought that what right did Akbar has to force
upon us such rites and ask us to cut our hair.

For every Rajput, mustaches was a sign of his honour, pride and manliness. They used to
be ready to even sacrifice their lives to save their mustaches. On the other hand, Akbar
was bent upon insulting Rajputs in every possible way and wanted to make them
helpless. Akbar was very particular about others obeying his orders and their bowing
before him. Akbar thought it very insulting that Rajputs were not ready to perform rites
for Jodhabai as she was his slave. He, therefore, tried, by hook or by crook, to make
Rajputs perform the rites; but his plan did not succeed.

Even today, the thought of marrying one’s daughter to a Muslim is loathsome

For the past 60 years, Hindi film industry has this bad habit of showing all Muslim
characters as very chivalrous. Now even a very depraved king like Akbar is being
glorified. It has been 402 years since Akbar’s death; but even now, a Hindu father would
not be ready to marry of his daughter to a Muslim. Such thought is very loathsome for a
Hindu even today. How bad it must have been even earlier? Hindus have to now decide
whether they want to believe in a so-called love story produced by a film producer with
his eyes only on earning money or have faith in the proven history told by a virtuous
person and protect our women folk.

Akbar’s name was actually Jalaluddin Mohamad and as the name suggests he was fiery.
When barely 18-19 years of age he got Behramkhan, the very man who had brought him
to power, murdered because he was lusting for Behramkhan’s wife. So with his murder
the path was clear to take Khan’s wife to his harem. The monarch of Jaipur Bhagwandas
accepted his sovereignty and gave the hand of his sister, who it is said was named
Jodhabai in marriage to Akbar. There is also some confusion regarding the words Jodhbai
and and Jodhabai. One of them is associated with Akbar and the other with his son Salim
(Jahangir).

Akbar the brute who molested several Hindu princesses !

The great India historian who can be equated to a sage, Shri P.N. Oak has written a well
researched book titled ‘Akbar Thor nhavtaach’ meaning Akbar was certainly not great.
This book elucidates many misdeeds of Akbar. So Jodha Akbar is only one aspect of
misdeeds of Akbar of grabbing Hindu women.

Oak writes, ‘Even an ordinary person with no knowledge of Indian history could say that
it was impossible for Akbar to marry a Rajput princess. Even the most ordinary Hindu
man would prefer Hindu women to die instead of them being captured by Muslims. To
save the honour of their women Rajputs even gave up their lives. So it is absurd to say
that a Rajput king chose Akbar belonging to another country and who always remained in
his harem drinking wine and smoking opium, as an ideal suitor for his daughter.

One of the reasons for the deadly hatred of the Kshatriya kings for Akbar was his lust for
their beautiful women. Akbar had also developed the superiority complex that he would
become the emperor by abducting their women and by way of his being a Muslim.

In fact every Muslim youth even if he be poor always dreams of abducting a Hindu
girl.They think this is a praiseworthy act. Islam teaches its followers that a Muslim has
every right to snatch away everything from a kafir. And it does not end at that. They
abduct the Hindu girl and oppressing the kafirs force them to embrace Islam. This is their
ultimate objective.

Akbar being a powerful Muslim he thought it was his duty to use as many women from
Hindu kingly families as possible. In fact he was convinced that he was entitled to
abducting Hindu women more than other women firstly because he was an emperor and
secondly because he was a Muslim.

In this way Akbar began to fill his harem with Rajput women. Is it not important to
substantiate whether the bride had formally accepted the groom, whether they were
engaged formally, the names of the Rajput princesses, whether the bride’s relatives
attended the wedding, whether families of both the bride and groom were invited to the
wedding, whether the wedding was held in the Hindu style with the antarpat and akshata,
whether the bride’s family had sent out invitations, whether the wedding procession had
taken the chief royal road and whether banquets were being organised for months
together to entertain people of all levels from the groom’s darbar ? It is absolute
foolishness that without even little evidence the claim is made that a Hindu princess
married Akbar.’
Threat of destroying the Hindu kingdom if the princess was not handed over to
him !

How false and deluding the historical claim that the monarch of Jaipur happily consented
to the marriage of his daughter to Akbar is is described by Shri Oak thus, ‘An average
history book narrates this incident as - the 19 year old poor Akbar who had come to pay
homage at the dargah of the fakir Moinuddin Chisti with pure, religious emotion halted
on the way to Ajmer at the Sambhar village .Here King Bharmalla of Jaipur came to
greet him and pleaded with him to marry his daughter as if it were a great opportunity
that he seized to grab this excellent Muslim youth emperor crossing his territory, as a
suitor for his daughter. Bharmalla is believed to have pleaded with him saying, “I would
be elated if you would accept my daughter as your bride. Then I will no longer remain in
her debt.” And it is projected that Akbar married her as a favour on the king (actually he
oppressed her in his harem).

The average reader and historian both think that the above story is true. However even
the average reader will be able to substantiate the falsity of the above untrue story. It is
sheer madness to believe that a Rajput king got his daughter married to Akbar ( or for that
matter that other Rajput princesses married Muslim emperors/sultans) when it is well
known how Rajputs would do anything, even wage wars or kill their women to prevent
them from being captured by the Muslims!

Let us see why King Bharmalla had to surrender to Akbar. The lesson in Ashirvadilal
Srivastav’s book (pg 61 -63) says :-“ A commander from Akbar’s army, Sharfuddin
attacked Bharmalla’s kingdom time and again and created terror. Falling prey to such
attacks Bharmalla had to accept defeat. Sharfuddin captured three Rajput princes, Sangar,
Rajsingh and Jagannath who retaliated this attack and imprisoned them. At Sambhar
using Islamic tactics of attack they treated them cruelly, even threatened to kill them. To
save these princes King Bharmalla was compelled to sacrifice his daughter to these sex-
lorn Muslims.Usually men were not allowed to see even the hands or feet of the beautiful
Rajput women . When they were given so much protection by their men would a Rajput
father hand over his own daughter to an unjust, cruel Muslim ? Certainly not. Because
this was akin to a man handing over his family cow to a Muslim butcher. King
Bharmalla had to finally surrender unto Akbar as he had no alternative and could no
longer bear the destruction of his kingdom. Bharmalla was compelled to submit to all the
conditions laid down by Akbar and handing over his daughter to Akbar was a part of that
treaty. Only then were the three captive princes released .”

Let us now acquaint ourselves with the credentials of Shri Ashirvadilal Srivastav, the
author of ‘Akbar the Great’. He was the head of department of history at the Agra
University and has three doctorates to his credit . In his book in some places Shri Oak has
already made a reference to this book.

It was not a wedding, rather a dacoity !

Further Shri Oak says, ‘Along with the daughter as per the treaty Bharmalla was
compelled to gift Akbar with hundred elephants, thousand horses, gold , silver, jewels,
etc. It was done only so that Akbar would not kill the three princes. In his book Srivastav
has also recorded that when Akbar’s army was approaching Sambhar the entire village of
Devsa on the way was deserted and fear-ridden. This proves that Akbar’s army had
unleashed terror by looting, plundering and murdering the villagers and raping their
women. This army was certainly not a happy marriage procession with music, etc. A
Muslim called Chagatikhan was nominated by Bharmalla to strike a compromise with
Akbar. If these were talks regarding marriage then would the Rajput king select a Muslim
mediator for such an auspicious cause ?After Bharmalla’s surrender in this manner
Akbar commanded Sharfuddin to attack another Rajput kingdom of Medta. If this were
a marriage then would he attack another Rajput kingdom in the same way ?

By abducting Rajput princesses and taking them to his harem Akbar certainly did not
insist on calling it a wedding. In fact he could not care less whether the darbar recorded it
as a wedding or not.’

Why are details on the marriage of a Hindu girl not available ?

When giving the causes for inability to trace the names of Rajput princesses along with
Jodhabai ,Shri Oak writes, ‘It was impossible to call this abduction a marriage from the
side of Rajputs because no religious ritual was performed. Besides, the sanskar of Vivaha
with the abductors was next to impossible. The kings had no option but to let go of their
daughters akin to one caught in a crocodile’s jaw be it by head or foot. In this way like
hungry crocodiles the Muslim attackers held the kings to ransom . So they had no
alternative but to let go of their women- daughters, sisters, mothers, etc. They had lost
their valour to give up their lives to protect the chastity of these women. The Rajputs did
not realise where down the line they lost their courage, their warrior radiance. They
would give up the woman and then out of shame never utter her name again saying that
now “she was dead for them”. As even uttering the name of a kafir was a sin for the
fickle- minded Muslims, in the Muslim darbar the Hindu girl would be projected as a
Muslim by changing her name. In this way these unfortunate Hindu women’s names were
wiped out from both sides and never remained on record That is why history only has
records of abduction of Hindu princesses from Basvada, Dongarpur, Jaipur, Jodhpur and
other kingdoms to the harems of so-and-so Muslim sultan or emperor. No details about
their names , family, date of abduction, perpetrator, etc. are on record. This alone is
sufficient to testify that this was not a marriage. Yet Muslim protagonist teachers and
professors from the very beginning have quietly fed this falsity down the generations in
such a way that none has dared to oppose this. See how useless our historians who have
studied this history are.

Kalyanmalla was the monarch of Bikaner. His brother Kahan’s daughter had to be gifted
to Akbar and him as a darbar hostage.But he was so obese that he could not even ride a
horse because of which he was permitted to return to Bikaner. Till date historians have
not dared to project to the world how all this was a type of slavery. The abducted
princesses were not only oppressed in the Muslim harems but also to prevent the Rajput
kings from revolting against them their Muslim perpetrators would keep those kings and
their sons in the Muslim capital darbar under strict vigilance.’