Mani Shankar Aiyar news: People of BJP call me ‘Babur’s child’.


Table of Contents


  • Iyer said, we do not consider Akbar to be non-existent
  • Jahangir was half Rajput. Three parts of Shah Jahan were Hindu.
  • Iyer said – BJP people call me Babar’s son

New Delhi
Senior Congress leader Mani Shankar Aiyar has hit out at the BJP, saying those in power today consider only 80 percent of the population who believe in Hinduism to be real Indians and the rest as non-Indians. He said this on Sunday in a program organized on the birth anniversary of the country’s first Prime Minister Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru. He said this at a time when there is a debate going on over former Congress President Rahul Gandhi’s remarks related to ‘Hindutva’ and the remarks made in the book of former Union Minister Salman Khurshid.

Congress leader Aiyar said, ‘Recently Rahul Gandhi ji said that there is a difference between Hinduism and Hindutva. I would like to add that the difference is that all those who believe in Hinduism are Indians. We consider all the inhabitants of this country to be Indians.

Those in power consider Hindus as real Indians
Targeting the BJP, he said, “There are few people among us, who are in power today, they say that 80 percent of the people who believe in Hinduism, they are the real Indians, the rest are non-Indians, in our country.” They are staying as guests, they will throw them out whenever they want. According to Iyer, Jawaharlal Nehru was well aware of India’s diversity.

He asserted, ‘It has been passed from the time of the Vedas that the Hindu says that it is our duty to seek truth, but truth can be in many forms. There are many paths, there is no one path. India is the only country where there are many paths. India had understood from time immemorial that one who says there is a path can never become a Hindu.

He said, ‘The history of India shows that these different paths can meet. When there is a meeting, they bring together the good aspects of everyone. It can never happen that nothing good is found in the thinking of others.’

People of BJP call Babur ki aulad
Referring to the Mughal period, the former Union minister said, “The people of BJP call me ‘Babur ki Aulad’. I want to tell these people that Babur came to India in 1526 and died four years later. He had written a letter to his eldest son Humayun and told that if you want to run this country, keep the empire safe, then you will not interfere in the religion of the residents here because these people are civilized people, they have an ancient belief, Their philosophy is deep.

Salman Khurshid Book Controversy: Salman Khurshid clarified on the book ruckus, listen what he said

According to him, ‘Humayun’s son Akbar ruled the country for 50 years. The Congress office is on Akbar Road. We don’t mind because we don’t consider Akbar to be non-existent. Akbar was more successful in accepting that instruction of Babur. Jahangir was half Rajput. Three parts of Shah Jahan were Hindu.

Iyer said, ‘Muslim rulers remained on the throne of Delhi for 666 years. Despite this, how many Hindus remained in the country and how many Muslims remained. In 1872 the British conducted the first census, which showed that Muslims constituted 24 per cent and Hindus constituted 72 per cent of the population. But they (BJP people) say that they (Muslim rulers) made everyone Muslim. Had it been so, the figures would have been different.

According to him, India is the only country in the world where Muslims came, but this country did not become an Islamic country. He said, ‘Muslims of India had got an opportunity to go to Pakistan, but they did not go. Now they are told to go to Pakistan. Salman Khan tells Shahrukh Khan, Aamir Khan to go to Pakistan? Why not go to Indonesia and Saudi Arabia? Because these people only do politics of hate.

Salman Khurshid controversial his book for selling more, former IPS Kishore Kunal said more

Singhvi did not comment directly
When asked about Aiyar’s remarks, Congress spokesperson Abhishek Manu Singhvi refused to make any direct comments and only said that history has had all kinds of people.

Singhvi told reporters, “I have not listened to him. I do not know his word and purpose. I am not commenting on that. I am answering your general question. Can there be any two opinions in this that any person who has been in history, has been condemnable or has been commendable, he is not associated with the history and civilization of India? There have been people of different standards in history. No country has progressed by denying its culture and history and writing it in a new way.


Source link


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here