Look, I will give you some example
Bollywood Actress Jinat Aman is a Tamang from Sindhipalchowk district of Nepal, When she was 13 a human traficker took her to Bombay to sell her.She some how managed to runway from that trafficker and took refuge in a house of Nepali driver who happen to be the Driver of Dev Anand. One day dev Anand saw her and he was so impressed with her beauty that he decided to make her an actress in one of his movie. He made Hary Ram, Hary krishna, it was filmed in Nepal because Jinat Amant missed her country.So, in oreder to make by happy Dev Anand had to film the film in Kathmandu.
You want proof? let me gove you some
1. Name itself
जिनत अमान=जिना तामांग
loook at her photo
She looks like a Tamang girl, look at her ear ring, Tamang gals wear that type of ear ring. Name Jinat Aman sounds Muslim but she has tika, that is because her real name is Jina Tamang, and Tamangs put tika. Name Jinat Aman was given to her for Bollywood only. Actually they were proposing different name but the she liked the name Jinat Aman because it was very close to her real name.
You know what reality is
Second
There was a guy named Sir Henry Tendon, Duke of London in UK in around 1925s. He visited Nepal as a special envoy of the king to discuss about the dangerous situation in Europe and how Nepal can help England in case war broke.
Sir Henry Tendon, Duke of London was a Nepali guy you don’t beehive me? Let me give you some proof
His actual name was
सरन हरि टन्डन डकुलनठन = Sir Henry Tendon Duke of London
you still don’t believe me?
In Kaushi Toshkhana (Ministry of Finance at the time of Rana rule) records shows that Rana govt spent rs 4000 at that time for him
what happened was, Sir Henry Tendon, Duke of London visited Nepal, to discuss political situation in Europe and seeking military help from Nepal in case war broke. Govt spend 4000 rs. While keeping the record, To the kharidar who used to keep the record the name Sir Henry Tendon Duke of London was very unfriendly to his ear, that sounded
more like सरन हरि टन्डन डकुलनठन, so he wrote that name instead of Sir henry Tendon, Duke of London.
Third,
Hitler was a Nepali guy, his real name was Hit Lal, see how similar is the name.
During First World War Hit Lal used to be a post man in army (who was chosen as post man because he was from mountainous Nepal who can walk uphill, downhill many times a day. At that time there was shortage of vehicles (most vehicles were used to carry soldiers) so he was chosen to carry letters for soldiers
Germans were punished after First World War, Hit Lal developed sympathy towards Germany. There was a leadership vacuum in GERMANY and you know Nepalese are always eager to become Leader. He became Leader of one of the party, won election.
He was an Aryan from Nepal so just before Second World War he tried to convince Nepal to be an ally with Germany during Second World War, send a Mercedes Benz Car as a present to then prime minister Judah Smasher. He tried many things. Being a "khas" Nepali He was convince that “Khas” are the real Aryan people so he had a plan for Nepal, He also believed that European Aryan is not a pure race, they were already mixed with different races. So his plan was forcing Nepali khas gals to marry with German Aryans so that a pure Aryan breed will be developed.
You see, how similarities can there be in name and how different can be the reality?
Fourth
Britain’s ex Prime minter Margret Thatcher is Nepali women, you know why?
She was an orphan in some village in Nepal and adopted By British White family. At the time of adoption The British women asked her mother about the name of the gal. Nepali mother understood differently and told अब यो छोरी तिमि
लै दिए हाले, मार, रेट, थचार यो छोरी तिम्रै हो.
When British family returned to England, they forgot what was kids name, but the mother remembered words मार,
रेट, थचार . She told to authorities oh, her name is Margaret Thatcher
Saying Mahamed of bhabisya Puran and Muhamad of Koran is same person is also similar thing. Those names are from different language which bears different meaning.
Regarding the stories in Hindu Books, you guys developed completely wrong concept. Hindu Books are the story (History) of the past. So that the new generation will learn from the mistakes of the past. (Same is true with Bible, Koran and Torah).
Vyas wrote Jaya which was of about 8000 verses, It was considered in depth history book of that time, People liked it. In the mean time they said Vyas missed many things in this book. On popular demand Vyas added many things to it. Then it became “Bijaya” ( about 16000 verses. Adding of history of later era continued and the book swelled into 24000 verses and the book become “Mahabharata”.
Actually Vyas was not happy adding of verses in “Jaya” which converted it into “Mahabharata”. He has mentioned this somewhere. So to include smaller events, history of less important kings, and to explain complicated things in Mahabharata Vyas wrote “Purana” . He was annoyed by peoples demand to keep on adding things into his original writings. To avoid this, he intelligently devised a solution to it. The solution is called “Bhabisya Puran”. That means in future people can keep on adding things on it. That means all his original writing will be left alone and in future people can continue writing history by adding the events of their time. Bhabisya PURAN does not says the things that will happen in future instead it was created so that people do not forget to write the history of their time and all of his original work will remain intact.
When people misunderstand things, then Jinat Aman becomes जिना तामांग , Margaret Thatcher becomes मार, रेट, थचार ,
Sir henry Tendon, Duke of London becomes सरन हरि टन्डन डकुलनठन, Hitlar becomes Hitlal.
So some people finding Muhammad in bhabisya puran is completely hilarious.
Religious Books are History books, where you can find how society was at that time, what the problem was and how they solve it. Nothing more. There are both good as well as bad things.
Later some cunning people found that these books can be used as a means to rule over other, they developed it into religion. For their personal benefit. Govt used this as a means to control unruly population. Dictators used it, terrorists used it.
So Mr. Servent, lesson of those History book are always used by clever people to control psychologically weak people like you. There is no logic.
Using those books people have enjoyed life in Christianity, in Islam, in Hinduism in Buddhism and in Judaism, actually in every religion. They are monsters of present time. They are the trouble makers. So which side you are on? Trouble maker’s side or problem solvers side?
Last edited: 25-Aug-12 01:36 PM
