- Sita’s Agnipariksha in Ramayan
- Prophet in Hindu Scriptures – Bhavishya Puran (Part 2)
- Prophet in Hindu Scriptures – Vedas (Part 3)
- Prophet in Hindu Scriptures – An analysis (Part 1)
- Polygamy in Hinduism
- ‘Concept of God in Hinduism’
- Introduction to Hinduism (edited with comments)
- FAQ on Hinduism – IITian thrashes Zakir Naik
Let us now critically examine the claim of Prophet in Vedas. You can read the original article at http://www.irf.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=201&Itemid=131
Let me declare at outset that Vedas contain no history or geography whatsoever and contain description of fundamental principles governing life and universe in a variety of manner. There are indeed names of several historical persons in Vedas. But that does not mean that Vedas prophesise those people. It only means that those words were popular and people chose to adopt these names. If we find mention of word “Krishna” in Mahabharat or Vedas, it does not mean, they prophesise about Lal Krishna Advani! By that logic, Bible prophesises about all people born with name George and Islamic texts about people named Muhammad, Ali etc!
I shall not dwell into the concept of Vedas being beyond prophecies, history and geography in this analysis. On contrary, we shall prove that even if we assume Vedas to contain prophecies, that can no way be associated with Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), unless IRF believes that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a mass murderer and protector of cows, as we shall see later. And if indeed they believe so, let them issue a world-wide fatwa to start donating cows, stop eating beef and admitting that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) killed the entire population of Mecca! Just as they would be issuing a fatwa that Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was a ghost/demon incarnate in name of Tripurasur (as per Bhavishya Puran). Going further, they should also then accept the theory of rebirth!
In brief, any attempt to prove Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) in Hindu Scriptures is nothing but an insult to both the great legacy of peaceful Prophet as well as a crooked attempt to malign Hinduism. Only an enemy of both Hinduism and Islam can perpetrate such a crime. So all Hindus and Muslims should unitedly thwart such attempts to malign their religions baselessly.
I shall quote the text published at IRF website as “IRF:” and the analysis of the same as “Analysis:”
The actual meanings of the mantras will be quotes as “Actual:”
1. Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) Prophesised in Atharvaveda
In the 20th book of Atharvaveda Hymn 127 Some Suktas (chapters) are known as Kuntap Sukta. Kuntap means the consumer of misery and troubles. Thus meaning the message of peace and safety and if translated in Arabic means Islam.
1. By this logic, all books of spiritualism and self-help and their content would mean Islam! Because Peace and removal of misery are the primary goals of any spiritual text on self-help book.
2. Considering that Vedas came way before Muhammad founded Islam, this only means that whatever peaceful or good was brought by Muhammad in Islam was actually already a part of Vedic traditions. And that the word Islam was already existing way before Muhammad adapted it to name his cult.
It is welcoming that Muslims are now acknowledging that they owe their peacefulness to Vedas. I hope they would take this journey of seeking truth even further and completely embrace the Vedas to reach their original roots.
Kuntap also means hidden glands in the abdomen. These mantras are called so probably because their true meaning was hidden and was to be revealed in future. Its hidden meaning is also connected with the navel or the middle point of this earth. Makkah is called the Ummul Qur’a the mother of the towns or the naval of the earth. In many revealed books it was the first house of Divine worship where God Almighty gave spiritual nourishment to the world. The Qur’an says in Surah Ali-Imran chapter 3, verse 96:
“The first house (of worship) appointed for men was that at Bakkah (Makkah) full of blessings and of guidance and for all kinds of beings”. Thus Kuntap stands for Makkah or Bakkah.
1. Which dictionary states that Kuntaap means hidden glands in the abdomen?
2. Further, even if it means so, as researched by Dr Naik, how does it link with navel? In abdomen, all other organs are hidden inside – liver, stomach, intestine etc. It is only the navel which is not hidden!
3. The third line of IRF quote obviously refers to Islamic belief of earth being flat, and Muhammad being born in centre of the earth! But as per Vedas and modern science, earth is almost spherical and hence all points on it can be considered middle point.
4. Had Mecca (Makkah) been on Equator, perhaps some credibility could have been attached to IRF claims. But as per modern science, in a non-flat world, Mecca lies at 21-29 N. It is not even on Tropic of Cancer!
(The importance given to Mecca in Islam is because of historical reasons dating prior to advent of Islam. As per some historical researches, there was a Hindu temple in Mecca. The story of Mecca being navel of earth seems to indicate that there was a grand statute of reclining Vishnu there with Brahma coming to from his navel, as indicated by certain researches. This is a popular Hindu image and may have led to story of Mecca being navel of earth, in dark ages. Even Prophet Muhammad had great reverence for the Vedic tradition and hence made worship of Mecca temple an important component of his religion.)
But no way, can Kuntaap be implied to mean Mecca!
5. The logic of IRF is fabulous:
Kuntaapa = abdominal glands = navel = center = center of the earth = Mecca
hence, Kuntaapa = Mecca
Let’s use IRF logic on Islam itself and see where it leads us:
Poison = Death = Rest = Peace = Islam
hence, Poison = Islam
So from IRF evidence itself, there is cold, hard proof that Islam is Poison!
These are ways of the rogue and no sensible person would try to demean religions in such manners as Zakir Naik is doing to insult Islam.
Several people have translated these Kuntap Suktas like M. Bloomfield, Prof. Ralph Griffith, Pandit Rajaram, Pandit Khem Karan, etc.
1. Of the translators mentioned by IRF, two are western indologists who had their own Christian agenda. They can no way be considered relevant for understanding of Vedas.
2. But interestingly, even they talk of nothing even remotely related to Muhammad or Mecca in the alleged verses. The only common point perhaps is the word camel. It seems that IRF team frantically searched for various mantras referring to camel in Vedas, and chose to interpret them, as per their own agenda, as would soon be evident. Readers can review the Griffith translation of these mantras at http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/av/av20127.htm and decide themselves. They can review translations of other scholars mentioned by IRF and check truth themselves. We shall provide excerpts from translation by Pandit Khem Karan as illustration. You can check them at http://www.aryasamajjamnagar.org/atharvaveda_v2/atharvaveda.htm
3. In their pursuit of searching mantras with reference to camel, IRF made another blunder. The Kuntaap Sukta appear at end of Atharvaveda and are not considered to be part of Veda Samhita, but merely an addendum (Khil Bhaag or Appendix) by many scholars. This is the only portion in entire Vedas that have such a difference in opinion among scholars. Had IRF chosen any other Sukta/Hymn in more than 20000 mantras of Vedas, they would have been much safer. Thus Kuntaap which IRF proved to mean “safe” is not that safe to defend their claim of Muhammad in Vedas!
The main points mentioned in the Kuntap Suktas i.e. in Atharvaveda book 20 Hymn 127 verses 1-13 are:
He is Narashansah or the praised one (Muhammad). He is Kaurama: the prince of peace or the emigrant, who is safe, even amongst a host of 60,090 enemies.
He is a camel-riding Rishi, whose chariot touches the heaven.
He is Mamah Rishi who is given a hundred gold coins, ten chaplets (necklaces), three hundred good steeds and ten thousand cows.
Vachyesv rebh. ‘Oh! ye who glorifies’.
Actual Meaning (Pandit Khem Karan): Narashanshah or the praised one shall be praised. O Kauram – one who dwells happily on earth, we shall receive 60090 kinds of gifts from those brave ones who have destroyed violent ones.
Mantra 2, 3
Actual Meaning (Pandit Khem Karan): His chariot has twenty fast-moving camels and she-camels. He donated 100 gold coins, 10 garlands, 300 horses and 10000 cows to deserving people.
Actual Meaning (Pandit Khem Karan): Keep preaching in the manner a bird chirps on a tree laden with fruits till death comes.
So far, nothing seems odd about the meanings given by IRF or other scholars. The only differences is that certain terms have subtly been introduced to set the context for proving Muhammad in these mantras. In modern parlance, this technique is called covert persuasion. Note that so far nothing hints at Muhammad except that there is a mention of camel!
Now let us enjoy the IRF research magic!
The Sanskrit word Narashansah means ‘the praised one’, which is the literal translation of the Arabic word Muhammad (pbuh).
1. The Arabic term b-ismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm which is uttered before every verse of Quran is literal translation of “Dayanand ki Jai”. Does it mean that Quran sings glory of Dayanand? Now Dayanand has been the strongest critic of Quran ever. So does it mean that Quran admits that Dayanand is right?
2. Again this is nothing but Poison = Death = Rest = Peace = Islam, hence Islam = Poison ( we shall keep revisiting this logic wherever IRF uses the same logic)
The Sanskrit word Kaurama means ‘one who spreads and promotes peace’. The holy Prophet was the ‘Prince of Peace’ and he preached equality of human kind and universal brotherhood. Kaurama also means an emigrant. The Prophet migrated from Makkah to Madinah and was thus also an Emigrant.
1. Kaurama means ‘one who dwells peacefully on earth’.
2. The way Prophet migrated from Makkah to Madinah, has been replicated by millions throughout the history. One can hardly name a historically famous person who becomes famous without moving around! Krishna migrated from Vrindawan to Mathura and then to Dwarka. Also Krishna has several meanings which mean ‘promoter of peace’ and ‘praised one’. So this verse equally applies to him as well! TE Lawrence (main character of classic movie ‘Lawrence of Arabia’) became famous because of his travels in deserts of Arab. Are Vedas talking about him?
3. Again the logic is same: Poison = Death = Rest = Peace = Islam
He will be protected from 60,090 enemies, which was the population of Makkah.
From which census did IRF find out this population figure? Or is yet another revelation? Historians estimate this figure to be around 5000 at most.
The Prophet would ride a camel. This clearly indicates that it cannot be an Indian Rishi, since it is forbidden for a Brahman to ride a camel according to the Sacred Books of the East, volume 25, Laws of Manu pg. 472. According to Manu Smirti chapter 11 verse 202, “A Brahman is prohibited from riding a camel or an ass and to bathe naked. He should purify himself by suppressing his breath”.
1. The mantra says allegorically that the chariot of the king will have twenty male and female camels. Even if we take it literally, did Muhammad ever travel on such a camel-chariot? And is Prophet the only camel-rider on earth ever in history?
2. The mantra talks about a king who is a Kshatriya and not a Brahman. So the relevant excerpt from Manu is not applicable in first place.
3. Vedas nowhere prohibit camel-ride for anyone.
4. Manu Smriti has been written much after Vedas. So evidence of Manu Smriti is not applicable in first place. Also the particular shloka from Manu Smriti is considered a later day interpolation by many scholars. In fact half of the Manu Smriti is considered interpolated because it is against the Vedas, which Manu himself declares to be most supreme.
5. But even if we agree to this shloka of Manu Smriti, it is not applicable or relevant in context of given mantras of Atharvaveda. Further the shloka simply states that if a Brahman has to ride on a camel, he can purify himself by doing Pranayam. It does not say that Brahman is banned from riding camel. And the mantra or the entire Sukta has no reference to Brahman whatsoever. It talks about battle and war, which is prerogative of Kshatriya and not Brahman, as per traditional Manu system.
This mantra gave the Rishi’s name as Mamah. No rishi in India or another Prophet had this name Mamah which is derived from Mah which means to esteem highly, or to revere, to exalt, etc. Some Sanskrit books give the Prophet’s name as ‘Mohammad’, but this word according to Sanskrit grammar can also be used in the bad sense. It is incorrect to apply grammar to an Arabic word. Actually shas the same meaning and somewhat similar pronunciation as the word Muhammad (pbuh).
1. The word “Mamahe” is used in the 3rd mantra of 127th sukta of Atharvaveda and not “Mamah”. There is a world of difference as we will see in next point. The derivation as given by IRF is their own independent research not corroborated by any text on grammar.
2. The word ‘Mamahe’ has been used as a verb here, meaning “We give” and NOT a noun.
3. Further the word has been used in plural and not singular. So it can not denote a singular person by wildest stretch of imagination.
4. If the word ‘Mamahe’ has to mean a noun ‘Muhammad’ in this mantra, the mantra becomes meaningless. Because ‘Mamahe’ is the ONLY verb in the entire mantra. And no sentence can have any meaning without presence of even a single verb!
He is given 100 gold coins, which refers to the believers and the earlier companions of the Prophet during his turbulent Makkan life. Later on due to persecution they migrated from Makkah to Abysinia. Later when Prophet migrated to Madinah all of them joined him in Madinah.
1. Suddenly, gold coins have turned into believers with Prophet in his Mecca times!
2. No text of Islam states that his followers were 100 in number initially. Some biographers do hint at 40 followers, but 100 seems to be another new revelation. Refer http://www.religionfacts.com/islam/history/prophet.htm
Thus this is the Prophetic imagination taken too far!
The 10 chaplets or necklaces were the 10 best companions of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) known as Ashra-Mubbashshira (10 bestowed with good news). These were foretold in this world of their salvation in the hereafter i.e. they were given the good news of entering paradise by the Prophet’s own lips and after naming each one he said “in Paradise”. They were Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali, Talha, Zubair, Abdur Rahman Ibn Auf, Saad bin Abi Waqqas, Saad bin Zaid and Abu Ubaidah (May Allah be well-pleased with all of them).
1. What made IRF think that necklace can mean companions? Merely the fact that 10 companions of Prophet are very famous in Islamic folklores? Almost all Prophets of Islam roamed in desert and hence were camel riders.
2. So why can’t this mean Ten Commandments of Moses, by same logic!
The Sanskrit word Go is derived from Gaw which means ‘to go to war’. A cow is also called Go and is a symbol of war as well as peace. The 10,000 cows refer to the 10,000 companions who accompanied the Prophet (pbuh) when he entered Makkah during Fateh Makkah which was a unique victory in the history of mankind in which there was no blood shed. The 10,000 companions were pious and compassionate like cows and were at the same time strong and fierce and are described in the Holy Quran in Surah Fatah:
“Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah; and those who are with him are strong against unbelievers, (but) compassionate amongst each other.”
1. This is yet another research of Dr Naik that ‘Go’ means ‘to go to war’. ‘Go’ indeed means a lot of things in various mantras depending on the context – Cow, Earth, Moving Body etc. But in the current context, where the subject is of donation, the obvious meaning is ‘Cow’.
Donation of Cow has been a longstanding Vedic tradition still practiced and respected. All Vedic legends were preservers and protectors of cow. All noble Vedic kings were known to donate cows. Cow forms the backbone of Vedic civilization and Hinduism.
This is where IRF comes in tight spot. Because contrary to donating cows, his followers till today are known to be the biggest tribe of cow-killers. They take pride in killing cows in Id. Thus, this reference to donating 10000 cows is sufficient enough to prove to the most sceptic mind that if indeed there is Prophet Muhammad or any of his predecessors or successors in Vedas, the first duty of any Muslim should be to prohibit killing of cows.
2. It is even more hilarious to see the comparison of 10000 companions of Muhammad with cow. If they mean cow, then cow cannot mean ‘to go at war’ in this mantra. Because the same word cannot mean two completely different things in same context.
3. If indeed Muslims consider cows to be compassionate and pious, as described in IRF article, what makes them kill these cows in name of Allah? What makes Muhammad a cow-killer as assumed by IRF elsewhere if that be so?
4. In fact in this mantra, to make sense in lines of IRF propaganda, Go has to mean three things – to go at war (a verb), symbol of peace and symbol of war, all at the same time! It has to be a verb and a noun at the same time! Because ‘Mamahe’ the only verb in the mantra has been deliberately interpreted as a noun in this mantra by IRF experts. Thus this would have to be the only sentence of its kind in history of language where a word is a verb and two nouns at same time, and another word which is supposed to be a verb is now a noun.
Sounds confusing, right? But then confusion alone can breed such blinded theories!
This mantra calls the Prophet as Rebh which means one who praises, which when translated into Arabic is Ahmed, which is another name for the Holy Prophet (pbuh).
Again the same logic of
1. Poison = Death = Rest = Peace = Islam
=> Poison = Islam
2. b-ismi-llāhi r-raḥmāni r-raḥīm is another way of saying “Dayanand ki Jai!”
Battle of the Allies described in the Vedas.
It is mentioned in Atharvaveda Book XX Hymn 21 verse 6, “Lord of the truthful! These liberators drink these feats of bravery and the inspiring songs gladdened thee in the field of battle. When thou renders vanquished without fight the ten thousand opponents of the praying one, the adoring one.”
This Prophecy of the Veda describes the well-known battle of Ahzab or the battle of the Allies during the time of Prophet Muhammed. The Prophet was victorious without an actual conflict which is mentioned in the Qur’an in Surah Ahzab:
“When the believers saw the confederate forces they said, “This is what Allah and His Messenger had promised us and Allah and His Messenger told us what was true.” And it only added to their faith and their zeal in obedience.”
The Sanskrit word karo in the Mantra means the ‘praying one’ which when translated into Arabic means ‘Ahmed’, the second name of Prophet Muhammed (pbuh).
The 10,000 opponents mentioned in the Mantra were the enemies of the Prophet and the Muslims were only 3000 in number.
The last words of the Mantra aprati ni bashayah means the defeat was given to the enemies without an actual fight.
Actual Meaning (Pandit Khem Karan): “O Protector of Truthful! You have been pleased by those brave ones who produce bliss, by acts of bravery and noble passion in wars against the enemies. Through smart action oriented zeal, ten thousand enemies have been defeated without resistance.”
1. If indeed it means Battle of Ahzab, why is the number of soldiers in Prophet’s army not given?
2. The phrase Dash Sahsra or its variants are used in several places in Vedas to signify a large number or limitlessness.
3. There is no word as ‘Karo’ in the mantra. The closest sounding word in the mantra is “Karave’ which DOES NOT mean praying one’. It means ‘for the action-oriented’. NO name of Muhammad means ‘action-oriented’. So any connection with Muhammad is categorically ruled out.
4. The mantra refers to spiritual battle where the mind destroys innumerable varieties of negative thoughts through practice and meditation of positive things in life. And hence the victory is bloodless. The sukta can also be interpreted to explain strategies of war. But no way does it, or any mantra in Vedas refers to any kind of history.
IRF team is advised to consult the Vedic experts to understand the hidden treasures and deep essence of Vedic mantras and come back to their original roots, rejecting the falsehood.
The enemies’ defeat in the conquest of Makkah is mentioned in Atharvaveda book 20 Hymn 21 verse no 9:
“You have O Indra, overthrown 20 kings and 60,099 men with an outstripping Chariot wheel who came to fight the praised one or far famed (Muhammad) orphan.”
The population of Makkah at the time of Prophet’s advent was nearly 60,000. There were several clans in Makkah each having its own chief. Totally there were about 20 chiefs to rule the population of Makkah. An Abandhu meaning a helpless man who was far-famed and ‘praised one’. Muhammad (pbuh) overcame his enemies with the help of God.
1. There is no census data to validate that Mecca had a population of 60,000 in Muhammad’s era except IRF research based on their own revealed sources.
2. Literal translation of this mantra means that 60000 plus enemies and their 20 kings were crushed under the chariots. By this logic, there should be 60,000 soldiers in the battlefield. If that be so, it means that entire population of Mecca fought against Muhammad and were killed by him. If that be so, if this mantra be a true Prophecy, Muhammad cannot be a symbol of peace. On contrary, it proves that Muhammad carried out a mass genocide of entire Mecca population because they refused to accept him as their dictator! Then, Islam remains a religion of peace only in Arabic dictionary, and not in reality!
3. In reality, this Balttle of Mecca was as small tribal battle where 900-1000 soldiers and 300 soldiers of Islam have supposed to have fought for a few hours, as per Islamic experts. And not more than 10 leaders are known to have participated from Meccan side. Thus neither the number 20, nor 60000 in mantra has any reference to this tiny battle.
4. This sukta actually details spiritual battle in the mind as is evident from other mantras in the sukta. The same strategies can be extended to external war as well. But it has no inkling of relation with any tribal war.
And if still, it is assumed to have so, it only means Muhammad was a mass-killer. IRF experts can decide what they want to accept.
III. Muhammad (pbuh) prophesised in the Rigveda
A similar prophecy is also found in Rigveda Book I, Hymn 53 verse 9:
The Sanskrit word used is Sushrama, which means praiseworthy or well praised which in Arabic means Muhammad (pbuh).
1. Literally translated, the meaning is similar to previous verse, implying Muhammad carried a mass-genocide of 60000 plus people to rule Mecca
2. Sushravasa means a good listener or a reliable friend in this mantra, nothing to do with Muhammad.
3. Even if its means well praised, it only means that Muhammad was well-praised by his men for carrying carnage of 60000 people of Mecca!
It is in best interest of IRF to not harp on such attempts to discover Muhammad in Vedas which only denigrate him. Their research of Muhammad in Bhavishya Puran has already proved him a demon and a ghost Tripurasur!
IV. Muhummad (pbuh) is also prophesised in the Samveda
Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is also prophesised in the Samveda Book II Hymn 6 verse 8:
“Ahmed acquired from his Lord the knowledge of eternal law. I received light from him just as from the sun.” The Prophecy confirms:
The name of the Prophet as Ahmed since Ahmed is an Arabic name. Many translators misunderstood it to be Ahm at hi and translated the mantra as “I alone have acquired the real wisdom of my father”.
Prophet was given eternal law, i.e. the Shariah.
The Rishi was enlightened by the Shariah of Prophet Muhammad. The Qur’an says in Surah Saba chapter 34 verse 28
“We have not sent thee but as a universal (Messenger) to men, giving them glad tidings and warning them (against sin), but most men understand not.”
This is laughing Jehad at its best. The aim to kill infidels by making them laugh like anything.
1. I tried my best to locate this mantra in the Samaveda but could not. Maybe if they can provide the exact mantra, that would help.
2. ‘Aham At Hi’ is authentic Sanskrit way of expression. And in joining of words, ‘t’ becomes ‘d’. For example, ‘Sat’ + ‘Aachaar’ = “SaDaachaar”. ‘Hi’ means only.
3. If indeed Vedas predicted word ‘Ahmad’ which is Arabic word, does it mean Arabic is older than Vedic Sanskrit?
4. If Vedas could predict upto ‘Ahmad’ and number of his armymen and companion, what prevented Vedas from predicting his actual name “Muhammad”? Why did Allah create so much of confusion? Had he simply put the biography of Muhammad in a few mantras clearly spelling his name, crores of people would have been convinced of Prophet’s coming and would have prevented themselves from going to Hell! Allah must be crazy as per IRF research, then!
1. If indeed Vedas have prophecy on Muhammad, why are they not in one place. In an ocean of 20000 mantras, there are only 7 mantras about Prophet, the most important topic of the Vedas who would change the entire structure of Vedic concept topsy-turvy! These too are distributed randomly and none clearly spelled the name of Muhammad. They only mean Muhammad in same way as Islam means Poison. Was it that Allah was still confused about the name of his last Prophet?
2. If indeed Vedas predict that Muhammad would kill so many people and make 10 his companion, it means that Allah had already decided that these people would be killed by Muhammad and dispatched to Hell. He had pre-decided the fate of these people millenniums before he gave them birth on earth! Does it not make Allah unjust and biased?
3. If indeed Vedas could predict Muhammad and his life, why is IRF and Muslim world shy about embracing Vedas as Books of God? Why he has to write in FAQ on Hinduism that Vedas may or MAY NOT be book of God?
4. And if Vedas can predict Muhammad, and they talk of concepts which clearly contradict Quran, which one should be believed?
After all Quran was written 20 years after Muhammad’s death, there was no oral tradition of memorizing and protecting Quran in Muhammad’s times and his favorite followers were fighting of each others’ lives after Muhammad died! So how can we trust Quran to be authentic?
But Vedas have an oral tradition since its inception and inbuilt mechanism to prevent any interpolation of even a syllable. So they are definitely the most protected books of the world. So should not IRF, Dr Zakir Naik and his followers return to their roots which are so accurate, unchanged and so strong in predicting future?
Further, they predict Muhammad as nothing but mass-murderer, by IRF’s own research in Vedas! Their research in Bhavishya Puran proved him to be a ghost or demon called Tripurasur who is supposed to bring lot of nuisance in the world! (Kindly refer to previous part of this series)
They say that lie has no feet! Hence it gets you trapped!
I appeal to all my lost friends – IRF, Dr Zakir Naik, his friends and his followers – to explore the real praiseworthy, the real Narashansah in the Vedas, the Ishwar and reject false prophecies. Such falsehood can only trap you in your own mistaken notions in same way as this falsehood has trapped you logically without any room for escape.
I appeal to them to stop believing in and spreading myths and return back to their original path – the path of Truth and Reason! And in process shower respect to all that is good in Islam and Hinduism without maligning them.
Only then can peace be on him (pbuh)!
This article is also available in Hindi at http://agniveer.com/2932/muhammad-vedas-hi/