Muhammad Prophesised in Hindu Scriptures

Tuesday, November 21, 2006 MUHAMMAD PROPHESIED IN HINDU SCRIPTURES? One can see blogs with the claims that muhhamad was prophesied in hinduism, christianity, buddhism etc. One such attempt is to prove that muhammad was prophesied in Bhavishya Purana. Some of the facts of this hindu scripture are given below. "The third Parvan viz., the Pratisarya of the Bhavisya Purana, contains historical material. It begins with the ascension on Manu to the throne and ends with the mention of the arrival of the British in India and the rule of "Queen Victavati" (Victoria). The historical material discussed in this part of the Purana is vague and haphazard. [...deleted...] Names of some Rajput kings have similarly been added in a most casual way. The chapters dealing with the fabricated myths of the births of Sankaracharya, Madhava, Jayadeva, Kabir, Nanak, Narsi and the references to Timur, Babur, Humayun, Shershah, Akbar, Salem, Aurangzeb, Shivaji, Mahadevaji Sindhia clearly prove that these chapters were incorporated in the Purana from time to time. The reference to English words like "Sunday," "February," and "Sixty" in the Bhavishya Purana, and to the coming of the British, their factories in Calcutta, and to Queen Victoria also show beyond doubt that these chapters or verses belong to the 19th century." (Raj K. Arora, Historical and Cultural Data from Bhavishya Purana", Sterling Publishers, Delhi, 1972, p. 18-19) "However, as will be clear from a perusal of the present thesis, it appears well nigh certain that the Purana received its characteristic form and underwent a drastic revision in the first half of 1000 A.D." (Raj K. Arora, ibid, p. 21) "The Bhavisya Purana in its extant form is a syncretic text. .... The result has been that the historical section of this work bristles with inconsistent assemblage of fiction and legend which makes the reader, at times sceptic to the veracity and authenticity of the whole text. The trustworthy account concerning the ancient period is scanty, references to episodes of medieval history are quite sketchy and no better than fairy tales; the allusions to the British period are equally jejune." (Raj K. Arora, ibid, p. vii) So, we can see that late dated documents are being used to show that Muhammad was "prophesied" by name, documents that contained historical material but unfortunately are useless as prophecies. Moreover, one realizes that to the Hindus, the Bhagavad Gita is one of the most important and popular scriptures, but where is the reference to Muhammad there? 9:48:40 PM Posted By Infidel M Comments (5) Musings Comments ddd555 Wednesday, November 22, 2006 12:34:27 AM Dear Friend,So how many times has your religious book changed?Well what do you have to say about Holy Quran?GOD Has sent the Holy Quran in Arabic to his messenger (pbuh) and challenged the whole world to find a single dot missing or any change / edition / deletion in the billions of copies of the Holy Quran around the world from the past 1400 years till the end of life on earth.I ask the entire humans who is protecting the holy quran?What about other religious books? infidel Wednesday, November 22, 2006 1:15:26 AM Did I mention Koran in the above blog even once?Did I say that Hindu scraptures never changed?Did you read the blog fully and inderstood what it meant?No.And you started the old crap about koran....Bhavishya Purana was edited till 19th century so will anybody be surprised that it says something about muhammad (Or even Queen Victoria, LOL).This blog is to show that Bhavishya Purana is not an authentic scripture as far as prophesies are concerned.Why didn't you answer about muhammad's prophacy in "Geeta". Lalu Leela Wednesday, November 22, 2006 1:57:44 AM THE REASON KORAN WAS NOT EDITED FOR SO LONG IS OBVIOUS, MOST OF THE MUSLIMS ARE ILLITERATE!!!! ruzan_shah Wednesday, November 22, 2006 5:33:00 AM Mr InfidelYou are doing the same that you accused ddd555 of arguing without understaning things right.Ok for your kind information Mohammed is revealed in vedas more that once but the most clear mention of Mohammed is Agni Rahasya in rigveda and also kalki puranaNow plz dont say that vedas are not authentic scriptures.I can give you all the vedic referances of Mohammed with sloka & mantra nos if you want.By the way what historical proof or authenticity do you have about divinity of Gita ?I would be honoured if you enlighten me with some logical proof of authenticity of Gita.Thanks. K.Venugopal Wednesday, November 22, 2006 9:16:16 AM Dear ddd555, No work of literature once in public domain ever changes just as a word once said cannot be recalled. Wherever there is a change in a work of literature, understand that change to be of conscious editing or interpolation. So in effect such changes should be called the second edition of the original etc. The Quran is only 1600 years old. The Geeta is a much earlier literature than the Quran. Has anyone said that the Geeta has had a new edition or interpolation at least for the last 1600 years? So what's the big deal about the Quran not having a second edition? If Allah is protecting the Quran, who is protecting the Geeta?