From thence he went to Mathra (Mathura) which is a place of worship of the infidels and the birthplace of Kishan, the son of Basudev, whom the Hindus… - `Abd al-Qadir Bada'uni

In this year also Sulaiman Kirrani, ruler of Bengal, who gave himself the tide of Hazrati A'la, and had conquered die city of Katak-u-Banaras, that mine of heathenism, and having made the stronghold of Jagannath into the home of Islam, held sway from Kamru to Orissa, attained the mercy of God…

“…The temple of Nagarkot, which is outside the city, was taken at the very outset… On this occasion many mountaineers became food for the flashing sword. And that golden umbrella, which was erected on the top of the cupola of the temple, they riddled with arrows… And black cows, to the number of 200, to which they pay boundless respect, and actually worship, and present to the temple, which they look upon as an asylum, and let loose there, were killed by the Musulmans. And, while arrows and bullets were continually falling like drops of rain, through their zeal and excessive hatred of idolatry they filled their shoes full of blood and threw it on the doors and walls of the temple… the army of Husain Quli Khan was suffering great hardships. For these reasons he concluded a treaty with them… and having put all things straight he built the cupola of a lofty mosque over the gateway of Rajah Jai Chand.”186

Badayuni alone remains. In order to understand his criticism it is necessary to understand him first. He was an ultra-conservative in religious matters for whom the beaten path was the only path to salvation. All non-Muslims were condemned to eternal hell according to him. He could not mention a Hindu name without boiling over with pious wrath. Shi’as were equally creatures for contempt. If Birbar is called *a bastard’, Shi’as were dubbed ‘heretics, fools, worshippers of the devil, fit only to be cast out’. He could not tolerate even a scholar of Muhammad Ghaus’s reputation if he happened to show common courtesy to Hindus. He would not go to pay his respects to Muhammad Ghaus when he discovered that he used to show respect to certain Hindus by rising to salute them. When Abu’l FaizI becomes a Shi’a, he is at a loss how to describe the change, and says alternately that he became a religious recluse and a Hindu, Islam to him seemed to centre not even in the observances of its outward ceremonials alone but in the display of militant hostility towards the non-Muslims. He was prepared heartily to condemn any one found negligent in these outward things.