#UninstallHotstar: Indian Netizens slam streaming platform's show The Empire for glorifying Mughals

[Ahmad-GERMANFC]

So Bin Qasim , Babur are not sons of Soil..

Yes Babur isn’t. But Aurangzeb most certainly is

As someone whose ancestors are from Delhi, aurangzeb is definitely more son of soil to me than Marathas who were thousands of miles away and had nothing to do with the region. For eg My ancestors didn’t see what totxay is south india as part of ‘our country’. It’s a British construct to lump them all together

 

[JaDed]

Yes Babur isn’t. But Aurangzeb most certainly is

As someone whose ancestors are from Delhi, aurangzeb is definitely more son of soil to me than Marathas who were thousands of miles away and had nothing to do with the region. For eg My ancestors didn’t see what totxay is south india as part of ‘our country’. It’s a British construct to lump them all together

I already said I agree with Mughals (from Akbar) being Indian have no issue them being part of my history-
keyword: History.

India and Pakistan can never become a republic if we keep taking pride in kings and queens, hate the “Praja” mentality.

 

[Napa]

How did he destroy it Hardly his fault his successors were inept

And in terms of wars and death thats a by product of being a succesfull ruler throughout the ages
You cant have one without the other

Form all accounts aurangzaib was brave, intelligent and beliigerent

Belligerent yes, but intelligence is the last word I would associate with Auranzeb. Akbar realized for the Empire to remain strong he had to work with the Hindus and was consequently successful. Auranzeb didn't have that understanding.

The fact is that 12 years after his death the Maratha Army was in Delhi deciding who will be the next Mughal Emperor.

You may blame his successors rather Auranzeb, but the many rebellions during his time fatally wounded the Empire, and the Marathas destroyed its military power.

The historian Stanley Wolpert wrote "the conquest of the Deccan, to which Aurangzeb devoted the last 26 years of his life, was in many ways a Pyrrhic victory, costing an estimated hundred thousand lives a year during its last decade of futile chess game warfare. The expense in gold and rupees can hardly be accurately estimated. Aurangzeb's encampment was like a moving capital – a city of tents 30 miles in circumference, with some 250 bazaars, with a 1⁄2 million camp followers, 50,000 camels and 30,000 elephants, all of whom had to be fed, stripped the Deccan of any and all of its surplus grain and wealth ... Not only famine but bubonic plague arose ... Even Aurangzeb, had ceased to understand the purpose of it all by the time he was nearing 90 ... "I came alone and I go as a stranger. I do not know who I am, nor what I have been doing," the dying old man confessed to his son, Azam, in February 1707."

 

[JaDed]

If its personal history then only rulers of Punjab that are non Muslim would be my ancestors?

Which would only mean Ranjit singh lol

This is why I’m all for Pan Indian history because I am an Indian citizen , I don’t want to take pride in Ashoka or Akbar they were rulers yeah fine nothing to do with me as such, Jayalalitha made more difference to me than Ashoka or Akbar did.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

So Bin Qasim , Babur are not sons of Soil..

I will answer once you let me know your thoughts on Aurungzeb.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Sorry [MENTION=137142]JaDed[/MENTION] I just read your reply to Ahmed. You accept Aurungzeb as not being an outsider.

My answer to Bin Qasim is that its perfectly fine to call him an outsider. Its obvious he was.

 

[Smbhayi]

Tipu sultan is a villain to a billion non muslims. India is not a islamic country that muslim bigots will be honoured here. Pakistanis can keep hero worshipping tipu sultan. In India he will be treated with utter contempt and there is nothing anyone can do about it.

Congress learnt the hard way, how celebrating tipu can cause loss of power.

You can always not read news about India.

This is what I can't understand? Why Tipu is villain but other kings are hero/freedom fighters..?

 

[Zaz]

How can anyone born and brought up in a area be an outsider?

Barring babar all the mughal kings were sons of the soil and not outsiders

 

[Ahmad-GERMANFC]

How can anyone born and brought up in a area be an outsider?

Barring babar all the mughal kings were sons of the soil and not outsiders

Most of them had majority subcontinent blood too (don’t wanna say Indian blood cuz there wasn’t ‘India’ at the the per se)

 

[Zaz]

Most of them had majority subcontinent blood too (don’t wanna say Indian blood cuz there wasn’t ‘India’ at the the per se)

Yes Born to local women By any definition they were indigenous

 

[cricketjoshila]

Wasn't Auranzeb born in India like his father , grandfather and great grandfather?
So how is he an outside invader?

He is foreigner from central Asia. Spoke a foreign language, followed a foreign culture or religion. Tried his best to enforce his foreign culture and religion on the natives and tried to finish off the native culture.

 

[cricketjoshila]

How can anyone born and brought up in a area be an outsider?

Barring babar all the mughal kings were sons of the soil and not outsiders

Being born in an area means nothing.

Even today, being born inside India doesn't give anyone Indian citizenship.

 

[cricketjoshila]

This is what I can't understand? Why Tipu is villain but other kings are hero/freedom fighters..?

Because of his treatment of non muslims. He was a tyrannical bigot.

 

[Zaz]

He is foreigner from central Asia. Spoke a foreign language, followed a foreign culture or religion. Tried his best to enforce his foreign culture and religion on the natives and tried to finish off the native culture.

Repeating a lie several times doesnt make it the truth

He wasnt from central asia, his father was born in the suncontinent to local women and so was his grandad and so was his great grandad

He followed a religion which had been in the region for a thousand years and many rulers before him followed

And neither did he try to finish off any hindus If he did there wouldnt be any around today

He was a son of the soil and the undisputed ruler of the kingdom

Your starting to sound diabolical now with these untruths If you cant make any serious and truthful points i suggest you stop posting

 

[KingKhanWC]

A) Mughals were not Indians. Babur, who was the decendent of Taimur and Gengis Khan, came to India from Central Asia.

B) Plenty of bollywood movies being made on Mughals including the superhit Mughal E Azam.

C) YesTaj Mahal is a landmark but India is known for many other things. Since India along with Brazil are the 2 biggest emerging markets in the world, its known for a country with immense growth potential. India is also known for producing IT wizards, ISRO space missions and its delicious cuisines. India is also known for spectacular himalayan peaks, Kerala backwaters or worlds largest statue. India is also known for giving Yoga around the world. India is also known for inventing '0'.

D) Trust me, Indians are much more aware of the history now and no one is interested in remembering bigoted empires of the past. There is a reason this web series has Web rating of 2.7/10 and finding tough to gain enough sponsor.

India since 2014 has moved on...not sure how many times I have to reiterate the same point again and again. No amount of agenda will work anymore.

A - According to evolution we all came from Africa. Babur wasnt the last Mughal, so its a poor argument. After him they were born in India, therefore they are Indian. Or only Hindus can be Indian in your mind. If you're born in Britain, you're British. How many years must ones family have to live in India for them to be Indian? This is a hillarious post.

B - I think Bollywood is trash, dont watch it. But no issue for the movies, so Hindus must enjoy them.

C- India is also known for computer geeks but my point was the most recognised land mark(world wide) is the Taj, nobody can dispute this.

D -Mughals made India the richest nation on Earth. Now we have BJP RSS Hindu fundos who ruling over a 3rd world nation, one of the poorest per person, with more poverty than much of Africa.

India cannot move on from history, esp from people who ruled the land. Close your eyes but the history books will remain them same.

My advise is for the RSS to show the world , how their extreme form of Hinduism will make India the richest nation on Earth, a shuppapower. How long will this take?

 

[cric_man]

He is foreigner from central Asia. Spoke a foreign language, followed a foreign culture or religion. Tried his best to enforce his foreign culture and religion on the natives and tried to finish off the native culture.

Yeah 4 generation born and bred in the sub continent with no physical connection to Central Asia but still outsiders because Joshila said so.

Embarrassing pretzel logic based on your hatred for Muslims.

 

[Itachi]

Hindus should be happy that they had a son of the soil like king aurangzaib He united all the princely states and the kindom flouished under him

Not many people could do what he did so succesfully Hats off to him Hes gone down in history as the most successful indian mughal

Why would one be happy if his state was attacked by aurangzab (aurangzab lost though)?

 

[cricketjoshila]

Why would one be happy if his state was attacked by aurangzab (aurangzab lost though)?

The great Lachit Borphukan

 

[Itachi]

The great Lachit Borphukan

Exactly. I am not understanding why some people want us to take pride in aurangzab. It seemed like they don't even read a little bit of detail before sprouting weird logics in PP.

 

[pillionrider]

He is foreigner from central Asia. Spoke a foreign language, followed a foreign culture or religion. Tried his best to enforce his foreign culture and religion on the natives and tried to finish off the native culture.

When has the Indian government said any Mughal king was not Indian?

Do you think that all Indians living here today have ancestors who sprouted from the soil? Everyone came here from somewhere, some time. And are now Indians.

Who is an Indian according to you? If you don't like the Mughals and don't accept anything good about their rule, that's fine. But now you're being absurd.

 

[pillionrider]

Being born in an area means nothing.

Even today, being born inside India doesn't give anyone Indian citizenship.

The law disagrees with you.

People living in the territory of India as on 26 November 1949 automatically became Indian citizens through operation of the relevant provisions of the Indian Constitution coming into force, and most of these constitutional provisions came into force on 26 January 1950. The Constitution of India also made provision regarding citizenship for migrants from the territories of Pakistan which had been part of India before partition.

 

[cricketjoshila]

When has the Indian government said any Mughal king was not Indian?

Do you think that all Indians living here today have ancestors who sprouted from the soil? Everyone came here from somewhere, some time. And are now Indians.

Who is an Indian according to you? If you don't like the Mughals and don't accept anything good about their rule, that's fine. But now you're being absurd.

The government has repeatedly said that these people are foreign invaders.

Muslim invaders are certainly foreigners. They made sure they remain alienated from the native culture and followed their own foreign culture and in fact tried to force it on the natives.

Let me give you an example,

Muslim invaders conquered Spain, ruled it for 700 years. But when they lost power, the natives removed the entire religion and culture of the foreigners. Many Muslims were left or converted to Christianity.

Spanish refused to submit to foreigners even after 700 years or adopt their culture.

 

[MenInG]

This nonsense style of argument "its not your problem" will need to stop in this thread or more deletions will follow.

Posters on PP are representing themselves ONLY - dont make generic remarks on behalf of others.

 

[cricketjoshila]

The law disagrees with you.

A person born in India on or after 1 July 1987 but before 3 December 2004 is a citizen of India if one of the parents was a citizen of India at the time of the birth.[6] Those born in India on or after 3 December 2004 are considered citizens of India only if both of their parents are citizens of India or if one parent is a citizen of India and the other is not an illegal migrant at the time of their birth. In September 2013, the Bombay High Court gave a judgement that a birth certificate, passport or even an Aadhaar card alone may not be enough to prove Indian citizenship, unless the parents are Indian citizens.

Read the full law.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Yeah 4 generation born and bred in the sub continent with no physical connection to Central Asia but still outsiders because Joshila said so.

Embarrassing pretzel logic based on your hatred for Muslims.

I don't say so, the Indian government has said it many times. And foreigners cannot change what opinion Indians and the government holds.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Mughals or muslim invaders were colonizers like Europeans colonized Africa.

Thats the view held by the govt of India currently. They has been a significant effort to stop the glorification of the colonials around the world. BLM in America is an example. There a minority black community is fighting glorification of white people who have been considered heroes of USA for centuries. Even the founding fathers are not spared.

Similarly in India, the majority community is fighting the glorification of these invaders, who have been white washed by leftists and a section of muslim academia.

 

[pillionrider]

The government has repeatedly said that these people are foreign invaders.

By the government do you mean politicians making statements? When has the Indian government officially said that Mughals are not Indians?

I really don't know. I'm asking. It would be really surprising to me if they have.

 

[pillionrider]

A person born in India on or after 1 July 1987 but before 3 December 2004 is a citizen of India if one of the parents was a citizen of India at the time of the birth.[6] Those born in India on or after 3 December 2004 are considered citizens of India only if both of their parents are citizens of India or if one parent is a citizen of India and the other is not an illegal migrant at the time of their birth. In September 2013, the Bombay High Court gave a judgement that a birth certificate, passport or even an Aadhaar card alone may not be enough to prove Indian citizenship, unless the parents are Indian citizens.

Read the full law.

But we are not talking about Mughals born after 1987. Even any surviving descendants of theirs would be Indian based on this part of the law.

People living in the territory of India as on 26 November 1949 automatically became Indian citizens through operation of the relevant provisions of the Indian Constitution coming into force, and most of these constitutional provisions came into force on 26 January 1950.

Applying this retrospectively and as far as I'm concerned, this means that anyone who was living in India was an Indian starting with the first Mughal king who set up base in India. Ghori and Ghazni were invaders. Not the Mughals.

 

[cricketjoshila]

By the government do you mean politicians making statements? When has the Indian government officially said that Mughals are not Indians?

I really don't know. I'm asking. It would be really surprising to me if they have.

Govt is run by politicians. No?

 

[cricketjoshila]

But we are not talking about Mughals born after 1987. Even any surviving descendants of theirs would be Indian based on this part of the law.



Applying this retrospectively and as far as I'm concerned, this means that anyone who was living in India was an Indian starting with the first Mughal king who set up base in India. Ghori and Ghazni were invaders. Not the Mughals.

September 2013, the Bombay High Court gave a judgement that a birth certificate, passport or even an Aadhaar card alone may not be enough to prove Indian citizenship, unless the parents are Indian citizens.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

The government has repeatedly said that these people are foreign invaders.

Muslim invaders are certainly foreigners. They made sure they remain alienated from the native culture and followed their own foreign culture and in fact tried to force it on the natives.

Let me give you an example,

Muslim invaders conquered Spain, ruled it for 700 years. But when they lost power, the natives removed the entire religion and culture of the foreigners. Many Muslims were left or converted to Christianity.

Spanish refused to submit to foreigners even after 700 years or adopt their culture.

Previously you have said that there is a distinction between muslim invaders and muslim converts and that Islam has been in India for longer than the 'invaders'.

Now if Islam was part of India already ( which you claim you believe), what was so foreign about the cultures that the Muslim rulers were following? There is a contradiction in your statements and I would be interestint in you making clear what you really think about Islam in India.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Why would one be happy if his state was attacked by aurangzab (aurangzab lost though)?

What state are you from?

 

[Itachi]

What state are you from?

Assam (current state). Back then, it also included most part of North east.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Assam (current state). Back then, it also included most part of North east.

The Ahom Empire

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Assam (current state). Back then, it also included most part of North east.

Interesting. Now forgive my naivety about your region but I have some questions, (these are genuine questions not trolling).

Wasnt the major empires of Assam established by Burmese/Chinese "invaders"? Why are these people viewed differently than Babar for example when they came for similar reasons?

At the time when your state was resisting Aurgunzeb do you think they would have willingly submitted to a hypothetical central govt based in new delhi based on the principle of common religion and national boundaries?

 

[Itachi]

Interesting. Now forgive my naivety about your region but I have some questions, (these are genuine questions not trolling).

Wasnt the major empires of Assam established by Burmese/Chinese "invaders"? Why are these people viewed differently than Babar for example when they came for similar reasons?

Nope. The ahom empire (established in 1228)roots goes back to Thailand. While coming to Assam, they took the local culture of Assam, and married Assamese girls. They spread the local culture and blended like the indigenous ones. Hence, when it talk about our tradition, there is a linear line instead of having abrupts even though there was an empire who came in 1228 and ruled for 600 years. They even took Hinduism as their religion.

 

[Itachi]

At the time when your state was resisting Aurgunzeb do you think they would have willingly submitted to a hypothetical central govt based in new delhi based on the principle of common religion and national boundaries?

Religion never played any part in north east.

Culture plays greater role (the division is hence based upon culture rather than religion).

Central India never had same culture as remote parts so its not a possibility in the first place.

 

[Zaz]

I don't say so, the Indian government has said it many times. And foreigners cannot change what opinion Indians and the government holds.

The indian govt is here today and gone tomorrow Laws change with govt just because the bjp is racist doesnt mean that is the intnl status quo or it will forever remain as they say

The fact of the matter is, its universally (in most sane and civilised countries) accepted that someone whos parents grandparents and great grandparents are born in a region, and the fact they are married into the local populace over generations they are nationals and citizens of that region More so when you are the undisputed ruler and king like aurangzeb

The bjp and you can try but cant change or expunge history or the truth

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Nope. The ahom empire (established in 1228)roots goes back to Thailand. While coming to Assam, they took the local culture of Assam, and married Assamese girls. They spread the local culture and blended like the indigenous ones. Hence, when it talk about our tradition, there is a linear line instead of having abrupts even though there was an empire who came in 1228 and ruled for 600 years. They even took Hinduism as their religion.

So does Assam culture today still reflect Assam culture of 1228?

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I don't say so, the Indian government has said it many times. And foreigners cannot change what opinion Indians and the government holds.

Nonsense. Foreigners can't change your govts views, but they can always change your peoples views through soft power. You will see it happening over last 50 years as Indians take on western culture and even talk to each other in English more and more. Eventually this will reflect in your govt as well, as liberal ideas you hold so abhorrent will work their way through the people psyche.

 

[Itachi]

So does Assam culture today still reflect Assam culture of 1228?

Yes. The same traditions are still going on.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Nope. Aurangzab will always be seen as an invader to us who lost against us.

Thank you for your other posts btw. It was good to learn more about your history and your feelings regarding its past. To an outsider it seems very similar to the situation with Babar. You guys were colonised and accepted it....Whereas those that accepted Islam are generally seen in a bad light. However, if you see it differently then that is your right but to me its somewhat similar.

I also find it strange that given the disparate cultural and religious nature of the time that someone like Joshilla is comfortable saying - "The great Lachit Borphukan". When he is a Bengali and I suspect his forefathers may have been viewed just as much as outsiders to someone from the Ahom empire as the Mughuls were and Aurungzeb as a bad guy.

Only viewing it in a post 1947 lens or Hindu nationalist lens could you claim Lachit as being "Indian" and Aurungzeb as not. Perhaps I am wrong but some indigenous Assamese may even resent this type of thinking as there are small independence movements in the state ( again I don;t know much about it so forgive the generalisation)

I suspect that when your state defeated the Mughals they had Muslims in their army and when the Mughals attacked they may have had non-muslims, primarily Rajputs as part of their forces. Were only the Mughals invaders and outsiders in this case but the Rajputs sons of the soil?

History is dynamic - unfortunately nationalism coupled with religion reduces it to black and white which for a colourful region such as the subcontinent is

 

[Itachi]

Thank you for your other posts btw. It was good to learn more about your history and your feelings regarding its past. To an outsider it seems very similar to the situation with Babar. You guys were colonised and accepted it....Whereas those that accepted Islam are generally seen in a bad light. However, if you see it differently then that is your right but to me its somewhat similar.

I also find it strange that given the disparate cultural and religious nature of the time that someone like Joshilla is comfortable saying - "The great Lachit Borphukan". When he is a Bengali and I suspect his forefathers may have been viewed just as much as outsiders to someone from the Ahom empire as the Mughuls were and Aurungzeb as a bad guy.

Only viewing it in a post 1947 lens or Hindu nationalist lens could you claim Lachit as being "Indian" and Aurungzeb as not. Perhaps I am wrong but some indigenous Assamese may even resent this type of thinking as there are small independence movements in the state ( again I don;t know much about it so forgive the generalisation)

I suspect that when your state defeated the Mughals they had Muslims in their army and when the Mughals attacked they may have had non-muslims, primarily Rajputs as part of their forces. Were only the Mughals invaders and outsiders in this case but the Rajputs sons of the soil?

History is dynamic - unfortunately nationalism coupled with religion reduces it to black and white which for a colourful region such as the subcontinent is

1. It had nothing to do with religion. The basis was, accepting the already existing culture. Mughals didn't accept the culture but ahoms did.

2. The movement of independence died decade ago.

3. Muslims in assam fought along side with ahom against mughals. Ismail siddiqui a.k.a bagh hazarika was one of the top commanders of the ahom military wing.

4. Those who studied history especially Indian history, will always take Lachit Borphukan as one of the heros. Doesn't matter he or she is Bengali or Assamese or some others. It was his art of winning battles and wars which have given him that respect.

5. Rajputs were not invaders. Those rajputs who took orders from mughals and invaded Assam were invaders.

6. Assam and surrounding states enjoyed a peaceful neighborhood for centuries. I don't know why you expect neighbors to be hostile with each other.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Yes. The same traditions are still going on.

I'm sure they are, but your answer is slightly different to what I was asking. We still have some traditions going on in Britain which are the same as eight centuries ago, but the culture is vastly different as a whole. Just as I am guessing culture in Assam is vastly different in the modern era to the period that you were talking about.

 

[Itachi]

I'm sure they are, but your answer is slightly different to what I was asking. We still have some traditions going on in Britain which are the same as eight centuries ago, but the culture is vastly different as a whole. Just as I am guessing culture in Assam is vastly different in the modern era to the period that you were talking about.

Give the criterion that you want to compare. I'll reply.

 

[cricketjoshila]

The indian govt is here today and gone tomorrow Laws change with govt just because the bjp is racist doesnt mean that is the intnl status quo or it will forever remain as they say

The fact of the matter is, its universally (in most sane and civilised countries) accepted that someone whos parents grandparents and great grandparents are born in a region, and the fact they are married into the local populace over generations they are nationals and citizens of that region More so when you are the undisputed ruler and king like aurangzeb

The bjp and you can try but cant change or expunge history or the truth

The government says so because the popular opinion that elected them says so. No one in India is going to go against that opinion unless they want to be out of power.

The fact of the matter is you are a foreigner and you are not going to decide who is indian who is not. The government has said many times that these invaders are foreigners and thats the opinion of the people as well.

These invaders will be treated with contempt and they will find no place of glory in India.

Just like the spainish removed the muslim invaders, just like the BLM movement removing white oppressors, Indians will remove the these muslim invaders from any place of glory.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Nonsense. Foreigners can't change your govts views, but they can always change your peoples views through soft power. You will see it happening over last 50 years as Indians take on western culture and even talk to each other in English more and more. Eventually this will reflect in your govt as well, as liberal ideas you hold so abhorrent will work their way through the people psyche.

Lol. Keep dreaming. More and more people are moving away from western media influence.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Give the criterion that you want to compare. I'll reply.

Do younger people in Assam wear traditional dress or more modern western dress? Are buildings and construction still in the old style of 13th century Assam or are they trending more towards western style architecture? Do young still get arranged marriages before they reach much past puberty or are we seeing more independence?

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Lol. Keep dreaming. More and more people are moving away from western media influence.

Then why do they speak so much English in Bollywood films and Indian tv shows, and wear trendy western clothing as compared to early days of Indian screen shows?

 

[Itachi]

Do younger people in Assam wear traditional dress or more modern western dress? Are buildings and construction still in the old style of 13th century Assam or are they trending more towards western style architecture? Do young still get arranged marriages before they reach much past puberty or are we seeing more independence?

Talking about western culture is off topic with regards to this thread. So I won't derail the thread on those aspects.

 

[OldWarHorse]

Wait when did the Indian govt get involved? I dont remember reading any statement from them claiming the Mughals to be foreigners, Am I missing something here?

 

[cricketjoshila]

Then why do they speak so much English in Bollywood films and Indian tv shows, and wear trendy western clothing as compared to early days of Indian screen shows?

English is a global language. So knowing it is a skill.

Indians wear a lot of ethnic as well as modern clothing.

Doesn't mean that XYZ will dictate how we run our country.

Why do you think a right conservative govt is in power?

 

[Zaz]

The government says so because the popular opinion that elected them says so. No one in India is going to go against that opinion unless they want to be out of power.

The fact of the matter is you are a foreigner and you are not going to decide who is indian who is not. The government has said many times that these invaders are foreigners and thats the opinion of the people as well.

These invaders will be treated with contempt and they will find no place of glory in India.

Just like the spainish removed the muslim invaders, just like the BLM movement removing white oppressors, Indians will remove the these muslim invaders from any place of glory.

The govt can say what they like Theyre no measure of truth or right And neither are you You speak for yourself not the billions

The status quo is and always has been that the mughals after babar were of local heritage

Heck even the last emperor bahadur shahs mother was hindu and he was nominated a leading figurehead in the uprising against the british by both hindus and muslims of the time after which he was exiled

If hes not of local heritage than neither are you or anyone else

 

[cricketjoshila]

The govt can say what they like Theyre no measure of truth or right And neither are you You speak for yourself not the billions

The status quo is and always has been that the mughals after babar were of local heritage

Heck even the last emperor bahadur shahs mother was hindu and he was nominated a leading figurehead in the uprising against the british by both hindus and muslims of the time after which he was exiled

If hes not of local heritage than neither are you or anyone else

The government speaks for the people of India and what they say is the official statement of the country. You are liking or agreement is not required for it.

When did you became the judge of status quo in India?

Again, a foreigner like you will have no say in deciding who is Indian and who is not. You can keep saying mughals are Indians, thats not going to change how the official version in India looks at them and that's what matters.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Talking about western culture is off topic with regards to this thread. So I won't derail the thread on those aspects.

Yes it's probably a good point to take your leave to be fair. Assam culture from 12th century might not stand up to that sort of scrutiny.

 

[sharmaji]

For starters, most Indians do not study history in detail. Our history text books are some of the most dull and boring literary works ever published. Only dates and places and kingdoms are mentioned without any context and stories or the legends that students can connect to.

So there are only a handful rulers that most people know of and discuss. The historical (not mythological kings like Rama, Krishna) Hindu rulers (most famous are Chandragupta Maurya, Ashoka, Prithviraj Chauhan, Krishnadevaraya) ruled the country for 2500 years and then the Muslim rulers (Ghazni, Ghori, Tughlak, Khilji, Nawabs of Deccan, Mughals - Babar, Akbar, Jehangir, Shah Jehan, Aurangazeb; Tipu Sultan) ruled for about 1000 years.

Much is unknown about the strife/challenges/issues during the Hindu rulers before the arrival of Islam in India. There is not much documentation about the problems that people faced back then because of these rulers. Caste was mentioned prominently so I believe caste issues were present even back then. Because nothing terrible about the rule under these kings is known, people assume that everything was mostly hunky-dory. And that's why you don't hear much about the evil Hindu rulers.

But since the invasions by the muslim warlords, history is divided between two groups: one that celebrates the incredible victories of these warlords and thereafter the establishment of the Delhi-centered sultanate and conquering of Indian subcontinent and making India the richest country in the world. And another that bemoans the violence through which it was done, the millions of people killed, forcibly converted and enslaved, thousands of temples destroyed etc. It really is upto us which side of the same history we chose to focus on.

Post the European arrival and colonisation of India, most Indians (Hindus, Muslims, Sikhs) see the British rule as brutal and exploitative, however even here there are some groups of people who think it was good that Britishers colonised India, so that Indians got exposed to the ideas of democracy, republic, liberalism, English, a few got to immigrate to the west and settle there etc. Again, it's upto you really what you wish to support.

This series on the early Mughal empire was always going to be a problem in India, whichever government (right wing/left wing) is in power. See, most Indians don't have problem with most kings and emperors like Akbar, Shah Jehan, Asoka. It is only a few rulers who have been notorious for killing masses and forcing conversions like Aurangazeb who are not seen kindly by many Hindus. Tipu Sultan is debatable because he fought the British but also was brutal on Kodavas and Hindus.

Consider this: Indian subcontinent was 80% Hindu and yet was ruled by Muslim rulers for about 1000 years. Understandably there will be strife among the Hindus who feel they were not treated fairly by these Muslim rulers. But all these (Hindu and Muslim and the British) rulers are long gone, they don't rule us anymore and they shouldn't matter in our day-to-day lives. We have much bigger problems facing our generation.

I think people are smarter than what the movies, tv shows, news, media (or the social media) tells them. They know that there are good people in every religion just as bad people in every religion. They can also differentiate religion from its followers. I hope this wisdom of the people prevails.

I have watched the show a little, it is not to my taste. Poor acting, production values, editing, direction etc. But I strongly think it should not be boycotted just because the idea of it hurts some people's sentiments.

 

[pillionrider]

Tipu Sultan is debatable because he fought the British but also was brutal on Kodavas and Hindus.

You separated Kodavas from Hindus , though in recent times, Hindu gods have started appearing in Kodava homes.

You can keep saying mughals are Indians, thats not going to change how the official version in India looks at them and that's what matters.

At this point, there is no official version that the Mughals were not Indians.

Maybe that's why Adityanath gifted Trump a portrait of the Taj Mahal

 

[pillionrider]

^ Tipu is generally hated by the Kodavas because he made several attempts at conquests. And it is claimed that he betrayed a large group having invited them for a peacemaking lunch or something. Tipu Jayanti was opposed the most violently in Coorg. Earlier, Coorgis used to limit their mockery of the Sultan by calling their pets Tipu. This has always been amusing because you love your dog and yet name it after someone you've grown up hating

 

[Ahmad-GERMANFC]

The government speaks for the people of India and what they say is the official statement of the country. You are liking or agreement is not required for it.

[MENTION=139758]pillionrider[/MENTION] [MENTION=150102]sharmaji[/MENTION] [MENTION=90888]Itachi[/MENTION] [MENTION=137142]JaDed[/MENTION] and other Indian posters - Has the government actually said that all Mughal rulers were foreigners or cricketjohsila is making things up like usual?

He doesn’t seem to be much for giving proof but I guess it goes with his Stockholm syndrome where he sees Marathas as heroes even if they raped and killed his ancestors by the hundreds of thousands. I actually don’t have much issue with that if he wasn’t taking shots at Indian Muslims for doing same thing lol.

 

[sharmaji]

I agree. Tipu is a hot topic among Coorgis. Even the Konkan Christians hate him. He was quite a religious fanatic, converted thousands and punished those who didn't. But at the same time, he left many temples unharmed and had Hindu generals in his army and he himself reported to the Mysore Maharaja (Wadayars) for most of his life like his dad, Hyder Ali did. So it is all muddled w.r.t Tippu Sultan.

I have witnessed how the Kodavas (and yes, it is strange, some call themselves Hindus, but most say they are Greek descendants from Alexander's lost army hate Tipu Sultan and Coorg becomes a hotbed of Kodava-Muslim clashes around Tipu Jayanti. Why do you think Coorgi Pork is so famous?

I personally think Tipu was a king who did what was good for him at that time. He fought everyone who threatened his power(British) or didn't yield to his power(Kodavas and Konkan Christians), which was the norm for any king. Should we celebrate his birth anniversary? That is debatable and depending on which government is in power today (Congress/JDU/BJP) you'll see different takes on this.

Personally, I love history as a neutral enthusiast, enjoyed my visits to Srirangapatnam and was amazed watching the palace of Tipu Sultan, where he ruled, fought and died. I marvelled at the scientific advancements that Tipu made regarding warfare, the gem studded pillars and thrones, the Kaveri river next to the fort, surrounded by trenches filled with crocodiles, the tiny, dark prison cells, all the underground secret passages, how the British got inside the fort, the story of betrayal by his treacherous minister, Tipu's sacrifice of his elder son, Tipu's many body doubles...the stories are incredible and will make a fascinating movie/tv show!

^ Tipu is generally hated by the Kodavas because he made several attempts at conquests. And it is claimed that he betrayed a large group having invited them for a peacemaking lunch or something. Tipu Jayanti was opposed the most violently in Coorg. Earlier, Coorgis used to limit their mockery of the Sultan by calling their pets Tipu. This has always been amusing because you love your dog and yet name it after someone you've grown up hating

 

[sharmaji]

[MENTION=139758]pillionrider[/MENTION] [MENTION=150102]sharmaji[/MENTION] [MENTION=90888]Itachi[/MENTION] [MENTION=137142]JaDed[/MENTION] and other Indian posters - Has the government actually said that all Mughal rulers were foreigners or cricketjohsila is making things up like usual?

He doesn’t seem to be much for giving proof but I guess it goes with his Stockholm syndrome where he sees Marathas as heroes even if they raped and killed his ancestors by the hundreds of thousands. I actually don’t have much issue with that if he wasn’t taking shots at Indian Muslims for doing same thing lol.

No, Government of India never officially said (documented) that Mughals are foreigners. Babur is named as a Central-Asian invader but once he established the Mughal empire, all his descendants are considered (and proudly claimed) as Indian.

In fact, the history books and official records do no make any judgment calls on good Mughals and bad Mughals. They just state dates and events of their reigns, all the wars fought and places conquered. That's all. Like I said earlier, our history books are dull and boring as hell.

Only the unofficial books and column pieces in newspapers/magazines mention about the atrocities committed by some rulers(Aurangazeb) and the kindness of other rulers(Akbar).

People can debate till the end of the time about the Mughal empire, but as per government of India, history is what it is, without any judgment, Mughals are Indians and they greatly contributed to the Indian culture, art and glory.

In my pinion, they are rightly celebrated. People keep forgetting that under the Mughals, India was the richest country in the world.

 

[MP2011]

Just finished seeing it. It should enrage only 2 types of people,

1) Right-wing trolls whose single aim in life is to somehow abuse/lynch every non-Hindu, Muslims many times over;

2) The ones who yearn for chaste Urdu pronunciation which sadly they'll miss in this series made on the Mughal empire!

 

[MP2011]

I was quite pleasantly surprised by how Babar was portrayed in it. If we go by the account of right-wing trolls, he was just a barbarian who attacked and won India, destroyed temples and erected Mosques, ravaged Hindus.

Also, I was a bit disappointed that entire Mughal empire was not shown in it, rather it was based on the life of Babar only. However, I can understand that depicting a Mughal empire that spanned more than 3 centuries and had so many emperors, was always going to be difficult for makers!

Maybe, they can create another season like this on Akbar!

 

[MP2011]

No, Government of India never officially said (documented) that Mughals are foreigners. Babur is named as a Central-Asian invader but once he established the Mughal empire, all his descendants are considered (and proudly claimed) as Indian.

In fact, the history books and official records do no make any judgment calls on good Mughals and bad Mughals. They just state dates and events of their reigns, all the wars fought and places conquered. That's all. Like I said earlier, our history books are dull and boring as hell.

Only the unofficial books and column pieces in newspapers/magazines mention about the atrocities committed by some rulers(Aurangazeb) and the kindness of other rulers(Akbar).

People can debate till the end of the time about the Mughal empire, but as per government of India, history is what it is, without any judgment, Mughals are Indians and they greatly contributed to the Indian culture, art and glory.

In my pinion, they are rightly celebrated. People keep forgetting that under the Mughals, India was the richest country in the world.

Well said sharmaji. Right-wing trolls love to propagate in alternate universes where fiction is the king.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

No, Government of India never officially said (documented) that Mughals are foreigners. Babur is named as a Central-Asian invader but once he established the Mughal empire, all his descendants are considered (and proudly claimed) as Indian.

In fact, the history books and official records do no make any judgment calls on good Mughals and bad Mughals. They just state dates and events of their reigns, all the wars fought and places conquered. That's all. Like I said earlier, our history books are dull and boring as hell.

Only the unofficial books and column pieces in newspapers/magazines mention about the atrocities committed by some rulers(Aurangazeb) and the kindness of other rulers(Akbar).

People can debate till the end of the time about the Mughal empire, but as per government of India, history is what it is, without any judgment, Mughals are Indians and they greatly contributed to the Indian culture, art and glory.

In my pinion, they are rightly celebrated. People keep forgetting that under the Mughals, India was the richest country in the world.

Yes. It should be a source of great pride, not resentment. Brits have written books and books glorifying the majesty of Mughal empire, and to them it was part of India.

 

[NishanKonar]

I agree. Tipu is a hot topic among Coorgis. Even the Konkan Christians hate him. He was quite a religious fanatic, converted thousands and punished those who didn't. But at the same time, he left many temples unharmed and had Hindu generals in his army and he himself reported to the Mysore Maharaja (Wadayars) for most of his life like his dad, Hyder Ali did. So it is all muddled w.r.t Tippu Sultan.

I have witnessed how the Kodavas (and yes, it is strange, some call themselves Hindus, but most say they are Greek descendants from Alexander's lost army hate Tipu Sultan and Coorg becomes a hotbed of Kodava-Muslim clashes around Tipu Jayanti. Why do you think Coorgi Pork is so famous?

I personally think Tipu was a king who did what was good for him at that time. He fought everyone who threatened his power(British) or didn't yield to his power(Kodavas and Konkan Christians), which was the norm for any king. Should we celebrate his birth anniversary? That is debatable and depending on which government is in power today (Congress/JDU/BJP) you'll see different takes on this.

Personally, I love history as a neutral enthusiast, enjoyed my visits to Srirangapatnam and was amazed watching the palace of Tipu Sultan, where he ruled, fought and died. I marvelled at the scientific advancements that Tipu made regarding warfare, the gem studded pillars and thrones, the Kaveri river next to the fort, surrounded by trenches filled with crocodiles, the tiny, dark prison cells, all the underground secret passages, how the British got inside the fort, the story of betrayal by his treacherous minister, Tipu's sacrifice of his elder son, Tipu's many body doubles...the stories are incredible and will make a fascinating movie/tv show!

Tipu Sultan is to Indians what Maharaja Ranjit Singh to Pakistan

Most Sikhs & Hindus see Ranjit Singh as a heroic character who kicked out Afghans from Punjab & Kashmir. Some Punjabi Muslims also see him as a local Punjabi hero. But many Pakistani Muslims detest him bcoz he was brutal to Punjabi / Kashmiri Muslims & Pashtuns & desecrated many mosques

Its the same with Tipu Sultan. Many HIndus see him as hero who fought against British while many others ( Hindus & Christians ) see him as a brutal genocidal maniac & religious fanatic

Again its also problematic to judge history without context & nuance. Ranjit Singh had many Muslim generals & ministers - same as Tipu Sultan & his Hindu ministers

 

[Nikhil_cric]

Dont like it. Then dont watch it. Most Hindus and Sikhs will never take to the Mughals too kindly and, perhaps, rightfully so but it must be remembered that atleast a couple of them were reasonably progressive for their time. But yo be honest, someone like an Akbar had pretty much renounced Islam for all practical purposes and he's probably seen in the most positive light. The more orthodox Aurangazeb is reviled.

Does that mean Hindu kings were less brutal? Not at all. But I suppose there will always be a bias and Muslim kings will always be seen in a negative light despite being no less barbaric than their Hindu/Sikh counterparts and I'm sure Muslims would see Hindu/Sikh kings as more barbaric and would praise the likes of Aurangazeb instead.

 

[NishanKonar]

No, Government of India never officially said (documented) that Mughals are foreigners. Babur is named as a Central-Asian invader but once he established the Mughal empire, all his descendants are considered (and proudly claimed) as Indian.

In fact, the history books and official records do no make any judgment calls on good Mughals and bad Mughals. They just state dates and events of their reigns, all the wars fought and places conquered. That's all. Like I said earlier, our history books are dull and boring as hell.

Only the unofficial books and column pieces in newspapers/magazines mention about the atrocities committed by some rulers(Aurangazeb) and the kindness of other rulers(Akbar).

People can debate till the end of the time about the Mughal empire, but as per government of India, history is what it is, without any judgment, Mughals are Indians and they greatly contributed to the Indian culture, art and glory.

In my pinion, they are rightly celebrated. People keep forgetting that under the Mughals, India was the richest country in the world.

By and large Indian history textbooks used in schools are very objective- just a chronology of rulers & dynasty without any bias & prejudice. There is nothing like Pak Studies in our school curriculum or any such narrative

The only part which is biased is coverage of Pakistan movement. By and large Jinnah is shown as an evil character who betrayed his nation

 

[OMB]

Yes. It should be a source of great pride, not resentment. Brits have written books and books glorifying the majesty of Mughal empire, and to them it was part of India.

I am aware of the fact that India was the rich well before the mughals arrived and remained rich durin gthe mughal rule, even though lot of wealth was looted. That was the reason Mughals invaded and that was the reason Colonial power did too.
I am not bitter at all as we shouldn't be. It was history and it has taught India a great lesson so that it got unified otherwise it was pretty much going to split into multiple kingdoms.
Not it is one nation and what a wonderful thing to be. We can travel freely from Maharashtra/Gujarat to West Bengal and Kashmir to Kanyakumari (I have done it so multiple times).

 

[sharmaji]

Well said.

That is some travel, OMB. Wow. By road or train or air?

I don't know about other things, but one good thing that BJP does (probably the only good thing) is build roads and other infrastructure. As a frequent traveler by road (weekend road trips), I am very happy with the progress made in the last few years.

I am aware of the fact that India was the rich well before the mughals arrived and remained rich durin gthe mughal rule, even though lot of wealth was looted. That was the reason Mughals invaded and that was the reason Colonial power did too.
I am not bitter at all as we shouldn't be. It was history and it has taught India a great lesson so that it got unified otherwise it was pretty much going to split into multiple kingdoms.
Not it is one nation and what a wonderful thing to be. We can travel freely from Maharashtra/Gujarat to West Bengal and Kashmir to Kanyakumari (I have done it so multiple times).

 

[sharmaji]

Yes, Jinnah is portrayed poorly in our history books. It's only when I became an adult, I read a book on Jinnah's life and found him to be a complex, ambitious and highly articulate man.

By and large Indian history textbooks used in schools are very objective- just a chronology of rulers & dynasty without any bias & prejudice. There is nothing like Pak Studies in our school curriculum or any such narrative

The only part which is biased is coverage of Pakistan movement. By and large Jinnah is shown as an evil character who betrayed his nation

 

[sharmaji]

Yes, I can imagine. No wonder Maharaja Ranjit Singh is portrayed as a hero in India and Tipu Sultan a hero in Pakistan.

Tipu Sultan is to Indians what Maharaja Ranjit Singh to Pakistan

Most Sikhs & Hindus see Ranjit Singh as a heroic character who kicked out Afghans from Punjab & Kashmir. Some Punjabi Muslims also see him as a local Punjabi hero. But many Pakistani Muslims detest him bcoz he was brutal to Punjabi / Kashmiri Muslims & Pashtuns & desecrated many mosques

Its the same with Tipu Sultan. Many HIndus see him as hero who fought against British while many others ( Hindus & Christians ) see him as a brutal genocidal maniac & religious fanatic

Again its also problematic to judge history without context & nuance. Ranjit Singh had many Muslim generals & ministers - same as Tipu Sultan & his Hindu ministers