What's new

Why our textbooks should include Ranjit Singh

This is what bias history books do.............Indian subcontinent was a flourishing civilization 1000 of years before Islam evem came into being..........Read about the Harrapans,Mauryans,Guptas,Rashtrakutas,Pallavs,Cholas etc etc etc............some of those empires stretched to Cambodia and Central Asia.

Read about what Greeks,Chinese etc had to say about the Indian civilization........Primitive People LOL...........

Truly sad at what biased history does to people.

yes indeed, but it goes both ways! the Muslims were also not raging barbaric hordes of blood thirsty hindu haters who raped thousands and thousands of women for fun!!
 
P.N. Oak IS a hindu. He published a book about Taj Mahal being a Siva temple in 1980s and the book got BANNED by the indian govt and then emails started floating around. You have to wonder when things get banned, which fanned even more controversy I also happened to receive those emails and completely dismissed them because they were so beyond the realm of my possibility and he made outrageous claims about Ka'aba being a hindu temple. P.N. Oak being an overt hindu, also pre-judices him against Islam and others against him.
How’s this rant relevant to my questioning of his credentials??? Clearly this loon is not a historian by his credentials such as his education and work experience. Moreover, as per the reviews from amazon.com about his book, this man uses vile language towards the mughal emperors in his book which is not the way a true historian would present his arguments. He sounds like a conspiracy theorist.
But, Ka'aba was clearly NOT a hindu temple but a pagan temple with many idols in there for local tribal Arabs. Even, this piece of knowledge will come as a shock to billions of muslims and non-muslims around the world who are not aware of it.

LOL, really have some respect for yourself and don't make retarded, ill-informed jahili claims on behalf of BILLIONS of muslims, even a ten year old muslim kid knows that Ka’ba was a place of pagan worship before the emergence of Islam.

The article I posted above is very objective and ONLY recently when I came across it and read other stuff about like Sofia Hagia in istanbul and cordoba in spain that I started believing that it is Quite likely that Taj Mahal was an existing structure and later converted. Please read it with an open mind ..
http://www.stephen-knapp.com/question_of_the_taj_mahal.htm
The authors also try to figure out the origin of bulbous dome...

This topic doesn’t interest me at all, and neither do I wish to derail this thread any longer than it has. It’s just a theory like there are for any given subject; suffice to say that the Indian archaeologists disagree with this claim.
 
sorry for derailing this thread further bro ^^............ but I would like to clarify post#49 where zindagi bro has made the following statement

"But, Ka'aba was clearly NOT a hindu temple but a pagan temple with many idols in there for local tribal Arabs. Even, this piece of knowledge will come as a shock to billions of muslims and non-muslims around the world who are not aware of it."

This is not a shock to any muslim and we indeed believe that before our beloved Prophet Muhammad SAW took over Makkah, Ka'aba was filled with idols.

But we also believe that Ka'aba was never a pagan temple but house of Allah. The reason us muslims believe and state this statement is on the basis that the Ka'aba was built by the Prophet Ibrahim AS (Jewish and christians call them Abraham) to worship the one god Allah SWT.

May I respectfully request brother Zindagi to be careful and do not quote out of context that it was a pagan temple. It was never built with the intention of being a pagan temple, but rather as a house of Allah for its people to worhip The One God of Abraham, which is also The One Allah of Prophet Muhammad SAW and its Ummah.

Indeed when times passed by and Abrahamic religion was lost people started filling it with idols and it was subsequently regained by muslims where idols were broken and restored to its rightful meaning.

It is the same as the story of Moses when he went on Mt Sinai to converse with God, that his people started to build a calf out of gold and started worshipping that statue. This doesnt mean that jewish had a culture of paganism or started worshipping idols, but merely a passage of time where the true intention or culture was diverted to a different meaning, not changing the reality.
 
Its not the first time RSS fundos have said that Taj Mahal was hindu temple. At this rate it wont be long before it destroyed to build another hindu temple like they did in 1992.
 
One thing about history books..it's fabricated by the powers that be to control the masses to show the glory of the victor. History should be the good and the bad...that's how we can judge the accuracy of it as well as learn from human fallacies.
 
yes indeed, but it goes both ways! the Muslims were also not raging barbaric hordes of blood thirsty hindu haters who raped thousands and thousands of women for fun!!

Yes Indeed.......not every Muslim ruler was barbaric.......the Ghoris Khiljis etc were..........while most Mughals were tolerant.The Nizams of Hyd the Nawabs of Bengal and Awadh are the other examples.

But yes some muslim invaders were barbaric killers...whose only intention was to loot........and to cover up their deeds they gave it the usual cover of doing it for Islam.Where as i understand that Islam was never supposed to be spread on the basis of threats.
 
Maharaja Ranjit Singh's empire was as secular as it gets. I don't think there's ever been fairer ruler.
 
ppp government is agent of india and western countries. they want to destroy us at fundamental level. i hate ppp.
 
Life-size sculpture of Maharaja Ranjit Singh unveiled at historic Lahore Fort

https://www.business-standard.com/a...d-at-historic-lahore-fort-119062701426_1.html

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en-gb"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Today is the 180th death anniversary of <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/MaharajaRanjeetSingh?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#MaharajaRanjeetSingh</a> greatest king of The Punjab, one eyed Maharaja ruled from Kabul to Delhi with billigerence, symbol of Punjabi supermacy Maharaja will be remembered for reforms in the Governance.</p>— Ch Fawad Hussain (@fawadchaudhry) <a href="https://twitter.com/fawadchaudhry/status/1144098134643134464?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">27 June 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en-gb"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">On the occasion of 180th death anniversary of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, Walled City Lahore Authority has facilitated the installation of 8ft Statue of Ranjit Singh in Lahore Fort. Punjab Tourism Minister was Chief Guest at the Ceremony attended by many Sikh visitors from Amritsar. <a href="https://t.co/9KCI6NyTIM">pic.twitter.com/9KCI6NyTIM</a></p>— Govt of Pakistan (@pid_gov) <a href="https://twitter.com/pid_gov/status/1144588805552447488?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">28 June 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


D-JHoIdWwAAhmXK.jpg


An interesting piece in the Dawn about this.

Is Ranjit Singh’s statue in Lahore worth celebrating?

https://www.dawn.com/news/1491672/
 
he convertd badshahi mosque into horse stable and we are giving him honours .. wow.
 
Pretty sure this Is against Islam, especially considering he was a Polytheist.
 
he convertd badshahi mosque into horse stable and we are giving him honours .. wow.

He was just like any other ruler of that era - under his rule mosques were turned into temples. tombs were destroyed, wealth was plundered etc.

Did he do more good than bad? The vast majority of Sikhs and Hindus would say yes. However the Muslims he ruled over would probably disagree. One man's hero is another man's villain etc.
 
he convertd badshahi mosque into horse stable and we are giving him honours .. wow.

I've no problem with erecting a statue of him in Lahore Fort but giving him honours and calling him the "Lion of Punjab" is way too much.
 
He was just like any other ruler of that era - under his rule mosques were turned into temples. tombs were destroyed, wealth was plundered etc.

Did he do more good than bad? The vast majority of Sikhs and Hindus would say yet. However the Muslims he ruled over would probably disagree. One man's hero is another man's villain

Very true, people look at historical figures from their point of view. The point here is that people like Fawad Choudhry, a Punjabi Muslim is giving honours to Ranjit Singh which is shocking. It's like an Indian Hindu giving salute to Aurangzeb for his war against the British (Child's war) whist ignoring the atrocities he commited against Hindus and Sikhs.
 
Very true, people look at historical figures from their point of view. The point here is that people like Fawad Choudhry, a Punjabi Muslim is giving honours to Ranjit Singh which is shocking. It's like an Indian Hindu giving salute to Aurangzeb for his war against the British (Child's war) whist ignoring the atrocities he commited against Hindus and Sikhs.

Many Indian Hindus suck up to Mughals inspite of killing them, only Sikhs hate Mughals the most coz they literally killed their Gurus..
 
We suffer from very serious identity crisis and this is the first step in the right direction. About time we learn to realize the real heroes of our region, instead of glorifying Arab invaders.
 
We suffer from very serious identity crisis and this is the first step in the right direction. About time we learn to realize the real heroes of our region, instead of glorifying Arab invaders.

Ranjit Singh is a hero? He slaughtered muslims, looted mausoleums and made Badshahi Mosque into a horse stable, he was no different than Aurangzeb. How about we honour ***** Bhatti instead? he's a much bigger hero compared to Ranjit Singh. Oppossing this move has got nothing to do with identity crisis.
 
Ranjit Singh is a hero? He slaughtered muslims, looted mausoleums and made Badshahi Mosque into a horse stable, he was no different than Aurangzeb. How about we honour Abdullah Bhatti instead? he's a much bigger hero compared to Ranjit Singh. Oppossing this move has got nothing to do with identity crisis.

People in Pakistan tend to have a very narrow perspective of their non-Muslim past because of our quest to Islamize our history. Hence, rulers like him are rarely mentioned in the “Pak Studies” that are taught in schools, where the history of Pakistan tends to start with Syed Ahmed Khan and his TNT.

Every ruler has a dark side. While his decision to ban Azaan and using Badshahi Mosque as his horse stable should not be justified, he was also a great administrator and his significance for Punjab cannot be understated.

He protected Punjab from invasions and also kept the British at bay. Education flourished under his rule and he is perhaps the biggest reason why Sikhism and Hinduism were protected from Islamization in Punjab.

While we tend to look back at history from an Islamic point of view and think of all these rulers as enemies, we also shouldn’t forget the services of the leaders who protected (of attempted to protect) the subcontinent from foreign invaders whom we now see as “liberators” because of our bias.
 
People in Pakistan tend to have a very narrow perspective of their non-Muslim past because of our quest to Islamize our history. Hence, rulers like him are rarely mentioned in the “Pak Studies” that are taught in schools, where the history of Pakistan tends to start with Syed Ahmed Khan and his TNT.

Every ruler has a dark side. While his decision to ban Azaan and using Badshahi Mosque as his horse stable should not be justified, he was also a great administrator and his significance for Punjab cannot be understated.

He protected Punjab from invasions and also kept the British at bay. Education flourished under his rule and he is perhaps the biggest reason why Sikhism and Hinduism were protected from Islamization in Punjab.

While we tend to look back at history from an Islamic point of view and think of all these rulers as enemies, we also shouldn’t forget the services of the leaders who protected (of attempted to protect) the subcontinent from foreign invaders whom we now see as “liberators” because of our bias.

Nice to know that you sugarcoat the crimes of Ranjit Singh by mentioning what he was good at, i hope you can also excuse the crimes of Akbar and Aurangzeb for demolishing temples and brutally killings innocents since Akbar was a good administrator and allowed religious freedom and Aurangzeb defeated the British in the Child's War and ruled the Mughal Empire at it's peak with the largest GDP in the world. But hey, if we glorify the Mughals then we're Pakistanis with an identity crisis.

I don't mind having a statue of Ranjit Singh though since he is a part of Pakistan's history but i don't like that we glorify and sugarcoat his life as if he was some saint.
 
Nice to know that you sugarcoat the crimes of Ranjit Singh by mentioning what he was good at, i hope you can also excuse the crimes of Akbar and Aurangzeb for demolishing temples and brutally killings innocents since Akbar was a good administrator and allowed religious freedom and Aurangzeb defeated the British in the Child's War and ruled the Mughal Empire at it's peak with the largest GDP in the world. But hey, if we glorify the Mughals then we're Pakistanis with an identity crisis.

I don't mind having a statue of Ranjit Singh though since he is a part of Pakistan's history but i don't like that we glorify and sugarcoat his life as if he was some saint.

There are two sides to every coin. Every conquerer is a foreign plunder depending on which side you are on. There are no saints and no outright villains - history is not black and white.

The Mughals did plenty of things that deserve recognition and adulation, but they also contributed to the decline of the subcontinent in terms of scientific achievements because of their overindulgence in worldly pleasures.

The crimes of Ranjit Singh are not forgiven or forgotten, but how you view his legacy depends on whether you look at him from an Islamic perspective or a Punjabi perspective.

Those who distinguish between rulers based on their views on Islam will not remember him fondly, but those who view rulers based on what they did at that time to protect their people will recognize him as a true hero of Punjab, and I am glad that the Punjab government is in the same boat.
 
Nice to know that you sugarcoat the crimes of Ranjit Singh by mentioning what he was good at, i hope you can also excuse the crimes of Akbar and Aurangzeb for demolishing temples and brutally killings innocents since Akbar was a good administrator and allowed religious freedom and Aurangzeb defeated the British in the Child's War and ruled the Mughal Empire at it's peak with the largest GDP in the world. But hey, if we glorify the Mughals then we're Pakistanis with an identity crisis.

I don't mind having a statue of Ranjit Singh though since he is a part of Pakistan's history but i don't like that we glorify and sugarcoat his life as if he was some saint.

Ranjit may have been a messiah like figure for Sikhs and Hindus but he certainly wasn't for us Punjabi Muslims. Why should we glorify him? It's like asking India to start glorifying Muhammad Ali Jinnah or otherwise they are narrow minded people who want to Hinduize their history.
 
There are two sides to every coin. Every conquerer is a foreign plunder depending on which side you are on. There are no saints and no outright villains - history is not black and white.

The Mughals did plenty of things that deserve recognition and adulation, but they also contributed to the decline of the subcontinent in terms of scientific achievements because of their overindulgence in worldly pleasures.

The crimes of Ranjit Singh are not forgiven or forgotten, but how you view his legacy depends on whether you look at him from an Islamic perspective or a Punjabi perspective.

Those who distinguish between rulers based on their views on Islam will not remember him fondly, but those who view rulers based on what they did at that time to protect their people will recognize him as a true hero of Punjab, and I am glad that the Punjab government is in the same boat.

Not just Punjabi muslims but also Kashmiri muslims were persecuted by Ranjit Singh.

What do you mean by "but how you view his legacy depends on whether you look at him from an Islamic perspective or a Punjabi perspective"? As far as i know, more than 50% of Punjabis(globally) are muslims by religion which puts us in the majoriy, so shouldn't our views on him be the "Punjabi perspective"? You probably mean from a Sikh point of view.
 
Sikhs are pure Polytheist, they believe God is inside every living thing, pure polytheism and Shirk.

Stop quoting out of context, they are monotheist.

“Sikhism teaches that God lasts forever, cannot be seen, and has no body. It is taught that he created the universe, can destroy it, and keeps it running. He is considered to be infinite, Alpha and Omega, no beginning and no end. Sikhs worship him, and meditate on his name through intense (passionate) repetition. They believe everything is a part of God and God is a part of everything. Good, bad, neutral are not applicable to God and for human beings, as Sikh philosophy indicates that human beings are born innately good.”
 
There are two sides to every coin. Every conquerer is a foreign plunder depending on which side you are on. There are no saints and no outright villains - history is not black and white.

The Mughals did plenty of things that deserve recognition and adulation, but they also contributed to the decline of the subcontinent in terms of scientific achievements because of their overindulgence in worldly pleasures.

The crimes of Ranjit Singh are not forgiven or forgotten, but how you view his legacy depends on whether you look at him from an Islamic perspective or a Punjabi perspective.

Those who distinguish between rulers based on their views on Islam will not remember him fondly, but those who view rulers based on what they did at that time to protect their people will recognize him as a true hero of Punjab, and I am glad that the Punjab government is in the same boat.

"Those who distinguish between rulers based on their views on Islam will not remember him fondly, but those who view rulers based on what they did at that time to protect their people will recognize him as a true hero of Punjab"

If killing innocent Punjabi and Kashmiri muslims, labour force in Kashmir and burning the Qur'an outside the homes of muslims to mock them is protecting your people, then fine, Ranjit Singh was a true hero of Punjab and anyone who disagrees is a Pakistani with an identity crisis.
 
Last edited:
Stop quoting out of context, they are monotheist.

“Sikhism teaches that God lasts forever, cannot be seen, and has no body. It is taught that he created the universe, can destroy it, and keeps it running. He is considered to be infinite, Alpha and Omega, no beginning and no end. Sikhs worship him, and meditate on his name through intense (passionate) repetition. They believe everything is a part of God and God is a part of everything. Good, bad, neutral are not applicable to God and for human beings, as Sikh philosophy indicates that human beings are born innately good.”

That is not monotheism, according to the Islamic Standard.
 
Not just Punjabi muslims but also Kashmiri muslims were persecuted by Ranjit Singh.

What do you mean by "but how you view his legacy depends on whether you look at him from an Islamic perspective or a Punjabi perspective"? As far as i know, more than 50% of Punjabis(globally) are muslims by religion which puts us in the majoriy, so shouldn't our views on him be the "Punjabi perspective"? You probably mean from a Sikh point of view.

"Those who distinguish between rulers based on their views on Islam will not remember him fondly, but those who view rulers based on what they did at that time to protect their people will recognize him as a true hero of Punjab"

If killing innocent Punjabi and Kashmiri muslims, labour force in Kashmir and burning the Qur'an outside the homes of muslims to mock them is protecting your people, then fine, Ranjit Singh was a true hero of Punjab and anyone who disagrees is a Pakistani with an identity crisis.

Again, you are viewing everything from the perspective of being a Muslim. It is not your fault though, because it is the route this country took after independence. We Islamized our history and decided to put our identity as a Muslim over everything.

We identify ourselves as Muslims first and then Punjabis, Pashtuns, Sindhis, Balochis etc. In Pakistan’s formative years, it was understandable because we didn’t have any identity without Islam. Our country was created for Islam and it served as the binding force.

General Ayub’s decision to merge history and geography into Pak Studies was a conscious decision, but it also has had negative long-term implications because our people today are largely ignorant of the contributions of the rulers excluding the Arab invaders.

Ranjit Singh isn’t a hero of Islam or even a defender of Islam - however, he is a hero and a defender of Punjab and there is nothing wrong in glorifying him.

Similarly, Raja Dahir is the hero of Sindh and not the foreign invader Muhammad bin Qasim, but since we are Muslims today, our version of myopic history remembers the former as a Hindu tyrant and the latter as a Muslim liberator who helped spread Islam in the subcontinent.
 
our textbooks should include ranjit singh. and should include everything, including the atrocities commited in his reign.
 
Pretty sure this Is against Islam, especially considering he was a Polytheist.

I always thought statues were considered non-Islamic, but if there is one erected for Ranjit Singh, clearly that isn't a cut and dried verdict.
 
Again, you are viewing everything from the perspective of being a Muslim. It is not your fault though, because it is the route this country took after independence. We Islamized our history and decided to put our identity as a Muslim over everything.

We identify ourselves as Muslims first and then Punjabis, Pashtuns, Sindhis, Balochis etc. In Pakistan’s formative years, it was understandable because we didn’t have any identity without Islam. Our country was created for Islam and it served as the binding force.

General Ayub’s decision to merge history and geography into Pak Studies was a conscious decision, but it also has had negative long-term implications because our people today are largely ignorant of the contributions of the rulers excluding the Arab invaders.

Ranjit Singh isn’t a hero of Islam or even a defender of Islam - however, he is a hero and a defender of Punjab and there is nothing wrong in glorifying him.

Similarly, Raja Dahir is the hero of Sindh and not the foreign invader Muhammad bin Qasim, but since we are Muslims today, our version of myopic history remembers the former as a Hindu tyrant and the latter as a Muslim liberator who helped spread Islam in the subcontinent.

Of course i’m viewing things from the perspective of a Punjabi Muslim. Everyone views history from their point of view. Look at European textbooks where they call Alexander of Macedon ”the great” while calling Chengiz Khan a tyrant. It’s only natural. And don’t even try to claim that i’m brainwashed by Pak studies, i don’t even live in Pakistan.

Once again, i don’t mind erecting a statue of Ranjit Singh and i don’t mind Sikhs and Hindus glorifying him but i do mind Punjabi muslims calling him a true defender of Punjab when in fact he persecuted and humiliated Punjabi Muslims. Same as how Pashtins shouldn’t expect Indians to respect the Durrani invasions because otherwise they’re brainwashed by ”Hindu propaganda”.

Two great heros of Punjab for Punjabi Muslims are Abdullah Bhatti and Rai Ahmad Khan Kharal.

As for Raja Dahir, nothing about him was great or heroic and the only reason he’s remembered is because he fought against the invading Umayyad forces, same as nothing about Neville Chamberlain is great yet he is remembered solely for being at war with Nazi Germany.
If anyone, Prithviraj Chauhan was the greatest Hindu king of the medieval era.
 
When you say "our history textbooks", I assume you're referring to history textbooks in school?

Well then that doesn't really make sense. Since each province controls education, I fail to see why Sindh would want to read about Ranjit Singh. He's irrelevant to the history of Sindh.

Every province in Pakistan has its own rich history, which should be taught in schools. Ranjit Singh is an icon of Punjab, and hence Punjab's history textbooks indeed should be referring to him. But Punjab's history goes back a lot further than him...much further back.

I have been advocating the complete overhauling of Pakistan Studies. It's a complete joke, which fails to inherit and teach our people the rich history of this land called the Indus (Sindhu)...over 9000 years of human activity and barely any of it is taught because mullahs opposed any such changes.

I along with an entire group have been advocating for the complete re-writing of Pakistan Studies to inherit our Indus past and make it part of our national psyche, instead of this "Islamic Republic" nonsense.

Imagine how fun Pakistan Studies would be if we were taught the complete history of the Indus Valley - beginning when early humans ancestors first arrived in Soan some 1.5 million years ago, to the birth of the great Harappan Civilization rivaling Egypt & Mesopotamia, to the various kingdoms and empires from as far away as Greece and Mongolia which all ruled over this land. Pakistan as a political entity is indeed only 70 years old, yet this territory (the Indus Valley) has a history spanning 9000 years. It is this unique Indus culture and history of ours that actually unites us as a nation, regardless of our ethnic and religious backgrounds.

Also join here if you're interested in learning more > https://www.facebook.com/AncientPakistan.pk
 
I always thought statues were considered non-Islamic, but if there is one erected for Ranjit Singh, clearly that isn't a cut and dried verdict.

It is forbidden, this is just some punjabi in pakistan trying to gain Sikh sympathy or tourism, sikhs are one of the most anti Islam group of people in the world.
 
It is forbidden, this is just some punjabi in pakistan trying to gain Sikh sympathy or tourism, sikhs are one of the most anti Islam group of people in the world.

I would have thought it would take more than just some Punjabi in Pakistan to give the go ahead for a statue to be erected at the Lahore Fort. Surely it would require some official sanction from authorities of the region.
 
These guys are trying too hard. I am sure such gimmicks are done to attract Indian Sikhs to Pakistan.
Indian Sikhs will always feel closer to India due to history between Islam and non muslim religions. No amount of statues will change that relation.
 
I always thought statues were considered non-Islamic, but if there is one erected for Ranjit Singh, clearly that isn't a cut and dried verdict.

It is forbidden, this is just some punjabi in pakistan trying to gain Sikh sympathy or tourism, sikhs are one of the most anti Islam group of people in the world.

There are several statues throughout Pakistan, even in the backward city of Peshawar.
 
Do the Pakistani textbooks taught to students go into much depth about the Indus Valley Civilization?

It teaches them but it doesn't connect it well. People think the Indus Valley inhabitants were different...for years there was a myth going around that they were "Dravidian". This has been proven false.

The latest genetic studies prove that modern-day Pakistanis are actually decedents of Harappans who merged with migrating Aryans in around 1500 BCE, giving rise to two groups > Indo-Aryans and Indo-Iranians. Every Pakistani group is basically 1 or the 2...each has a little Harappan in them.
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en-gb"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">Meet the man behind Maharaja Ranjit Singh’s Lahore statue <a href="https://t.co/gHPAi1AF7C">https://t.co/gHPAi1AF7C</a></p>— Naila Inayat नायला इनायत (@nailainayat) <a href="https://twitter.com/nailainayat/status/1144556318147129344?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">28 June 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">‘Religious party activist’ arrested for vandalising statue of Maharaja Ranjit Singh<a href="https://t.co/IPeEGQgFJe">https://t.co/IPeEGQgFJe</a> <a href="https://t.co/NYbCWEYsVi">pic.twitter.com/NYbCWEYsVi</a></p>— The Express Tribune (@etribune) <a href="https://twitter.com/etribune/status/1337418241057165314?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 11, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">‘Religious party activist’ arrested for vandalising statue of Maharaja Ranjit Singh<a href="https://t.co/IPeEGQgFJe">https://t.co/IPeEGQgFJe</a> <a href="https://t.co/NYbCWEYsVi">pic.twitter.com/NYbCWEYsVi</a></p>— The Express Tribune (@etribune) <a href="https://twitter.com/etribune/status/1337418241057165314?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 11, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

What a *****. I don't what he was trying to achieve by damaging the statue :facepalm:

A young man in Lahore was arrested on Friday for allegedly vandalising the statue of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, ruler of Sikh empire during 19th century.

Hopefully, he received some phainta from police and he should be charged for the damage caused.
 
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">‘Religious party activist’ arrested for vandalising statue of Maharaja Ranjit Singh<a href="https://t.co/IPeEGQgFJe">https://t.co/IPeEGQgFJe</a> <a href="https://t.co/NYbCWEYsVi">pic.twitter.com/NYbCWEYsVi</a></p>— The Express Tribune (@etribune) <a href="https://twitter.com/etribune/status/1337418241057165314?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 11, 2020</a></blockquote> <script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Is not this guy famous for committing lot of atrocities against muslims? If yes then I am very surprised that Pakistani muslims have built a statute for him :facepalm:
 
Is not this guy famous for committing lot of atrocities against muslims? If yes then I am very surprised that Pakistani muslims have built a statute for him :facepalm:

I have to say I agree. It's one thing if the statue was already there and the authorities were trying to preserve it for historic reasons, but going out of your way to build one as an Islamic state seems going too far the other way.
 
I have to say I agree. It's one thing if the statue was already there and the authorities were trying to preserve it for historic reasons, but going out of your way to build one as an Islamic state seems going too far the other way.

Thats why I do not call Pakistan an Islamic state. It is really a muslim majority state and Islam word is used as a pawn. No way a real Islamic state would build statue of a person who is remembered for prosecuting muslims.
 
Thats why I do not call Pakistan an Islamic state. It is really a muslim majority state and Islam word is used as a pawn. No way a real Islamic state would build statue of a person who is remembered for prosecuting muslims.

Weird nation. Pakistanis have a lot of sikh traditions.
 
Is not this guy famous for committing lot of atrocities against muslims? If yes then I am very surprised that Pakistani muslims have built a statute for him :facepalm:

Obviously no Kashmiris or afghanis have complained about it
Vandalism is still wrong though especially considering that Pakistan supports the khalistani fight for freedom
Acts like this must Bring bad memories of partition in 1947 where sikhs were stigmatised to have caused a lot of bloodshed on the border lines
 
Nice pandering of Sikhs, Let's put a statue of Erdogan next all over Pakistan and offer the Turkish Language in schools and colleges.
 
Nice pandering of Sikhs, Let's put a statue of Erdogan next all over Pakistan and offer the Turkish Language in schools and colleges.

I won’t be surprised if we erect a statute of Etrugrul considering how obsessed we are.

Jokes aside, Erdogan has nothing to do with Pakistan.

However, Ranjit Sindh is Punjab’s greatest hero. His services to this great province will never be forgotten.
 
I won’t be surprised if we erect a statute of Etrugrul considering how obsessed we are.

Jokes aside, Erdogan has nothing to do with Pakistan.

However, Ranjit Sindh is Punjab’s greatest hero. His services to this great province will never be forgotten.

Are not muslims the biggest group among all Punjabis of the world?
 
I won’t be surprised if we erect a statute of Etrugrul considering how obsessed we are.

Jokes aside, Erdogan has nothing to do with Pakistan.

However, Ranjit Sindh is Punjab’s greatest hero. His services to this great province will never be forgotten.

Why what did he do? Pardon my ignorance, he's not really a well known figure over here.
 
Why what did he do? Pardon my ignorance, he's not really a well known figure over here.

Founder of the Sikh empire and ruled most of northwest India. He was also one of the few subcontinent rulers who showed resistance against the British instead of selling out or running away.

He is known as the Lion of Punjab.
 
Founder of the Sikh empire and ruled most of northwest India. He was also one of the few subcontinent rulers who showed resistance against the British instead of selling out or running away.

He is known as the Lion of Punjab.

Perhaps if Khalistan is ever realised we can justify statues in Pakistan, otherwise it seems pointless. If India is happy to see Punjab divided then not our business to doing bhangra over some Sikh empire from centuries ago.
 
so DA how can he be Punjab's greatest hero when he committed atrocities against majority of Punjabis (muslims)? You need to interact more with Punjabis.

Punjab doesn’t belong to Muslims only. I don’t need to interact with any Pakistani on this because we have done a great job of whitewashing our non-Muslim past and non-Muslim heroes, so we must commend the government for erecting a statue of this great figure in Punjabi history.
 
Perhaps if Khalistan is ever realised we can justify statues in Pakistan, otherwise it seems pointless. If India is happy to see Punjab divided then not our business to doing bhangra over some Sikh empire from centuries ago.

Punjab is a cornerstone of Pakistan and we should celebrate its great heroes. Nothing to do with Khalistan.
 
Punjab is a cornerstone of Pakistan and we should celebrate its great heroes. Nothing to do with Khalistan.

Seems like Ranjit Singh fought against the forefathers of Pakistan. Just doing a bit of google research and in fact he allied with the British to overthrow the Mughal rulers. Also seems he desecrated the Badshahi Mosque in Lahore.

Actually I have no issue with him being seen as a great Sikh hero, but I still don't understand how he can be seen as a hero of Punjab Pakistan. He created the Khalsa army so I think my initial assessment that we can revisit this topic should Khalistan ever become a reality was correct. It is not Pakistan's job to celebrate Sikh heroes who fought against Muslim administration.
 
Back
Top