02-18-2008, 09:48 PM
A few x-posts from BR
<!--QuoteBegin-"Paul"+-->QUOTE("Paul")<!--QuoteEBegin-->Akbarnama
Ain-e-Akbari
Neither of them AFAIK refer to Akbar's marriage or his numerous wives.
I was reading in Ain-e-Akbari about the way Hemu was slaughtered. Akbar's role in this heinous episode is not clear. Bairam Khan egged Akbar to get rid of this Kaffir.
Tardi Beg and Bairam Khan did all the dirty work for Akbar in his early days.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-"Paul"+-->QUOTE("Paul")<!--QuoteEBegin-->Akbar was short, bow legged from years of riding horses, had mongolid features....completely opposed to what Hrithik is like.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-"csharma"+-->QUOTE("csharma")<!--QuoteEBegin-->Regardless of what the reality of Jodha is, one has to keep in mind that the story was important for Hindu Rajput narrative. Muslim writers would definitely downplay such an episode because history writing at that time(or even now) was not an impartial event recording exercise.
 To cite an example, a book written on Indian history by a British author in early 20th century devoted one third of the book to Alexander's "invasion" of India.
 In the movie, they show Bairam Khan beheading Hemu. In any case, Akbar was definitely more tolerant and credit should be given to him for that. For 100 years Hindus enjoyed equality until Aurangzeb became the emperor.
IMHO, while Turks were great conquerors, running of an efficient administration was possible when the Hindus were co-opted. The same thing is seen after Persia is conquered. Eventually all the bureacratic positions were filled up by Persians.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-"csharma"+-->QUOTE("csharma")<!--QuoteEBegin-->Not unsurprising since the Mughals are Turko-Mongol from Central asia. They are the descendants of Tamerlane.
 It is quite remarkable how these Uzbeks, Tajiks had traveled far and wide conquering lands like India among others. Look at how these countries are faring now and look at India. The Indian civilization genius is now free again and should take us again to the dizzy heights achieved during Gupta age.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-"ramana"+-->QUOTE("ramana")<!--QuoteEBegin-->Csharma, I was thinking that the hundred years respite that Akbar's reign gave the Hindus led to them casting of dhimmitude and do bhagawat all over Hindusthan, when zulmi laws were brought back by Aurangazeb. I personally thank Jodha Ma for giving us the respite. This is the narrative we need to understand. Not the bogus one of eternal dhimmitude. And the other thing is Akbar's tolerant kingship was the model for the West's Enlightenment.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-"bhavani"+-->QUOTE("bhavani")<!--QuoteEBegin-->Amen Ramana sir, i think one has to put a lot of things out of his mind, before they watch this movie
Saw Jodhaa akbar at the 10.00PM Show. Same crap of showing Akbar as a secular, merciful lord of Hindustan. Johdhaa Is never converted in the movie, which is false. She has her own small place of worship in agra fort which is not true. Everyone of Akbars wives did convert.
When Akbar sends the mullah to Mecca at the end of movie as a way of moving the guy out of kingdom, everybody was laughing as it was similar to the way he sends bairam khan to mecca.
WHo ever Jodhaa bai was she must be one hell of a lady, for living in such a frightening place and also controlling all the Other Harems.
Akbar was obviously better than aurangzeb, like getting fried in a pan is better than falling in the fire itself.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-"csharma"+-->QUOTE("csharma")<!--QuoteEBegin-->Ramana, good points.
The more history I read, the more I think Hindus have always fought against injustice. This eternal dhimmitude is probably an invention of Muslim triumphalism and sustained by British admiration of the Turkic Mughals and Europe's knowledge and admiration of the Ottomans. They know of the Ottomans who were all set to conquer European heartland in the 16 century and in India they find the 'brethren' of the Turks and they glorified that chapter of India's history. The lack of western interest in the dramatic rise of Marathas is perplexing to me. Here are a bunch of people reeling under the mighty Mughal empire and they come from nowhere to replace them as rulers of India. While many in BR already know but most Indians don't know that 18th century was the century of Hindu revival in India. Mughal emperor in Delhi was reduced to a puppet of Marathas and Marathas used to provide security to Delhi.
You also have to keep in mind that Hindus at this stage were a very old civilization. And Muslim world was the superpower at this stage (even though the Ottomans peaked in the 16 century). Yet the Marathas achieved the improbable. That shows the fighting spirit and resilience of the Hindus.
 As we all know Indic and Sinic civilization have survived the longest. What is remarkable is that India because of the geography took a lot of pounding in its lifetime, more so than China. But yet, here we are at ths cusp of achieving greatness one more time. How can this happen if people are eternal dhimmi?
 The present dhimmitude could be traced to recent leadreship of the Hindu community. By recent I mean last 75 years.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-"Paul"+-->QUOTE("Paul")<!--QuoteEBegin-->Akbarnama
Ain-e-Akbari
Neither of them AFAIK refer to Akbar's marriage or his numerous wives.
I was reading in Ain-e-Akbari about the way Hemu was slaughtered. Akbar's role in this heinous episode is not clear. Bairam Khan egged Akbar to get rid of this Kaffir.
Tardi Beg and Bairam Khan did all the dirty work for Akbar in his early days.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-"Paul"+-->QUOTE("Paul")<!--QuoteEBegin-->Akbar was short, bow legged from years of riding horses, had mongolid features....completely opposed to what Hrithik is like.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-"csharma"+-->QUOTE("csharma")<!--QuoteEBegin-->Regardless of what the reality of Jodha is, one has to keep in mind that the story was important for Hindu Rajput narrative. Muslim writers would definitely downplay such an episode because history writing at that time(or even now) was not an impartial event recording exercise.
 To cite an example, a book written on Indian history by a British author in early 20th century devoted one third of the book to Alexander's "invasion" of India.
 In the movie, they show Bairam Khan beheading Hemu. In any case, Akbar was definitely more tolerant and credit should be given to him for that. For 100 years Hindus enjoyed equality until Aurangzeb became the emperor.
IMHO, while Turks were great conquerors, running of an efficient administration was possible when the Hindus were co-opted. The same thing is seen after Persia is conquered. Eventually all the bureacratic positions were filled up by Persians.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-"csharma"+-->QUOTE("csharma")<!--QuoteEBegin-->Not unsurprising since the Mughals are Turko-Mongol from Central asia. They are the descendants of Tamerlane.
 It is quite remarkable how these Uzbeks, Tajiks had traveled far and wide conquering lands like India among others. Look at how these countries are faring now and look at India. The Indian civilization genius is now free again and should take us again to the dizzy heights achieved during Gupta age.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-"ramana"+-->QUOTE("ramana")<!--QuoteEBegin-->Csharma, I was thinking that the hundred years respite that Akbar's reign gave the Hindus led to them casting of dhimmitude and do bhagawat all over Hindusthan, when zulmi laws were brought back by Aurangazeb. I personally thank Jodha Ma for giving us the respite. This is the narrative we need to understand. Not the bogus one of eternal dhimmitude. And the other thing is Akbar's tolerant kingship was the model for the West's Enlightenment.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-"bhavani"+-->QUOTE("bhavani")<!--QuoteEBegin-->Amen Ramana sir, i think one has to put a lot of things out of his mind, before they watch this movie
Saw Jodhaa akbar at the 10.00PM Show. Same crap of showing Akbar as a secular, merciful lord of Hindustan. Johdhaa Is never converted in the movie, which is false. She has her own small place of worship in agra fort which is not true. Everyone of Akbars wives did convert.
When Akbar sends the mullah to Mecca at the end of movie as a way of moving the guy out of kingdom, everybody was laughing as it was similar to the way he sends bairam khan to mecca.
WHo ever Jodhaa bai was she must be one hell of a lady, for living in such a frightening place and also controlling all the Other Harems.
Akbar was obviously better than aurangzeb, like getting fried in a pan is better than falling in the fire itself.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin-"csharma"+-->QUOTE("csharma")<!--QuoteEBegin-->Ramana, good points.
The more history I read, the more I think Hindus have always fought against injustice. This eternal dhimmitude is probably an invention of Muslim triumphalism and sustained by British admiration of the Turkic Mughals and Europe's knowledge and admiration of the Ottomans. They know of the Ottomans who were all set to conquer European heartland in the 16 century and in India they find the 'brethren' of the Turks and they glorified that chapter of India's history. The lack of western interest in the dramatic rise of Marathas is perplexing to me. Here are a bunch of people reeling under the mighty Mughal empire and they come from nowhere to replace them as rulers of India. While many in BR already know but most Indians don't know that 18th century was the century of Hindu revival in India. Mughal emperor in Delhi was reduced to a puppet of Marathas and Marathas used to provide security to Delhi.
You also have to keep in mind that Hindus at this stage were a very old civilization. And Muslim world was the superpower at this stage (even though the Ottomans peaked in the 16 century). Yet the Marathas achieved the improbable. That shows the fighting spirit and resilience of the Hindus.
 As we all know Indic and Sinic civilization have survived the longest. What is remarkable is that India because of the geography took a lot of pounding in its lifetime, more so than China. But yet, here we are at ths cusp of achieving greatness one more time. How can this happen if people are eternal dhimmi?
 The present dhimmitude could be traced to recent leadreship of the Hindu community. By recent I mean last 75 years.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->