What's new

Land of the impure

Status
Not open for further replies.

pak-marine

ELITE MEMBER
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
11,639
Reaction score
-22
Country
Pakistan
Location
Pakistan
By a quirk of fate, the Indian Campaign of Alexander the Macedonian was restricted entirely to what is now Pakistan. After his death in 322 BCE, his empire disintegrated and the brilliant Chandragupta Maurya rose to power in a great kingdom that spread across much of the subcontinent. Asoka, who outshone his grandsire, extended his rule to most of Afghanistan, even wresting bits of that country from its Greek masters.

The decay of the Mauryan Empire gave rise to a new wave of Greek adventurers. In or about the year 184 BCE, Demetrius, the first of the Euthydemid line of kings, left his seat of power at Balkh from where he controlled Afghanistan, and annexed Taxila. Not two decades had passed when another line of Greek adventurers, the descendents of Alexander’s general Seleucus Nikator, displaced the Euthydemids to become masters of first Taxila and Sialkot and eventually most of what is now Pakistan.

Far away in the east, the caste-conscious rulers of Patliputra (Patna) looked upon this parade of outsiders with disdain. The Yavanas (the local pronunciation of the Persian Yunani from Ionian) were despised people. For the Pundits of the east, these people were the Mlechha — unclean ones. There was, in that early pre-Islamic age, no appreciation for the white-skinned foreigners. By extension, the land of the outsiders became Mlechha Desa — Land of the unclean.

The power of the Greeks eventually waned and a hundred years after Eucratides, the Seleucid king, had taken Taxila, Punjab and Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa fell to Scythian hordes. Under their able king, Maues, these people rose in power and even before Maues died, they had spread across what is now Pakistan.

Having been in fashion for more than a hundred years, the title of Mlechha Desa now stuck fast. This was the land customarily under control of the impure, unclean outsiders. Little did it matter to the high caste Pundits of the east that they and outsiders in reality sprang from the common Indo-Aryan stock separated only by some scores of generations. Nevertheless, there was clearly no admiration for the newcomers; there was only revulsion.

This remained the case for the next millennium. It was only subsequent to the Muslim influx into the subcontinent when a sufficiently large number of conversions led to friction between the old established belief system and the new, that the first seeds of ‘love for the tormentor’, the invading newcomer, were sown. This was largely because the invader was now always Muslim (save Chengez Khan) and looked upon by the converts of India as a saviour.

Mahmud Ghaznavi, a Turk erroneously adopted by the Pathans as one of them, who raped and looted regardless of the religion of his victim, was lionised simply for being a Muslim. Few care to know that while this common brigand descended upon India in the winters, he routinely pillaged the rich (Muslim) cities of Central Asia. Only Abu Rehan Al Beruni got the real measure of this robber chief: Never in his life did he refer to him as Imad ud Daula, Sultan Ghazi etc. For Al Beruni, he was forever plain Amir Mahmud.

The cowardly Jalaluddin Khwarazm flying in front of the superior arms and tactics of Chengez Khan was turned into a hero by that sham historian Nasim Hijazi. This spineless man abandoned his family to the Mongols, knowing full well what they did to their adversaries, and fled to watch their rape and plunder from the safe side of the Sindhu River.
Subsequently, he indulged in wholesale slaughter in Multan, Uch and Bhambore (all Muslim cities) and utterely sacked Pari Nagar, a rich and fabulous city shared by Hindus and Muslims in Tharparkar. Mindless of all this savagery, we, in our ignorance, shamelessly permitted the spurious work of Hijazi to hone our love for this tormentor.

There is clearly a lack of national pride. There can be no other reason that we worship invaders who raped, looted and sacked our cities. We worship them and name sons after them only because we share the same religion with them.

]
Published in The Express Tribune, June 11th, 2011.
 
.
where is the proof he 'raped'????? he looted yes, but isnt what the britain did??? they looted the wealth, but still them both changed indian civilization, built taj mehals, if they had been cruel, your ancesters hadnt converted to islam in the first place

you want to be proud of hindu heritage??, go back to india i guess and worship hindus who divide into castes and treat shudras as pigs and worship rats
 
.
Idiotic posts as usual , try using the little pea if there is on he writes for a popular news paper and if you dont agree find a source , or keep it shut
 
.
where is the proof he 'raped'????? he looted yes, but isnt what the britain did??? they looted the wealth, but still them both changed indian civilization, built taj mehals, if they had been cruel, your ancesters hadnt converted to islam in the first place

you want to be proud of hindu heritage??, go back to india i guess and worship hindus who divide into castes and treat shudras as pigs and worship rats

Just beecause in some village temple it is practised you generalise it on all hindus.

Are you seriously a mentally retarded boy?
 
.
it is true that the land of the subcontinent has been invaded many times,greeks,pesians,turks,british,french,portugese.Many stayed back and in way became a part of the culture of the subcontinent.As it is with the invaders,they committed many crimes,plunder of wealth,rape and murder.

There is no justification in feeling proud about them due to same religion,at the same time one should not be ashamed due to same religion.Religion is at its own place.
 
.
lets see what you name your kids...ishu pishu gishu mishu??? :rofl:

certainly not mehmood gaznavi you seem his admirer keep following dacoits and name ur child aftr the tyrants see whr u get with that
 
.
it is true that the land of the subcontinent has been invaded many times,greeks,pesians,turks,british,french,portugese.Many stayed back and in way became a part of the culture of the subcontinent.As it is with the invaders,they committed many crimes,plunder of wealth,rape and murder.

There is no justification in feeling proud about them due to same religion,at the same time one should not be ashamed due to same religion.Religion is at its own place.

the so called local rulers were not saints either... they did the same too. just a difference of skin between them... No ? so why not start with what the locals kings were doing ? instead of bashing the invaders ?
 
.
you want to be proud of hindu heritage??, go back to india i guess and worship hindus who divide into castes and treat shudras as pigs and worship rats

There are different ways of worshiping the God.It is not necessary that everybody look at things the way you do.The very early forms civilization used to worship different forces of nature,or the mother goddess,something that was predominant in the Harappan civilization ,a major part of which is in present Pakistan.They had their own way of doing things,you may have your own.There is nothing wrong in either of them.
 
.
certainly not mehmood gaznavi you seem his admirer keep following dacoits and name ur child aftr the tyrants see whr u get with that

ishu pishu gishu mishu lets see where these names take your children !!
 
.
hmm... So you are suggesting that what ever we have believed so far was all lie?


It is very easy to undermine a person's achievements and degrade him once he is dead.
 
.
the so called local rulers were saints either... they did the same too. just a difference of skin between them... No ? so why not start with what the locals kings were doing ?

History is a fascinating subject.It is full of many recorded incidents of plunder and murder.But also at the same time,the rulers patronized art,culture,architecture and Science.Now it would be kind of revolting to see all that being destroyed in an invasion aimed at plunder of wealth.

A well-established kingdom will try to stabilize its territories and an invasion will always destroy peace and prosperity,and bring miseries to the people in the process.
 
.
History is a fascinating subject.It is full of many recorded incidents of plunder and murder.But also at the same time,the rulers patronized art,culture,architecture and Science.Now it would be kind of revolting to see all that being destroyed in an invasion aimed at plunder of wealth.

A well-established kingdom will try to stabilize its territories and an invasion will always destroy peace and prosperity,and bring miseries to the people in the process.

Churchill was being told about German bombardment, he kept listening till the informer told we are going to be destroyed...he interrupted and asked is our courts serving justice to the commoners? the informer replied Yes, they are doing their job... Churchill said then hold tight, no one can destroy us.
 
.
ishu pishu gishu mishu lets see where these names take your children !!

I am not naming any kids , since u seem keen on ghaznavis u should find source to confirm or else we will have some more dakos to deal with
 
.
hmm... So you are suggesting that what ever we have believed so far was all lie?


It is very easy to undermine a person's achievements and degrade him once he is dead.

I have read the same thing that these guys were heros and how he captured somnath and what a great warrior he was whereas we have a pakistani writer writing in a pakistani publication that these people were rapists & dacoits !?
 
.
The last paragraph is so true.

When people in Pakistan don't even identify themselves as Pakistani primarily then theres going to be no national unity and pride. And its not just past invaders some Pakistanis worship due to share religion but even today you'll see some Pakistanis worship arabs due to shared religion.
 
.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom