What's new

Which Indian King/Historical event is most under appreciated in Indian History?

whole of the world except India was in deep shit
So True.....Europe of that time was overflowing with Mud slums....and famous Conqueror of the world dont wants to extend their empire in that Dirty Area
.

It was probably only time when India was strongest country in world. During Mauryas and Mughals, it had to contend with strong competitors.
Frankly speaking, all the time......Whoever enthrones Delhi, Name Hindustan contains fear in the mind of its neighbours vessel states

Fact 1) I read book of Ibn-e-batoota ....as traveler he reached india, he was made Supreme Judge of Hindustan, then his relations with king (also called Mad-King of india) embitters & he have to leave to save his live to Maldives.....in maldives he was received with dignity by the Local king......bcoz they know him as supreme judge of india & as special envy of King of india.......he wrote in his book local kings fear to have in Bad relation with king of india

Fact 2) During the 2nd rise of Mongol king "Timur" he promised himself to conquer all Super Power of the world (of his time) which include a) Russia ... b) Turkey c)Persia d) India e) China..........he conquered them all except China where he died by Pneumonia while leading compaign to conquer china
 
IMHO, I feel that barring the Mauryan empire, everything else had been sidelined by the cultural marxist academia of modern India.
We had sagas and sagas of 'central asian kings benevolence' which was simply whitewashing their barbaric acts of medieval terrorism against people of the land. While they have had only one or two pages written about great kings and emperors like the following. Many of them have no mention at all about their bravery and their noble acts:
1 - Harshvarshana,
2 - Rajendra Chola,
3 - Ajatshatru,
4 - Krishnadevraya
5 - Phuntsok Namgyal of Indrakil (Sanskrit for Sikkim),
6 - Queen Gaidinliu of Nagas,
7 - Vikramaditya of Kashmir,
8 - Queen Didda of Kashmir,
9 - Queen Durgawati of Uttarakhand,
10 - King Prataap Singha of Ahoms (Assam),
11 - The Nandas,
12 - Peshwa Baji Rao of Marathas,
13 - Pulakesin of Chalukya dynasty
14 - Hemu the valiant

And there are so many more kings and even army commanders who fought valiantly from time to time against outside invaders. But cultural marxists of Indian academia found it convenient to sideline them so as not to 'offend' some people.

How many fellow Indians know about Lachhit Borphukan of Assam who thrashed the living daylights out of mughals?

How many of them know king Prithvi Narayan (first founder of Nepal though, but had tributaries in our country too then) and how he and his successors made Nepal an unconquerable fortress?

How many of fellow Indians know about queen Didda of Kashmir or queen Durgawati or even king Vikramaditya ?

When I asked about this, not many of our fellow countrymen knew these noble figures.

I think the entire north east needs more coverage in Indian books.
 
k. is it worshipped through out india or specific to one area? How does Surya Dev fits in the Hindu gods i mean like rank?
Surya deva is a Hindu god & has an important place in India Culture / Religion /Arts/Civilization.
 
Don't know whether OP wanted only leaders which had positive effect from Indian POV to be posted ( in which case i am sorry).


But one King which had and is still having a debilitating effect on India and about whom, not a single line is mentioned in our history books is Sultan Sikander Butshikan who would make Aurangzeb,Firuz Tuglaq, and Sikandar Lodhi look like secular pacifists.

He converted whole of Kashmir to Islam at swordpoint, a event which is still causing geopolitical problem for India.

To quoteFirishta, "Many of the Brahmans rather than abandon their religion or their country poisoned them selves, some emigrated from their homes while a few escaped the evil of banishment by becoming Mohamadans."

Puts A.K. Mujumdar, "These Sufi Muslim immigrants brought with them that fanatic iconoclastic zeal which distinguished Islam in other parts of India, but from which Kashmir was happily free up to this time." He further records, "Sikandar's reign was disgraced by a series of acts, inspired by religious bigotry and iconoclastic zeal for which there is hardly any parallel in the annals of the Muslim rulers of Kashmir."

This also puts to rest a common misconception that Sufi muslims are less Jihad loving than their Wahabii cousins.

Also a misconception of Pakistanis that should be sent to it's well deserved grave is that " majority of muslims were converted by Sufi saints". The sufi part may be correct but saint part is not.

It also provides a comparative analysis of Sword vs Saint mode of conversion.

Rajasthan: Saint mode = 8% muslims

Kashmir: Sword mode = 99% muslims.


@SarthakGanguly @Indrani @Sahasranama @wolfschanzze @Saheli @Sidak @levina @Dem!god
 
Last edited:
Don't know whether OP wanted only leaders which had positive effect from Indian POV to be posted ( in which case i am sorry).


But one King which had and is still having a debilitating effect on India and about whom, not a single line is mentioned in our history books is Sultan Sikander Butshikan who would make Aurangzeb,Firuz Tuglaq, and Sikandar Lodhi look like secular pacifists.

He converted whole of Kashmir to Islam at swordpoint, a event which is still causing geopolitical problem for India.





This also puts to rest a common misconception that Sufi muslims are less Jihad loving than their Wahabii cousins.

Also a misconception of Pakistanis that should be sent to it's well deserved grave is that " majority of muslims were converted by Sufi saints". The sufi part may be correct but saint part is not.

It also provides a comparative analysis of Sword vs Saint mode of conversion.

Rajasthan: Saint mode = 8% muslims

Kashmir: Sword mode = 99% muslims.


@SarthakGanguly @Indrani @Sahasranama @wolfschanzze @Saheli @Sidak @levina @Dem!god
OOps truth=communal :D
 
Don't know whether OP wanted only leaders which had positive effect from Indian POV to be posted ( in which case i am sorry).


But one King which had and is still having a debilitating effect on India and about whom, not a single line is mentioned in our history books is Sultan Sikander Butshikan who would make Aurangzeb,Firuz Tuglaq, and Sikandar Lodhi look like secular pacifists.

He converted whole of Kashmir to Islam at swordpoint, a event which is still causing geopolitical problem for India.





This also puts to rest a common misconception that Sufi muslims are less Jihad loving than their Wahabii cousins.

Also a misconception of Pakistanis that should be sent to it's well deserved grave is that " majority of muslims were converted by Sufi saints". The sufi part may be correct but saint part is not.

It also provides a comparative analysis of Sword vs Saint mode of conversion.

Rajasthan: Saint mode = 8% muslims

Kashmir: Sword mode = 99% muslims.


@SarthakGanguly @Indrani @Sahasranama @wolfschanzze @Saheli @Sidak @levina @Dem!god

Yes Butshikan was responsible for the islamization of kashmir...I think I've posted the same earlier on this thread.
And I do believe that atleast half the population of muslims that exists in India today are muslims because they were forcibly converted at some point of time.
 
Last edited:
Yes Butshikan was an responsible for the islamization of kashmir...I think I've posted the same earlier on this thread.
And I do believe that atleast half the population of muslims that exists in India today are muslims because they were forcibly converted at some point of time.
The Arabs came to conquer Sindh
under command of Muhammad bin
Qasim in 711 CE. This was an easy
task, as the people of Sindh had
been practicing Buddhism and
Hindu ahimsa (non-violence)
[citation needed] for many years,
and battle was sinful. The Arab
Muslims quickly destroyed the
Sindhi forts and conquered Sindh.
Many Hindus chose to flee Sindh
and move to Punjab and Kutch.
Those that stayed behind were
asked to convert to Islam. For those
that did not comply to this request,
heavy taxes were levied on them
and their properties were taken from
them.
The Jizya (poll tax) was the most
important factor in the mass
conversion to Islam, the tax paid by
all non-Muslims (Dhimmis ) in
Islamic ruled states In
the 8th century, under
administration of the Muslim Arabs ,
heavy taxation moves large
numbers of Coptic Christians to
convert to Islam in North Africa.
And also with the Zoroastrians
living under Muslim's rule in
ancient Persia,
Sahih al-Bukhari ,

Mughal ruler Aurangzeb cherished
the ambition of converting India
into a land of Islam. For this, he
encouraged forced religious
conversions and destroyed
thousands of Hindu temples during
his reign. [67][68] During Tipu
Sultan 's invasion of Malabar in the
late 18th century, he forcefully
converted over 400,000 Hindus to
Islam. [69][70][71] During the Moplah
Riots of 1921 in Kerala , Muslim
Mappilas forcibly converted
thousands of Hindus to Islam [72]
and killed all those who refused to
apostatise. [73] During the Noakhali
genocide of Hindus in 1946, several
thousand Hindus were forcibly
converted to Islam by Muslim mobs.
[74][75] In Bangladesh , the
International Crimes Tribunal tried
and convicted several leaders of the
Islamic Razakar militias, as well as
Bangladesh Muslim Awami league
(Forid Uddin Mausood), of war
crimes committed against Hindus
during the 1971 Bangladesh
atrocities. The charges included
forced conversion of Bengali Hindus
to Islam. [76] In the 1998 Prankote
massacre, 26 Kashmiri Hindus were
beheaded by Islamist militants after
their denial of converting into Islam.
The militants struck when the
villagers refused demands from the
gunmen to convert to Islam and
prove their conversion by eating
beef.

Don't know whether OP wanted only leaders which had positive effect from Indian POV to be posted ( in which case i am sorry).


But one King which had and is still having a debilitating effect on India and about whom, not a single line is mentioned in our history books is Sultan Sikander Butshikan who would make Aurangzeb,Firuz Tuglaq, and Sikandar Lodhi look like secular pacifists.

He converted whole of Kashmir to Islam at swordpoint, a event which is still causing geopolitical problem for India.





This also puts to rest a common misconception that Sufi muslims are less Jihad loving than their Wahabii cousins.

Also a misconception of Pakistanis that should be sent to it's well deserved grave is that " majority of muslims were converted by Sufi saints". The sufi part may be correct but saint part is not.

It also provides a comparative analysis of Sword vs Saint mode of conversion.

Rajasthan: Saint mode = 8% muslims

Kashmir: Sword mode = 99% muslims.


@SarthakGanguly @Indrani @Sahasranama @wolfschanzze @Saheli @Sidak @levina @Dem!god
this is what happening today...

In Jammu & Kashmir, the Ladakh
Buddhist Association has said:
"There is a deliberate and organised
design to convert Kargil's
Buddhists to Islam. In the last four
years, about 50 girls and married
women with children were taken
and converted from village Wakha
alone. If this continues unchecked,
we fear that Buddhists will be
wiped out from Kargil in the next
two decades or so. Anyone
objecting to such allurement and
conversions is harassed."
 
we are talking about the rulers about whom we were not taught much in our school books and beyond 12th century.
we are never been taught the whole of history... but only the part which which suits the leftist agenda....
in schools they will never teach u how Muslims plundered the indian wealth, mass rape of women and kids, killing and looting of innocent ppl.... the best reflection of past Muslim adventurism can be seen in ISIS.... this how barbaric previous muslims rulers were...
no history book in india speaks the truth...
i eagerly wait for the new books to be released to see what changes new govt. has brought to it...
 
we are never been taught the whole of history... but only the part which which suits the leftist agenda....
in schools they will never teach u how Muslims plundered the indian wealth, mass rape of women and kids, killing and looting of innocent ppl.... the best reflection of past Muslim adventurism can be seen in ISIS.... this how barbaric previous muslims rulers were...
no history book in india speaks the truth...
i eagerly wait for the new books to be released to see what changes new govt. has brought to it...
The day it happens secularism and peace of this country will go for a six.
Why should we get agitated about something that happened in the past?? and why punish somebody who is not even remotely related to that incident??
 
i have learnt about Ajasath but not about his acomplishments. It seems indian history is a very vast subject.

I am interested in ancient religions that is why i asked abt Surya god.
 
Don't know whether OP wanted only leaders which had positive effect from Indian POV to be posted ( in which case i am sorry).


But one King which had and is still having a debilitating effect on India and about whom, not a single line is mentioned in our history books is Sultan Sikander Butshikan who would make Aurangzeb,Firuz Tuglaq, and Sikandar Lodhi look like secular pacifists.

He converted whole of Kashmir to Islam at swordpoint, a event which is still causing geopolitical problem for India.





This also puts to rest a common misconception that Sufi muslims are less Jihad loving than their Wahabii cousins.

Also a misconception of Pakistanis that should be sent to it's well deserved grave is that " majority of muslims were converted by Sufi saints". The sufi part may be correct but saint part is not.

It also provides a comparative analysis of Sword vs Saint mode of conversion.

Rajasthan: Saint mode = 8% muslims

Kashmir: Sword mode = 99% muslims.


@SarthakGanguly @Indrani @Sahasranama @wolfschanzze @Saheli @Sidak @levina @Dem!god
I would also like to debunk a popular myth.

Sikander was a Sufi. :D

As for conversion - it is obvious when a population gets rapidly changes faith, there must have been a strong stimuli. Think about it, even if we appreciate a particular way of life, how many of us would go ahead and reject our present way of life and adopt a new one on our own? :azn:

All this is documented and not disputed. Sikander is taught in higher level in India, not in secondary school though.
 
I would also like to debunk a popular myth.

Sikander was a Sufi. :D

As for conversion - it is obvious when a population gets rapidly changes faith, there must have been a strong stimuli. Think about it, even if we appreciate a particular way of life, how many of us would go ahead and reject our present way of life and adopt a new one on our own? :azn:

All this is documented and not disputed. Sikander is taught in higher level in India, not in secondary school though.

Sikander's mentor was a Sufi peer ,and all his advisers and generals were too. It would mean little whether Sikander himself was a sufi or not.

I gave that example as a contrast to first chapter of Modern India history textbook which mentions about abolition of Jazia after Auranzeb's death nearly 6 times in first two pages.It is so illogical that it mentions abolition of Jazia by each and every mughal sultan without explaining how it was imposed again after it was abolished by muhammad shah.
 
Back
Top Bottom