What's new

Why Indians embraced slavery in past ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
You see you are insulting yourself. I did mention word sub-continent region when there was no Pakistan/India/Bangladesh. You are insulting Hinduism if you are saying that Hindus were cowards to surrender to outsiders even if we assume that those all Hindus surrendered were forefathers of Pakistani which is far from reality. Where you brave majority Indian Hindus/Muslim were hiding ?
If it is far from reality, how does it insult hindus.... if the outlying areas of Ancient India i.e present day pakistan not hindu areas, then you might want to explain 3000 years of slavery under hindus, if you do claim they were hindu areas which contradicts your "far from reality", then explain 800 years of invader slavery... the onus is on you

I'm an athiest, so it doesn't concern me insulting any religion (which I am not doing in the first place).... the question was about the people... your aforementioned heroes/invaders took land where you live right now, introspect hard to understand the slavery question....
 
I am proud of my religion. All religion take birth with zero follower and then people from previous religion Christianity, Judaism, polytheism etc join them. so what is your point? 
 
 
Last edited:
Coz they really didn't care. Mentally they were always free. Considering the history of Indian people, civilization which is 5000 years old, few centuries doesn't make any difference. :D
Few centuries are not small period. I gave you thank because at least you were on topic unlike others insecure fellows who were asking more questions instead of giving answer of what is being asked :D
 
I have not started this topic to insult anyone. These are two genuine questions come in my mind frequently which i was not able to get any logical answer.

We know English,Arabs, Persian, Mongol, Turkish, Spanish, Portuguese, French, Russian etc went all over the world to conquer different region and had established their rule over there. Some of them were less in number compare to native Indians of sub-continent region. Which part of the world ruled by Indians ? Why Ghaznavi, Ghori, Abdali with few thousand of people managed to conquer India easily? Why native Indians gave up and embraced slavery of Arabs/afghan/Persian/Mughal/British easily which lasted century after century ? Was It because of cowardice or submissive/subdue nature of Hindus?

The only Hindu empire worth noting for its bravery was the Marathi empire of the 18th century which actually had a lot of Muslims soldiers in its ranks. Living among Hindus for so long the minorities of India have also been affected by this disease of gutlessness and cowardice. Is there something in the Hindu scriptures or Indian psyche that drives this cowardly behavior?

or this cowardice nature was because of extreme division among themselves along caste (sub caste within caste), culture, state, sect, language, dialect etc etc which in result created insecurity, jealousy, hatred, fear, mistrust among them. We know Religion often acts as a morale booster if you are full of confidence and hold your beliefs close to your heart. This is true in case of Muslims at least. Muslims were very few in the beginning of Islam but they faced opponents three-four times bigger in size/strength and often defeated them convincingly.

Hindus create their own interpretation of Hinduism based on their secular beliefs. This is why Hinduism today is nothing more than idolatry, senseless rituals, polytheism, caste system, cow worship etc. Hindus claiming that smoking, drinking, drugs, homosexuality, robbing, cheating etc etc are all cool in Hinduism because Hinduism has "no rules". It is all being done to show that Hinduism is more compatible with west and it is a very liberal religion. You can act cowardly because there is something called karma. You are very peaceful if you cannot dare to fight. I don't think such Religion with no rules can inspire its followers to fight against invaders.

I have shared my personal thought and perception. I would be interested to know what you guys think about it ? Please give to the point answer without bringing irrelevant stuffs. Thanks

Ghaznavi did raids and got his loot.

Ghori defeated Prithviraj Chauhan and died soon after.

Most of their victories came from technical prowess in their military and sometimes treacherous people like jaichand.

Moreover,none of the Hindu kingdoms were united and didn't see themselves as fighting for hinduism,they were only fighting for the sovereignity of their own kingdoms.

And you added many nationalities there like Russian/Spanish and all who were never there in India.

French and the Portuguese held two territories in India and they had technical prowess unmatched.

By the way most of the soldiers of Maratha/Sikh were Hindu or Sikh with a few muslims and not a lot of them.

And Ghaznavi/Ghori/Abdali didn't conquer India,they only conquered Delhi.

Hinduism doesn't allow any of those you mentioned and even meat is looked down upon.

Vegetarian Jats gave so much trouble to the Mughal Empire in Delhi all the time.

Muslims have not conquered India and they only have Pakistan.

India is the only stumbling block in the path of the erstwhile Islamic Conquest.

And Smoking Drugs/Loot maari is the quality of Muslims and not Hindus.

We have always lived in Fertile lands filled with water and prosperity instead of deserts and semi arid regions.

I suggest you go study history from genuine sources before coming up and writing stuff that ll make your parents feel ashamed of you.
 
I am proud of my religion. All religion take birth with zero follower and then people from previous religion Christianity, Judaism, polytheism etc join them. so what is your point? 

But its you who is trolling here without contributing anything useful to the questions being raised ?
If I were trolling I would be asking you the question on why the so called inferior hindus cut your country in to half
 
You see you are insulting yourself. I did mention word sub-continent region when there was no Pakistan/India/Bangladesh. You are insulting Hinduism if you are saying that Hindus were cowards to surrender to outsiders even if we assume that those all Hindus surrendered were forefathers of Pakistani which is far from reality. Where you brave majority Indian Hindus/Muslim were hiding ?

I ll be a coward today and survive and take my revenge tomorrow,rather than being brave today and becoming extinct from the history of mankind.

However brave you are,if you dont put a price on your life,you ll die like a dog infront of a cannon.
 
Few centuries are not small period. I gave you thank because at least you were on topic unlike others insecure fellows who were asking more questions instead of giving answer of what is being asked :D
I once saw a video, that if one is afraid of being forced by some master to convert then that person doesn't deserve to follow his/her faith.

In Indian sub-continent, some accepted other faith because they found it better, some due to fear. Its upto them. As far as I am concerned, I am proud of my heritage.

Having said that, I respect other faiths too. I don't have any problem with any faith as long as they are not forced on anyone. Peaceful Co existence is what that matters at the end of the day.
 
That was not choice but forcefully conversion by all those barbaric invaders.
Well no one forced me. You and me cannot go back in history to see how people were converted and for what reasons. But if it was not choice and was forced conversion in past then it was weakness of Hinduism/Hindus who could not protect/defend its followers being converted forcibly by others . No? But you said it before they were surrendered themselves because they were cowards lol

So my question become more relevant now :)
 
Well no one forced me. You and me cannot go back in history to see how people were converted and for what reasons. But if it was not choice and was forced conversion in past then it was weakness of Hinduism/Hindus who could not protect/defend its followed being converted forcibly by others . No? But you said before they were surrenders themselves because they were cowards lol

so my question become more relevant now :)

Proud of what?? Wannabe arab :rofl::rofl:

You people show true nature of your forefathers... You can not be honest to your religion (south asian aka converted muslim but always trying to project your self as arab or turkish :cheesy:)
 
@Proudpakistaniguy

When you say "Indian History" , Its our history too . My grand father was born in British India and lived most of his life in "British India" , untill our part of land came to be known as Pakistan . so would have been your grand father too . All of our ancestors were "Indians" . Actually you are trying to insult all of us including yourself (unless your ethnicity is Turk or Arab)
 
I ll be a coward today and survive and take my revenge tomorrow,rather than being brave today and becoming extinct from the history of mankind.

However brave you are,if you dont put a price on your life,you ll die like a dog infront of a cannon.

You were greater in number than those few thousand afghans and British. You were not helpless because you had no other option. I gave example of Muslims who fought with 3/4 times bigger enemy. Its not bravery to attack people when you are powerful and they are down. If you were united and would have fight against them then you could have win easily but you did not bother and got subdue easily without showing any major sign of resistance
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom