What's new

To Indians and followers of Hindu religion

The first date was Iltutmish; he was the first to rule from within India, although a deft debater would point out that a larger view of south Asia would include Afghanistan, and therefore would include both Ghor and Ghazni, would force consideration of both Ghurid and Ghaznavid, and would push things back a couple of centuries.

If we are discussing the first South Asian muslim Sultan then personally i would say Qutbuddin Aibek was the first one albeit his reign was 4 years long. Nevertheless he established a capital at Lahore, hence the transgression from Central Asia to South Asia.
 
Why are we all getting so uptight? sheesh!

I am from South India,
Here we dont have any traces of what the thread starter said, i dont give a damn about that..i only care about who rules India now.

Champ, when you find out, be sure to let me know.

Sir who am I to question a senior defence person like you I am just a arm chair general :D part of the reason I joined PDF is to learn from guys like yourself you have much knowledge to give to us newbies

:cheers:

Jacked.

Listen, I'm NOT a senior defence person; those are guys dressed in civvies who march leaning slightly to the left, and with handlebar moustaches. I was a technician in defence and avionics applications. Well, maybe not a technician, more like an administrator; by that time, I was corporate overhead, not project cost.

And I'm learning more by lurking and reading than by posting. Just check the number of times I've posted.:whistle:

off topic but i am curious to hear from a south indian.

why do north indians hate you south indians?

Are you kidding? They love each other. IT'S JUST US PEACELOVING, POETIC, SENSITIVE, IMAGINATIVE, LOYAL, HARDWORKING, SELF-SACRIFICING, BRAVE, GENTLE BENGALI THAT THESE TWO, THE NORTH INDIANS AND THE SOUTH INDIANS, HATE!!!

AND MOST OF ALL, IT'S US BANGLADESHIS THEY HATE THE MOST!!!
 
Last edited:
If we are discussing the first South Asian muslim Sultan then personally i would say Qutbuddin Aibek was the first one albeit his reign was 4 years long. Nevertheless he established a capital at Lahore, hence the transgression from Central Asia to South Asia.

I could live with this. Reasonable enough.
 
off topic but i am curious to hear from a south indian.

why do north indians hate you south indians?

Oh really, may be that was the reason behind the resignation of our Telecom minister A Raja..East or West..North or South..We are INDIANS and i am proud of that.
Get an own life kiddo :rofl:
 
Why are we all getting so uptight? sheesh!
Are you kidding? They love each other. IT'S JUST US PEACELOVING, POETIC, SENSITIVE, IMAGINATIVE, LOYAL, HARDWORKING, SELF-SACRIFICING, BRAVE, GENTLE BENGALI THAT THESE TWO, THE NORTH INDIANS AND THE SOUTH INDIANS, HATE!!!

AND MOST OF ALL, IT'S US BANGLADESHIS THEY HATE THE MOST!!!

Joe, what makes you think South Indians or North Indians hate Bengalis/ Bangladeshis? I don't know about North Indians but South Indians aren't much in touch with Bengalis to hate them.
 
Thanks for the excellent post and some good lessons on history and putting things in perspective.
When Pakistanis claim 1000year Muslim rule in India, where does it come from? If we fix 1857 as the end date, does it mean that they claim mid-9th century as the start of the Islamic domination of the subcontinent? or only the areas consisting of todays Pakistan (Punjab and Sindh)?
Is basic math different in modern Pakistan?

In an earlier post of mine, I had protested against some of the labelling you had used, and tried to avoid the questions raised by you in your post cited above.

Unfortunately, these questions, and others, kept niggling away in my mind. I would like to unburden myself in part by responding to your mail, in part by going beyond it.

If we look at dates first, without looking at the categories to which they are being applied, we can win some cheap victories. Let us see what these might be.

When anyone speaks of a 1000 years of Muslim rule, he is wrong, on many counts; however, here we are absorbed with the clock, and what is on it. Very simply, can he claim 1000 years of continuous rule of anything?

The answer is no. There was a date over 1000 years earlier, 710 AD, when the first invader of Muslim background captured two of the native provinces. This stayed with those two, Sind and Multan, until finally, the Ghaznavids broke through the outer wall of defences against invaders of all kinds, and poured into the plains.

What is the situation then? Why are we asked repeatedly to accept a set of mysterious numbers, and about a mysterious category?
 
In the post you have cited, I have been thinking about and defining things for a different purpose, hence left out binQasim and talked about events nearly 500 years later. But I could just as easily have included it if the definition of the question had been, "How old was the earliest state use of Muslim laws in India?" It automatically become co-terminous with bin Qasim OR (a big caveat) the earliest coming of Islam to India in Kerala!!! The first mosque's establishment (in the Beary territory) before the 8th century was out might be another landmark.

I'd love to answer your question(s) but you need to reword them; just now you sound very hostile, and have managed to scare the **** out of me.

Hey Joe, Thanks for replying patiently :tup:
I didn't mean to sound hostile and my query is genuine. My knowledge history is very very rudimentary. I come from a place on south-west cost, a little north of beary territory. When I look back at the history of my place, we never had a Muslim ruler, except for a brief period during Tipu Sultans conflict with the British. Still there is considerable Islamic influence in the local culture. The unique thing about the Beary culture is their high degree of local cultures adaptation, unlike the Arabic/Turkic/Persian influenced Islamic cultures of other parts in subcontinent. Its something similar to Islamic cultures in South-east Asia, which has Islamic tones with predominantly local pre-Islamic flavor.
 
Hey Joe, Thanks for replying patiently :tup:
I didn't mean to sound hostile and my query is genuine.

My dear Sir, Although I have not written many posts, people have come to understand that I am a harmless eccentric, and make allowances accordingly. One of the least comprehensible eccentricities is my tendency to crack jokes the humour of which is apparent to nobody else, and to be immoderately amused by them.

I don't seriously think you were being hostile, I was just being facetious, a normal mode of communication for me.

Of course your query is genuine; it kept me up most of the night, unable to drop off, because of some niggles relating to it. Suddenly, the whole puzzle fell into place. As it was then already early morning, and I was exhausted, I left a brief 'place-holder' comment for you, and went to sleep, very relaxed and happy.

My knowledge history is very very rudimentary. I come from a place on south-west cost,

Ah, a Konk. My home in Malleswaram in Bengaluru is half Konk and half Hebbar Iyengar; 8th Main on till the railway tracks is Konk. Canara Union is on 8th Main, btw, and so on and so forth. Very pleased to meet you.

a little north of beary territory.

How wonderful. It is a very good thing that people don't know too much about that stretch of coastline between Mangalore and Karwar; let's keep it quiet. To me, that's as close to heaven as you can get. With the Malnad a short jeep ride behind, of course.

The Bearys are a very special community, and I wish you would take time to write them up. Very few people know that they (and the Moplahs around Kozhikode and Kannur - Calicut and Cannanore, if you are old-fashioned) were around arguably earlier than Muhammad bin Qasim, and for me to say these things out aloud on a forum like this will invite involuntary circumcision, with not much attention paid to the anatomical niceties.

When I look back at the history of my place, we never had a Muslim ruler, except for a brief period during Tipu Sultans conflict with the British. Still there is considerable Islamic influence in the local culture. The unique thing about the Beary culture is their high degree of local cultures adaptation, unlike the Arabic/Turkic/Persian influenced Islamic cultures of other parts in subcontinent. Its something similar to Islamic cultures in South-east Asia, which has Islamic tones with predominantly local pre-Islamic flavor.

You have got it exactly, and that's what makes them a show-piece community, in my eyes, that and their reputation for integrity and fair dealing. Not for nothing are they so trusted in the property market.

I have a LOT of time for Bearys. Bless them. Wonderful community. Please do find some excuse for introducing them. They are utterly charming, without being exotic in any sense, even as their feet are firmly on the ground.

I shall look forward hugely to some word from you on them.
 
Story of Prithviraj Chauhan and the triumph of islam in india--written by myself


prithviraj chauhan was the king of ajaymeru ( now ajmer ) ,who also ruled over delhi .he was the most powerful king in north india ,and had incurred the wrath of jaychand ,the ruler of kanauj in UP , by eloping with his daughter sanyukta .

all these rulers , including those in UP, were rajputs ,who dominated north india .

they were descendants of scythian invaders from central asia ,who had intermarried into local people after settling in india. because the brahmins had realised that these warlike people were set to be the rulers of india for a long time , they had smartly co-opted the rajputs into the hindu system , by declaring them to be kshatriyas.this happened in the seventh century ,after the death of emperor harshavardhan.

by the time of prithvi , the rajputs had dominated india for a period of 5 and a half centuries.they were a people who followed a code of chivalry .......did not hurt innocent women and children in war ,did not chase an opponent who turned away to flee ,and did not attack or destroy the towns and cities or even villages ......indeed ,people went about calmly working and tilling their fields while armies fought battles nearby !!......in short , dharmayudda.......

they also considered death in battle the passageway to heaven if they fought by principles of dharmayudda ,and were not at all afraid to die........but the major weakness of this was that to them , the result of the battle was not important ,it was more important to fight bravely without compromising their principles.

this was okay while fighting other indians , but was glaringly exposed while fighting against determined opponents on an international scale .

not all times they were unsucessful however , and a major arab invasion was defeated by raja bhoj ,the king of ujjain ,in the ninth century.

also muhammad ghauri ,the opponent of prithvi was defeated by the rajput ruler of gujrat ,and by prithvi himself in early encounters.

but in the 11th century , one of the greatest generals mahmud of ghazni invaded india 17 times ,including somnath in gujrat ,which he utterly destroyed, and the weakness of the rajput military machine was glaringly exposed.

the chief advantage of the turks was archery , and their main technique was the parthian shot.......this involved turning back while the horse was galloping at full speed forward,and still be able to fire the arrow accurately backwards on the chasing opponent.

thus the opponent could be lured in to chasing the turkish army which feigned retreat ,and suddenly the fleeing turkish army would turn back on their horses and fire arrows on the enemy ,surprising the opponent.

this was not easy , as firing arrows backwards accurately while the horse was moving forwrds required a lot of skill and practice ,but the turks had mastered it.


mahmud of ghazni's invasions resulted in loss of punjab ,northwest frontier ,while sind and baluchistan had already gone to arabs.

thus the area that has become pakistan was under muslim occupation for a much longer time than other parts of india ,which explains the greater muslim population in that area , and the creation of pakistan.

later mahmuds dynasty was replaced by the ghurids , to whom muhammad ghauri ,prithviraj's principle opponent belonged.as punjab passed to him from mahmuds dynasty ,he already had a foothold in india.

now he confronted the brave ,chivalrous prithviraj , ruler of rajasthan ,and dhillika ( delhi ).

but afraid to confront such a powerful and capable ruler ,he first tried his hand in invading gujrat . in this ,he was soundly beaten by the rajput ruler of gujrat .

however , jaychand ,the king of kanauj , proved traitor to his country by inviting ghauri to invade india and crush prithvi , in order to take revenge for the humiliation he had suffered ,when his daughter sanyukta had eloped with prithvi.

realising that cracks were appearing between the rajputs themselves , ghauri decided to invade delhi .declaring that '' he would send the cow-faced hindus to hell '' he proclaimed jehad ,and advanced with a force of maybe 50-60,000 horsemen on delhi ,which was governed by govind rai ,prithviraj's brother .

but as luck would have it , prithvi was in the vicinity of delhi ( actually dhillika ), not in ajaymeru ( ajmer ) his capital.he had with him a force of one lakh cavalry( horsemen ).

the two met at the village of tarain ,near thaneswar north of delhi.

mahmud's army was divided into 3 wings , right ,left and center.

the rajputs had all taken opium , which made them forget all attachment to the world , and fight with reckless bravery.

they attacked in a solid mass onto the turks. the turks were overwhelmed by the superior numbers of the rajputs , and their death defying heroics.

the sheer force of the rajput attack seperated the right and left wing of the turkish army from the center , and the turks began to lose heart.

ghauri decided to bolster up his force's courage and attacked govind rai ,prithviraj's brother with a lance that broke his teeth . but undaunted , govind rai picked up a spear ,and threw with accurate aim , wounding ghauri ,who fell from his horse.

just as govind rai's bodyguards began to close in to kill ghauri ,a khalji ( turk stteled in afghanistan ) soldier quickly picked him up on his horse ,and carried him to safety.

by this time the rout of the turks was complete ,and the first battle of tarain had gone in favour of the rajputs .

ghauri had done the mistake of meeting the brave rajputs in frontal charge ,where the rajputs excelled ,instead of using archers to attack them from far......hence he had lost.

true to their chivalrous spirit ,the rajputs did not try to destroy the retreating turks ......a mistake which would cost india dear in the days to come...........as many turks fled with their lives intact , free to fight another battle......

after this ,the rajputs laid seige to the fort of bhatinda , but did not possess seige engines , and could not capture it ........eventually ,it was starved into surrender after thirteen months........ but this again exposed indias lack of military knowledge .


prithviraj returned in triumph to his capital which was gayly decorated to welcoming him by his wife sanyukta .here , he remained immersed in pleasures and enjoyment , and neglected the defence of the frontiers. this was his grave mistake as he should have realised that ghauri would attack again. prithvi clearly had become overconfident of his strength.

his achievements were sung by his court poet chanda bardai ,who has left us an account from which we also know the story of prithviraj from his veiwpoint ......as also the story of his romance with sanyukta.

not so ghauri ,who was so incensed by his defeat ,that he put the generals who had fled from the battlefield in prison ,and freed them only when they took an oath to be ready to die on the battlefield if they fought again.

next year , he advanced fully prepared , with a force of no less than one lakh and twenty thousand horsemen .

such preparations could not go unnoticed , and prithviraj called upon all the rajput kings in north india ,who advanced to help him. his total forces numbered a mighty 3 lakh horsemen.

again the two armies came face to face at tarain .it was an year after the earlier battle ....the year was 1192 , a fateful year that would change the destinies of india.

the rajputs sent a haughty message telling ghauri of their vast forces.clearly they were overconfident of success. to this ghauri replied by lying that he was indeed impressed by the size of the rajput force ,and he wanted to negotiate a peace and return home.

the rajpots became so relaxed by his answer that they spent the night wining , dining and taking opium , thinking that no war was going to be fought.

next dawn ,they were rudely woken up from their slumber and morning ablutions,as 1,20,000 turkish cavalrymen charged them from all sides.........

this time ghauri had brought along his horse archers ,who formed four wings ,and surrounded the rajputs from all sides ,firing arrows.

as the rajputs tried to close in with them for hand to hand combat , they would retreat , and fire the arrows backwards while retreating , the classic parthian shot.

the rajputs were frustrated as they could not get into grips with the enemy , and the constant shower of arrows harassed them and began to thin their numbers. this continued for 3 hours.

as rajputs were dwindling in numbers , and began to tire out ,ghauri sent in his reserve force ,who were heavy cavalry expert in hand -to hand combat ,and wore chain armour. these troops were fresh ,and had not fought ,so they were untired. rajputs ,on the other hand ,were tired ........above all ,they had not kept a reserve ,to face untired enemy troops .

this turkish reserve force charged at full gallop into the rajputs ,who were tired by now by the constant skirmishing ,and did not have the energy for hand to hand combat anymore.

slowly but surely the rajputs were cut down .......

finally ,they began to flee .....it was now every man for himself.....

the turks did not show them any chivalry , and a great massacre began .......

prithviraj ,the tragic hero of the tale , proved that he was no hero at all, by trying to escape from the battlefield on a horse ,instead of dying a true general's ( and needless to say ,rajput's )death ,by suffering the same fate as his soldiers........but to no avail ,as he was caught by turkish soldiers and put to death.

nobody knows what happened to sanyogita and chanda bardai . as far sanyukta's father jaychand is concerned , the traitor did not live to relish his revenge for long ,as the turks invaded his domains and killed him ,destroying his capital kanauj .

with that this saga had come to an end.......
 
Last edited:
Joe, what makes you think South Indians or North Indians hate Bengalis/ Bangladeshis? I don't know about North Indians but South Indians aren't much in touch with Bengalis to hate them.

That wasn't a serious remark I reckon.

South Indians in general treat everyone above Karnataka and Andhra as northies! Doesn't matter if you're from North-East or North-West! :lol:
 
off topic but i am curious to hear from a south indian.

why do north indians hate you south indians?

If you are flaming here then I can say only get a life dude but if you are wondering why such questions are available then let me try to explain you a bit.. There is exactly not "Hate" between both community but yes there were a big "Divide" over many things which include language (Devnagri/Prakriti vs Tamil based languages), race (Aryan Vs Dravid), Foods (Wheat based Vs Rice based dishes), , Dress (Pant Shirt Vs Lungi shirt) and other practices..

This divide broaden when in 1950-1965 Hindi was forced as national language and this caused a big issue as Government Jobs were dependent on that.. Many suicides and oppose took place.. Till 1990-95 the case was same.. as migration was very less between both area..but after IT boom it got changed as interaction grew from both side.. and now I see there are plenty North South Marriages( My college jr got married to telugu guy).. good frnds ( my roomies & boss with me) and to add that I call my wife as half southie as she did her higher studies (BDS) from Chennai..
 
In an earlier post of mine, I had protested against some of the labelling you had used, and tried to avoid the questions raised by you in your post cited above.

Unfortunately, these questions, and others, kept niggling away in my mind. I would like to unburden myself in part by responding to your mail, in part by going beyond it.

If we look at dates first, without looking at the categories to which they are being applied, we can win some cheap victories. Let us see what these might be.

When anyone speaks of a 1000 years of Muslim rule, he is wrong, on many counts; however, here we are absorbed with the clock, and what is on it. Very simply, can he claim 1000 years of continuous rule of anything?

The answer is no. There was a date over 1000 years earlier, 710 AD, when the first invader of Muslim background captured two of the native provinces. This stayed with those two, Sind and Multan, until finally, the Ghaznavids broke through the outer wall of defences against invaders of all kinds, and poured into the plains.

What is the situation then? Why are we asked repeatedly to accept a set of mysterious numbers, and about a mysterious category?

As we look at the historical record, and at the recorded evidence of not merely the British, who brought in their own classification of Indian history for reasons of their own, in a form of propaganda warfare that the prime wagers themselves never quite recognised even while they practised it, as we look at the record of what is said by other nations about India and the Indians, as we listen to the Arabs, and the Central Asians, and to the invaluable accounts of the intrepid Chinese, and synchronise our history with their meticulous records and their record keeping, it is not difficult to understand that there is a major disconnect.

The disconnect is not with dates at all. It was never a question of dates, in fact, whatever little storms in a tea-cup occurred over it. It was always about something else.

The whole dispute was about identity.

Some naive Indian observers may object that this is about Ancient History; where does identity come into it?

The answer lies in Pakistan's hearts and minds, in their quest for a national reason, a myth, a quest that their concept of Nazariya-e-Pakistan tried to reach, but unsuccessfully.
 
That wasn't a serious remark I reckon.

South Indians in general treat everyone above Karnataka and Andhra as northies! Doesn't matter if you're from North-East or North-West! :lol:

I was rather disconcerted when some people did take it seriously.WTF?
 
South India historically hasn't faced a lot of difficulty. The invading armies could never reach the south with full force. So south is a little more tolerant than the north. Both of them think they are superior.
Though the Tamils felt different from others during the early years of partition, the central government did a great job of promoting national unity without threatening the local culture. Slowly and steadily, linguistic identity is giving way for national identity and overall development.

The tamils are like bengalis,linguistically chauvinistic people.They pursue education,arts,culture,music,sports just like any other bunch of people.

The problem came because of DMK and the movement which had the backing of probably 5-6% of Tamils.DMK is full of pussies and they never had the balls to seriously back any claim of theirs,linguistic chauvinism was tapped and used for electoral results.

Basically,it was movement of the OBCs against the brahmins and whatever the brahmins did and stood for became taboo.

Brahmins learnt sanskrit,sanskrit is bad.
Brahmins are vegetarian,vegetarianism is bad.
Brahmins hold government jobs,take it away from them.
Brahmins have land,take it away from them.

Basically the OBCs ousted from the brahmins politically successfully.

Having said that the Tamil Brahmins(us) are also to blame as they kinda behaved like jews.Most of them came down from the north escaping the raids of Malik Kafur,Alauddin Khilji's lieutenant where you have to convert or die.The brahmins just moved south,where they were protected by the vijayanagar empire.

They are tight knit community and dont marry mix outside(Trust me,it is a big deal even if i want to marry a brahmin from outside TN).Therefore it definitely alienates them from the society.

Even though lot of Tam-Brams have contributed in various fields,they r still a big stigma in TN.
 
Why are we all getting so uptight? sheesh!



Champ, when you find out, be sure to let me know.



Jacked.

Listen, I'm NOT a senior defence person; those are guys dressed in civvies who march leaning slightly to the left, and with handlebar moustaches. I was a technician in defence and avionics applications. Well, maybe not a technician, more like an administrator; by that time, I was corporate overhead, not project cost.

And I'm learning more by lurking and reading than by posting. Just check the number of times I've posted.:whistle:



Are you kidding? They love each other. IT'S JUST US PEACELOVING, POETIC, SENSITIVE, IMAGINATIVE, LOYAL, HARDWORKING, SELF-SACRIFICING, BRAVE, GENTLE BENGALI THAT THESE TWO, THE NORTH INDIANS AND THE SOUTH INDIANS, HATE!!!

AND MOST OF ALL, IT'S US BANGLADESHIS THEY HATE THE MOST!!!


I dont think South Indian hate Bengalis.South indians especially tamils hate north indians to the hilt.It is basically because of their arrogance,even though this is just a general thing.

Bengalis and other East indians are there in abundance in Madras and it is quite chilled out fro them.
 
Back
Top Bottom