What's new

Afzal khan and treachery of Shivaji

453px-Death_of_Afzal_Khan.jpg

Afzal Khan was a powerful man of Afghan descent and was an experienced warrior, he was general of bijapur. He was much taller and strongly-built than Shivaji. He would attack shivaji and fail? no way. Pashtun custom of hugging men on hello cost him his life, shivaji stabbed him with his hidden dagger while hugging. Afzal khan was unarmed.
The urdu phrase "shivaji ka khanjar" means treachery


Afzal Khan was a dishonourable man, unfit to be called either a warrior or a man. He invited another Hindu King before Shivaji for a meeting, and stabbed him to death. When he invited Shivaji, Shivaji knew what a cowardly woman Afzal Khan was, and rightly stabbed that unhonourable man to death for his previous cowardice.
 
Afzal Khan was a sorry excuse for a human being, got what he deserved, Chatrapati Maharaj ki Jai

19MP_SAAT_KABAR_1__1334569f.jpg

The last cries - The Hindu

BIJAPUR: Saat Kabar silently bears the dark saga of 60 wives dying at the hands of a possessive army chief-husband

My last halt in Bijapur turns out to be a bit of a grave destination and the setting of a cold-blooded tale. It is well past five in the evening, and I have been on a whirlwind tour of the heritage town where almost every monument is a mahal or a mosque or a mausoleum. But I have not had my fill yet.

The auto driver is a bit skeptical when I tell him I want to head to Saat Kabar. He tries to dissuade me. “There is no road. You may have to walk. The auto cannot go there,” he says. He warns me it is rather isolated and there will be no one around. But I refuse to give up. We drive down, leaving the dusty town and hit the highway. A detour takes us across a few scattered homes as we watch some boys play cricket on grounds. The auto stops at a dead-end. All I see in front of me are just a bit of dense undergrowth and a clump of bushes. There is no path. I walk behind the auto driver looking out for snakes. On one side is sheer wilderness and on the other, lush fields.

We keep walking and suddenly I spy the outline of a monument peeping at us through the trees. Brick red, it seems to be on the other side of a high compound wall with no access. I stop and look at it towering in front of me, the unkempt branches of the trees snaking towards it, shrouding it from public view.

It is eerie, as I wonder if this is the Saat Kabar or the 60 graves of the murdered wives of Afzal Khan, the army chief of Adil Shahi II. The graves narrate the gruesome fate of these women who were killed by their own husband. The tragic story is set in the 17th Century, when Chatrapathi Shivaji wages war against Adil Shah II. Afzal Khan leads the forces, but is distracted by an astrologer who tells him he will not survive the battle. The jealous and possessive commander decides to kill all his 60 wives lest they remarry after the war. So, he beckons them to an isolated spot and pushes them into a well. One of them tries to escape, but is captured and killed as well. And, I’m standing in the middle of nowhere looking for those 60 graves.

Suddenly, my auto driver calls out to me. He is ahead of me, near a clearing, and I make my way through the shrubs only to see a vast open space. There lie several graves, made of black stone, arranged neatly in rows. Some of these stones are broken, open to the skies. Afzal Khan apparently wanted to be buried near his wives as well, but he never returned from the battlefield.

The silence is ominous here, almost echoing the last cries of the women who were pushed to their death. I feel a shiver, and hurry back to the safe confines of civilisation.

Didn't know he was such a barbarian.Sick.
 
most of comments here are from muslims supporting afzal and hindus supporting shivaji,as a christians my point of view is shivaji was great and patriotic leader ,were afzal was just a shithead who commited grave crimes like killing his wives etc,were as shivaji even built a tomb and asked for funeral of afzal to be done according to islamic traditions now thats called a leader.
 
most of comments here are from muslims supporting afzal and hindus supporting shivaji,as a christians my point of view is shivaji was great and patriotic leader ,were afzal was just a shithead who commited grave crimes like killing his wives etc,were as shivaji even built a tomb and asked for funeral of afzal to be done according to islamic traditions now thats called a leader.
In fact this is the ideal leader that we should look up to. One who fights evil but is not blinded by it. :tup:
 
How can a son of the soil, native of the land possibly be treacherous towards a farangi afghan? These people don't belong here anyway and deserved to be shipped back to their deserts of khorasan, where they can live in peace with other disgusting cockroaches of their kind.

Har Har Mahadev. Vande Mataram

Its Indian companies who are investing in Afghanistan to get natural resources and even working to get direct access and whatever you are talking is like Indians should break relations with all the other nations because of their religion. Ever thought if the same Afghans son of soils, native of that land would talk the same, how would be our reaction. :tsk::tsk:
 
Stupid and illogical excuse, being native doesn't stop you from committing treachery....
Marathas didnt care about honour and all that stuff like rajputs......their way of fighting much powerful mughals required them to adopt tactics like this.


I guess you're right. That means any foreign occupation, however illegitimate, becomes legal through force. Taliban fighting NATO occupation of Afghanistan are also traitors to kabul regime, no?

When we were fighting 1857 war of independence- our Jang-e-azadi- against Britishers, it was muslims from present day Pakistan who played huge role in crushing it as slave soldiers. So yes, in the eyes of the British, and their loyal shoe polishers like syed ahmed khan and hazrat muhammad ali jinnah (peace be upon him), us natives were probably treacherous and angrez was right to rule us.

Sorry, its just a difference in mindset. for you farangi is to be worshipped. for us it is to be thrown out, however long it takes. Although I thought pathans had more ghairat than this.


Pashtuns have certain rules, honour code.......have you heard about "nanawatay"? according to it you are supposed to give protection to even your enemy if he asks for it.....A guest with asylum is protected at all cost even if your entire clan is annihilated.....few centuries ago my tribe was nearly annihilated by ghilzais after refusing to hand over their culprit who was under our protection.....

But yes ambushes and surprise attacks are part of our warfare even since British came to our lands, before that we used to fight in conventional way.......taliban have adopted guerrilla warfare of new level, terrorism is added to it.


No I did not know that. Rajputs of Delhi and most hindu kingdoms before that had codes of honor, but you already know what that resulted in. Unfortunately it took too many centuries for us to realize the kind of filth we were facing had no sense of ethics or honor.
 
Pashtuns have certain rules, honour code.......have you heard about "nanawatay"? according to it you are supposed to give protection to even your enemy if he asks for it.....A guest with asylum is protected at all cost even if your entire clan is annihilated.....few centuries ago my tribe was nearly annihilated by ghilzais after refusing to hand over their culprit who was under our protection.....

But yes ambushes and surprise attacks are part of our warfare even since British came to our lands, before that we used to fight in conventional way.......taliban have adopted guerrilla warfare of new level, terrorism is added to it.

Pashtuns have certain rules, honour code.......have you heard about "nanawatay"? according to it you are supposed to give protection to even your enemy if he asks for it.....A guest with asylum is protected at all cost even if your entire clan is annihilated.....few centuries ago my tribe was nearly annihilated by ghilzais after refusing to hand over their culprit who was under our protection.....

But yes ambushes and surprise attacks are part of our warfare even since British came to our lands, before that we used to fight in conventional way.......taliban have adopted guerrilla warfare of new level, terrorism is added to it.

Yes Pashtuns have very good code I agree!!

But how many of them followed it strictly while invading India??

Raping women and killing unarmed Brahmins and destroying temples !!

I think most of them deviated from Pashtunvali.
 
Yes Pashtuns have very good code I agree!!

But how many of them followed it strictly while invading India??

Raping women and killing unarmed Brahmins and destroying temples !!

I think most of them deviated from Pashtunvali.
If they were really into raping hindu women, killing unarmed brahamins and destroying temples.........the hindu population would have turned against them as they did against aurangzaib

I guess you're right. That means any foreign occupation, however illegitimate, becomes legal through force. Taliban fighting NATO occupation of Afghanistan are also traitors to kabul regime, no?

When we were fighting 1857 war of independence- our Jang-e-azadi- against Britishers, it was muslims from present day Pakistan who played huge role in crushing it as slave soldiers. So yes, in the eyes of the British, and their loyal shoe polishers like syed ahmed khan and hazrat muhammad ali jinnah (peace be upon him), us natives were probably treacherous and angrez was right to rule us.

Sorry, its just a difference in mindset. for you farangi is to be worshipped. for us it is to be thrown out, however long it takes. Although I thought pathans had more ghairat than this.





No I did not know that. Rajputs of Delhi and most hindu kingdoms before that had codes of honor, but you already know what that resulted in. Unfortunately it took too many centuries for us to realize the kind of filth we were facing had no sense of ethics or honor.
What are you talking about? we pathans fought against british till the end.............even in india, Rohilla pathans were very prominent in 1857 war of Independence. General bakht khan and khan bahadur khan were rohilla pashtuns.
 
If they were really into raping hindu women, killing unarmed brahamins and destroying temples.........the hindu population would have turned against them as they did against aurangzaib

Yes they turned against the invaders ...... You can check out the Islamic expansion in India and the rapes, murders and looting that happened.

There is lot of material on the internet related to this.

This is one of the main reason why Hindus hate Islamic rulers even now.
 
Yes they turned against the invaders ...... You can check out the Islamic expansion in India and the rapes, murders and looting that happened.

There is lot of material on the internet related to this.

This is one of the main reason why Hindus hate Islamic rulers even now.
I have not heard about any hindu insurgency during lodhi and suri times......
 
I have not heard about any hindu insurgency during lodhi and suri times......
There is a reason why the Islamic domination ultimately failed in India. Your history is not very good, I'm afraid.
Rana Sanga was a Rajput chief who not only grew powerful, but also... ah well the suspense. Read about him. :D


All throughout out history, there were leaders who fought against invaders.
 
There is a reason why the Islamic domination ultimately failed in India. Your history is not very good, I'm afraid.
Rana Sanga was a Rajput chief who not only grew powerful, but also... ah well the suspense. Read about him. :D


All throughout out history, there were leaders who fought against invaders.
i know about him. let me tell you an interesting fact. Rana sanga and Mahmood lodhi joined forces against babur after panipat war......
 
I have not heard about any hindu insurgency during lodhi and suri times......

There is always a resistance from Rajputs. Throughput the History these guys particularly the guys from Rajasthan have resisted the Islamic rulers.

There is a reason why the Islamic domination ultimately failed in India. Your history is not very good, I'm afraid.
Rana Sanga was a Rajput chief who not only grew powerful, but also... ah well the suspense. Read about him. :D


All throughout out history, there were leaders who fought against invaders.

:lol:
 
There is always a resistance from Rajputs. Throughput the History these guys particularly the guys from Rajasthan have resisted the Islamic rulers.



:lol:
Invalid example........rajputs always maintained full or semi Independence......they were not fighting with muslims because of the atrocities you mentioned, but to maintain their Independence.......even if the most honorable people on earth had invaded rajputs, they would have given them wars.
 
Invalid example........rajputs always maintained full or semi Independence......they were not fighting with muslims because of the atrocities you mentioned, but to maintain their Independence.......even if the most honorable people on earth had invaded rajputs, they would have given them wars.
And their ladies would jump in fire when their husbands went to battle the invaders when all hope was lost. :disagree:
 
Back
Top Bottom