Mughals used to celebrate Holi with much enthusiasm

[Spring Onion]

Mughal Emproer Jehangir playing holi

During that era it was called Aab-e pashi or Eid-e-gulaabi.

 

[T-123456]

View attachment 383489

Mughal Emproer Jehangir playing holi

During that era it was called Aab-e pashi or Eid-e-gulaabi.

So,its a Turkic thing?

 

[navtrek]

So,its a Turkic thing?

 

[haviZsultan]

Respecting the local citizens religion was pivotal to the growth of both the Delhi Sultanate and the Mughals. Secular law was the means for local leaders to create a conducive environment for their subjects. They even had Hindu generals in their armies. There is much to learn from Akbar's Din E Elahi and the general Mughal tolerance for Pakistan today. Muslims can rule over non muslim subjects through respecting them and making them feel a part of the nation. This is how our minorities should feel about Pakistan, equal, safe and secure citizens of the country.

 

[Spring Onion]

So,its a Turkic thing?

It is a Turkic respect and broad mindedness for other faiths
After all Mughals were not that bad as portrayed by these Indian Hindus.

 

[T-123456]

It is a Turkic respect and broad mindedness for other faiths

This is so very true,real Turkics respect all faiths and through history have Always lived together with other faiths.
We have never seen faith as a problem until recently and only by outside influence.
They try but they cant change us,let them try as much as they want.

 

[utraash]

Sau chuhe khaake bili chali haz ko....
After killing idolatrous same killers went on to celebrate holi .......
Good attempt to show their good side....

 

[Srinivas]

It is a Turkic respect and broad mindedness for other faiths
After all Mughals were not that bad as portrayed by these Indian Hindus.

They are forced to do those things because Turks are a minority.

Why are Pakistanis celebrating Mughals?

Pakistanis do not represent Mughals, Mughals conquered Pakistani regions first before the panipat battle.

 

[Spring Onion]

They are forced to do those things because Turks are a minority.

Why are Pakistanis celebrating Mughals?

Pakistanis do not represent Mughals, Mughals conquered Pakistani regions first before the panipat battle.

what is wrong in celebrating Turks? why one needs to be representative of Turks to celebrate them? if you ask me I would say for me all the great conquests of that time were so grand to be ignored at all. these were so amazing if you just study these with military point of you irrespective of the faith.
if you come to emotional point of you well we simply love Turks .

Sau chuhe khaake bili chali haz ko....
After killing idolatrous same killers went on to celebrate holi .......
Good attempt to show their good side....

do you have any conquest of fight in Hindu mythology that was bloodless?

 

[Indika]

Sau chuhe khaake bili chali haz ko....
After killing idolatrous same killers went on to celebrate holi .......
Good attempt to show their good side....

example of manufactured tokenism, as such these things should not come as a surprise. Radical supporters often these kind of irrelevant stuff to justify the benevolence.

broad mindedness for other faiths

if you had posted in good faith, you wouldnt have brought up the religion in the first instance. None of the Indian posters brought any religion's name into discussion.

Indian Hindus.

Hindu mythology

 

[Spring Onion]

example of manufactured tokenism, as such these things should not come as a surprise. Radical supporters often these kind of irrelevant stuff to justify the benevolence.

So in opinion of the radical Hindus All those Western neutral authors who penned these facts are supporters of radicals and they manufactured these facts??

if you had posted in good faith, you wouldnt have brought up the religion in the first instance. None of the Indian posters brought any religion's name into discussion.

Actually when we post in Senior cafe we have all the good faith intentions until some hindutva spoilers decides to spoil otherwise a serious thread.

 

[Indika]

So in opinion of the radical Hindus All those Western neutral authors who penned these facts are supporters of radicals and they manufactured these facts??



Actually when we post in Senior cafe we have all the good faith intentions until some hindutva spoilers decides to spoil otherwise a serious thread.

Already answered before, how good your intentions are. Lets disengage, no point in having discussion with ppl who brings in religion every now and then.

 

[niaz]

Sau chuhe khaake bili chali haz ko....
After killing idolatrous same killers went on to celebrate holi .......
Good attempt to show their good side....

For the record, Nuruddin Jehangir / Prince Salim was half Rajput. His mother Jodha Bai whose formal title was Maryam Zamni Begum did not convert and remained Hindu. Shahjehan’s mother Jodh Bai / Bilqis Makani Begum was a princess of Jodhpur and also a Rajput. Hence Shahabuddin Shahjehan was in fact 75% Rajput. Jahangir’s first wife was also a Rajput princess. Even though not secular like Akbar, both the Jahangir and Shahjehan, were quite liberal in their attitude towards religion.

It is clear that by this time Moghals were only part Turk. It is hard to find instances where Jahangir or Shahjehan acted as killers of non-Muslims for the sake of religion. However they were also powerful kings and ruthlessly suppressed any challenger to their power irrespective of race or religion.

Jahangir’s wars were against Rana of Mewar, Raja of Kangra and the Sikhs. He also fought Lodis of Deccan, his son Khurram (Shahjehan) and the Safavids who had capturted Qandhar from the Mughals. Jahangir was also briefly captured by the Afghan Mohabat Khan in 1626 on his way to Kabul.

Shahjehan fought Rana of Mewar, Muslim Kings of Deccan and recaptured Qandahar from the Safavids. Few people are aware that Shahjehan even invaded Uzbek lands of Central Asia during 1645 -1647.

You remark is therefore uncalled for. Credit should be given where the credit is due.

 

[utraash]

what is wrong in celebrating Turks? why one needs to be representative of Turks to celebrate them? if you ask me I would say for me all the great conquests of that time were so grand to be ignored at all. these were so amazing if you just study these with military point of you irrespective of the faith.
if you come to emotional point of you well we simply love Turks .


do you have any conquest of fight in Hindu mythology that was bloodless?

Countless story..... Delve little deep into history where Hindu kingdoms used to have all kind of hostilities yet no human skull pyramid erected when wars were fought. Underline message is innocent ppl were not harmed, women & kids were not taken as war booty & more important is swords were not brandished to change the faith of the entire populace...
There could be very few exception to aforesaid norm though.

 

[utraash]

For the record, Nuruddin Jehangir / Prince Salim was half Rajput. His mother Jodha Bai whose formal title was Maryam Zamni Begaum did not convert and remained Hindu. Shahjehan’s mother Jodh Bai / Bilqis Makani Begum was a princess of Jodhpur and also a Rajput. Hence Shahabuddin Shahjehan was in fact 75% Rajput. Jahangir’s first wife was also a Rajput princess. Even though not secular like Akbar, both the Jahangir and Shahjehan, were quite liberal in their attitude towards religion.

It is clear that by this time Moghals were only part Turk. It is hard to find instances where Jahangir or Shahjehan acted as killers of non-Muslims for the sake of religion. However they were also powerful kings and ruthlessly suppressed any challenger to their power irrespective of race or religion.

Jahangir’s wars were against Rana of Mewar, Raja of Kangra and the Sikhs. He also fought Lodis of Deccan, his son Khurram (Shahjehan) and the Safavids who had capturted Qandhar from the Mughals. Jahangir was also briefly captured by the Afghan Mohabat Khan in 1626 on his way to Kabul.

Shahjehan fought Rana of Mewar, Muslim Kings of Deccan and recaptured Qandahar from the Safavids. Few people are aware that Shahjehan even invaded Uzbek lands of Central Asia during 1645 -1647.

You remark is therefore uncalled for. Credit should be given where the credit is due.

My alone contention is look at their deeds from humane perspective.

To me, anyone who doesn't respect the human life is a murderer irrespective of what cast creed or religion he/she belongs to except a case of self defence.

Would you have praised hitler arduously as you do for Jehangir if you had found him celebrating Jews festival?