Myth: Indian Kings never Invaded Foreign Lands

[InFn-0]

Chola territories during Rajendra Chola I,

This is very interesting, "Vangadesam" sounds very close to "Bangladesh"(Vanga=Bangla, Desam=Desh), i wonder if the name Bangladesh is derived from that. It would be great if you could tell us what lands Vangadesam possessed. Thanks again.

 

[asad71]

1. An Indian child learns that Maha Bharat had once extended from the Oxus to the Bali Islands. In the west sometimes the Caucasus ?Caspian regions are also included. The child from the start does develop a tendency to go on a conquest mode when he grows up. The thread lead paper is really an example of that lurking in the Indian psyche waiting to be expressed through action. Thus are born leaders like Tegadia, Modi, etc.

2. We in BD face another problem from the Indian child. When in school he learns to draw the map of his country he finds the blob called BD irritating and irrational. He would therefore be asking the Masterji all sorts of interesting questions. And when he grows up he cannot accept this irrational blob.

3. Hindu kingdoms really existed in mythology / folklore. The Mahabhrata and the Ramayana of Kalidas are classics and fiction. They are also sources of certain Hindu rituals. Truth or degree of truth of these fables are still disputed. SA saw only few Hindu kingdoms and they were small and scattered about. At the time of their existence they dis not call themselves Hindus as the term given to a religious entity came much later. These kingdoms existed in the ancient period and were all local. Only Porus among these kings made any name in history.

4. The period called Middle Kingdoms saw the rise of Buddhism. (And Prince Gautam was our prince, ie original Greater BD). The Great Mauryas were Buddhists. They also did not have to go for much conquest because they inherited what Alexander's Generals left.

5. The expansion of Buddhism was carried out really by the Buddhist teachers. Tibet, China, Burma, Indo-China and further east; and upto the Caucasus/Caspian in the west. The earliest Buddhist teacher to preach in China was Atish Dipankar from BD. He is a revered name among Buddhists all over the world, particularly China. A teacher from the Punjab had taken Buddhism to Tibet. Therefore, the conquest that is claimed is really an expansion of Buddhist Confederacy.

6. Even today the oath/affirmation into the armed forces of BD, India, SL and Pak include the phrase, " and I shall go wherever ordered to by land, air or sea". This was imposed by the English Co because Hindu religion of old days forbade crossing of "seven rivers" or in plain terms, going overseas.

 

[senselesstalk]

1. An Indian child learns that Maha Bharat had once extended from the Oxus to the Bali Islands. In the west sometimes the Caucasus ?Caspian regions are also included. The child from the start does develop a tendency to go on a conquest mode when he grows up. The thread lead paper is really an example of that lurking in the Indian psyche waiting to be expressed through action. Thus are born leaders like Tegadia, Modi, etc.

2. We in BD face another problem from the Indian child. When in school he learns to draw the map of his country he finds the blob called BD irritating and irrational. He would therefore be asking the Masterji all sorts of interesting questions. And when he grows up he cannot accept this irrational blob.

3. Hindu kingdoms really existed in mythology / folklore. The Mahabhrata and the Ramayana of Kalidas are classics and fiction. They are also sources of certain Hindu rituals. Truth or degree of truth of these fables are still disputed. SA saw only few Hindu kingdoms and they were small and scattered about. At the time of their existence they dis not call themselves Hindus as the term given to a religious entity came much later. These kingdoms existed in the ancient period and were all local. Only Porus among these kings made any name in history.

4. The period called Middle Kingdoms saw the rise of Buddhism. (And Prince Gautam was our prince, ie original Greater BD). The Great Mauryas were Buddhists. They also did not have to go for much conquest because they inherited what Alexander's Generals left.

5. The expansion of Buddhism was carried out really by the Buddhist teachers. Tibet, China, Burma, Indo-China and further east; and upto the Caucasus/Caspian in the west. The earliest Buddhist teacher to preach in China was Atish Dipankar from BD. He is a revered name among Buddhists all over the world, particularly China. A teacher from the Punjab had taken Buddhism to Tibet. Therefore, the conquest that is claimed is really an expansion of Buddhist Confederacy.

6. Even today the oath/affirmation into the armed forces of BD, India, SL and Pak include the phrase, " and I shall go wherever ordered to by land, air or sea". This was imposed by the English Co because Hindu religion of old days forbade crossing of "seven rivers" or in plain terms, going overseas.

What ever history suits you for India bashing dude that is right.

 

[third eye]

2. We in BD face another problem from the Indian child. When in school he learns to draw the map of his country he finds the blob called BD irritating and irrational. He would therefore be asking the Masterji all sorts of interesting questions. And when he grows up he cannot accept this irrational blob.

BD now seems to have problems with Indian children too !

Wonder where these pearls of wisdom came from ?

Can we have a link to this comment .

 

[niaz]

To me history is not based on myths or highly biased accounts as published in the histories taught in the subcontinent but the one arrived at thru research by serious scholars.

There may have been earlier Hindu/Budhism Kingdoms but presence Indian origin kingdom in the Bujong valley near Kedah in southern Malaysia from 4th Century onwards has been documented thru archaeological proof.

Earliest Sanskrit inscription found in Indo China is the stele of Vo Cahn telling the stories of a king called Sri Mara dating from the 3rd century AD which is located in South Vietnam. By the onset of Khmer empire in beginning of 9th Century Buddhism as well Hinduism was already well established in Indo china.

Earliest Indian origin kingdom in Indonesia is probably Srivijaya of Sumatra. However the historical proof can only be traced back to 7th century thru an inscription written in Pallava script found at Kedukan Bukit in Southern Sumatra.

Therefore without doubt East Indian Kings had colonised large chunks of South East Asia in the pre Islamic era

 

[Rahul Banerjee]

Yes from ancient time as invaders invade India, Indian hindu kings also invaded foreign. Ashoka Maurya as viceroy of Afganishthan, used to move every year with his victorious army to antolia, arabia and entire kurdishthan and used to plundered them, Kasmir's emperor lalitaditya muktapid moved with his victorious army through afganishthan, bukhara, Iran , turmenisthan and almost upto russia, at the time of abbassid Caliphate, Mumin the turky ruler of bukhara faught with muktapid 4 times and was defeated everytime, Arya vikramditya defeated the Arabs at their land and constructed the temple of Shiva their, Emperor Sanjit also conquered arabia before that. The Indian recaptured afganishthan under leadership of Maharaja Ranjit Singh and took revenge about the incident of long back, when raja jaipal was defeated by md Gazani. Prince Kalbhoj or Bapp a Rawal marched with his army upto tigris eupharates and defeated Caliph Hisam, So we Indians never feel that we ar alaways invaded, Our kings also invaded foreign lands, emperor Devpala extended his empire upto the border of Abbasid Caliphate, all sultans of Mawara al nahar bowed their heads down infont of raja Muktapid of Karkota dynasty. So this myth India kings never invaded foreign lands is not true, Our kings were very capable in conquring foreign lands.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

First of all a definition of "India" is needed. What is India today, and was supposed to be Hindustan after partition, had never existed as a country before except under the Mughals. Even the British colony of India was divided between native states and the colony.

Mallu miah,how many times will you try to convince yourselves of this?India is derived from persian word.,The real word is bharat.The bharat of one culture that has existed from vedic times.
What do you think the terms aryabarta,uttarapatha,dakshinapatha,chakravarti samrata mean.
And mughals were just another epoch,no more.
The empire of the mauryas was far more ancient and larger than the mughals.
And the guptas .
The name of our greatest epic,and without a doubt the greatest story ever told-'mahabharat' should be enough to shut your pieholes. 

Yes from ancient time as invaders invade India, Indian hindu kings also invaded foreign. Ashoka Maurya as viceroy of Afganishthan, used to move every year with his victorious army to antolia, arabia and entire kurdishthan and used to plundered them, Kasmir's emperor lalitaditya muktapid moved with his victorious army through afganishthan, bukhara, Iran , turmenisthan and almost upto russia, at the time of abbassid Caliphate, Mumin the turky ruler of bukhara faught with muktapid 4 times and was defeated everytime, Arya vikramditya defeated the Arabs at their land and constructed the temple of Shiva their, Emperor Sanjit also conquered arabia before that. The Indian recaptured afganishthan under leadership of Maharaja Ranjit Singh and took revenge about the incident of long back, when raja jaipal was defeated by md Gazani. Prince Kalbhoj or Bapp a Rawal marched with his army upto tigris eupharates and defeated Caliph Hisam, So we Indians never feel that we ar alaways invaded, Our kings also invaded foreign lands, emperor Devpala extended his empire upto the border of Abbasid Caliphate, all sultans of Mawara al nahar bowed their heads down infont of raja Muktapid of Karkota dynasty. So this myth India kings never invaded foreign lands is not true, Our kings were very capable in conquring foreign lands.

Eh--wtf?

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

1. An Indian child learns that Maha Bharat had once extended from the Oxus to the Bali Islands. In the west sometimes the Caucasus ?Caspian regions are also included. The child from the start does develop a tendency to go on a conquest mode when he grows up. The thread lead paper is really an example of that lurking in the Indian psyche waiting to be expressed through action. Thus are born leaders like Tegadia, Modi, etc.

2. We in BD face another problem from the Indian child. When in school he learns to draw the map of his country he finds the blob called BD irritating and irrational. He would therefore be asking the Masterji all sorts of interesting questions. And when he grows up he cannot accept this irrational blob.

3. Hindu kingdoms really existed in mythology / folklore. The Mahabhrata and the Ramayana of Kalidas are classics and fiction. They are also sources of certain Hindu rituals. Truth or degree of truth of these fables are still disputed. SA saw only few Hindu kingdoms and they were small and scattered about. At the time of their existence they dis not call themselves Hindus as the term given to a religious entity came much later. These kingdoms existed in the ancient period and were all local. Only Porus among these kings made any name in history.

4. The period called Middle Kingdoms saw the rise of Buddhism. (And Prince Gautam was our prince, ie original Greater BD). The Great Mauryas were Buddhists. They also did not have to go for much conquest because they inherited what Alexander's Generals left.

5. The expansion of Buddhism was carried out really by the Buddhist teachers. Tibet, China, Burma, Indo-China and further east; and upto the Caucasus/Caspian in the west. The earliest Buddhist teacher to preach in China was Atish Dipankar from BD. He is a revered name among Buddhists all over the world, particularly China. A teacher from the Punjab had taken Buddhism to Tibet. Therefore, the conquest that is claimed is really an expansion of Buddhist Confederacy.

6. Even today the oath/affirmation into the armed forces of BD, India, SL and Pak include the phrase, " and I shall go wherever ordered to by land, air or sea". This was imposed by the English Co because Hindu religion of old days forbade crossing of "seven rivers" or in plain terms, going overseas.

Your mistake is to co relate india's identity with hinduism.Buddhism was born in india,magadha.And is as much a part of us as hinduism.Your deep hatred of hinduism ofcourse and need to justify 'inferiority of hindus' leads u to baseless claims.
As for the kings not making names of history-thats because ancient indians didn't write history down as such-not because they didn't do anything significant.
'They inherited what alexander's generals left'-HA HA HAHA.noobish,read history first.The empire of magadha ascended by absorbing the 16 mahajanpadas.Chandragupta conquered south india as well as defeated alexander's successor seleucus and TOOK it,he didn't inherit anything.
As for indian child on BD,he doesn't bother-so stop deluding yourself on your importance.The indian child has far more important things in mind than foreign policy.
And what your prince?Matha ki puropuri geche naki?He was born in a kingdom ,currently in nepal.Nepal is a hindu kingdom.He preached his dharma in magadha and kasi,current day bihar,U.P.What greater B.D?The language bengali didn't exist then.The bulk of the subcontinent spoke sanskrit or pali/prakrit.Ab ganja khana chor dijiye.Then there was Anga and samtata.Bangladesh's division from bengal is based on religion acc to two nation theory which is a 20th century product.
'SA saw few scattered hindu kingdoms'-Yeah right.The Guptas,satavahans,vijaynagar empire,the mighty rashtrakutas,palas,cholas,chalukyas and the gurjara pratiharas.You people like to talk about mhd bin qasim and his conquest of sindh.But not how further attempt at expansion from sindh was smashed by the gurjara pratiharas.In the words of arab chroniclers themselves-''there was no place arabs could hide,and caliph gave up all schemes of conquering hindustan''.The arab rulers of sindh existed as vassals of the gurjara pratihar.
Not until the break up of the gurjara pratihara empire into the chauhans,solankis and parmara rajput clans were any invaders from the west able to make any intrusions.And the breakup happened because of the strain of the tripartite conflict between the palas of bengal,pratiharas of rajasthan and rashtrakutas of the deccan.
For 300 years they guarded the western approaches for which they earned the title 'pratiharas'. or sentinels.
Ghori was defeated by the solankis,won 1-1 against the chauhans .The breakup of the rajput clans into petty clans was a major reason.

 

[asad71]

@Malaun/denda.

1.Tarai region was v much included in the lands of our ancestors. Our historical/traditional home starts from the Rajmahal Hills. We had lost this on 23 Sep 1757 to the English Co and would surely recover this when an opportunity arises.

2. Republic of India is the establishment of a sovereign Hindu state after the Hindus had remained subjugated for mileniums.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

@Malaun/denda.

1.Tarai region was v much included in the lands of our ancestors. Our historical/traditional home starts from the Rajmahal Hills. We had lost this on 23 Sep 1757 to the English Co and would surely recover this when an opportunity arises.

2. Republic of India is the establishment of a sovereign Hindu state after the Hindus had remained subjugated for mileniums.

1.The land of our ancestors is anga,with its flourishing ports of champa and tamralipta [modern tamluk],not an artificial state set up for a few years by a errant nawab following a imported creed,that our ancestors never even knew about.

2.Republic of india is not a hindu state,otherwise you would see minorities wiped out like they ahve done in pak and now ongoing in bangladesh.
Milleniums,lol.1192-1707.Does that sound like a 1000 yrs?Subjagation had ended not by the hands of the english- but by the marathas and sikhs.The mughal emperor was a puppet to the marathas who ruled bulk of india along with sikh empire that by remaining 'subjagated' had somehow extended their boundaries into ,modern afganisthan.Its actually the english that saved you haters from 'subjagation'.

 

[Shinigami]

@Malaun/denda.

1.Tarai region was v much included in the lands of our ancestors. Our historical/traditional home starts from the Rajmahal Hills. We had lost this on 23 Sep 1757 to the English Co and would surely recover this when an opportunity arises.

2. Republic of India is the establishment of a sovereign Hindu state after the Hindus had remained subjugated for mileniums.

1. what are you smoking?

2. the descendents of the subjugated hindus live in todays pakistan and bangladesh

 

[asad71]

1. what are you smoking?

2. the descendents of the subjugated hindus live in todays pakistan and bangladesh

You had obviously drowned in bhang during diwali!!

 

[scorpionx]

Emperor Sanjit also conquered arabia before that. The Indian recaptured afganishthan under leadership of Maharaja Ranjit Singh and took revenge about the incident of long back, when raja jaipal was defeated by md Gazani. Prince Kalbhoj or Bapp a Rawal marched with his army upto tigris eupharates and defeated Caliph Hisam, S.

I sincerely hope this post was written in a lighter mood or just for sarcasm only.