The best ruler of the Indian Subcontinent - Aurangzeb Alamgir

[doorstar]

Cow slaughter was always a strict NO among hindus.

British christians claiming to interpret Hindu scriptures mean nothing.

Muslim not eating pork is directly related to quran, but they drinking, smoking but still not eating pork is linked to their conversion from Hinduism.

my hands are tied here, If I manage to prove you wrong --which I most certainly can-- regarding cow slaughter by hindus a mod formerly known as oscar will jump in on your side as he has done 3+ times in the past (whensoever I manage to score a hit against bharatis he and/or an anonymous one, do the dirty on me). and the ever so eager mr. the eagle won't hesitate to charge me with insulting a religion either, which he has done many times already

 

[W.11]

but they drinking, smoking but still not eating pork is linked to their conversion from Hinduism.

smoking as in cigerette or bhang?

regards

 

[Andhadhun]

so tamil language is also poor sanskrit?

regards

How ?

smoking as in cigerette or bhang?

regards

Either or.

 

[Zhukov]

Jalalludin Muhammad Akbar and Ashoka Maurya among the Kings who Ruled whole of the Subcontinent united in my opinnion.
I would Prefer Akbar as his History is known properly and more authentic while a lot of stuff relating to Ashoka is lost in Myth and Fantasy writing. Infact most of History of subcontinent rules is corrupted and overly fantasized by their respective Religious Followers.
Alamgir was also a very strong Ruler but he will probably be disliked and Vilifies by South Indians the most. Akbar was the most successful and beloved Emperor of Mughal Hindustan in my knowledge.

Other then them and a few others most of the subcontinent was ruled by different rulers in different regions.

 

[achhu]

AKBAR was somewhat a good king .all others were anti hindu jihadi .

 

[Cherub786]

I have mixed feelings about Aurangzaib (rahmatullah alaih). Overall, he was a good king, but he was also a sinful person, who will have to answer for his personal transgressions, like how he dealt with members of his own family. Therefore, I consider him a Muslim hero but not a Muslim saint. Most of our kings and rulers were personally not pious people, but some like Aurangzaib did offer some valuable services to the Religion and the cause of Shari'ah. Aurangzaib was right, in my humble opinion, to quell the terrorist Sikh rebellions. He was correct in having Tegh Bahadur executed. He was also correct in having Sarmad the nudist executed. It is enough for me to hail someone like Aurangzaib simply for the fact that our enemies, the Hindus and Sikhs, despise him.
However, someone who I think was greater than Aurangzaib was the ruler of Kashmir, Sikander Butshikan (rahmatullah alaih) of the Shah Miri dynasty. He was more zealous than Aurangzaib for our Religion. His title was 'Butshikan' because he was famous for having Hindu idols and temples destroyed during his reign. Therefore, I consider Sikander Butshikan the greatest ruler in Indian history to date

 

[fitpOsitive]

Tepo Sultan was the guy.
Rest were all playboys.

 

[Cherub786]

Tepo Sultan was the guy.
Rest were all playboys.

Tipu Sultan was foolish for fighting the British. The British were aligned with the Nizam of Hyderabad against Tipu Sultan, so that shows the British were not motivated by anti-Muslim sentiment. British colonization of India was overall a very good thing. Princes in India that made treaties with the British often kept a degree of sovereignty and continued to reign as princely states.

 

[achhu]

Tepo Sultan was the guy.
Rest were all playboys.

tepo was anti hindu his father usurped hindu kingdom mysore by his crafty methods , killed thousands of brahmins .he wanted to establish khilafat in india .

Tipu Sultan was foolish for fighting the British. The British were aligned with the Nizam of Hyderabad against Tipu Sultan, so that shows the British were not motivated by anti-Muslim sentiment. British colonization of India was overall a very good thing. Princes in India that made treaties with the British often kept a degree of sovereignty and continued to reign as princely states.

yes you are right .

 

[Naofumi]

Aurangzeb was a racist and a bigot. He not only hated the Indian's religion but also hated their race even degraded the valor of his own Indian soldiers (mostly Rajputs) in his will, which is funny because he himself was 37.5% Rajasthani Rajput.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1089132731089473536