Historical folk tales in Pakistan And India.

[vinod2070]

Originally Posted by Zob

ok so finally i thought i should join the foray but first i wanted to listen to all the "Indian" perspective there was out there!!

Thanks for joining in. Welcome to the discussion and nice having you.

I would respond to the rest of your points in a bit. One thing caught my eye.

now i know ZAID HAMID is the worse nightmare of INDIANS

Actually to me he is the stuff of the best entertainment possible. I do have a name for him which I won't share here as it may offend some.

Some fellow Indians that I interact with on our forum have stopped watching Shin-chan and other cartoons. I will repro one comment by a fellow member:

Tito, you know the enlightened legend Zaid Hamid has forced me opt for visiting this thread regularly, and to get me the feelings which I did not get in Shin-Chan and Ninja Boy Rantaro.

Many others agree with him.

[vinod2070]

Originally Posted by Lady Macbeth

Hurrah to Zaid Hamid....thank you Zob for the link.
So we are clear on that issue....next myth raised by Prof Shahida Kazi :

(http://www.pakistanstrategicreview.c...read.php?t=560)

Invasion of Mahmud Ghaznavi....Anyone care to comment????
(I'll get back to this one later if someone hasnt already started on this.)

I think this issue still has some steam left. Let's move to the next issue once we are done with the current one.

[vinod2070]

Originally Posted by Zob

firstly vinod the whole concept of women and enjoyment and harem ladies and dancing girls didn't kick in in the 700A.D in the muslim world!! it actually kicked in the Ottoman Empire....by then muslim rulers were corrupted beyond repair!!

Are you saying the Arabs did not treat the women of defeated people (even other Arab tribes) as booty? That they did not rape them?

As I mentioned above, I can provide Hadhith reference that such a practice existed. That too from the earliest days.

Muslim writings themselves mention hundreds of thousands of women and kids taken as slaves in he conquest of North Africa and Spain. Mehmud of Gazani took 1/2 million women and kid slaves from North India and what is now Pakistan. It is all part of history.

in the time of Mohammed Ibn Qasim Hajaj Bin Yousuf was the Khalifah!!

he recalled Qasim back not because some female who was sent to the khalifah complained of Qasims heavy handedness!!

Qasim was recalled because the khalifah grew insecure of his generals and was scared that one of them might return to the capital of the empire as a Ceaser and overthrow him!

May be. This is not what LM mentioned. This doesn't take anything from the fact that massive atrocities were committed by Qasim on Sindhis.

this might help you understand the prespective better....now i know ZAID HAMID is the worse nightmare of INDIANS but for once he is talking specfic history and not discussing current affairs on how india should be treated!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lzXUTD2AkE

I don't think he is credible at all but even he mentions the various political reasons and the earlier attempts on Sindh.

[vinod2070]

Originally Posted by Zob

the problem is that there are two sides to history the indian view and then the pakistani view & then there is a 3RD which is the truth!!!

inorder to find out the truth you need to find out the arabic view of the situation back then!

And why should one believe that the Arabic view would be truthful? Just like the American view of Iraqi WMDs?

Also what is this Pakistani view? Is it any different from the Arab view? How?

and please do not forget muslim history in the sub continent has been meddled with by hindus as well as the British...so Muslim view has become very apologetic and has been watered down...and rulers like Jalludin have become famous and started being called Jallaludin Akbar.....may i ask why?

the answer is simple he was adored by the non muslims making him famous giving him titles....and if you look at him from purely a religious point of view then i guess he was a damned soul....but then again history has been rewritten and portrayed as wished by the victorious......

Akbar killed 15000 Rajput civilians after a battle in Rajasthan. He was better only in comparison to others who were even worse.

[DarkStar]

Originally Posted by vinod2070

And why should one believe that the Arabic view would be truthful?
Also what is this Pakistani view? Is it any different from the Arab view? How?

I believe what zob was alluding to is going back to contemporary sources in matters of history, which are invariably sources in the Arabic language, as they would be more reliable, and free from any possible historical revisioning by over zealous, nationalistic indo pak hisorians.

Akbar killed 15000 Rajput civilians after a battle in Rajasthan. He was better only in comparison to others who were even worse.

Which battle was that, in which he killed civilians after a battle? name and date please

Please do not forget , that his army comprised of many rajput soldiers and officers, whose completed loyalty he commanded.

Not worse than Ashoka, or other Indian Vedic and SanatanDharm/Hindu princes and Rajas, who have been engaged in invading each other's territories, killing civlians...and gasp! desecrating each other's temples. Does digvijaya ring a bell?

[Lady Macbeth]

[QUOTE=vinod2070;4040]Tell me one thing. Here are some girls, their father has been killed by an enemy, their own honor has been taken by the same person, their kingdom gone, thousands of people killed.
What are they to do to avenge the enemy now? If they used a trick to eliminate the hated enemy (losing their lives in the bargain by coming out with the truth after the enemy is killed), I think the girls were brave.
QUOTE]

Well yes these girls were brave...very brave indeed...but this does not take away the attention from the fact that they had not been ravished until now! These beautiful girls were had their honours intact.......a testimony to the restraint shown by the Muslim soldiers and officers was that these beautiful princesses had reached the Khalifa without missing a hair on their head.

The only reason why those princesses managed this trick was exactly because they knew that such defilement of women would be severely punished and this was also a factor in the muslim armies good treatment of civilian women and children.

[Lady Macbeth]

Originally Posted by vinod2070

Even if they were avenging just their father, it was a noble cause. I suspect they had much bigger reasons.
I actually like this. See the focus on incest. I am not sure whether to believe this. Our religion does not permit incest, not even marrying with cousins.

Oh then you should be blissfully ecstatic that MBQ got rid of the tyrant who was violating your religious principles.

[Lady Macbeth]

Originally Posted by vinod2070

OK, even if I were to believe this, how did the Arabs respond? By taking thousands of ladies away from their family? Were they any better than the pirates?
.

Thousands???
Oh now where is the evidence of the thousands???

And yes lets not get into the USA and Iraq war just yet...

[vinod2070]

Originally Posted by DarkStar

I believe what zob was alluding to is going back to contemporary sources in matters of history, which are invariably sources in the Arabic language, as they would be more reliable, and free from any possible historical revisioning by over zealous, nationalistic indo pak hisorians.

Makes sense. I hope some Pakistani member who has some expertise in this area can share them.

I am not sure they need to be necessarily considered any more reliable than the contemporary American writings on the reasons for Iraq war. They could be and almost surely would be manipulated to suit the political agenda of the day.

Which battle was that, in which he killed civilians after a battle? name and date please

It was after the battle of Chittod. There are many links available to support this. I am posting a few.

http://www.indianetzone.com/37/mahar...atap_singh.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Akbar_the_Great
http://thecandideye.wordpress.com/20...istory-part-9/

Please do not forget , that his army comprised of many rajput soldiers and officers, whose completed loyalty he commanded.

I agree with that. Not sure if Chittod happened before or after that.

Not worse than Ashoka, or other Indian Vedic and SanatanDharm/Hindu princes and Rajas, who have been engaged in invading each other's territories, killing civlians...and gasp! desecrating each other's temples. Does digvijaya ring a bell?

I agree that Ashoka was very violent before the battle of Kalinga. He is a hero for us not for that violence but what he did after he renounced the violence.

The invasions by the Rajas/princes were a constant, the rest of it I am not sure except may be in a tiny number of cases. That would anyway be a separate discussion. It would be like saying that just because there may be sectarian voilence within Pakistan, USA can come in and kill a few too.

Digvijaya does ring a bell. Thank you.

[vinod2070]

Originally Posted by Lady Macbeth

Well yes these girls were brave...very brave indeed...but this does not take away the attention from the fact that they had not been ravished until now! These beautiful girls were had their honours intact.......a testimony to the restrained shown by the Muslim soldiers and officers was that these beautiful princesses had reached the Khalifa without missing a hair on their head.

The only reason why those princesses managed this trick was exactly because they knew that such defilement of women would be severely punished and this was also a factor in the muslim armies good treatment of civilian women and children.

They were not ravished as they were the reserved for the Caliph to ravish!

I see no honor in this. The others ravished other Sindhi women.

Musa too brought 30,000 virgins for his Caliph as his 1/5 share of the booty? Does that show restrain! No it only shows that 120,000 others were ravished by the other invaders.

You need to look at this by removing the tinted glasses of religion. If the same deed was done by a gang of bandits with no religion and they took some girls to their boss without harming them, would it be a great example of honor?

P.S.: I notice the absence of quotation marks around "brave" now.