Timur - Founder of the Timurid Empire

[Neo]

Originally Posted by DarkStar

Tell me, where have you ever heard Pakistanis speak of this pure blood theory that you come out with? It's certainly not something that I've read, heard or seen anywhere in Pakistan in my entire life.

I believe its mentioned in every second Pakistan or Islam related post in BR and many non Pakistani forums out there.

[vinod2070]

Check this again:

One irony, of course, is that contrary to their wishful thinking, the vast majority of Muslims in the subcontinent have more Hindu blood in their veins than there is Arab, Afghan, Turkish or Persian blood. Many of the invaders took Hindu wives and concubines. And many Hindus converted to Islam to further their military or civil service careers. As a result of this intermingling, despite proud boasts of pure bloodlines, most Pakistanis have many Hindu ancestors.

[Neo]

Originally Posted by vinod2070

Well I know there are several Muslims who adore him, just because he plundered their fellow countrymen and ancestors.

This post needs to be directed to those Muslims.

There are several hindoos who adore Modi or Bal Thackeray aswell. Does it affect hinduism at all?

[A1Kaid]

YouTube - Tamerlán

YouTube - Tamerlán

Educacion Documentary en Espanol.

Tamerlán "Timur el Cojo" conquistó enormes extensiones de Eurasia en poco más de dos décadas. Entre 1382 y 1405 sus grandes ejércitos atravesaron desde Delhi a Moscú, desde la cordillera T'ian Shan del Asia Central hasta los Montes Tauros de Anatolia.

Google Trans: Tamerlane "Timur the Lame" conquered vast expanses of Eurasia in just over two decades. Between 1382 and 1405 their great armies crossed from Delhi to Moscow, from T'ian Shan mountains of Central Asia to the Taurus Mountains of Anatolia.


I hope you guys took some Spanish courses...Interesting Doc. I can understand parts of it...


P.S Best Documentary I've seen so far on Timur, great job to the people who produced this excellent educational Documentary!

[Xeric]

Originally Posted by vinod2070

DS, your post is valid in parts. I agree that most Pakistanis are indigenous. I never disputed that!

I am talking of their own claims! Have you not read that there are more Quraishis in Pakistan than in Arabia? That so many miliions fake Arab/Persian/Turk ethnicities!

Let me share an article by a Pakistani writer, the one with many aliases!

He describes what many think of Islam in India very well.

LETTER FROM LONDON: Demons from the past —Irfan Husain

Whether we like it or not, neither geography nor history can be changed. While both countries have engaged in rewriting the past to suit their respective agendas, the facts cannot be erased. Both Muslims and Hindus have to live together as neighbours, and in India, as citizens

In a tranquil place like St Andrews, there are not many distractions, so I have been reading lots of history and trying to reflect on its lessons. For some time now, I have been interested in the dynamics of Hindu-Muslim relations, and the impact of ancient enmities and grievances on current Indo-Pak relations.

We have forgotten much of our past, but it nonetheless affects our daily lives.

For instance, when we now think of the Afghan city of Kandahar, we equate it with the Taliban. But its original name was Gandhara, and it was a part of the ancient Buddhist civilisation with its capital city in Taxila. Swat, Peshawar and the Kabul Valley were all included in this thriving, peaceful community that had absorbed Mediterranean culture brought to the subcontinent by Alexander, and before him, by Greek mercenaries and traders.

While it was no utopia, it was a stable, prosperous civilisation that threatened none of its neighbours, and has bequeathed us a wealth of artefacts that attest to its high level of cultural development.

The reason I mention this period of history is to try and understand the bitterness that must exist in many Hindu minds over the Muslim conquest of their country. In his Story of Civilisation, Will Durant writes: “The Mohammedan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest in history”. While historical events should be judged in the context of their times, it cannot be denied that even in that bloody period of history, no mercy was shown to the Hindus unfortunate enouh to be in the path of either the Arab conquerors of Sindh and south Punjab, or the Central Asians who swept in from Afghanistan.

The Muslim heroes who figure larger than life in our history books committed some dreadful crimes. Mahmud of Ghazni, Qutb-ud-Din Aibak, Balban, Mohammed bin Qasim, and Sultan Mohammad Tughlak, all have blood-stained hands that the passage of years has not cleansed. Indeed, the presence of Muslim historians on their various campaigns has ensured that the memory of their deeds will live long after they were buried.

Seen through Hindu eyes, the Muslim invasion of their homeland was an unmitigated disaster. Their temples were razed, their idols smashed, their women raped, their men killed or taken slaves. When Mahmud of Ghazni entered Somnath on one of his annual raids, he slaughtered all 50,000 inhabitants. Aibak killed and enslaved hundreds of thousands. The list of horrors is long and painful.

These conquerors justified their deeds by claiming it was their religious duty to smite non-believers. Cloaking themselves in the banner of Islam, they claimed they were fighting for their faith when, in reality, they were indulging in straightforward slaughter and pillage. When these warriors settled in India, they ruled as absolute despots over a cowed Hindu populace. For generations, their descendants took their martial superiority over their subjects for granted. When the British exposed the decadence of the Moghuls and seized power, the Muslims — especially the aristocracy — tried to cut deals with the new rulers to ensure that they would be treated differently from the Hindus.

It has been argued by some historians that Pakistan was really created to ensure that the Muslim ruling class would not be subject to Hindu rule in an undivided India. But having created Pakistan, the ruling elites promptly started lording it over the Bengalis of East Pakistan. What, after all, is the point of being descendants of Tughlak, Aibak and Mahmud if there is no under-class to persecute and exploit?

This, then, is the Hindu perspective of the Muslim invasion of their country. After centuries of first Muslim and then British rule, they are finally in charge of their destiny. For the first time in modern history, Indians feel that they can play a role on the world stage in keeping with their numbers and the size of their country.

Pakistan, especially its establishment and military, is smarting from successive military defeats and the steady diminishing of its international image. Due to their long domination of much of India, the Muslim elite in Pakistan feels it has some kind of divine right to be treated on a par with India.

With this psychological and historical baggage, both sides are unable to engage constructively with each other. Many Hindus feel they have centuries of humiliation to avenge. And a substantial number of Pakistani Muslims are secretly convinced that they are inherently superior to the Hindus.

One irony, of course, is that contrary to their wishful thinking, the vast majority of Muslims in the subcontinent have more Hindu blood in their veins than there is Arab, Afghan, Turkish or Persian blood. Many of the invaders took Hindu wives and concubines. And many Hindus converted to Islam to further their military or civil service careers. As a result of this intermingling, despite proud boasts of pure bloodlines, most Pakistanis have many Hindu ancestors.

This reality makes the Hindu-Muslim divide all the more bitter, for it pits brother against brother. And as students of Moghul history are aware, this is perhaps the bloodiest kind of conflict. By ties of consanguinity, culture, geography, and history, there is far more that unites than divides Indian Hindus and Muslims. But the politics of self-interest, too often garbed in the banner of faith, has pushed them far apart.

Why resurrect these ghosts from history? Because until we have confronted the demons from our past, we cannot understand the dynamics of contemporary events. As India and Pakistan go through the intricate steps of peace talks, each side needs to know what makes the other tick.

Whether we like it or not, neither geography nor history can be changed. While both countries have engaged in rewriting the past to suit their respective agendas, the facts cannot be erased. Both Muslims and Hindus have to live together as neighbours, and in India, as citizens.

A study and understanding of the past will promote better understanding between the two communities. It is important that Hindus grasp the central fact that their Muslim neighbours cannot now be held responsible for the persecution of their ancestors, and Muslims must face the fact that they are not the political heirs of the emperors Babar and Akbar.

Time is a great leveller; it is also a great healer.

The writer is a freelance columnist

i was just going to inform all about this.

This is THE only writing that you have seen on this subject and have quoted SEVERAL times on this board!

You need to come out of the inferiority complex, Vinod.

Let's see how many times further you would quote this on this forum, you have shamelessly brought this one in almost every single thread that you have participated in.

i think you need to check that hindustan was ruled by quite a few number of nationals, may be everyone in india is carrying that trans-national add-on in their blood!

[DarkStar]

A common misconception about the surnames of Quraishi and Sheikh. Both of them do not denote people of Arabic origin. Quraishi is a surname commonly used by people from Mirasi (singer artist/musician) biradiris, while sheikh is a surname commonly used by converts from the baniya classes.

It is a misconception that Quraishi has anything to do with the Arab tribe of Quraish, or that Shaikhs have anything to do with Arabia either.

[vinod2070]

Originally Posted by Xeric

Now this exactly is the problem that you suffer with.

You extrapolate this syndrome to just every Muslim and Pakistani as opposed to the majority members around here who condemn such mentality and wants to clear Islam and Pakistan off this stigma, and you (deliberately) fail to understand that.

i would take your concerns as genuine if i would feel that you are doing it out of misunderstanding or ignorance but that's not the case, you understand the concept of Islam and teachings very well but then you whole heartidly chose not to take those into account and stick to the same old stance where you want all to believe that Islam actually teaches suicide (though it declare suicide as Haram and have severe punishments for those who commit one in the afterlife) promote bloodshed.

Like another system of life Islam promotes peace, but not being a 'docile' religion it also tells us to take punitive actions if the followers are threatened, hurt or provoked. Now it is this phenomenon that is being misused by certain people and resultantly we see the mess that has been created today.The majority condemns these actions and dont owe them and thats what we are doing here. But what comes as a surprise is that if educated people like yourself would fail to understand the truth, how or why can we blame that ignorant lot who are immature, illiterate and young and fall prey to propaganda and some selective (out of context) Quranic Verses?!

I can see why you took my post that way.

I never said that every Muslim and Pakistani supports such acts. I did say that there are people who do that in the name of Islam and for the reasons mentioned.

[vinod2070]

Originally Posted by Neo

Ohh they do but not at this forum. There are dedicated fora for that. Yes, there were attrocities and wars throughout the history and many of them are mentioned in Abrahamic religions. As a matter of fact the first murder on earth involved two brothers, children of Adam and Eve. One killed the other out of jeallousy because he had offered an animal to God.

Lets avoid mythology and stick to historical facts!

Jews, the first and eldest of all Abrahamic religions fought many wars. Read about Jericho and you will learn.

They may have. I didn't dispute that.

[Xeric]

Originally Posted by vinod2070

I can see why you took my post that way.

I never said that every Muslim and Pakistani supports such acts. I did say that there are people who do that in the name of Islam and for the reasons mentioned.

Yeah right, my little angle!

[A1Kaid]

^ Hope this helps and contributes to your thought and understanding Xeric. (Referring to post #118)