Shivaji -- Portrait of the King as Barbarian

#255 {``The truth is that Aurangzeb was a failure in all aspects. Can anyone even name who succeeded Aurangzeb ? Within 10 years of his death the Marathas overtook the Mughals as the dominant power in India. ``}

Bbabus,
Yes, it was his son, Bahadur Shah I. :)
Aurangzeb died in 1707 and Mahrattas became the dominant power in India around 1739, with the arrival of Nadir Shah. The Mahrattas were decisively defeated at Panipat in 1761, but by that time the British had become the dominant power in India after Plassey in 1757.

Salim_Chauhan #244

`` Babu,
I think that it has more to do with the length of the name than the perception of Maharaja Aurangjeb as an ``evil`` person. People don`t name their kids Fakhruddin or Shamsuddin, or even Jalaluddin anymore. In fact Ud Din is considered too ancient as are Daulah, Zaman and other long names with that suffix. Babur is short, as is AKbar and so is Khurram. People name their boys Zafarf - probably not in honor of Bahadur Shah II. :) ``

I presume you are referring to Bahadur Shah II the last Mughal emperor. He might have lost to the British and gotten exiled to Rangoon. What do you expect ? He did not have the military strength to fight the British. At least he did not sell out like a Mir Jaffar.

I will give you some slack on the issue of shorter names. There is a Syed Shahbuddin (Janata Dal leader), Saifuddin Chowdhury (CPI-M leader), Mohammed Azharruddin (cricket player) etc.

The truth is that Aurangzeb was a failure in all aspects. Can anyone even name who succeeded Aurangzeb ? Within 10 years of his death the Marathas overtook the Mughals as the dominant power in India.

Most Indian Muslims are not dumb to realize this. Hence they do not name their kids.
Case closed.

dullabhatti#249:

My reference to Muslim influence on Sikhism referred to Sikhism and not Nanak and referred to post-Arjundev period, esp. the establishment of the Khalsa Panth by the tenth guru.

sadna:

Thanks for the links. I will try to find time to read them soon.

tahmed32:

``you were asking me how i can take a correct view of things given my ``muslim identity````

No, I was not asking you that. I was merely saying that Hindus and Muslims in general have different perspectives on Indian history. All you have to do is to compare the textbooks used in Pakistan and compare them to those used in India. I did also say that there are many Muslims and Hindus who do not, respectively, accept Muslim or Hindu perspective.

As for my other point, when one suddenly changes one`s name, food, apparel, script, etc. when one changes one`s religion, one rejects, in my view, a substanital part of one`s identity.

Salim_Chauhan:
I was talking about name changes as a result of a change in faith and it was more common in India than in other countries. Muslims in Iran continued with their names as did Indonesians and Central Asians. Ironically, Indians upon conversion frequently adopted Persian rather than Arabic names.

This is different from the new and natural evolution of names. In India, non-muslims are naming their kids Sahil, Sameera, Sahiba, etc. and in Pakistan Muslims are being named Reema, Meera, Bina, etc. This is a welcome change - one`s name should not be an announcement of one`s relgion, language, caste, etc. as for example is the case in my own name.

#247, jang {``#245 i hope you are having fun with dm..otoh if you sincerely disagree with dm that 99% muslims in india have ferner names, i suspect batting for your team is happening.``}

Jang,
I am just pointing out exceptions to DM Sahib`s statement. There are plenty of non-Arabic names used by non-Arab Muslims. But you are right in that the overwhelming majority of Muslim names, in India and elsewhere, are Arabic.

I am not batting for any team. I refuse to be a team player. :)

Corr: `India from Curzon to Nehru and After`

249,

this is another example of fallacies, rumors, and kanjarpana......

Nanak was equally critical of Islam/muslims.....as he was of Hinduism.....

DM: I have heard a lot about how Guru Nanak was influenced by spiritual message of Islam and hence the conclusion that Sikhism is influenced by and has copied a lot from Islam. I do agree that Sikhism is influenced by ``Islamic culture`` but what I see is that influence is actually much later in the times of later Gurus particularly post-Hargobind than during Guru Nanak`s time..... Strict rehat-maryada, long hair, turbans, sword, jhatka etc are all traditions picked up by Sikhism much later than Guru Nanak`s life time. If one has to see how much was Nanak influenced by Islam one has to read what he wrote. Since he wrote a lot, much more, almost equivalent to combined efforts by rest of the 9 Gurus, one can get a clear picture of how he thought and what was he influenced by. He spent lot of time in Muslim lands yet all the vocabulary, concepts, myths, metaphors, analogies etc found in his poetry has very little to do with Islam. Why so? Anyone can read his ``Japu ji`` , his first writing, core to his belief system, his idea of God, eternity, re-incarnaiton, hell, heaven, good deeds etc and not find a single reference to or use of Islamic spiritual vocabulary If he was so influenced or copying Islam, one would find Islamic metaphors, names, vocabulary, tradiitons in his writing a lot... but that is not the case....only references are when he is talking about absurdity of some of the rituals..and even that too is very little...is that influence to the extent that Islam needs credit for it? I don`t think so. I think that is unfair evaluation of Guru Nanak. In fact I can produce quotes from e.g. Asa di War where he clearly condemning people for mindlessly copying turk traditions and language. ``mian mian sabna jee`an, boli awar tumari``....``neel bastar......(something)...turk pathani vais kia``..etc

dost-mittar #229
You might find these interesting. These are excerpts from Durga Das`s `India from Nehru to Curzon and After`. I trust you know who Durga Das was? I recommend reading them in order:

http://www.sulekha.com/blogs/blogdisplay.aspx?cid=29113
http://www.sulekha.com/blogs/blogdisplay.aspx?cid=29114
http://www.sulekha.com/blogs/blogdisplay.aspx?cid=29159
http://www.sulekha.com/blogs/blogdisplay.aspx?cid=29160

btw, post-independence, Fazli Hussain`s son was an Ambassador of India, if I am not mistaken.

Incidentally I liked this chapter one too:
http://www.sulekha.com/blogs/blogdisplay.aspx?cid=31775

#245 i hope you are having fun with dm..otoh if you sincerely disagree with dm that 99% muslims in india have ferner names, i suspect batting for your team is happening.

What BS bukwaas!!!!????
this `article` is.

DM Sahib #189 {````Where does it say in quran that you must change your name from Ramesh to Rehmatuallah when you become a Muslim, and yet this is what happens?``.``}

You are right and there are quite a few converted people who kept their native names - mostly Persian and Turkish, but even some Hindu.

Persian - Javed, Pervez, Aftab, Firoz, Shaheen, Perveen, Dara, Sirosh,
Turkish - Arslan, Timur, Genghis, Attila, Yavuz, Yilderim, Deniz, Nergis,
Indian - Kiran, Suraj, Meena, Chand, Ranjhha, Raja, Rani, Rao
Greek/Persian - Sikandar, Arastoo, Suqraat, Aflatoon :)

#195 bbabu {``Point was that very few Muslims name their kids Aurangzeb``}

Babu,
I think that it has more to do with the length of the name than the perception of Maharaja Aurangjeb as an ``evil`` person. People don`t name their kids Fakhruddin or Shamsuddin, or even Jalaluddin anymore. In fact Ud Din is considered too ancient as are Daulah, Zaman and other long names with that suffix. Babur is short, as is AKbar and so is Khurram. People name their boys Zafarf - probably not in honor of Bahadur Shah II. :)

#200 harimau {``#200 Those guys claim that the invading Sakhas brought the needle to India and the idea of stitched cloth. About 1000 years before the camel jockeys arrived>``}

Harry yaar,
Some camel jockeys are my Hindu Rajput cousins in the Thar desert. :)

Ranjit Bhai #209, {``From a purely Indian nationalistic perspective, it makes immense sense for us to integrate Indian muslims fully into our system. Leaving behind 120 million people with the potential for jihadi behavior makes no sense. Therefore, the current thaw with Pakistan gives us a great tactical advantage to totally integrate Indian muslims into our mainstream. That means massive spread of education, shutdown of any madrassahs, propagation of secular ideals like uniform civil code, spreading message for family planning, providing scholarships to deserving muslim students to go for higher education, providing micro-loan programs to deserving muslims to help them start businesses etc. ... By some chance if Salim Chauhan manages to convert all Pakistanis to his viewpoint, we may have a real problem :-).

Ranjit Bhai,
Amen to your excellent suggestions. Integration of IMs into mainstream Indian society is the answer - no quotas, no separate and special Muslim courts due to ``religious`` nonsense such as divorce, marriage, segregation of sexes, and inheritance laws. If Muslims want to be Indian citizens, they must conform to Indian law like everyone else - unless that law is unconstitutional. Consuming UriCola would be in the unconstitutional category. :)

Whether I convert all Pakistanis or not is immaterial. Economic realities will force Pakistanis to embrace Indians or risk becoming the Afghans from the 80s and 90s.

#212, bolta-aina, {``There is no point discussing and dissecting A.Zeb-Shivaji, Akbar-Maharana Pratap etc. etc. They all represent our process of evolution into a Modern, Secular State what we are today. When we got independence from the Birtish and became a republic on 26th January.1950, we have surrendered all our history , all our lands, all our heroes to the Nation.``}

Talking Mirror Sahib,
Very good point and well stated. I agree with most of what you have been posting on this thread - importance of recognizing Mughal contribution to Hindustan as a nation, meaningless differentiation of Indus valley vs. Ganges valley, etc. If we can stop tagging Indians as heroes or villains, then I submit, why the constant drum beats of declaring Shivaji a great hero for fighting Aurangzeb?