The Greatest Hindu King - A Translation and Analysis of Maratha Fury and Shivaji

ahmedmadani #8

`` We can do as Shivaji done and capture kashmir. Indepedent kashmir can kill us. As then they will start useing water for their use and detrimental to Pakistan. Still is time to attack india before it consolidates into big giant monolith and dangerous to us. As most our our people have become whiners and do not want to pay extra taxes for war in Kasmir and army is always avoiding confrontation with india, shivaji way is right to defeat india and snatch and Kashmir. As people number is increasing rapidly they need to expand east and southward as historically. In long term delhi will have pakistani governer. South India can be left as maraths acan give trouble and drain on money as Alamgir times. Little enclave can be sikhshahi and they can act as pakistani gurakhas to control north india as a junior partner. Even China can bear on India, provide then some land in Kashmir. Army should be emboldent o think of Northern india coquest as will provide all food fiber and water needed for expanding population. 1000 cuts is good policy no good will come from talking, talking we lost east pakistan. Soon 80s f-16 will join fleet which can eat indian old aged migs and varients and before they are proficient with use of SU-30. India is still dependent on railway not like pakistan. Some destruction of 15 junctions of rails canbring india to standstill also same with few west coast harbors put out of commision with atomic attacks by Gurrillas ( so India can not retaliate) also with americans in country India can not do. Time is short or enemy will be getting stronger and not favourable to us. Jehidi war against india is only way to Kashmir to be part of Pakistan. Talk is opium, vajpai was ready to give Kashmir but kargil spoiled game and take over dashed hopes. ``

Rules of warfare have changed in 200 years. I hope one would notice.

If Vajpai was willing to give Kashmir why would Mushy launch Kargil ? He does stupid things. But he is not that stupid.

Do Pakistanis have the money to pay more taxes ? If that was true they would be no need to shake the begging bowls in front of Uncle Sam ?

Fact for an idiot like you. Pakistani Air Force has mounted one long range attack on Indian soil. It was pre-emptive strike on Agra air force base in 1971. We know how that war went.

``Hazrat Aurangzeb Alamgir was one of the few Muslim rulers after the first 4 caliphs who was both King and Saint``

Naqshbandi

Does the Islamic tradition of sainthood consist of imprisoning fathers and killing brothers?

``Hazrat Aurangzeb Alamgir was one of the few Muslim rulers after the first 4 caliphs who was both King and Saint``

Naqshbandi

Does the Islamic tradition of sainthood consist of imprisoning fathers and killing brothers?

Whyb should Hindus be ashamed of Hinduvta?

ranjit #32 {``The events after that resulted in the third battle of Panipat in 1757 where the Marathas lost to Ahmed Shah Abdali in a disasterous manner, which resulted in the complete eclipse of Maratha power from India`s political stage. Interestingly, the Rajputs and Sikhs did not cooperate with the Marathas against Abdali. In fact, the relations between Rajputs and Marathas were always strained (our Salim bhai is still mad at them :-) )``}

Ranjit Bhai,
If I am not mistaken, this battle of Panipat took place in 1762. The opposing forces were remnants of Mughal Empire, Nizam of Hyderabad, and Abdali on one side and Mahrattas, Sikhs, and some Rajputs on the other. The use of the gun ``Zamzama`` (``Kipling`s`` gun in Lahore) by Abdali and the stamina of the Pathans resulted in a horrific slaughter of the Marhattas. Upon receiving news of the defeat the Peshwa in Pune succumbed to what probably was a heart attack. I think that the reason why Abdali left was that anything worth looting had already been done earlier in 1739 when the other brigand, Nadir Shah, attacked and sacked Delhi. Abdali was one of Nadir Shah``s proteges. I think the reason many Rajputs detested the Mahrattas was the latter`s ``hit and run`` tactics that many Rajputs considered cowardly - today we call it terrorism. I am sure that caste had a lot to do with it. Furthermore, the behavior of the conquering Mahrattas in Rajasthan, Gujarat, MP, and southern UP after the retreat of the Mughal Empire has a lot to do with Rajput hatred for Mahrattas. The term is synonymous with looting, raping, burning, and general vandalism. Anyway, all that is in the past.

Ranjit #33 {``Salim bhai,
Believe me, Indians have always accepted the Mughals. There was only 1 coordinated attempt to preserve the Mughal empire from the brits. And guess what? It was the hindus who led that effort in 1857. The muslims participated in 1857 too, but interestingly enough, muslims never united behind the mughals to fight off the british. The punjabi, pathan and sindhi muslims in Pakistan didnt even participate in 1857.

Now we may like several of the Mughals or hate a few of them but they are all ours.

Ranjit Bhai,
You said it all with your sentence stating ``...but they are all ours.`` That is all I have been seeking and you said it. History is there for us to record accomplishments, compare approaches, learn from mistakes, and have an understanding of how we got to the present. Any family`s history, whether written or oral, is laden with great feats, misfortunes, and betrayals bey ``cousins and uncles.`` Why shouldn`t Indian history have its share of sibling rivalry, calamities, heroism, and betrayal?

You are right about 1857 and the lack of support from what is now Pakistan. In fact, the Sikhs and loyal Punjabi sepoys from Punjab and soldiers from Bombay and Madras were critical in the fall of Delhi and the relief of Lucknow for the British.

#31 if there was any true ``intermarriage`` things would indeed have been different. there were no intermarriages..only donations from rajput princly families to harems for political consideration. if mughals (and other invaders) had seeked marriages in good faith for their daughters, the case could be made. to akbars credit, the princes out of these alliances were legitimate heirs.

#34 i have a novel about 18-th century deccan by an american author which discusses pindharis as a mob of hindu and muslim brigands without a specific power-seat, but a real challenge to authorities.

Can`t we guys start taking up issues which concern the Present and the future instead of raking up the past and reviving past glories-Its kind of pathetic.
Look at europe ,France and Germany fought the bloodiest wars,WW2 caused so much death and destruction.The people have learnt to forget the past and work towards a better future- AN ECONOMICALLY UNITED EUROPE.

Lets learn from them ,and try to improve the standards of living of our people.For a region is one of the poorest regions of the world.

Enough of this .

Why do people take u literally? i don`t know.
If Shivaji was the symbol and guardian of hinduism to hindus Aurangzeb was dear to muslims despite carrying hindu blood in his veins.The real genius of Shivaji was the uniting of Maharashtran peasentry into a fighting force.
Someone mentioned about Pak Army in the wars, well sir! they are as brave and courageous as anyone can be for his country.Their valour is acknowledged by indian Generals and this fact is on military records.During WW II, Brits used to mock Americans of just chewing bubblegums and escorting WACOS.But D-DAY shut all the mouths and pointing fingers after witnessing the yanki dash in the face of the sudden death.Can anyone produce another example of such heroism and professionalism other than ``The charge of the light Brigade``.
Same was the case with marathhas that the farmers of yore became fighters of their time under Shivaji`s command.
Can someone throw some light on ``Pindaris`` also.

Re:Salim_Chauhan#31

Salim bhai,

Believe me, Indians have always accepted the Mughals. There was only 1 coordinated attempt to preserve the Mughal empire from the brits. And guess what? It was the hindus who led that effort in 1857. The muslims participated in 1857 too, but interestingly enough, muslims never united behind the mughals to fight off the british. The punjabi, pathan and sindhi muslims in Pakistan didnt even participate in 1857.

Now we may like several of the Mughals or hate a few of them but they are all ours. We have preserved Mughal culture and architecture with a lot of care. The most famous is of course the Taj Mahal, which is a great icon for India. There are also many more forts, mosques, buildings, gardens etc left behind by Mughals which are viewed as our heritage and taken good care of. Our independence day celebrations take place from the Red Fort, which was built by the Mughals.

And finally, we are the country which produced the film Mughal-e-Azam, a fitting tribute to the Mughals. Can you imagine Pakistan producing a movie of that caliber? Only India can do something like that ;-).

Re:sishapa #24

Yeah..thats right. Most of the invaders were Turks or Central Asians who had conquered Afghanistan. Ghaznavi was a Turk, Ghauri was a Tajik, the Khiljis/Tughlaks/Lodis etc were Afghans. Ahmed Shah Abdali was a Pushtoon, if I am not mistaken. When Maratha power was at its peak, the North Indian muslims became panicky since the Mughals were in no position to defend Delhi. They sent pleas to Ahmed Shah Abdali to step in and save Islam in India.

The events after that resulted in the third battle of Panipat in 1757 where the Marathas lost to Ahmed Shah Abdali in a disasterous manner, which resulted in the complete eclipse of Maratha power from India`s political stage. Interestingly, the Rajputs and Sikhs did not cooperate with the Marathas against Abdali. In fact, the relations between Rajputs and Marathas were always strained (our Salim bhai is still mad at them :-) ). In any case, the real winner of the third battle of Panipat were the British, who basically stepped into the vaccum created by the eclipse of Mughal and Maratha power. For some strange reason Abdali didnt stay back in Delhi and reestablish an Afghan sultanate in 1757, which was quite unusual given past history of Afghan conquests.

Ranjit #22 {``Comparing Mughal Empire with Pakistan is like comparing a prized stallion with a lame mule. As my friend Salim Chauhan says rightly, Mughals were Indians. We Indians accept with pride the strength, vitality, the majestic glory and the cultural accomplishments of the Mughals. They intermarried with Rajputs and took the best of Indian and Central Asian culture to create a majestic empire.``}

Ranjit Bhai,
Now you are talking. Mughals were Indians. Had they conquered India and taken its riches to Kabul or Ferghana, I would join everyone in declaring them to be ``foreign`` invaders like Qasim, Ghaznavi, Ghori, Nadir Shar, and Abdali. Mughals called the country they ruled ``Hindustan`` with pride and loyalty. Yes, the Sultanate was theirs but they regarded its Hindu citizens and its Muslims citizens as their subjects - to be taxed and protected. A Hindu citizen of Mughal Empire was closer to Mughals than an Iranian citizen of Safavid Empire. While not a nation state, as present-day India, the Mughal Sultanate of Hindustan had borders and population that is roughly equivalent with almost all of India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and BD today. Thank you for your appreciation for the accomplishments of the Mughals. Pakistan has not had a single ruler who comes close to any of the early six in statutre or accomplishments. I think that Pakistan may have much in common with the later Mughals - Farrukhsiyaar, Muhammad Sha, Ahmed Shah Rangeela, Shah Alam, and Bahadur Shah II. Good or bad, effective of ineffective, successful or failures, all the Mughals after Babur were Indians and belong to its rich and colorful legacy of becoming a permanent home for all kinds of people from Central Asia. If the Huns from Central Asia can become Rajputs and Indians, why can`t the Mongols of Central Asia become Indians, especially if they intermarried with the once-foreign Rajputs? :)

``I will not lift my veil

---

For if I did, who knows?

The bulbul might forget the rose,
The Brahman worshipper
Adoring Lakshmi`s face
Might turn, forsaking her,
To see my face;
My beauty might prevail.

Think how within the flower
Hidden as in a bower
Her fragrant soul must be,
And none can look on it;
So me the world can see
Only within the verses I have writ

---

I will not lift the veil.


No Muslim I,
But an idolater,
I bow before the image of my Love,
And worship Her.

No Brahman I,
My sacred thread
I cast away, for round my neck I wear
Her plaited hair instead.

``Men see it not, so dull they are and blind.``

(a Ghazal by Aurangzeb`s daughter Zaibunnissa)

#26 actually, sivaji lived very nicely towards the end of his life..he was not on the run or anything. he had a long campaign in the south which was a peace mission..no wars, he visited many kings including the hydrabad nizam on cordian terms..very unreal

...continued

approval. shahjehan was always so scared of azeb, that he kept him away to kandahar, and then desolate (he thought) deccan. azeb however discovered that deccan (golconda) was actually very rich in precious stones...

#26 hasanji, you need to read some history of alamgir. there is no confusion that he was a hindu basher. i personally think he was a great warrior and only legitimate heir to the mughal throne, but he definately was a self-avowed hindu-buster (his own court historians boast of it, there is corroborating evidence from european ambassadors). he did not kill his mother and he did kill his brothers, but that should not be held against him much, for else they would (at least shuja and murad) would have killed him. i think of him as a sad person pining for is fathers