Bahadur Shah Zafar

[sankar]

I am not disputing that the conquest (and rule) was destructive to Indian culture, particularly its heart of dharma. What I am saying is that there are positive sides as well.

i understand, just like the postive side of a rape is that it would result to birth of a child, right ?

The Mughals looted during the conquest, but at times made important contributions to the upliftment of the socioeconomic situation thereafter.

kindly state them if there is any, according to what i know they simply percecuted hindus, destroyed temples and looted their property, is that the socioeconomic upliftment you are talking about?

The British were far more rapacious when it came to exploiting resources and removing them from India.

but with less shed of blood.

Still, India is exceptionally blessed with natural resources. Progress is being made. One day not too far from now the world will look to India as a model of development.

to my understanding the progress is mainly due to hardwork.

Is it really necessary to be sarcastic? I am (somewhat) familiar with the history of Akbar. Need I remind you that Ashoka, one of the few who truly deserved the title of Great, also was a conqueror in his youth?

Consider Akbar's environment and lineage (ie, his mad, bloodthirsty grandfather), and consider his own behavior. He was truly an exceptional man.

the same justification can be applied to every criminal, that is to blame the environment in which they were brought up. Aurangazed is his death bed felt sorry for what he did against hindus, so auranagzed was a nice guy? Yes he is, so is bin laden, hitler etc. Hitlers childhood life was a very painful one.

[Believer]

Namaste,

It is said that youth in wasted on the young. When people with little life experience and no sense of history make obnoxious statements, they are ignored, as the comments are borne of ignorance. But one wonders about the things coming from some of our wise and learned members....

In my opinion, it would be dishonest to ignore the positive sides
..........contributed greatly to the project of nationbuilding.

When over half of Hindu land has been lost (Afganistan, Paki, BD)...
When half the population has been converted to Islam and is always looking for ways to screw the remaining Hindus.....
Someone is looking for positivity?
And calling everyone who does not, DISHONEST?
Give me a break!

Pranam.

[Shuddhasattva]

Namaste

i understand, just like the postive side of a rape is that it would result to birth of a child, right ?

Precisely. That has been the experience of many women; the child can be considered a blessing.

kindly state them if there is any, according to what i know they simply percecuted hindus, destroyed temples and looted their property, is that the socioeconomic upliftment you are talking about?

You may continue reading that article about Akbar if you wish.

to my understanding the progress is mainly due to hardwork.

Hardwork is certainly an important factor.

the same justification can be applied to every criminal, that is to blame the environment in which they were brought up. Aurangazed is his death bed felt sorry for what he did against hindus, so auranagzed was a nice guy? Yes he is, so is bin laden, hitler etc. Hitlers childhood life was a very painful one.

Except that I'm not excusing Akbar as a criminal. He was legitimately a great man, Muslim or not. My point is that Akbar transcended his environment/conditioning. Early in his rule, he was a product of it. Later, he sobered like Ashoka did. Was Akbar as great as Ashoka? Not nearly, but my point is that we should not blind ourselves to the good qualities of people (such as the person about whom this thread was started) simply because they're Muslim, or even Mughal.

Understanding the environment that shapes people, at times deforming them, is not an excuse for behavior. It's a way of understanding why people behave the way they do, so that future behavior can be corrected.

I detest Islam precisely because of the way it conditions people towards A., bad behavior, and B. no real relationship with Bhagavan. Nonetheless, within Islam, some people rise above its low-mindedness and still become good, even great, people. This, in my opinion, is to be celebrated as the triumph of the human spirit over the forces of avidya.

Islam will not be destroyed by the sword, nor will it be destroyed by argument, for blind faith inures itself to reason by necessity. The way to destroy Islam is by setting such a superior example that Muslims will want to live as you do, and to do that, they must learn from you. This requires compassionately embracing Muslims despite all differences and blood spilled between ancestors. This is my opinion.

Namaste

[PARAM]

Wikipedia is not a good source of knowledge, most of the Wiki knowledge about Hinduism is also misleading.

Bahadur Shah Zafar was a Muslim ruler with no support to Hindus, but the Indian freedom struggle of 1857 started during his time, and he supported freedom fighters against British East India Company to regain his lost Empire.

[IcyCosmic]

I asked my dad about this again, and he still facilitated that Mughal rule had some posotives, telling me he studied history for 9 years in detail...I don't know though I told him I think the emperors had zero to no benefit, the same things could happen with less bloodshed and malicious activity.

He did however proceed, to slander a certain emperior called Aurangzeb. I have no knowledge of him but apparently he was especially horrid towards hindus and indian culture.

[PARAM]

I asked my dad about this again, and he still facilitated that Mughal rule had some posotives, telling me he studied history for 9 years in detail...I don't know though I told him I think the emperors had zero to no benefit, the same things could happen with less bloodshed and malicious activity.

He did however proceed, to slander a certain emperior called Aurangzeb. I have no knowledge of him but apparently he was especially horrid towards hindus and indian culture.

Aurangzeb was one of the big destroyer of Hindus and Hinduism, he is popular in Muslims because of re-imposing the Jaziya and other tax on Hindus, banning Hindus to visit tirthas and implementing many other ways to depress Hindus. Aurangzeb is also loved by Muslims for fighting against Guru Gobind Singh, Shivaji Maharaj and all other Hindus.

[Equinox]

Aurangzeb was also the one who imprisoned his father, Shah Jahan! And he was definitely ruthless towards non-Muslims, besides destroying many Hindu schools and an infinite number of Hindu temples, including the Kashi Vishwanath Temple.

[sankar]

Precisely. That has been the experience of many women; the child can be considered a blessing.

you know why they do so. Do you think actually it is a positive thing?
Sorry to offend you, if the same happens to somelady very close to you, would you say the rapist contributed to your family in a good way?

Except that I'm not excusing Akbar as a criminal. He was legitimately a great man, Muslim or not. My point is that Akbar transcended his environment/conditioning. Early in his rule, he was a product of it. Later, he sobered like Ashoka did. Was Akbar as great as Ashoka? Not nearly, but my point is that we should not blind ourselves to the good qualities of people (such as the person about whom this thread was started) simply because they're Muslim, or even Mughal.

You know the difference? Ashoka had to become buddhist to be a good man, but incase of akbar he had become detatched from his religion to be a tolerant guy. The main motives behind conquests by mughals(including akbar) was religion(because they are muslims), this is not the same for Ashoka.

I detest Islam precisely because of the way it conditions people towards A., bad behavior, and B. no real relationship with Bhagavan. Nonetheless, within Islam, some people rise above its low-mindedness and still become good, even great, people. This, in my opinion, is to be celebrated as the triumph of the human spirit over the forces of avidya.

Thanks for your opinion, there are certainly great people who claims to be muslim, but i wont attest that they are muslims. I would say they dont have any idea about muhammad or quran. I have debated with such good muslims, there are many things in islam that they cant answer, what they say is that they cant answer that but they are muslims.

Islam will not be destroyed by the sword

you know that islam destroyed many religions using sword, im not saying we should follow the same, but cant discard any possibilities.

nor will it be destroyed by argument

we should argue if they argue, it is for the protection of our own faith.

The way to destroy Islam is by setting such a superior example that Muslims will want to live as you do, and to do that, they must learn from you. This requires compassionately embracing Muslims despite all differences and blood spilled between ancestors.

we have been doing all these as per the teaching of gandhi, but did it work? Gandhis teachings are all bullshit, he allowed a seprate nation for muslims, and now all indians are paying for that. Pakistan has become a terrorist centre in this world. See the situation of hindus in pakistan.

[Shuddhasattva]

Namaste

Sorry to offend you, if the same happens to somelady very close to you, would you say the raper contributed to your family in a good way?

No, as contribution implies intent. The salient point is that if this lady chose not to abort the child, I would accept the child as as much a family member as any other child, and in that sense, a positive addition to the family.

You know the difference? Ashoka had to become buddhist to be a good man, but incase of akbar he had become detatched from his religion to be a tolerant guy. The main motives behind conquests by mughals(including akbar) was religion(because they are muslims), this is not the same for Ashoka.

Ashoka had to realize the folly of violence to become a good man - this lead him to Buddhism. Akbar had to realize the folly of violence and repression - this lead him away from Islamic fundamentalism. I agree.

Thanks for your opinion, there are certainly great people who claims to be muslim, but i wont attest that they are muslims. I would say they dont have any idea about muhammad or quran. I have debated with such good muslims, there are many things in islam that they cant answer, what they say is that they cant answer that but they are muslims.

Yes, in many cases this is true. However, other good, even great, people were very devout Muslims, though generally of a more esoteric bent - Sufis, for instance. What are we to say, for example, of Shirdi Sai Baba and his provenance?

you know that islam destroyed many religions using sword, im not saying we should follow the same, but cant discard any possibilities.

That is a possibility that should certainly be discarded. Destroying Islam by the sword practically means in this time the use of nuclear weapons, which would be an unimaginable folly greater in extent than the original invasion of Bharat.

we should argue if they argue, it is for the protection of our own faith.

There may be times when argument is warranted to protect those who would otherwise be vulnerable from being swayed by the weak arguments of the Abrahamics. Otherwise, it is quite useless.

we have been doing all these as per the teaching of gandhi, but did it work? Gandhis teachings are all bullshit, he allowed a seprate nation for muslims, and now all indians are paying for that. Pakistan has become a terrorist centre in this world. See the situation of hindus in pakistan.

Though you may blame Gandhi, unjustifiably for the creation of Pakistan and its use by cynical forces to perpetuate geopolitical instability for their benefit, you will not credit him for the vital role he played in the liberation of India and its establishment as a vast unified nation rooted in solid principles?

I will contend that a sufficiently better example has not been set. Not until poverty is banished from the fair face of Bharat Ma can this be said to be accomplished.

Namaste

[sankar]

No, as contribution implies intent. The salient point is that if this lady chose not to abort the child, I would accept the child as as much a family member as any other child, and in that sense, a positive addition to the family

.
the same is for what you call 'contribution' of mughals, their intention was not good.

You may continue reading that article about Akbar if you wish.

a period when millions of hindus were persecuted, you call it as social-economic upliftment?

Yes, in many cases this is true. However, other good, even great, people were very devout Muslims, though generally of a more esoteric bent - Sufis, for instance.

path of sufism is bit different from islam, many islamic scholars accepts this fact. The sufis dance, sings etc etc, all which is banned in islam. I agree that it has something common with islam, but sufism is not islam.

What are we to say, for example, of Shirdi Sai Baba and his provenance?

he had to act according to the situation, so did he receive fans from every community.

That is a possibility that should certainly be discarded. Destroying Islam by the sword practically means in this time the use of nuclear weapons, which would be an unimaginable folly greater in extent than the original invasion of Bharat.

You misunderstood my point, i did not say i would like to see islam destoryed by sword, but anything can happen, reality wont care about the severeness of nuclear weapons.