zen Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 4 minutes ago, maniac said: Sure but the difference being is that Taimur never ruled in India...so his invasion stops at looting and taking back riches from India..it wasn't like he was a friendly visitor who got a lot of goodies from the local king. There are plenty of arguments for Akbar,Humayun,Babar,Jahangir/Salim etc etc being tyrants too but at the end of the day they were emperors of India which is a fact and no one cares if someone named their kid that because it is what it is. Similarly with Taimur only known thing is he was a invader and bandit who killed innocent civilians Big difference. Even Ravana was supposed to be a noble Brahmin king who made 1 blunder in his life and even more that is just mythology but obviously no one names their kid that....Sure any parent can name their kid Ravan if they want but the kid will surely be bullied and 2)clearly if the parents are not ignorant they are trying to make a diss statement by naming their kid that. Appears as if you are not seeing the similarities and connections b/w Mughals and Mongals. Mughal is the persian word for Mongal, iirc Babar's lineage can be traced to Timur Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
maniac Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 Just now, zen said: Appears as if you are not seeing the similarities and connections b/w Mughals and Mongals. Mughal is the persian word for Mongal, iirc Babar's lineage can be traced to Timur The point is Taimur the person to any other Mughal emperor or Gahzni/Ghori etc. Mughals ruled the country,Taimur came,ransacked and left. Obviously they all fked us some way or the other.....but it all comes down to a the difference between a Goonda who becomes a politician and a leader vs an actual terrorist...who cares they both are douchebags-just so that a terrorist is worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 8 hours ago, Mariyam said: So killing a lot of Indians and then saying 'oops' and renouncing worldy pleasures definitely weighs over the fact that emperor Ashok was a mass murderer. A 'get out of jail free' in the history books? I'm not sure what you are trying to say. That its okay for someone to name their kid 'Ashok' because he said sorry and not 'Taimur' because he was stupid/articulate enough to have his attrocities documented? Do I understand you right? We digress anyways. The point here is that neither you , nor anyone else can say with any degree of certainity that Saifeena named the kid after the conqueror. Ashoka was not a mass murderer. You have your definitions mixed up. Killing someone in war is NOT murder. Murder is defined as unlawful execution. Such as killing civilians who are not guilty of crimes prescribing capital punishment, by an authority not licensed to carry out the verdict. When you show up to battle, you are legally there to kill combatants. If you are a soldier, every single enemy soldier you kill, is legally sanctioned, legitimate execution. Not murder. They signed up to kill or be killed. That makes it legal. And yes, being the greatest nation-builder in the Before-Christ era in known history, goes a long way to negate sanctioned killings on a battlefield. Because when you build roads, tanks (the ones that hold water), canals, rest houses, government paid schools, rest-homes, strengthening the rights of the Sreni (which were the merchant guilds), being the first ruler in history of mankind to designate protected status to forests and animals, etc. you are progressing humanity and making a direct, decisive difference in uplifting the condition of your citizens. That is pretty much A++ for being a ruler, as the fundamental job of a ruler is to progress his nation. When you spend your entire life on a never-ending killing spree, raise taxes on your own subjects so high that they kill your tax collectors, make skull mountains from Smyrna (which is Turkish coast facing Greece), all the way to Delhi, you have done nothing but take humanity backwards and deserve to be vilified. That is the big difference between Timur and Ashoka. One waged never-ending war for 40 years, bankrupted his country and massacred civilians. The other went to war twice - once to put down a rebellion (Taxila) and one of conquest (Kalinga), killed his brothers who conspired against him, educated his people, enriched them and built a bloody nation. The same difference exists between a genocidal mass-murderer like Hitler and a general who wages war but takes care of his people like Napoleon. Sad you cant see the difference. Ironhide, CasualVisitor, Rasgulla and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mariyam Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 2 hours ago, New guy said: Yes, those who want cheap publicity And a Kareena Kapoor and a Saif Ali Khan are in need of this publicity? This is your rationale? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gattaca Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 Why would you name your kid after a cripple ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mariyam Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 22 minutes ago, jalebi_bhai said: What is it that is really bothering you about people's reaction? The criticism of Saif-Kareena's decision or the criticism of imperialists who used Islam as their political-military doctrine or both? What is bothering me is the immediate assumption that people make when they say Saifeena named their son after Taimur the conqueror. And start a whole round of generalizations on Muslims in India. A la Kubrickan and Narenpande in this thread for instance. Its not as if Saif Ali Khan is the best representative of how a typical Indian Muslim (if such a thing exists) thinks or behaves. Book_Worm 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 6 minutes ago, Mariyam said: What is bothering me is the immediate assumption that people make when they say Saifeena named their son after Taimur the conqueror. And start a whole round of generalizations on Muslims in India. A la Kubrickan and Narenpande in this thread for instance. Its not as if Saif Ali Khan is the best representative of how a typical Indian Muslim (if such a thing exists) thinks or behaves. If you name your kid Napoleon, chances are, its inspired by Bonaparte. If you name your kid Adolf chances are it is Inspired by Hitler. Similarly, if you name your kid Timur, it is Inspired by Timur-e-Lang Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zen Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 (edited) 20 minutes ago, maniac said: The point is Taimur the person to any other Mughal emperor or Gahzni/Ghori etc. Mughals ruled the country,Taimur came,ransacked and left. Obviously they all fked us some way or the other.....but it all comes down to a the difference between a Goonda who becomes a politician and a leader vs an actual terrorist...who cares they both are douchebags-just so that a terrorist is worse. Babar came to Ind as he was driven out of his native place, iirc .... the rule of Mughals can be seen as the rule of the region (as there was no Ind as we know it today) by British (foreigners) Mauriya empire actually ruled the whole region including what we call Ind, Afg and Pak. SL and Norh East were its tributories Note that Romans have ruled England (and most known parts of the world in their time) too. Now see if the occupied European communities see Ceaser as one of "their" emperors This "Timor" argument only exposes the inability of many in Ind to connect dots .... if Indians have to feel offensive about anything, it should be for how they have turned the region in to a garbage Edited December 21, 2016 by zen Book_Worm 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mariyam Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 (edited) @ Muloghonto At the outset, let us get this straight. I am not comparing Ashok the Great with Taimur. Far from it. But Ashok did attack in an act of aggression another sovereign state and massacred at least its military. This much isn't disputed. And that isn't ideal role model behaviour if you ask me. On another note, thanks for the history lessons. You do know quite a bit about Indian history. Its been a pleasure reading your posts on the topic. Edited December 21, 2016 by Mariyam Muloghonto 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mariyam Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 4 minutes ago, Muloghonto said: If you name your kid Napoleon, chances are, its inspired by Bonaparte. If you name your kid Adolf chances are it is Inspired by Hitler. Similarly, if you name your kid Timur, it is Inspired by Timur-e-Lang What do you have to say about this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 Just now, Mariyam said: What do you have to say about this? That the kid is one hell of a rebel. You get named after the greatest general (or one of them atleast) mankind has ever known AND the greatest scientist of the last 100 years but you choose to play cricket ? Yep, kid probably is rebelling pretty big Mariyam 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jalebi_bhai Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 9 minutes ago, Mariyam said: What is bothering me is the immediate assumption that people make when they say Saifeena named their son after Taimur the conqueror. And start a whole round of generalizations on Muslims in India. A la Kubrickan and Narenpande in this thread for instance. Its not as if Saif Ali Khan is the best representative of how a typical Indian Muslim (if such a thing exists) thinks or behaves. Ok. The Taimur argument is going around in circles so let's move on from it. I would definitely want to know how do typical Indian Muslims think or behave? I'm an interested party because my sister has been dating a Gujju Muslim for nearly 7 years and I would definitely appreciate some input from your end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 3 minutes ago, Mariyam said: @ Muloghonto I know what is murder. I used to be a practicing property/corporate lawyer till a couple of years ago. A very good one, I'm told. At the outset, let us get this straight. I am not comparing Ashok the Great with Taimur. Far from it. But Ashok did attack in an act of aggression a another sovereign state and massacred at least its military in a war of aggression. This much isn't disputed. And that isn't ideal role model behaviour if you ask me. It isn't ideal, but it isn't by default evil either, if property & civillians are not harmed- which according to all surviving records, was the case in Kalinga. But when you spend 40 years building a nation in such excellence that has never been seen before, it does make for an ideal role model. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 btw, i would like to mention again, that this whole notion that 'India didnt exist till the British as a concept' is a fabrication of the Muslim League during partition years, to obfuscate and disassociate with the identity of India to create a new country (Pakistan). India/Indians is the English of the Greek term 'Indae/Indoi'. The Greeks used it the same way we use the term Indian subcontinent - to describe a geo-political region of common cultural & civilization identity. At first they applied it to only Pakistan coz Alexander pretty much only went to Pakistan and thats the first time Greeks, in recorded history, visit India. 20 years later, Megasthenes describes Pataliputra, Kalinga, etc. all as various parts of India. Indicating that the concept was applied to ALL of India. We personally used the term Aryavarta & Bharatvarsha to describe what is modern day Indian subcontinent. The Sassanid Persians, through history have used the term 'Hind' to describe the Indian subcontinent and even called parts of eastern Afghanistan like Qandhar & Kabul as 'Safed Hind', which means 'white India'. Incase you are wondering why, its because in Turko-Persian culture (which were beginning to fuse around the time of the Sassanids), colors indicate direction. White represents west, Black represents North etc. This is why you have so many Turko-Persian & Mongol polities named after colors - like Black-Sheep Turkoman, Red-Sheep Turkoman, Golden Horde, White Horde, etc. It is meant to designate 'western horde/northern horde/central horde' that kinda stuff. Heck, in the era of the last great Sassanid Emperor, Khusrow Anushirvan, he calls the region of Seistan 'Koochak-e-Hind', meaning 'little India', due to the presence of Indian artisans & merchants in large numbers in Sarang (modern day Zaranj) and deep cultural, political & economic roots with 'Safed Hindh', aka Kabul Dynasties. The concept of India as a NATION didnt exist before the British. But then again, the concept of Nations itself died around 300s AD and wasnt resurrected till the 19th century. But the concept of a civilization/geo-political region named India, has existed since the ancient times. Mariyam, surajmal, jalebi_bhai and 4 others 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jalebi_bhai Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 (edited) 16 hours ago, Muloghonto said: btw, i would like to mention again, that this whole notion that 'India didnt exist till the British as a concept' is a fabrication of the Muslim League during partition years, to obfuscate and disassociate with the identity of India to create a new country (Pakistan). India/Indians is the English of the Greek term 'Indae/Indoi'. The Greeks used it the same way we use the term Indian subcontinent - to describe a geo-political region of common cultural & civilization identity. At first they applied it to only Pakistan coz Alexander pretty much only went to Pakistan and thats the first time Greeks, in recorded history, visit India. 20 years later, Megasthenes describes Pataliputra, Kalinga, etc. all as various parts of India. Indicating that the concept was applied to ALL of India. We personally used the term Aryavarta & Bharatvarsha to describe what is modern day Indian subcontinent. The Sassanid Persians, through history have used the term 'Hind' to describe the Indian subcontinent and even called parts of eastern Afghanistan like Qandhar & Kabul as 'Safed Hind', which means 'white India'. Incase you are wondering why, its because in Turko-Persian culture (which were beginning to fuse around the time of the Sassanids), colors indicate direction. White represents west, Black represents North etc. This is why you have so many Turko-Persian & Mongol polities named after colors - like Black-Sheep Turkoman, Red-Sheep Turkoman, Golden Horde, White Horde, etc. It is meant to designate 'western horde/northern horde/central horde' that kinda stuff. Heck, in the era of the last great Sassanid Emperor, Khusrow Anushirvan, he calls the region of Seistan 'Koochak-e-Hind', meaning 'little India', due to the presence of Indian artisans & merchants in large numbers in Sarang (modern day Zaranj) and deep cultural, political & economic roots with 'Safed Hindh', aka Kabul Dynasties. The concept of India as a NATION didnt exist before the British. But then again, the concept of Nations itself died around 300s AD and wasnt resurrected till the 19th century. But the concept of a civilization/geo-political region named India, has existed since the ancient times. Indeed. The concept of the modern nation state emerges only after the Treaty of Westphalia in the 17th Century. Prior to that, it was always Civilizationally connected states. In a way, the present Parliamentary Democratic Republic of India is a mixture of both. Edited December 22, 2016 by jalebi_bhai Muloghonto 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandeep Posted December 21, 2016 Share Posted December 21, 2016 The Pataudis are descended from Afghan mercenaries who accompanied the Mughals from the badlands of present-day Afghanistan as part of the invading War Party. He is simply going with a name that honors his personal heritage. As distasteful as some might find the acts of the hisotrical Taimur, I think the ones who are frothing at the mouth over this particular Naam karan, are really, just looking to make issues. What would satisfy you? Banning such names? I mean, its a slippery slope. I don't think its a great choice for a name, but let's not jump to bash someone as "anti-national" - it just comes across as you are just waiting and watching for any kind of action that can be possibly interpreted as such, from citizens of a "particular religion". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coffee_rules Posted December 21, 2016 Author Share Posted December 21, 2016 (edited) I never started the thread to criticise Saifeena as anti-national or communal, but to see how pinheaded they are to name their kid after somebody who is seen as evil in history. Not only to the Indian region , but to humanity. Nobody is gunning for them to change his name or ban names. Edited December 21, 2016 by coffee_rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted December 22, 2016 Share Posted December 22, 2016 16 minutes ago, Viper said: Prudvi raj chuhan to blame.. If he killed gauri when he should have.. we wouldn't have had this problem.. Being too nice can bit back and it changed the whole course of history from 12th century Timur was 200 years after Phritvi Raj Chauhan. Doubt he could've done much. sandeep 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coffee_rules Posted December 22, 2016 Author Share Posted December 22, 2016 20 minutes ago, Viper said: Who opened the flood gates of islam to india first ? Major one that changed the country.. He was part of it Mohd Bin Qasim in the 8th century and Ghazni in 10th, predates Mohd of Ghor. They invaded the region even before Ghori. sandeep 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muloghonto Posted December 22, 2016 Share Posted December 22, 2016 19 minutes ago, Viper said: Who opened the flood gates of islam to india first ? Major one that changed the country.. He was part of it Err no. Ghaznawi came before Prithvi Raj Chauhan did. What opened the floodgates to India are the Indians themselves and our lack of horses. India spent 500 years, between 700 AD and 1200 AD annihilating itself. The Pratiharas-Pals-Rashtrakutas waged never-ending wars against each other for 300 straight years- till the Pratihara empire- the same that beat Mohammed Bin Qasim at the height of the Caliphate- was nothing more than a bunch of fragmented, petty kingdoms, the Rashtrakutas were destroyed, Pals were in terminal decline, etc. Even in the south, the Chola-Chalukya wars were staggering in their bodycount. When you have 200 years of war, where kings like Vikramaditya VI and Kulothonga Chola are mobilizing 15,000 war elephants and 250,000 troops every war season for 10 straight years and this continues for another century, then you begin to understand why, just a 100 years after Kulothonga Chola, Malik Kafur journeyed nearly 2000 kms from his base, right into the Pandyan heartland and so much as sneezed and the Pandyas keeled over and died. Till invention of gunpowder & its use in India by Babur for the first time in 1550s, India has fallen to outsiders only twice in 1500+ years prior, when North India was unified under one empire : The Guptas lost to the Hepthalites (ancestors of the Abdali & most Afghan clans who migrated from Xinjiang), though they only lost the western half of their empire and Delhi Sultan Tughlaq lost to Timur. Thats it. in 1500 years. The moral of the story is, don't blame others for invading us, blame ourselves- if we hadn't destroyed our economic & military might by never-ending war for 500 years, the subcontinent would look a lot different. Ironhide and Shunya 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts