India is about to spend a ridiculous $530 million on a statue in the middle of the Arabian sea

[surajmal]

4 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

Also, Goras are interested in Buddhism today for the same reason Indians, Chinese were interested in Buddhism 1000+ years ago: they were/are exceedingly rich, better educated and living in lands of abundance. Buddhism promotes enquiry, empiricism and shuns caste divisons, ritualism, blind faith.

Those principles are far easier to grasp and verify for educated& rich minds than poor illiterates. 

 

[Muloghonto]

1 hour ago, surajmal said:

Your disagreement would mean something, if you actually had any knowledge on Buddhism. Since you don't, its no different than a muslim saying all other religions suck coz his book said so.

 

[randomGuy]

Shivaji is a symbol of Hindu unity and of Indian unity.

 

A grand statue (the largest in the world) of the great man would serve as a uniting and inspiring force.

 

 

[surajmal]

Quote

1. Epigraphical evidence from 2250 years ago isn't nothing. It's the decisive, overriding evidence.

Said who? A monk, looking for market share, decides to carve something into stone and I'm supposed to believe it millennia later? 

Quote

2. I am not a commie, so what commies say is a strawman argument

You may or may not be a commie, I don't know. I don't you. But your "knowledge" comes from commie sources. Particularly, since you refuse to come here without any sources, what am I to believe.  

 

Quote

Attrocities committed by the Hindu rulers against Buddhists/Jains is primarily evidenced from Sangam literature and chronicles of Chinese & Indonesian monks travelling through India in the 6th-12th century AD.

Sangam literature? I am sure you will start posting your kumari kundum theories next. 

Correction: "Chinese & Indonesian Buddhist monks."

Quote

 

We have plenty of evidence , via foreign travellers

 

No we don't. Thats the problem with Indian history. Couple of chinese monks doesn't make plenty. 

 

Quote

The reason Bharat was reconverted as Hindu is predominantly due to Islam wiping away Buddhism, Hinduism better equipped to survive it, due to Hinduism being the preferred religion of central Asian Indo-Iranics such as the Hepthalites( ancestors of Afghans), Gujjars( ancestors of Rajputs) and due to violent spreading of Shaivism by the Cholas.

There was no reconversion. Majority remained Hindu. Areas that converted to Buddhism, are slurping some mullah jizz today. 

 

Quote

 

6. You are just butt hurt that the most influential Indian in history is a non-Hindu. Which is why you engage in denigrating non-Hindus in your misguided notions of Hinduvta. And the irony is, the person arguing against you, is a Kulin brahmin( me), who are the Brahmins with the most ancient proven lineages in India.

 

PS: As a cultural Hindu, who's read most of the scriptures, let me say that I find more empiric truth in one chapter of Tripitaka than I find in the entire Gita. But then again, there was a reason why India was #1 in the world in education and science when it was predominantly Buddhist & Jain, not Hindu. 

 

I ain't gotta be butthurt about nothing. You are the one claiming to be an expert on Hindu dharma by reading a translation of Gita. 

 

And let me google it for the guy who feigns pride in his cooked up lineage... "Caste system" went tits up during supposedly great age of buddha. 

http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/science/Caste-system-has-left-imprints-on-genes-study/article14022623.ece

 

Quote

I'd also advice against indoctrinated views arising from your own ego driven ignorance. If you wish to denigrate Buddhism as plagiarized Hinduism, the least you can do is actually read the Buddhist texts before forming an opinion, which you clearly have not. Otherwise you end up sounding like an ignorant Hindu version of a mullah.

Now let me give you a little advice... If you are going to present yourself as an expert on everything under the sun, Start reading original documents, ditch the colonial era translations. Least you could do is use google. 

Edited January 4, 2017 by surajmal

[surajmal]

1 hour ago, Muloghonto said:

Your disagreement would mean something, if you actually had any knowledge on Buddhism. Since you don't, its no different than a muslim saying all other religions suck coz his book said so.

 

Again, stop reading translations. You are not a Buddhist. 

[Muloghonto]

13 minutes ago, surajmal said:

Again, stop reading translations. You are not a Buddhist. 

I don't have to be a buddhist to read.

And there is nothing wrong with translations. Maybe a little context is lost here or there, but you arnt going to convince anyone that 'anti-caste' Buddhism is 'pro-caste' Buddhism due to translations. Incase you forgot, i am an Indian too, i understand what is lost in translations for an Indian language to English or vice versa.

 

[surajmal]

7 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

I don't have to be a buddhist to read.

And there is nothing wrong with translations. Maybe a little context is lost here or there, but you arnt going to convince anyone that 'anti-caste' Buddhism is 'pro-caste' Buddhism due to translations. Incase you forgot, i am an Indian too, i understand what is lost in translations for an Indian language to English or vice versa.

 

Ofcourse not. Who needs science when you got religious propaganda. 

[BeautifulGame]

Sangam literature? I am sure you will start posting your kumari kundum theories next. 

Correction: "Chinese & Indonesian Buddhist monks."

 

What on earth on u about .Sangam literatures are the most authentic source of Tamil history.

In fact we have literature sources dating back 2000 years .

Kumarikandan theories are completely different and some nonsense propaganda started​ started by Tamil nationalists atmost a century back and has no relevance to that

[Tibarn]

On 1/2/2017 at 7:47 PM, Muloghonto said:

1. Ashoka wasn't a mass murderer. He won a war killing soldiers.

He indeed was. In his own inscriptions on the Kalinga War, between 100-200,000 people were killed including civilians. Killing civilians does indeed make someone a mass murderer, but that was not all I was referring to.

 

 

I was also referring to the  Ashoka-vadana which states how, even after he supposedly became a "Pacifist" he genocided 18,000 Ajivikas in Bengal in a single day. That was one of multiple genocides done to Jains and Ajivikas by this Buddhist Fundamentalist. 

  

Another thing I was referring to was when he offered a gold coin for every decapitated head of a Jain. 

 

 

Not to mention the building he built for his pet psychopath, Girikaa, known as Ashoka's hell where all sorts of exotic torture was enacted. 

 

 

And then there was his murdering of his brothers and half-brothers to seize the throne. He more and more resembles Aurangzeb. 

 

 

And again, you are the one that stated that Shivaj was a marauder who was only interested in establishing his own fiefdom. That seems to apply far better to Ashoka. Shivaji didn't attack civilians, according to any reliable/primary source, unlike Buddhist Aurangzeb.   

On 1/2/2017 at 7:47 PM, Muloghonto said:

2. Ashoka is infinitely greater than Shivaji because he instituted economic reforms, infrastructure reforms; protected species and forests. First time ever in human history. He also is one of the strongest candidates, along with Augustus Caesar & Emperor Wu Di as the strongest administrative policy-makers in human history . Shivaji is a big fat zero in the most important benchmark for a successful ruler.

Ashoka was a fool in regards to economics, and a failed ruler. Your ignorance of basic Indian history is not surprising. His hair-brained policies were the reason for the Mauryan decline. 

As pointed out by Sanjeev Sanyal

Quote

Ashoka clearly speaks of government intervention in the day-to-day lives of his subjects. Indeed, he literally speaks of a nanny State in one of his inscriptions: “Just as a person feels confident having entrusted his child to an expert nurse thinking ‘the nurse will keep my child well’; even so the Rajjukas have been appointed by me for the welfare and happiness of the people

 

 

It’s no coincidence that his own advisers had to restrain his reckless spending.

 

Quote

The now ailing Ashoka began to plan a second quinquennial Buddhist festival, but his ministers, increasingly alarmed at the amounts Ashoka was spending in his patronage of Buddhist institutions, restricted his access to the state finances, and eventually took de-facto control, leaving Ashoka an ailing and powerless figurehead in his last days.

 

…

 

The Mauryan Empire was struggling economically, with later Mauryan rulers having to debase the currency and increase taxes to oppressive levels. The Empire fragmented after Samprati’s death seven years later, with a succession of weak rulers ruling an increasingly weak kingdom centered around Magadha. Kalinga regained his freedom, and under it’s greatest ruler, Kharavela, humiliated Magadha in the field, smashing it’s armies. The Indo-Greeks whom Chandragupta had defeated with ease ravaging North India, due to the weakening of border defenses.

 

Also lol at improving citizens lives

 Sanjeev Sanyal where he describes some of the “improvements” in people’s lives.

 

Even Romila Thapar recognized in her book 

Aśoka and the Decline of the Mauryas, 

Quote

In the Indian secular sources, Aśoka remained largely a name in the dynastic king lists, as obscure during the later centuries as the script in which he had his edicts engraved. The fact that the work of Aśoka as a monarch was almost erased from Indian history and thought cannot be overlooked

A supposedly great king who was irrelevant in history until after Indian independence. On the other hand, Shivaji is a name that inspires people across India. But Shivaji is the marauder and Ashoka was great, .

You declare that psychopath one of the 3 greatest administrators in human history, lol. Also lol at the other 2 as well.

Aside from Majumdar, Sarkar, and Sardesai, I doubt you’ve even read Kulkarni’s work on Shivaji where he talks about the agriculture, irrigation systems, banking systems, manufacturing, merchant activity, state loans, etc in Maharashtra under Shivaji.  at big fat zero. If Shivaji is a zero, then Ashoka is negative 100 on a 10 point scale.

 On the other hand, your clown Ashoka caused the death of one of the greatest Indian empires with his nonsense economic policies. Lol at great administrator.

Shivaji apparently didn’t improve his people’s lives by saving the civilization from genocide. On the other hand, genociding people is considered helping them. 

On 1/2/2017 at 7:47 PM, Muloghonto said:

. All Shivaji did was fight the Mughals. Did not beat them, did not have any infrastructure impact and his never-ending war made the region poorer.

Shivaji didn’t defeat them at the time of his death, but the Marathas, the empire he birthed, liberated most of India from foreigners. Shivaji didn’t beat them, they just gave him territory. Lol

Shivaji left the region poorer? Lol let’s see something to back that up.

Ashoka’s idiocy, economic illiteracy, and murderous bloodlust led to the death of the empire his ancestors made.  His one “accomplishment” that his sycophants praise him for, his supposed pacifism post conversion to Buddhism, is nonsense as he was Buddhist before ever invading Kalinga and murdered civilians throughout his life.

Sorry, you dreams of Buddhist Sharia in India are over.

On 1/2/2017 at 7:47 PM, Muloghonto said:

4. Saying we are not Muslim because of Shivaji is laughable since the Muslims ruled us for 700 years before Shivaji and less than a 100 years later the British beat them all.

Another of your strawmen. Shivaji is the reason the subcontinent isn’t a quasi-middle eastern shithole. Being a middle eastern shithole doesn’t require that all non-Muslims become Muslims.

Aside from stating a historically inaccurate 700 years of ruling a vague “us”. You fail to even recognize that different rulers have different policies. Aurangzeb isn’t Dara Shikoh.  

 

I will skip the rest of the borderline retarded drivel you posted and move to the best part.

On 1/2/2017 at 7:47 PM, Muloghonto said:

Shivaji is nothing more than a Hindu marauder, who like all marauders cared about personal enrichment and fiefs- a fact reflected in subsequent medieval and backwards Maratha political structure. 

 

I am am happy that India was rescued from the Marathas by the Brits because if it weren't for them, India would look like an ethnic shithole like Africa. Because that's how bad Maratha policies were.

India and the subcontinent’s, indicators were comparable to Africa barring the last 20 years or so, so your beloved British sure did great work.

Coming from someone who someone who uses WebMD  a scientific source, and who’s idea of economic policy is copy Scandinavia, it is not surprising that you are weak in history as well.  

The bolded is the best.  What kind of ch**tiya is happy that millions of Indians were killed in genocide and the economy was destroyed.  

I am still waiting for that joke Indian history thread that you promised to make, copy and pasting Wikipedia. I apologize to @Finer, This post I’m quoting is actually the dumbest thing ever written on ICF.  

 

Comments by both contemporaries and later day historians to get a measure of Shivaji. This is followed by some of the guiding principles of the Maratha Empire. 

 Khafi Khan,  contemporary Historian in Muntakhab-ul-Lubab

"Shivaji had always striven to maintain the honour of the people in his territories … and was careful to maintain the honour of women and children of Muhammadans when they fell into his hands. His injunctions on this point were very strict ….."

 Bhimsen,  contemporary historian in Tarikh-i-Dilkasha

"He was a straightforward man and a matchless soldier and knew the administrative side of the king-ship very well. He enjoyed the full confidence of his soldiers ….."

 Dr. Bernier, the French Doctor traveller who was in India from 1658 to 1668

"..... Shivaji is exercising all the powers of an independent sovereign. ..... He distracts the attention of Aurangzeb by his bold and never ceasing enterprises that the Mughal cannot find opportunity of conquering Vizapur. How to put down Shivaji is become his object of chief importance".

Contemporary English merchants of Surat

"Shivaji is the fairest friend, noblest enemy, and the most politique Prince".

"Shivaji Raja ..... marched into Karnatak and with a success as happy as Caesar's in Spain, he came, he saw, and conquered. He has taken two very strong forts, being no less dexterous thereat than Alexander the Great and became master of Bijapur. He loved his country but was not partial to any one. He had many Muslims in his service … but he could not tolerate the conversion of his Hindu brethren to either Islam or to Christianity. The underlying reason for his vengeance upon Aurangzeb was the religious policy of that monarch.

Later Estimates of Shivaji

Swami Vivekanand

"Is there a greater hero, a greater saint, a greater bhakta and a greater King than Shivaji? Shivaji was the very embodiment of a born ruler of men as typified in our great epics. He was the type of the real son of India representing the true consciousness of the nation. It was he who showed what the future of India is going to be sooner or later ….."

A.B.de Braganca Pereira (ed.), Arquivo Portugues Oriental,Vol.III

"Wonderous mystic, adventurous and intrepid, fortunate, roving prince, with lovely and magnetic eyes, pleasing countenance, winsome and polite, magnanimous to fallen foe like Alexander, keen and a sharp intellect, quick in decision, ambitious conqueror like Julius Caesar, given to action, resolute and strict disciplinarian, expert strategist, far-sighted and constructive statesman, brilliant organizer who sagaciously countered his political rivals and antagonists like the Mughals, Turks of Bijapur, the Portuguese, the English, the Dutch, and the French, undaunted by the mighty Mughals, the greatest power in Asia, Shivaji fought the Bijapuris and carved out a grand Empire".

Sir E. Sullivan, Warriors and Statesmen of India

"He (Shivaji) possessed every quality requisite for success in the disturbed age in which he lived, he possessed … An energy and decision that would in any age have raised him to distinction ….. His strength and activity in action were the glory and admiration of his race".

Kincaid, The Grand Rebel

"In spite of the character of a crusade which Ramdas's blessings gave to Shivaji's long struggle, it is remarkable how little religious animosity or intolerance Shivaji displayed. Even his enemies remarked on his extreme respect for Musalman priests, for mosques and for the Koran ….."

Cosme da Guarda, Life of the Celebrated Sevagy

"Such was the good treatment he (Shivaji) accorded to the people and such was the honesty with which he observed the capitulations that none looked upon him without a feeling of love and confidence ….."

Sir Richard Temple (Oriental Experience)

"..... Shivaji was not only a bold man, but he had the peculiar power of arousing enthusiasm in others and he raised an abject race from nothingness up to empire. Besides, Shivaji was a great administrator".


J.N. Sarkar

Shivaji's political ideals were such that we might accept them even today without any change. He aimed at giving his subjects peace, universal toleration, equal opportunities for all castes and creeds, a beneficent, active and pure system of administration, a navy for promoting trade and a trained militia for guarding the homeland ….. "All this national expansion proceeded from the initial energy of one man. Shivaji was the central power-house of the new Maharashtra …..

He was not only the maker of Maratha nation, but also the greatest constructive genius of medieval India. States fall, empires break up, dynasties become extinct, but the memory of a true 'hero as King' like Shivaji, remains an imperishable historical legacy for the entire human race".


Administrative Rules from Shivaji's Amatya

Quote

1. The defence of the country (swarajya) should be given highest priority through a net-work of well garrisoned land and marine forts, a strong army and a navy. In view of peculiar geographical features of Maharashtra, specially the Konkan region, this was the best means of protecting the land from the hostile powers.

2. All those in the Government service were to be paid in cash and not through land grants or jagirs. In no case, fresh grants of lands were to be made.

3. No post or office, even the highest, were to be hereditary, and those on civil and military posts were to be transferred from one place or position to another as a matter of principle.

4. All posts were to be filled on the basis of merit and not heredity, caste, or religion.

5. Revenue collection was to be direct, i.e. by the State, through its own agencies and departments, and not through middlemen of any type.

6 The system of farming lands, like the ijara system of the Mughal government, so widespread after Aurangzeb's death, was abolished.

7. People of all castes, including tribals, were to be involved, according to their suitability, in the defence and upkeep of the forts and land, and in the administration of the country, with no caste enjoying exclusive position or privileges.

8. All people, irrespective of their caste and religion, were to have same rights, and enjoy freedom to follow their religion, and no section of the people should be discriminated against on the basis of their faith.

9. During war, and in course of raids in the enemy territory, the women, children and religious places were not to suffer any harm or damage.

10. The finances of the state were to be so managed and budgeted as to leave surplus every year to fall back upon in times of national need.

Sources for those who want to see the clown Ashoka exposed:

I reccomend the 1st one by Sanjeev Sanyal in swarajrya the most. 

http://swarajyamag.com/culture/ashoka-the-not-so-great

http://indiafacts.org/revisiting-ashoka-i/

http://indiafacts.org/revisiting-ashoka-ii-ashokas-rise-power/

http://indiafacts.org/revisiting-asoka-iii-ashoka-terrible/

 

By the way, lol at the attempt to discredit  Ashokavadana  and similar sources. All of Ashoka's supposed accomplishments are from similar if not worse sources in term of reliability. You want to use those sources for trumpeting the Buddhist bigoted, fundamentalist, mass-murdering tyrant, but others can't use similar sources.  

Edited January 4, 2017 by Tibarn

[Muloghonto]

38 minutes ago, surajmal said:

Said who? A monk, looking for market share, decides to carve something into stone and I'm supposed to believe it millennia later? 

Sure, a monk carved rock, pillar, etc. edict from Kandahar all the way to Karnataka & Bengal. Sure. You can believe what you want, but educated people go by archaeological evidence. And all of them are carved within a 10 year period too. You know how we know ? SCIENCE.

 

FYI, all historians consider archaeological evidence more decisive than tales in a book that can be re-written over and over again.

 

Quote

You may or may not be a commie, I don't know. I don't you. But your "knowledge" comes from commie sources. Particularly, since you refuse to come here without any sources, what am I to believe.  

My knowledge comes from academia. Which means non-hinduvta BS. if you believe in VHP/RSS nonsense, thats the Hindu equivalent of Noah's ark BS. So i understand where your allergy to empiric information comes from.

 

Quote

Sangam literature? I am sure you will start posting your kumari kundum theories next. 

Correction: "Chinese & Indonesian Buddhist monks."

If you don't know history, i suggest you shut up and learn, instead of letting your imagination run wild. Sangam literature isn't Kumari Kandam BS, its the literature spanning myths, poems, history, ballads, etc from 400s BC to 600s AD Tamil culture. Its a period of history.

 

And i don't care if its Chinese buddhists or Indonesian hindus, they were foreign travellers who didn't give a F about India. So no reason to falsify records. When Huen Tsang says the Buddhist ruler of Assam (Bhaskaravarman) treacherously invaded the kingdom of Sasanka's son Manama, he is lying too, correct ? Coz that is denigrating Buddhists by a Buddhist. 

See, this is why idiots like you are easy to expose- you form opinions based on religious brainwashing instead of actually READING.

 

Quote

No we don't. Thats the problem with Indian history. Couple of chinese monks doesn't make plenty. 

 

Almost a dozen spread over 1000 years is plenty.

 

Quote

There was no reconversion. Majority remained Hindu. Areas that converted to Buddhism, are slurping some mullah jizz today. 

False. When Buddhist monks say that what is Madhya Pradesh was mostly Jain, they have no reason to lie. FYI, Jainism is the oldest evidenced religion in India, not hinduism. 
Besides, we have plenty of archaeological remains of Buddhist stupas & Jain temples all over India. When we tally up the head counts of monks giving numbers of Buddhist, Jain and Brahmins in cities, its pretty easy to see that Buddhism, Jainism & hinduism were in THAT order between 200-900s AD India.

Quote

I ain't gotta be butthurt about nothing. You are the one claiming to be an expert on Hindu dharma by reading a translation of Gita. 

 

And let me google it for the guy who feigns pride in his cooked up lineage... "Caste system" went tits up during supposedly great age of buddha. 

It didn't go 'tits up' during Buddha's age. Buddha and Mahavira almost freed India from the most evil concoction of Brahmins - caste, but did not succeed, as evidenced by the creep of caste system through India with the rise of Hindu dynasties and Hinduism in the last half of 1st millennium CE. 

We have epigraphical records of that too.

Oh and Kulin Brahmins do not cook up lineage- maybe a butt-hurt non Brahmin may think that, but there is a reason why we are allowed to override other Brahmins in Hindu temples- its because we preserve our lineages better than even the Rajput royalties of India.

 

Quote

Now let me give you a little advice... If you are going to present yourself as an expert on everything under the sun, Start reading original documents, ditch the colonial era translations. Least you could do is use google. 

As a speaker of multiple Indian languages, i understand the limitations of translations. Since i am not tracing linguistic transformations of Early, middle or late Indo-European languages, i don't need to read original text in original sanskrit/pali/ardhamagadhi. 

Not to mention, your suggestion is ridiculous, because there isn't anyone around who is fluent in all three of the above-mentioned languages to fully read original material of Buddhist, Jain and Hindu works.

 

[Muloghonto]

10 minutes ago, surajmal said:

Ofcourse not. Who needs science when you got religious propaganda. 

Says the guy who is displaying his religious propaganda. 

You can keep exposing yourself as the idiot who thinks all Ashokan pillars were erected by random monks as fraud.

 

[surajmal]

 

Quote

 

Sure, a monk carved rock, pillar, etc. edict from Kandahar all the way to Karnataka & Bengal. Sure. You can believe what you want, but educated people go by archaeological evidence. And all of them are carved within a 10 year period too. You know how we know ? SCIENCE.

 

FYI, all historians consider archaeological evidence more decisive than tales in a book that can be re-written over and over again.

 

1 monk , 10 monks , couple of thousands? I don't know. Ashoka used up the treasury for something. I wonder what. 

 

Quote

My knowledge comes from academia. Which means non-hinduvta BS. if you believe in VHP/RSS nonsense, thats the Hindu equivalent of Noah's ark BS. So i understand where your allergy to empiric information comes from.

Your knowledge comes from the commie gang. You wanna call them academia? go nuts. 

 

Quote

If you don't know history, i suggest you shut up and learn, instead of letting your imagination run wild. Sangam literature isn't Kumari Kandam BS, its the literature spanning myths, poems, history, ballads, etc from 400s BC to 600s AD Tamil culture. Its a period of history.

Citations. Citations. Citations. 

Quote

 

And i don't care if its Chinese buddhists or Indonesian hindus, they were foreign travellers who didn't give a F about India. So no reason to falsify records. When Huen Tsang says the Buddhist ruler of Assam (Bhaskaravarman) treacherously invaded the kingdom of Sasanka's son Manama, he is lying too, correct ? Coz that is denigrating Buddhists by a Buddhist. 

See, this is why idiots like you are easy to expose- you form opinions based on religious brainwashing instead of actually READING.

 

Monks would take months long treacherous journey because they are into travel documentaries. 

 

 

Quote

 

It didn't go 'tits up' during Buddha's age. Buddha and Mahavira almost freed India from the most evil concoction of Brahmins - caste, but did not succeed, as evidenced by the creep of caste system through India with the rise of Hindu dynasties and Hinduism in the last half of 1st millennium CE. 

We have epigraphical records of that too.

Oh and Kulin Brahmins do not cook up lineage- maybe a butt-hurt non Brahmin may think that, but there is a reason why we are allowed to override other Brahmins in Hindu temples- its because we preserve our lineages better than even the Rajput royalties of India.

 

Citations. Citations. Citations.  

for your kulin brahmin reputation sake.

 

Quote

 

As a speaker of multiple Indian languages, i understand the limitations of translations. Since i am not tracing linguistic transformations of Early, middle or late Indo-European languages, i don't need to read original text in original sanskrit/pali/ardhamagadhi. 

Not to mention, your suggestion is ridiculous, because there isn't anyone around who is fluent in all three of the above-mentioned languages to fully read original material of Buddhist, Jain and Hindu works.

 

Not many claim to be expert on all dharmic thought. 

[Muloghonto]

3 minutes ago, Tibarn said:

He indeed was. In his own inscriptions on the Kalinga War, between 100-200,000 people were killed including civilians. Killing civilians does indeed make someone a mass murderer, but that was not all I was referring to.

I was also referring to the  Ashoka-vadana which states how, even after he supposedly became a "Pacifist" he genocided 18,000 Ajivikas in Bengal in a single day. That was one of multiple genocides done to Jains and Ajivikas by this Buddhist Fundamentalist. 

 

1.He did not mention killing civillians. He said he killed people in battle. 

2. Ashoavadana is not a historic text. This book is laughable, since it says Ashoka promised Dinara- a word that is NOT POSSIBLE to be present in India for 200 years after Ashoka, to people who bring him his head. As i said, if you read Ashokavadana, it becomes entirely clear that it is completely unreliable religious propaganda.

Few links for you:

https://books.google.ca/books?id=slVobUjdzGMC&pg=RA1-PA99&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

https://books.google.ca/books?id=9jb364g4BvoC&pg=PA32&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

https://archive.org/details/ajivikas00barurich

 

Quote

And again, you are the one that stated that Shivaj was a marauder who was only interested in establishing his own fiefdom. That seems to apply far better to Ashoka. Shivaji didn't attack civilians, according to any reliable/primary source, unlike Buddhist Aurangzeb.  

Plundering village after village definitely qualifies as being a marauder. His method was so successful that the later Peshwas tried the same tactic in Bengal, Bihar and Oudh - known as Bargi raids, where innocents were slaughtered.

 

Quote

Ashoka was a fool in regards to economics, and a failed ruler. Your ignorance of basic Indian history is not surprising. His hair-brained policies were the reason for the Mauryan decline. 

 

As pointed out by Sanjeev Sanyal

Only money-hogging pigs think that providing state funded services are 'foolish economic policies', which is a template for virtually every successful state that is not expanding into empty space.

And if you had read history, you'd realize that Mauryan demise, is the same reason for Mughal demise - emperors (Ashoka/Aurangzeb) lived too long and had too many heirs who fractured the empire.

 

Quote

A supposedly great king who was irrelevant in history until after Indian independence. On the other hand, Shivaji is a name that inspires people across India. But Shivaji is the marauder and Ashoka was great, .

Every north Indian great king was obscured in history till the British taught us how to catalogue history. Your precious Chandragupta Vikramaditya was in the same boat as Ashoka.

 

Quote

Aside from Majumdar, Sarkar, and Sardesai, I doubt you’ve even read Kulkarni’s work on Shivaji where he talks about the agriculture, irrigation systems, banking systems, manufacturing, merchant activity, state loans, etc in Maharashtra under Shivaji.   at big fat zero. If Shivaji is a zero, then Ashoka is negative 100 on a 10 point scale.

 

 On the other hand, your clown Ashoka caused the death of one of the greatest Indian empires with his nonsense economic policies. Lol at great administrator. 

 

Shivaji apparently didn’t improve his people’s lives by saving the civilization from genocide. On the other hand, genociding people is considered helping them.

Shivaji was a despicable mauraduer, because he had no policies. That is a fact, no amount of re-writing history is going to change the facts that Marathas look like clueless idiots compared to Europeans in terms of policy & statecraft. 

As for Ashoka's genocides- like i said, learn to differentiate spurious sources from decisive sources. Epigraphy is decisive. Your written texts hundreds of years later, replete with errors, are not.

But hinduvta indoctrinated idiots cannot abide the fact that of the greatest indian empires and Indian glory age, only one- the Cholas- were purely Hindus. 

And Shivaji saved nobody from anything. Muslims ruled india for 700 years before Shivaji & 100 years after. Indian muslim population is still much less than the Hindu (even including Pakistan + Bangladesh) and Shivaji's efforts were irrelevant to the demographics.

Quote

Shivaji didn’t defeat them at the time of his death, but the Marathas, the empire he birthed, liberated most of India from foreigners.

 

Birthed an empire that was 1000 years behind the time in policy,statecraft, succession laws and were nothing more than the Indian version of tribalistic Afghans. And so successful an empire that 100 years later, the Brits kicked them to the curb like yesterday's garbage. Nice job!

 

Quote

Sorry, you dreams of Buddhist Sharia in India are over.

My dreams are not of Buddhist sharia, my dreams are of letting go of ignorant religious mumbo jumbo,be it Hindu or any other. On that record, my dreams are getting closer every moment. 

Quote

Shivaji is the reason the subcontinent isn’t a quasi-middle eastern shithole.

Nothing more than aggrandized nonsense. Its the British who deserve more credit than Shivaji because they gave us rule of law. But then again,  prideful hinduvta would rather eat cow dung than see the pros and cons of British rule.

 

Quote

India and the subcontinent’s, indicators were comparable to Africa barring the last 20 years or so, so your beloved British sure did great work.

They exploited us economically, enriched us intellectually. India is India today because of British legal code, governance and law. Otherwise it would be a hinduvta-version of middle-eastern craphole.

 

Quote

 What kind of ch**tiya is happy that millions of Indians were killed in genocide and the economy was destroyed. 

The one that sees rule of law & legal code to be more important than economics. Thats the score where Brits did more than 3000 years of Hindu/Buddhist/Jain ever could muster.

 

Quote

All of Ashoka's supposed accomplishments are from similar if not worse sources in term of reliability.

Err no, bacchey.

Ashoka's life is chronicled through his rock & pillar edicts. Before there was doubt that Devanampriya Priyadassi was Ashoka himself. But since the inscription in Orissa (IIRC, Dhauli) specifically identifies Devanampriya Piyadassi as Ashoka. Thus removing any doubt.

Like i said, i quoted ACTUAL historians on what they think. 

 

[Tibarn]

3 minutes ago, surajmal said:

Citations. Citations. Citations

Asking for sources from this guy is like asking pigs to fly. I'm still waiting for citations from claims he made to me months ago. 

 

 @Muloghonto forget Ashoka, why don't you prove your ridiculous claims against Shivaji. 

[Texan]

Good initiative. New York is identified by its Statue of Liberty, Sydney by the opera House. Its time we had a major city like Mumbai have its own landmark with a statue in the middle lf the sea. Those arguing against it - have you guys done the math for how much tourism revenue this could generate? And I am not talking about just foreigners. I can see pretty much every Mumbaikar waiting to take a tour of this island along with all those who visit Mumbai. Hope they are also building a little park around the statue. 

[Muloghonto]

4 minutes ago, surajmal said:

 

1 monk , 10 monks , couple of thousands? I don't know. Ashoka used up the treasury for something. I wonder what. 

 

Considering that your info is from the flawed chronicles, that isn't even a fact, just dreamt up fiction.

Quote

Your knowledge comes from the commie gang. You wanna call them academia? go nuts. 

 

Nope. But from a hinduvta, i'd take that as a compliment. 

 

Quote

Citations. Citations. Citations. 

You need citations on what Sangam literature is ? in that case you don't need citation, you need education.

 

Quote

Monks would take months long treacherous journey because they are into travel documentaries. 

Classic exposure of lack of knowledge. One of the tenets of Buddhism is to seek knowledge. Thats why the first Indians to travel to England were buddhists, not hindus- who ironically, considered leaving india as a sin.

 

Quote

Citations. Citations. Citations.  

for your kulin brahmin reputation sake.

 

You need citations that Indian rulers 1000 years ago left caste-based comments on their temple inscriptions and notes ? No, you need education, not citation.

Not to mention, Rajatarangini, a text from just over a thousand years ago, uses caste plenty. Showing us caste is still present 1000 years ago.

So do Buddhist & non-Buddhist travellers. 
Oh right, buddhists from China, Muslims from Mali, Jesuits from Italy- all are in one grand India-centric conspiracy spanning thousands of years. 
LOL.

 

Quote

Not many claim to be expert on all dharmic thought. 

But there is no expert who reads all of Sanskrit, Ardamagadhi & Pali. So then there are no experts according to your 'read original sources sans translation' comments.

 

[Muloghonto]

Just now, Texan said:

Good initiative. New York is identified by its Statue of Liberty, Sydney by the opera House. Its time we had a major city like Mumbai have its own landmark with a statue in the middle lf the sea. Those arguing against it - have you guys done the math for how much tourism revenue this could generate? And I am not talking about just foreigners. I can see pretty much every Mumbaikar waiting to take a tour of this island along with all those who visit Mumbai. Hope they are also building a little park around the statue. 

Bigger question is, is Mumbai able to handle said increase in tourist traffic ? Last time i was in mumbai, it was a traveller's nightmare due to its over-congested city. It makes Kolkata look like a village.

 

[Muloghonto]

7 minutes ago, Tibarn said:

Asking for sources from this guy is like asking pigs to fly. I'm still waiting for citations from claims he made to me months ago. 

 

 @Muloghonto forget Ashoka, why don't you prove your ridiculous claims against Shivaji. 

Right after you prove that he saved us from being similar to muslim dominated middle eastern shit-hole.

Show us how Shivaji's activities made any decisive impact in religious demographics.

 

[Texan]

4 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

Bigger question is, is Mumbai able to handle said increase in tourist traffic ? Last time i was in mumbai, it was a traveller's nightmare due to its over-congested city. It makes Kolkata look like a village.

 

You can have ferries take you to the island from different points. I am not really sure where they are planning this, but hopefully they have taken into account accessibility from different points. The tourists I was talking about are folks already residing in Mumbai (not new people) and those who would visit Mumbai anyways (not specifically to see the statue). Those two sets of audiences are not going to cause an increase in traffic.

 

Besides, traffic is a problem in every major city in India. It does not mean that we stop building landmarks.

[surajmal]

Quote

Considering that your info is from the flawed chronicles, that isn't even a fact, just dreamt up fiction.

No, its just deductive reasoning. Something, a religious nutter would find alien. 

 

Quote

Nope. But from a hinduvta, i'd take that as a compliment. 

So we know where you stand... wrong side of history. 

 

Quote

You need citations on what Sangam literature is ? in that case you don't need citation, you need education.

So you got nothing. 

 

Quote

Classic exposure of lack of knowledge. One of the tenets of Buddhism is to seek knowledge. Thats why the first Indians to travel to England were buddhists, not hindus- who ironically, considered leaving india as a sin.

Say it with me... Evangelism. 

 

Quote

 

You need citations that Indian rulers 1000 years ago left caste-based comments on their temple inscriptions and notes ? No, you need education, not citation.

Not to mention, Rajatarangini, a text from just over a thousand years ago, uses caste plenty. Showing us caste is still present 1000 years ago.

So do Buddhist & non-Buddhist travellers. 
Oh right, buddhists from China, Muslims from Mali, Jesuits from Italy- all are in one grand India-centric conspiracy spanning thousands of years. 
LOL.

 

I gave you a genetic study that leads one to question the prevailing sentiments about "caste system". You gave the usual commie chewtiyapa. 

LOL at yourself. 

 

Quote

But there is no expert who reads all of Sanskrit, Ardamagadhi & Pali. So then there are no experts according to your 'read original sources sans translation' comments.

Write a letter to your "academia" raising these concerns. 

Edited January 4, 2017 by surajmal