Kashmir Fateh Thread August 2019

Status
Not open for further replies.

Indrajit

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2018
Messages
1,670
Likes
3,708
Country flag
Where the idol
Are the letter and its authenticity proof available to read?

Regards
They are available and its authenticity is accepted since the Sringeri Sharada Peetham has its own records of the correspondence with 29 letters in Kannada from Tipu Sultan to the Shankaracharya Sri Sacchidananda Bharati III. Post the sacking and looting of Sringeri where the idol was displaced, Tipu Sultan’s help was sought and was received for the re-consecration of the idol along with large donations.

The relationship between Tipu Sultan and the Sringeri Shankaracharya stands in contrast to his behaviour outside of his kingdom (within it, he largely left Hindus and Christians alone and routinely gave donations to temples). Whether it is purely for Administrative convenience or Tipu Sultan had a schizophrenic bent, it will be difficult to say but he was also following in the footsteps of his father Hyder Ali who also treated the Sringeri Shankaracharya with great respect. A crystal linga given by Tipu is still today worshipped by the Shankaracharya. Even Tipu’s enemies , both Hindu and Muslim showed respect for the Shankaracharya and the Peetham. The Marathas themselves realised the uproar caused by the desecration of Sringeri ( the Sringeri Math directly blames the Marathas and says that the attack was led by a Patwardan) and attempted to make amends . Peshwa Baji Rao II declared himself a disciple in 1800.

It is likely that the Marathas, whether of the regular or irregular army didn’t realise the importance of Sringeri when they looted it and regretted it when there was an uproar. The desecration and the looting was a fact though and the destruction was substantial.

If you are interested, this is the website of Sringeri Sharada Peetham.
https://www.sringeri.net/

This is the link in the site to the then Shankaracharya and his story including of the looting and Tipu’s connection to the Math.
https://www.sringeri.net/jagadgurus/sri-sacchidananda-bharati-iii-1770-1814
 

Haldiram

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2018
Messages
5,709
Likes
28,478
Country flag
What I said was in context of their known acts against hindu religious institutions elsewhere . My point was that history is not as black and white as we may want it to be. Also that as Hindus, they would have been favorably inclined to Hindu interest but that inclination had a limit. (Funnily enough, the present politics of the Shiv Sena is a good example...:biggrin2:)
All those "Hindu" people who got attacked were under foreign rule and providing tributes/taxes to invaders. There were raids on Surat and Bengal, both of these principalities were under enemy rule and the 'Hindu' subjects were happily paying taxes to strengthen the enemy. They got a well deserved hammering.

It's the Hinduness of these subjects that is suspect, not that of the Marathas for attacking them. The Hinduness of these so called 'Hindu' subjects that was incidental, like today's liberals who lick the feet of enemies for personal gain at the cost of the Hindu cause and then conveniently claim immunity from castigation by other Hindus, proclaiming that "we are Hindus too". Such 'Hindus' have always deserved a good hammering. They were Hindus to the same extent that Arundhati Roy is Hindu.

Bengal had dug trenches to prevent Maratha cavalry raiders from coming in. There are even Bengali poems about the Bargi raids. It's great that the wound has left a deep psychological impact which has endured till date. Glad to do it again if need be. Some people understand only that language. The trenches still exist in Bengal; It's called a "Maratha ditch".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maratha_Ditch

The Bengali folk poem goes..

Khoka ghumalo, para juralo, bargi elo deshe
Bulbulite dhan kheyechhe, khajna debo kise?

Gist : Basically, I have no tax left to pay you "invaders"..

The missing context in this poem is that these people were at that time under the rule of Alivardi Khan, who, according to them, was not an "invader" so they gladly paid taxes to him but Hindu Marathas on a mission to saffronize India were the "invaders". It is because of this charbi that they got hammered, lost their money and whatever little of their dignity was left from renting out their loyalty to Alvardi Khan.



The Sringeri attack did happen. It was the result of freelance tribal mercenaries who were hired from the outskirts of Tipu's kingdom on the way to the main objective. This contingent was not a part of the main force when it left to tackle Tipu sultan. These mercenaries went and looted the temple after the skirmish. It was later returned after the transgression came to light. This was unintended and undeserved, unlike the raids on Bengal against Alivardi Khan and on Surat against Inayat Khan which were intended and deserved. Ain't nobady gon be defensive for that. People who pay tributes to enemies deserve to become collateral. In fact, instead of being collaterals, they deserve to be the main targets. It is the insider who always opens the gates to foreign invaders.

Glad to see that it is still remembered.
 
Last edited:

Indrajit

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2018
Messages
1,670
Likes
3,708
Country flag
All those "Hindu" people who got attacked were under foreign rule and providing tributes/taxes to invaders. There were raids on Surat and Bengal, both of these principalities were under enemy rule and the 'Hindu' subjects were happily paying taxes to strengthen the enemy. They got a well deserved hammering.

It's the Hinduness of these subjects that is suspect, not that of the Marathas for attacking them. The Hinduness of these so called 'Hindu' subjects that was incidental, like today's liberals who lick the feet of enemies for personal gain at the cost of the Hindu cause and then conveniently claim immunity from castigation by other Hindus, proclaiming that "we are Hindus too". Such 'Hindus' have always deserved a good hammering. They were Hindus to the same extent that Arundhati Roy is Hindu.

Bengal had dug trenches to prevent Maratha cavalry raiders from coming in. There are even Bengali poems about the Bargi raids. It's great that the wound has left a deep psychological impact which has endured till date. Glad to do it again if need be. Some people understand only that language. The trenches still exist in Bengal; It's called a "Maratha ditch".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maratha_Ditch

The Bengali folk poem goes..

Khoka ghumalo, para juralo, bargi elo deshe
Bulbulite dhan kheyechhe, khajna debo kise?

Gist : Basically, I have no tax left to pay you "invaders"..

The missing context in this poem is that these people were at that time under the rule of Alvardi Khan, who, according to them, was not an "invader" so they gladly paid taxes to him but Hindu Marathas on a mission to saffronize India were the "invaders". It is because of this charbi that they got hammered, lost their money and whatever little of their dignity was left from renting out their loyalty to Alvardi Khan.

Why I said history is never in black and white. What you see depends on where u sit. It’s why different people interpret differently the same piece of history. Since this is intra our nation, we have varying interpretation available to us.

@ashdoc has a thread on the 3rd battle of Panipat where he says the Marathas had no friends in North India because of their habit of looting even fellow Hindus. An interesting and must read piece.
 

hit&run

Mod
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
9,136
Likes
21,512
Country flag
Where the idol

They are available and its authenticity is accepted since the Sringeri Sharada Peetham has its own records of the correspondence with 29 letters in Kannada from Tipu Sultan to the Shankaracharya Sri Sacchidananda Bharati III. Post the sacking and looting of Sringeri where the idol was displaced, Tipu Sultan’s help was sought and was received for the re-consecration of the idol along with large donations.

The relationship between Tipu Sultan and the Sringeri Shankaracharya stands in contrast to his behaviour outside of his kingdom (within it, he largely left Hindus and Christians alone and routinely gave donations to temples). Whether it is purely for Administrative convenience or Tipu Sultan had a schizophrenic bent, it will be difficult to say but he was also following in the footsteps of his father Hyder Ali who also treated the Sringeri Shankaracharya with great respect. A crystal linga given by Tipu is still today worshipped by the Shankaracharya. Even Tipu’s enemies , both Hindu and Muslim showed respect for the Shankaracharya and the Peetham. The Marathas themselves realised the uproar caused by the desecration of Sringeri ( the Sringeri Math directly blames the Marathas and says that the attack was led by a Patwardan) and attempted to make amends . Peshwa Baji Rao II declared himself a disciple in 1800.

It is likely that the Marathas, whether of the regular or irregular army didn’t realise the importance of Sringeri when they looted it and regretted it when there was an uproar. The desecration and the looting was a fact though and the destruction was substantial.

If you are interested, this is the website of Sringeri Sharada Peetham.
https://www.sringeri.net/

This is the link in the site to the then Shankaracharya and his story including of the looting and Tipu’s connection to the Math.
https://www.sringeri.net/jagadgurus/sri-sacchidananda-bharati-iii-1770-1814
Where is the fucking letter?

The last link you posted only talked about letters written by Tipu to Shankracharya, not the other way around. It also mentioned Tipu giving money to repair the damages done to the Peeth during his father Haider Ali's campaigns.

The link clearly says the Hosts under Maratha commander Patwardan foolishly plundered Sringeri. The host means locals and foolishly means the Peeth is downplaying it or saw it as a mistake, not contempt.
 

Haldiram

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2018
Messages
5,709
Likes
28,478
Country flag
Why I said history is never in black and white. What you see depends on where u sit. It’s why different people interpret differently the same piece of history. Since this is intra our nation, we have varying interpretation available to us.

@ashdoc has a thread on the 3rd battle of Panipat where he says the Marathas had no friends in North India because of their habit of looting even fellow Hindus. An interesting and must read piece.
I read Ashdoc's piece, it is accurate. The Marathas and the Northern Hindu kings were both of the view that they can do it all alone and the other is just an eyesore, and both parties ended up paying the price for this miscalculation for wanting to have the entire pie for themselves. These are calculated political risks one takes, but neither of the disagreeing parties was anti-Hindu, they were just anti-eachother. It's like Modi and Advani playing their inside politics for the throne.

None of those "other Hindu kingdoms" wrote poems about the skirmishes with Marathas; It was all forgotten and forgiven as insider competitiveness. But the way the two principalities of Surat and Bengal were, where the civilians were happily paying tributes to the prevailing Muslim kings. Helping the enemy, and being happy about it..umm.. dat kinda happiness ain't gon last very long. This set of people were happily anti-Hindu in their behavior. Both these set of "Hindus" are very different kind of people, so they got different treatment. One is insider competitiveness, the other is insider treachery.

The raids of Bengal and Surat are not seen with the undercurrent of regret. There's nothing to regret there. Let us ask @ashdoc if he thinks the Surat and Bengal raids ought not to have happened. The Sringeri issue is a tactical incident where even the people of Sringeri don't raise it today but people from the other principalities who got hammered raise that issue on behalf of others.

The lessons from Panipat, especially, the mistake of not taking Northern Hindu kingdoms along is still taught as a very bad mistake which cost very heavily. It is used as a metaphor for failure in local folklore. Bollywood has tried to misinterpret the defeat into Congress's version of "moral victory". No one wants such moral victories. A loss is a loss and profit from raiding traitors is still a profit.
 
Last edited:

ashdoc

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2010
Messages
2,875
Likes
3,371
Country flag
Why I said history is never in black and white. What you see depends on where u sit. It’s why different people interpret differently the same piece of history. Since this is intra our nation, we have varying interpretation available to us.

@ashdoc has a thread on the 3rd battle of Panipat where he says the Marathas had no friends in North India because of their habit of looting even fellow Hindus. An interesting and must read piece.
During time of peshwa bajirao friendly relations had developed between marathas and north Indians due to his policy of hindu badshahi . After nadirshah looted delhi a plan to put the udaipur rana on delhi throne using combined rajput maratha army was hatched but did not materialize due to bajirao's untimely death.

But after his death his son peshwa nanasaheb began looting north Indians. When ishwari singh became rana of jaipur using maratha help the marathas began to blackmail him for money on pain of whole jaipur being looted . Ishwari singh committed suicide and jaipur was seething with anger against marathas. The next ruler madho singh invited marathas to get their money and when they were in the gates of jaipur were closed from inside and 3000 marathas were massacred.
 

Sanglamorre

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 4, 2019
Messages
1,530
Likes
5,445
Country flag
Guys, please shift this discussion to a. Appropriate history thread. Posting it as an offtopic in an PKMKB thread is doing injustice to both the interesting topic being discussed and the thread meant for entirely different topic.

Please, my sincerest request.
 

Sourav Kumar

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2016
Messages
748
Likes
1,279
Bengal had dug trenches to prevent Maratha cavalry raiders from coming in. There are even Bengali poems about the Bargi raids. It's great that the wound has left a deep psychological impact which has endured till date. Glad to do it again if need be. Some people understand only that language. The trenches still exist in Bengal; It's called a "Maratha ditch".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maratha_Ditch

The Bengali folk poem goes..

Khoka ghumalo, para juralo, bargi elo deshe
Bulbulite dhan kheyechhe, khajna debo kise?

Gist : Basically, I have no tax left to pay you "invaders"..

The missing context in this poem is that these people were at that time under the rule of Alivardi Khan, who, according to them, was not an "invader" so they gladly paid taxes to him but Hindu Marathas on a mission to saffronize India were the "invaders". It is because of this charbi that they got hammered, lost their money and whatever little of their dignity was left from renting out their loyalty to Alvardi Khan.
-------****************************************
The Sringeri attack did happen. It was the result of freelance tribal mercenaries who were hired from the outskirts of Tipu's kingdom on the way to the main objective. This contingent was not a part of the main force when it left to tackle Tipu sultan. These mercenaries went and looted the temple after the skirmish. It was later returned after the transgression came to light. This was unintended and undeserved, unlike the raids on Bengal against Alivardi Khan and on Surat against Inayat Khan which were intended and deserved. Ain't nobady gon be defensive for that. People who pay tributes to enemies deserve to become collateral. In fact, instead of being collaterals, they deserve to be the main targets. It is the insider who always opens the gates to foreign invaders.

Glad to see that it is still remembered.
It's one thing to attack and loot a prominent temple by mistake and it's another thing to loot the poor subjects of a province then ruled by a Muslim nawab (like many other provinces of India of those days). The marathas made that mistake. They needed the loot from poor subjects and the wikipedia article says that the marathas were interested in plundering and not capturing those areas.

If I were a poor subject there on the west side of bhagirathi river, I would seriously crib about the double whammy of double txation (ie loot) by the Nawab and the Marathas. It was good that Marathas could not do it for more than 10 years. In any case they were overstretched and they could not go beyond bhagirathi! But in Bengali some poor folk made some folk song on that. Seriously speaking "Bargis" had no deep psycholgical impact, LOL. Just 10 years of plundering in 1200 years of subjugation- seriously? Is that even supposed to count?

Ideally if marathas could bring the west side of bhagirathi under their territory, the subjects would pay tax to them as well. But it seems the Marathas could not afford to care about the double taxation pain on poor subjects!
 

ashdoc

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2010
Messages
2,875
Likes
3,371
Country flag
I read Ashdoc's piece, it is accurate. The Marathas and the Northern Hindu kings were both of the view that they can do it all alone and the other is just an eyesore, and both parties ended up paying the price for this miscalculation for wanting to have the entire pie for themselves. These are calculated political risks one takes, but neither of the disagreeing parties was anti-Hindu, though they were anti-eachother. It's like Modi and Advani playing their inside politics for the throne.

None of those "other Hindu kingdoms" wrote poems about the skirmishes with Marathas; It was all forgotten and forgiven as insider competitiveness. But the way the two principalities of Surat and Bengal were, where the civilians were happily paying tributes to the prevailing Muslim kings. Helping the enemy, and being happy about it..umm.. dat kinda happiness ain't gon last very long. This set of people were happily anti-Hindu in their behavior. Both these set of "Hindus" are very different kind of people, so they got different treatment. One is insider competitiveness, the other is insider treachery.

The raids of Bengal and Surat are not seen in that light of regret. There's nothing to regret there. Let us ask @ashdoc if he thinks the Surat and Bengal raids ought not to have happened.

The lessons from Panipat, especially, the mistake of not taking Northern Hindu kingdoms along is still taught as a very bad mistake which cost very heavily. It is used as a metaphor for failure. Bollywood has tried to misinterpret the defeat into Congress's version of "moral victory". No one wants such moral victories. A loss is a loss.
Bengal invasion was necessary to demoralize Muslim rule in Bengal. Interestingly only that part of Bengal is with India today that was raided by marathas. Rest is Bangladesh. But the peshwa nanasaheb was jealous of raghuji bhosale of nagpur who was invading Bengal. He thought that if raghuji conquered Bengal then he would become too powerful. So he himself went to Bengal and defeated raghuji .
 

Sourav Kumar

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 13, 2016
Messages
748
Likes
1,279
Bengal invasion was necessary to demoralize Muslim rule in Bengal. Interestingly only that part of Bengal is with India today that was raided by marathas. Rest is Bangladesh. But the peshwa nanasaheb was jealous of raghuji bhosale of nagpur who was invading Bengal. He thought that if raghuji conquered Bengal then he would become too powerful. So he himself went to Bengal and defeated raghuji .
The fact that WB is in India has nothing to do with Marathas- the peshwa and the bhosles. It is about demography. Even after marathas were gone, the Muslim nawabs of Bengal had their capital city in west side of the former undivided Bengal and yes, demographically "Hindus" were majority there.
 

ashdoc

Senior Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2010
Messages
2,875
Likes
3,371
Country flag
The fact that WB is in India has nothing to do with Marathas- the peshwa and the bhosles. It is about demography. Even after marathas were gone, the Muslim nawabs of Bengal had their capital city in west side of the former undivided Bengal and yes, demographically "Hindus" were majority there.
Yes but maratha invasion remained just a series of raids and not actual conquest due to nanasaheb interfering in raghuji's invasion. It should have resulted in conquest not just raids .

Overall nanasaheb was not great like bajirao . He started looting hindus and also was responsible for sending women and unnecessary camp followers to panipat. He also destroyed the maratha navy because the maratha admiral ( son of the great kanhoji angre) was acting too independent.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Global Defence

Articles

Top