The Greatest Kings in Indian History

[Param]

I think Phenom's post nailed it




IMO the Dravidian movement guys went overboard and the movement acquired a anti North Indian, anti Hindu character. Use of Dravidian is funny 'cause "Dravida" is a Sanskrit word

Yeah I agree, but how does this relate to my post?

 

[LurkerBaba]

Yeah I agree, but how does this relate to my post?

Reformatting and editing......

the so called chauvinists were basically against the system of caste

IMO the Dravidian movement guys went overboard from the usual anti-caste stance and the movement acquired a anti North Indian, anti Hindu character.

I think Phenom's post nailed it

Caste system in India is not a giant monolithic entity, which is what some in the DK movement believed. Also the movement was not just anti- Brahmin, it was also anti-hindu, they believed Hinduism is just an extension of Brahminism. This anti-hindu attitude was one of the reason why they could never get enough popular support.

Cholas were Tamil linguistically and ethnically.They were Dravidians.

Use of Dravidian is funny 'cause "Dravida" is a Sanskrit word

 

[The Messiah]

The greatest ruler in India was Indira Gandhi.

 

[Param]

Reformatting and editing......



IMO the Dravidian movement guys went overboard from the usual anti-caste stance and the movement acquired a anti North Indian, anti Hindu character.

I think Phenom's post nailed it






Use of Dravidian is funny 'cause "Dravida" is a Sanskrit word

Yeah I too agree with the rest of your post.
The Anti north Indian stance was a bit successful. It was the anti religious stuff that was flop.
But this 'dravida is a Sanskrit word' makes no difference. Infact the name Ramaswamy also sounds Sanskritised.

Just like the word Indian was not invented by those living in India.But we still call ourselves Indian.Does that make any difference?

 

[Ray]

I hope we are going even keel and no one is required to be made to walk the plank!

 

[Iamanidiot]

brigadier you are flogging a .let the horse be dead

 

[Ray]

Just doing my job.

Just thought there was a wee bit of 'noise'!

 

[Rahul M]

since we were discussing chanakya's attitude about birth, I thought this might be interesting.

the niti-shastra or chanakya niti is a collection of aphorisms written by chanakya, somewhat like sun-tsu's art of war, but unlike it applicable to day to day life. while the arthashastra was meant for instructing princes and students of statecraft, this one was meant for common people, which is obvious from its much simpler structure and lack of detail.

a verse in chapter 8 says :

of what use is high birth is if the person is uneducated,
(while) even the gods sing the praises of a man of low birth if he is learned.

 

[pmaitra]

^^

Thank you Sir! Now that will silence some of the detractors of Chanakya who have been carrying out a smear campaign against him.

 

[Virendra]

What exactly is the difference between getting killed by another Indian ruler and getting killed by a Muslim invader? The end result is the same, isn't it? Does the fact that one is Hindu and the other Muslim make a difference?

But you're right, some people won't understand. Best to just leave them alone.

Throughout the history, I don't remember an Indian ruler killing 30,000 civilians at a fort in one shot after he already won his battle. So that is not usual of the Kings.
Now coming to the difference. Death is death, I know. But difference is in the purpose for which slaying took place. Kingdom A fighting the Kingdom B is not new, collateral damage is not new. But Akbar after the massacre at Chittor, writing this in his Fatehnama-i-Chittor seems rotten?

..."This is of the grace of my Lord that He may try me whether I am grateful or ungrateful"—we spend our precious time to the best of our ability in war (ghiza) and Jihad and with the help of Eternal God, who is the supporter of our ever���increasing empire, we are busy in subjugating the localities, habitations, forts and towns which are under the possession of the infidels, may God forsake and annihilate all of them, and thus raising the standard of Islam everywhere and removing the darkness of polytheism and violent sins by the use of sword. We destroy the places of worship of idols in those places and other parts of India. "The praise be to Allah, who hath guided us to this, and we would not have found the way had it not been that Allah had guided us"...

If the basis/purpose was as narrow as this, I don't see how he was aiming at a pan Indian outlook or anything even remotely secular.
I only want him to be viewed as a religiously fanatic ambitious killer in young days, who cooled down only during his old age. Lets call a spade a spade.


Regards,
Virendra

 

[Param]

Kings with all powers vested in them are tyrants.

I hate Tyrants.

 

[Tshering22]

Kings with all powers vested in them are tyrants.

I hate Tyrants.

Tyrants only came later. There is a certain amount of authoritarianism needed to run a successful country. Otherwise what is currently happening in India is what happens.

A lot of our kings were righteous. Though there were many tyrants too.

 

[Tamil Arasan]

I believe Chathra Pathi Shivaji Maharaj should be in top, because he fought against an enemy most of them are ruthless with no ethics in war, to win a war they will take any extreme rout but yet Shivaji Maharaj prevailed them and formed a swaraj where he made every subjects treated equally irrespective of their religion...I voted for Shivaji Maharaj.

 

[Godless-Kafir]

so rajus and reddys are shudras ?

Naidu is the misnomer of the word Nayaks, in TN the Nayak is called Nayaker, it is not one single group that dominates inside Naidus they have Balji, Kamma and various other sub groups inside Naidu. So Naidu was a title and titles became casts, the story goes that many of these Nayaks where of lower caste who supported the Vijayanagar empire and the king deputed them as Nayaks in apperication of their support.

Same goes with Reddys.

 

[mac]

Perhaps you represent some Hindus, so you are not speaking on behalf of all Hindus; definitely not me.



So what makes one evil? How is evil defined?



Akbar and Tipu Sultan's names evoked as much anger in the minds of their victims' families as did the name of Ashoka in the minds of his victims' families in Kalinga.

Again, may I ask you to speak for yourself?

definitely Muslim rulers are not indian.

Ashoka killed many people but remember it was only for Power and land . He never killed people for any religion , he never killed people to destroy culture.
how can you compare a islami Akabar and his culture destroyer descends with Ashoka who given gift of Buddhism.

When you say Ashoka only Kaliinga victims hate him . but when you say Muslims every religion hindu,Buddhism,sikh,jain A hole culture which born in indian soil hate them. how could muslim ruler be an indian when they devoted their life to kill culture of india and invade it from a nonindian Barabarism culture.

simply to be an "indian" King he must respect indian culture.

 

[mac]

Greatest king I think shivaji , because he was the last hope of hinduism when islami devil Auragzeb was destroying Indian culture and he made it . its his people who achived freedom for india from long rule of Devil Muslims .

I think it was toughest thing to survive any king when his kingdom was surrounded by Muslims he achived it. His successor like peshawa were responsible for given birth to again hindu powers as dominating powers of india. Sikh , jat get benifited from them and era of true indian rule started agian in india. In bengali there are lot of books on Marathas . Jadunath Sarakar is a legendary writer of my state. "war of 27 years" explained by jadunath sarkar in very inspiring everyone should read it once.

No doubt Ashoka and Chandragupta were geat but comparing them with Shivaji is like comparing Amitabh bacchan with Raj Kapur.

 

[Godless-Kafir]

There are probably kings who are far greater that we may have forgotten. For example the spread of Hinduism all over the subcontinent seems to have been done by some empire that history has either made it a legend that we cant consider as history any more or they have plainly slipped out and forgotten.

 

[Blackwater]

Maharaja Ranjit Singh

He Bangged Mughal's Ass

his empire spread till Afghanistan's Kandhar

He was secular

The spire and ceilings of Kashi Vishwanath Temple (rebuilt in 1780) in Varanasi were plated with 820 Kilograms of Gold gifted by Ranjit Singh in 1839



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranjit_Singh

 

[Param]

What a stupid poll.

Why the heck did this thread show up after such a long time?

How can greatness be decided by the number of votes, that to among a non homogenous population?

It's like conducting a global poll about who was the greatest man of the 20th century and Mao wins because 1.3 billion Chinese cast their vote for him!

So It is not about greatness but the number of supporters.

 

[Tamil Arasan]

Maharaja Ranjit Singh

He Bangged Mughal's Ass

his empire spread till Afghanistan's Kandhar

He was secular

The spire and ceilings of Kashi Vishwanath Temple (rebuilt in 1780) in Varanasi were plated with 820 Kilograms of Gold gifted by Ranjit Singh in 1839



Ranjit Singh - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

When the Foreign Minister of the Ranjit Singh's court, Fakir Azizuddin, met the British Governor-General of India, Lord Auckland, in Simla, Lord Auckland asked Fakir Azizuddin which of the Maharaja's eyes was missing, Azizuddin replied: "The Maharaja is like the sun and sun has only one eye. The splendor and luminosity of his single eye is so much that I have never dared to look at his other eye." The Governor General was so pleased with this reply that he gave his gold watch to Azizuddin.