CC#12 RT fans and my gup shup ladies welcome! invitees only! - Page 87

This content was originally posted by: shivis18

Spellbound , oh god !! My mom is so beautiful but yet when somebody praises her shes like 'oh comeon iam not that beautiful ' 😆

This content was originally posted by: Sandhya.A

Nobody is put down Shreya. That was how the discussion  started there. I admire MP and all those other wonderful  kings i mentioned. The topic was why only Akbar and Ashoka were called 'the Great'.

Edited by munnirony - 8 years ago

This content was originally posted by: adiana12

And this one will bust all the myths !!!!!

http://scroll.in/article/698006/rani-padmini-and-four-other-hindutva-history-myths-exploded/

This content was originally posted by: munnirony

guys one req. plz dont drag MP or other brave warriors into this. i wont be able to tolerate their insult. akbar was great & my love for him is as much as u, but tht doesnt give anyone right to put others down. i cant stop anyone but im out of this club. have a great chat. 

This content was originally posted by: munnirony

sandy, i wasnt talking about ur comment. ur comment was just too good. praising akbar, yet respectful to others. i also believe tht akbar's greatness over shadows all but tht doesnt bring down MP's achievements. fighting with akbar & giving him equal takkar wasnt a joke. both were right in their own point of views. & we should praise sumone by not demeaning sumone else. i dont care about others, but if my friends r also doing like others it hurts. & it happened previously as well. but as i said i cant stop anyone but at least i can move out. 

This content was originally posted by: Sandhya.A

There  was a discussion  in a JA thread regarding  'Greatness.' Isn't  MP as great if not greater than Akbar,...and the  like. My thoughts . ...😊

Our country has given  birth  to many precious  men and women, rulers who have exhibited heroism and exceptional  achievements. Chandragupta  Maurya , Harshavardhana, Maharana  Pratap, Chand Bibi, Chatrapati  Shivaji, Raja RajaChola,Vikramaditya, PrithviRaj Chauhan, Rana Sanga and many more. Each  of  them were special and heroic in their own way.

But Ashoka  and  Akbar  are accorded the suffix 'Great'  due to the  scale of their achievements  and due to  their humility  and humanity  inspite  of  such huge achievements. And deservedly  so.

The world has seen innumerable  scientists whose contributions  to science  has been  special and valuble. But why is Einstein  considered the greatest of them all ? 

What makes Tulsidas  the greatest  among Hindi poets? Aren't  others' works valuble?

What makes Amitabh's  voice the most sought after in India? Why is M.S. Subbulakshmi considered the best Carnatic Singer? Why is the Mona Lisa the most famous painting? Why is Don Bradman and Sachin's cricket hailed? Aren't  other's  cricket good enough? What makes Shakespeare's plays superior  to the rest. What makes Mahatma  Gandhi  the Father  of  the  nation? Aren't  other's  patriotism  and sacrifice  great?

Not that others are not good, but they are  extra good, so good that they have  beome symbolic  and iconic.

Ashoka and Akbar are the greatest among great rulers and warriors  of India. Two greatest kings who have ruled India and are called 'The Great'

 The fact that Asoka adopted a policy of gentleness not after a defeat, but after a victory, is what makes him great. The fact that he practised and preached the virtues of amity, toleration and non-violence while he still possessed the vast resources of a mighty empire makes him one of the greatest rulers of the ancient world. 

He directed all his zeal to the promotion of spiritual and moral welfare of his subjects, whom he referred to as his "children" in his edicts. He gave up the policy of foreign annexation and military conquest and chose the path of well being of his subjects while at helm.

Akbar has a high place among the rulers of the world for he successfully brought together the Hindus and the Muslims. During a time when in Europe, warring sects (Catholics and Protestants) were killing each other, Akbar ensured peace to all religious sects. He is among the first rulers of a barbaric era to promote tolerance. 

In his 49 years of rule, India was never invaded by a foreign ruler. He established a strong administration because he gave equal opportunities to all deserving men no matter what sect they belonged to. He transformed the Mughals from military invaders into a permanent Indian dynasty. He laid the foundation of an empire which worked brilliantly, even years after his death. 

The modern visionaries that Asoka and Akbar were in their age is what makes them great.

Also

The reign of Akbar bears a strange resemblance to that of Asoka though  they were separated from each other by an interval of

eighteen centuries; the main features of their respective lives were

practically the same. 

 Asoka was occupied for years in conquering and consolidating his empire; so was Akbar. 

Asoka conquered India to the north of the Nerbudda; so did Akbar.

Ashoka  conquered and ruled almost entire India. So did Akbar.

Ashoka was a fearless excellent   warrior who could inspire fear in his enemies. So was Akbar.

 Asoka was tolerant of other religions; so was Akbar.

Ashoka was an excellent  administrator. So was Akbar.

Ashoka had a very capable   samithi and council of ministers. So were Akbar's  Navratans.

Ashoka introduced  many policies with public welfare in mind. So did Akbar.

Both of them were excellent  judges of personalities.

 Asoka went against the priests; so did Akbar.

 Asoka taught a religion and promoted it; so did Akbar. 

Asoka abstained from flesh meat; so did Akbar.

 In the end Asoka took refuge in Buddha, the law, and the assembly. In the end Akbar too sought peace in religion, one which he himself originated.

(Btw, none of this info fits in our present  buddhuram.😉 begum bhajan singer.😆)

This content was originally posted by: jayaks02

I am with you here munni - Akbar is great. But the fact MP fought for his dignity and homeland against whom he considered as an invader is remarkable. This itself makes him great. In spite of losing everything he never surrendered to Akbar. And if you do not have a land to rule, what reforms you can bring ? Had he ruled we could have done Apple to Apple Comparison and said one is greater than the other - But his battle has been different.

@Mandy - aap bhi 😕. Disappointed . This has nothing to do with religion BTW.

Agree with Sri & Munni . Not to take away anything away from Ashoka or Akbar who still was considered a foreign invader from the Indian rulers' POV , Rana Pratap persisted in fighting for his homeland to the last despite the might of the opposition when all his contemporaries were either surrendering or getting defeated right & left by the Mughals. And Adi, I don't much agree with those articles either bcos just as many other recent Hindu fanatical articles decrying as almost nil the achievements of the Mughals, this article also seems to onesided bias against any bravery at all from the Indian rulers. This is entirely my POV after reading them, of course & no offence meant to anyone

This content was originally posted by: jayaks02

I am with you here munni - Akbar is great. But the fact MP fought for his dignity and homeland against whom he considered as an invader is remarkable. This itself makes him great. In spite of losing everything he never surrendered to Akbar. And if you do not have a land to rule, what reforms you can bring ? Had he ruled we could have done Apple to Apple Comparison and said one is greater than the other - But his battle has been different.

@Mandy - aap bhi  😕. Disappointed  . This has nothing to do with religion BTW. 

This content was originally posted by: Sandhya.A

Shri

Surely  that is not Mandy meant for sure. MP was heroic in his own right. He resisted Akbar's  military  supremacy  and the temptation  to surrender  and thrive as did the Ameris. He fought  for the pride of his homeland with  valour and minimal supplements.  MP's premise and range is thus  limited. Akbar  is in a different  league altogether.

Areed. He didn't  have a land to bring reforms. But  we cannot argue on what could  have been na. The question  raised was why 'The Great' titles only to Akbar  and Ashoka.

As for Raja RajaChola  he too was examplary in every way. Not a single  stain in his  entire  life  and rule. Yet  not called Great. That was because  the scale of his achievements  was lesser than these two. He didn't  face the kind of opposition  they did. He didn't  have to run that extra mile. No diverse praja to revolt. No scheming family. He had everything  perfect. Doting sister and brother-in-law who stood rock solid and the most sincere and respectful  son. That puts Akbar's  and Ashoka's  achievements  a scale higher. 

Now this is not demeaning  Raja RajaChola. Mandy too was not putting  MP down. Her comment was only meant comparitively.😊

This content was originally posted by: ngayou

Agree with Sri & Munni . Not to take away anything away from Ashoka or Akbar who still was considered a foreign invader from the Indian rulers' POV , Rana Pratap persisted in fighting for his homeland to the last despite the might of the opposition when all his contemporaries were either surrendering or getting defeated right & left by the Mughals. And Adi, I don't much agree with those articles either bcos just as many other recent Hindu fanatical articles decrying as almost nil the achievements of the Mughals, this article also seems to onesided bias against any bravery at all from the Indian rulers. This is entirely my POV after reading them, of course & no offence meant to anyone