The real Alaudin- Khilji

First Previous

Page

Next Last

Frequent Posters

1011128

Suspended

Posted: 7 years ago

#41

Originally posted by: MrsAkyurek

Why should anyone give credit to Khilji's political acumen or his skillful war strategy when his vices outweigh his so-called virtues? I don't care how prim and proper Khliji looked when at the end of the day he's a frikking marauder. Let's also give credit to Hitler for the world saw various advancements in science and technology under his regime, he built the world's first national highway system, the autobahn. and forget about the Holocaust.

I think you have to give credit. Who would be defending against Mongols? Rana Ratan Singh? lol. Doing ghoomar ghoomar with rani padmavati and then next day 200,000 strong Mongols doing ghoomna all over India.

There is two side to every issue. My problem with this darial SLB is that he instead of being in the middle ..for some political reason perhaps widened the gap.

Originally posted by: Flame.

This is my exact problem with Khilji sympathisers. His bad deeds are overlooked only because he had some good ones too, when it just doesn't matter at all, because the bad were so bad that there is no room for any type of understanding.

As you pointed out, trains ran on time during Hitler's regime, he defended his people against the outsiders, so did Stalin. These deeds suddenly do not make them brave and good men. They were ruthless, barbaric murderers. Being a lover of art or building infrastructure makes no difference whatsoever.

But will you show Hitler as a jaahil ganwar? You did not...u just mentioned his good too

Sanjay Bhainsali NOT ONLY hide the truth BUT DELIBERATELY DISTORTED it...for SOME REASON

That was my entire point...we can debate on khilji and his antics

my issue is SLB lol

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

There are two sides to a coin. You have to look at both sides. If not you have not realized the full value of a coin.

A study of history requires such a holistic view. History demands that we give/take credit based on the merit of each action. A holistic view does not mean sympathy or glorification. It is neutral at best.

And looking at the whole picture does not mean not coming to an objective conclusion. In the case of Khilji, he was a brutal and cruel invader. In the case of Hitler, he committed mass genocide. These are undeniable facts even if we give credit.

Beautiful post..as i said i want everyone to get what they deserve..nothing less or more and this bhainsali went against my objective

Originally posted by: Heisenberg17.

Are you have a laugh? In what sense is he Indian? simply cause he was born in India? 😆 Several Brits were born and died in India too, does that make them Indian? 😆 Genetically he wasn't even South Asian, he didn't speak Indian languages, he didn't dress up in Indian attire, didn't celebrate Indian traditions and festivals, didn't adopt any Indian religions, despised the religions and people of the land he conquered, levied the jizya on non-Muslims, so ethnically, culturally and linguistically, he was not Indian by any metric, so in what sense is he Indian, much less one of India's greatest warrior kings?

And about keeping India's culture and civilisation safe? lmao, that's because people like Khilji, and his fellow Turkish brethrens were busy laying to waste India's culture and civilisation, Alberuni talks about Turkish sultans absolutely devastating the lands they conquered, laying to waste centres of learning, universities, temples etc.

This guy was a mass murderer, a rapist, and a tyrannical religious zealot, by all standards he was a barbarian, and it's a bit puzzling that some people are getting offended by the way he's been portrayed, would you be offended if Hitler or Bin Laden were portrayed differently too?

# 1 that was a quote from INDIAN HISTORIAN ..not me lol. check the link

# 2 I agree with Indian historian though..its like many Americans here are from different parts of the world but once they are born here they are American..at least on passport lol

# 3 I think you should do more research and blame a person only for what he has done ...u r mixing things..

I will do my research and will only be offended if I see a person deviating from history which SLB did for some reason...i have problem with him ..khilji can lick my jooti..i damn care.

Originally posted by: briahna
Why would Bhansali make his Khilji so clownish , towards the end of the movie his face was , cowboy boots , alien clothes were so freaking ugly
Btw Bhansali ladies in Devdas were wearing Gucci shoes, even very poor Paros mom

It is possible that Bahnsali sees himself as raja ratan singh and is trying to take revenge in this janam from khilji lol.

Originally posted by: MeDhakkanHu
Padmavat , the movie is more about a fictional poem by Mohammed Jayasi
So did SLB copy it correctly ? 😆 How did the poet portray Khilji in his poem ? 😕

Check one my earlier links where someone mentioned how bhainsali distorted and did maa behn of the poem...

its a fictional poem..there was no raani padmavati...someone else was king when khilji attacked

rana came few hundred years after

raj of chitor's supari was given by another rajpot king...

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

I understand your sentiments. However, I do not think it makes sense to waste time trying to identify the real Khilji.

1) Despite his merits, Khilji was a cruel conqueror and does not deserve the merit of a defense.
2) Exaggerating villains is a commonly used technique. Fictional villains are always cast as ugly or malformed in some way. In Baahubali the Kalakeyas were depicted as dark and ugly. The same thing was done for the men who fight for Sauron. When villains are historical, filmmakers heighten or exaggerate their negative habits and embellish personality to portray villainy. The film 300 was banned in Iran for its depiction of Xerxes and Persians. The entire Persian army was grossly misrepresented in that movie. Putting the Rajputs on a pedestal and kicking down Khilji is part of this narrative. Even Malik Muhammad Jyasi did it in his poem.
3) You can't force feed history into unwilling participants. Interested people will do their own research on historical characters and draw their own conclusions. Uninterested people have drawn their own conclusion.
4) When you think about it, Khilji is not that misunderstood

When it involves Hindu and Muslim then one should be careful...

Note more than supporting Khilji my problem is that man whose name is S L B

Its him that I have issue with..why the heck did you spin? why are you insecure? why cant you be neutral? What he did to me shows weakness in character..low confidence and insecurity...if Rajputs are proud and valor and great then YOU DONT NEED TO PROP THEM UP...it demeans them

I am a kind that does not need fake support...anyway people are not getting my pain here. lol. i just dont like such people

Originally posted by: mz.gigglez
Slb should stop making historic movies and messing them up

Stupid idiot and to think he wanted to add a dream sequence for his cheap publicity

welcome giiggle ..good to see u here. lol

Originally posted by: ---Betty---

BLUE - So why is he hailed and Mongols reviled?

I've posted the following question in another thread with no answer

Weren't the Mughals Mongols? (Mughals means Mongol in Persian)

They don't like Mongols but love Khilji?

Why the hatred only towards Mongols? Bcz Genghiz Khan killed millions of muslims (and Europeans, Chinese etc)?

I heard even Genghis Khan was very religiously tolerant

Aaap ko bohat kasht ho raha hai...

FIrst dont talk in THEY and US...i dont like it..take name.

I dont think Khilji is hailed nor mongols are hated..dont know where u got that...many people think mongols are muslims because of Khan at the end lol.

Have u gone mad? who is saying people love khilji...whats ur problem?

GO sort yourself out ...moghuls were mix of mongols and turkish.

Quote

Flame.

@Flame.

Rocker

+ 4

Posted: 7 years ago

#42

Since the discussion has now come to Genghis Khan, will share an interesting fact I had read a while ago - although it's not completely related to the topic.

"The destruction by Genghis Khan and the Mongols scrubbed off 700 million tonnes of carbon from the atmosphere, after forests regrew on previously populated and cultivated land"

😲 😆

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

1011128

Suspended

Posted: 7 years ago

#43

Originally posted by: Flame.
Since the discussion has now come to Genghis Khan, will share an interesting fact I had read a while ago - although it's not completely related to the topic.
"The destruction by Genghis Khan and the Mongols scrubbed off 700 million tonnes of carbon from the atmosphere, after forests regrew on previously populated and cultivated land"
😲 😆

My favorite is Kublai Khan - aka The great Khan.

I think he is the greatest emperor of all time

He looked like me a little

ok later

Quote

CherHorowitz

@TotalBetty

Sparkler

+ 3

Posted: 7 years ago

#44

"Aaap ko bohat kasht ho raha hai...

FIrst dont talk in THEY and US...i dont like it..take name.

I dont think Khilji is hailed nor mongols are hated..dont know where u got that...many people think mongols are muslims because of Khan at the end lol.

Have u gone mad? who is saying people love khilji...whats ur problem?

GO sort yourself out ...moghuls were mix of mongols and turkish."

THEY are the people who are getting upset that the great king Khilji is portrayed like this in the movie (Not US vs THEM)

Because I've seen a few threads like this... Some people while saying how unfair his portrayal was in the movie and listing his great qualities & contributions to India said Khilji stopped evil Mongols and saved India, it's culture, it's people etc. citing that as his greatest quality

So I asked but Mughals were Mongols too

Edited by ---Betty--- - 7 years ago

Quote

CherHorowitz

@TotalBetty

Sparkler

+ 3

Posted: 7 years ago

#45

Originally posted by: Flame.
Since the discussion has now come to Genghis Khan, will share an interesting fact I had read a while ago - although it's not completely related to the topic.
"The destruction by Genghis Khan and the Mongols scrubbed off 700 million tonnes of carbon from the atmosphere, after forests regrew on previously populated and cultivated land"
😲 😆

His talents were unbelievable and unsurpassed (the good, the bad and the ugly)

He built the biggest empire in his lifetime (bigger than the Roman Empire in its entire history)

His empire didn't crumble after him, it lasted...

He was supposedly a prolific lover and fathered so many children

There are rumors that today one in two hundred men are his direct descendants 😛

Quote

1093604

Suspended

Posted: 7 years ago

#46

Originally posted by: hippopotamus

# 1 that was a quote from INDIAN HISTORIAN ..not me lol. check the link

# 2 I agree with Indian historian though..its like many Americans here are from different parts of the world but once they are born here they are American..at least on passport lol

# 3 I think you should do more research and blame a person only for what he has done ...u r mixing things..

I will do my research and will only be offended if I see a person deviating from history which SLB did for some reason...i have problem with him ..khilji can lick my jooti..i damn care.

1 - Indian leftist historian is talking out of his arse.

2 - There are people living in America and UK who do not see themselves as either American or British despite having a passport. Khilji would most probably be horrified with being called an Indian, a group of people he despised.

3 - I think you shouldn't be making threads and going to great lengths to defend a mass murderer if you really do not care a damn about him. 😆

Quote

Flame.

@Flame.

Rocker

+ 4

Posted: 7 years ago

#47

Originally posted by: ---Betty---

His talents were unbelievable and unsurpassed (the good, the bad and the ugly)

He built the biggest empire in his lifetime (bigger than the Roman Empire in its entire history)
His empire didn't crumble after him, it lasted...

He was supposedly a prolific lover and fathered so many children

There are rumors that today one in two hundred men are his direct descendants 😛

Ahh, yeah. Although my knowledge in the department of Genghis Khan is limited (Read as zero), I did read the descendants part somewhere.

I was blown away after reading the scrubbing of carbon from the atmosphere thing. I mean, even something of this sort is possible? 🤪

I remember being confused for a moment as the disappearance of all that carbon ensured a better future for the coming generations. But trust me, the confusion lasted for only a few moments 😆

Quote

1093604

Suspended

Posted: 7 years ago

#48

Originally posted by: ---Betty---

BLUE - So why is he hailed and Mongols reviled?

I've posted the following question in another thread with no answer

Weren't the Mughals Mongols? (Mughals means Mongol in Persian)

They don't like Mongols but love Khilji?

Why the hatred only towards Mongols? Bcz Genghiz Khan killed millions of muslims (and Europeans, Chinese etc)?

I heard even Genghis Khan was very religiously tolerant

The Mughals were originally Turko-Mongols. It's funny because the Persians do not defend mass murderers like Genghis Khan and Timur, but Indians, mainly the communists/feminists/regressive liberals have a slave mentality and an inferiority complex, who fetishise everything Islam and Persian/Arab.

Quote

CherHorowitz

@TotalBetty

Sparkler

+ 3

Posted: 7 years ago

#49

Originally posted by: hippopotamus
https://thewire.in/203518/INDIA-GRATEFUL-ALAUDDIN-KHILJI-THWARTING-MONGOL-INVASIONS/
At a time when most of the medieval world was laid waste by the brutality of the Mongol armies, Khilji kept India and its culture and civilisation safe.

Against this backdrop, one can safely argue that Alauddin Khilji, for all his faults, actually saved the syncretic culture of the Indian subcontinent of that time which included Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, and Jain subcultures from enormous destruction, even if preserving the culture of India may not have been what motivated his resistance to the Mongols.

The Mongols did not just invade and conquer; they exterminated civilisations. To give just an idea, during Genghis's invasion of the Persian Empire, these were the number of people put to death in some of the cities overcome by the Mongols in 1222 CE: Urgench, 1 million; Merv, 700,000; Nishapur, 1.7 million; Rey, 500,000 (an estimate based on the order that every male should be killed in a city of approximately a million people); and Herat, 1.6 million. That's nearly 6 million people just from these cities, at a time when the world population is estimated at 400 million. In other words, the Mongols are said to have killed 1.5% of the world population in a single campaign.

Alauddin Khilji was born in Delhi in 1266 CE, lived his entire life in the Indian subcontinent, and ruled as sultan of Delhi from 1296 CE 1316 CE. By any definition, he would have to be called an Indian monarch, not a foreign invader. As a ruler, he would prove himself to be one of India's greatest warrior kings and one of the world's great military geniuses.

Khilji, by his military brilliance, managed to defeat the Mongols not once, but five times, and avoided defeat a sixth time even when taken by surprise, as the Mongols attacked with massive forces.

Was Alauddin Khilji a bigot?
The story of Alauddin Khilji shows us that we need to understand history in its entirety. Just as most Indians are unaware of Alauddin Khilji's role in stopping many Mongol invasions, even the image of Khilji as someone who persecuted Hindus is based on an incomplete understanding of history.
To be sure, Khilji was an extremely cruel, suspicious and vindictive man, and meted out barbaric punishments to those who antagonised him. But his cruelty was impartial, and made no distinction between Hindus and Muslims.
Historians are generally agreed that while Alauddin Khilji was a cruel despot, he was not a bigot. He was a pragmatist.

You made this post highlighting in red that "Khilji was India's greatest warrior'

And another post

Originally posted by: hippopotamus
I am liking the bravery of Khilji

I mean defeating Mongols ...is something special.

Yes I understand that he killed people but then problem is that in older days we cannot apply current standards ...world has changed...I am sure even local Indian rulers were cruel ...He is hated because he defeated them and ruled them. lol

I dont know why but this guy is impressing me more and more ...mainly because of bravery

No article i have read talks about sex slave and all.,.thats a big lie by SLB.

Bold - You're liking his bravery you said

So I assumed you like him

Maybe you don't love but just like Khilji

But as I mentioned in my previous post there have been a few threads were people defended him so much, vehemently opposed his portrayal and praised him for stopping evil Mongol invasion of India

Edited by ---Betty--- - 7 years ago