The Saga of Aambhik - Page 28

Originally posted by: jhum_86

abhi awesome part after so many days..this time the hindi bhashan is outstanding...but please continue soon..we don't have time for one month again...

Originally posted by: Fantasies

wow abhi excellent shudh hindi yar...

do u have shudh hindi as a subject. coz i have read this type of hindi in old novels only and especially in historic fiction.

loved it especially the hindi samvad!

Originally posted by: chatterbox

that was nice abhi
i was also wondering when u wud update..

too powerful hindi though hehe

and happy friendship day to all

Originally posted by: Historylover

Thanks for the update abhi...loved chanakya's dialogue...i guess ab aagey dhannu and chanakya ka confrontation aayegi and shikha khulegi 😭 ...and yes as everybody is saying hindi samvad are very nice..do update soon plz..waiting for the next part 😊

Originally posted by: Manipadma

Nice update...
Hey..i really like the Hindi u used..nice update

Originally posted by: _Vrish_

I am going to be a contrarian here - not for the mere sake of it. Note that all my comments here are based on historical events, not what's shown in this serial (which I've largely not been following)

Okay,😉

In Ambhik's defense, there was no concept of Akhand Bharat at that time. Every kingdom was a country of its own, and yeah, while Vedic religion was common to most of them, that alone didn't require that any of the kingdoms subsume itself into others. So Ambhik taking Alexander's help against Paurava wasn't much different from his making alliances w/ any other Kshatriya ruler - the Macedonians, unlike Muslim invaders millenia later, did not have a policy of helenizing the lands that they conquered. (Eg Persia remained Zoroastrian even after Alexander's conquests - having the Parthians and the Sassanids provide them, whereas after the Arab conquests, they were Islamized) Even ancient rulers freely made alliances w/ Yavana (i.e. non-Vedic cultures) rulers when it suited them.

You have a point there Vrish,but Ambhik's murdering of his own father,in a brutal manner is not justified.Also Aambhik did not realize that his alliance making would harm the interests of Bharat...I agree that there was no concept of Akhand Bharat at that time...but allying with a unknown ruler...and that too for settling personal scores with Parvateshwar...and allowing Alexander to plunder India is not justified.😊

So it did not make sense for any kingdom to ally w/ traditional enemies against unknown foreigners, w/ whom the opportunity of friendship at least existed. So from that standpoint, what Ambhik did was correct - Paurava was his enemy, while Alexander was an unknown visitor who could either be befriended or opposed simply b'cos he was unknown. Ambhik chose the first option, and probably saved his people from a lot of grief. Ambhik's move was opportunistic vis a vis Paurava, but nobody can deny that it was in the best interests of Gandhara for him to do what he did.

Yes,what Aambhik did by allying with Alexander,Paurava did by fighting with Alexander.Still as Aambhik just wanted to settle personal scores with Puru,he would have anyway led to other kingdoms near Panchanad and Mallarayja,and Avanti to be endangered by Alexander's marauding armies.But Aambhik's move had just one good result,that is he saved thousands of his people and his army from slaughter.

Any ruler's responsibilities was to secure their own kingdoms, and not chase utopian dreams of other philosophers. An Akhand Bharat, at that time, would have been analogous to today's EU, which a lot of people in Western European countries are getting more resentful about due to an extremely intrusive bureaucracy completely isolated from the real problems it's created for them. Smaller kingdoms were far more managable, and that model actually worked well for Indians during the pre-Islamic period. Chanakya made up a construct that all Indians were natural allies of each other, while all foreigners were enemies, but that had little basis on the ground, where normally, a Dhananand would have more to worry from a Chanakya than from a Selukus.

But Dhanananda would have anyway won the war,if by chance Alexander had managed to reach Magadha,as at that time Dhanananda had the longest standing army in the world...and also Alexander would have faced a very tough fight.

Yeah, at the time, you did have different rulers try and conquer neighboring kingdoms and build themselves big empires, but that was more either for their own self aggrandizement, or to consolidate the security of their own kingdoms, and not to insulate other kingdoms from foreign invasions. In fact, it's fair to argue that historically, until the Arab invasion of Sind, foreign invasions weren't even threats, which is why the first wave of invasions went unopposed.

Originally posted by: -Vrinda-

onceagain nice upd abhi