Jodha Akbar 11-12: Siyaasat ki jung - Page 9

Originally posted by: Sandhya.A

Thanks Shreya and Alakh!

Was Kartikeya Sati's son? Parvati's na?

Down south the interpretation varies. That is if Sati and Dakshayini are the same. The story is different (There was no Sati practice here ever). And Ganesha is supposed to be elder to Kartikeya.😳

Yes, that is the Khorasani influence.Mir speaks only Persianised Hindi.

Shyamala

Originally posted by: Sandhya.A

Yup.😆

And Sushim too says : Raaz and matlab!😲

That was 1500 years before Mughal entry. Or perhaps Mir Khorasan taught Sushim his language.

Parvati had been cursed by Rati, after the Manmata dahanam by Lord Shiva with his third eye, that she can never bear a child. So Kartikeya is created out of the combined energies of Mahadev and Parvati. He is their elder son.

The ball of energy is divided into six parts - there is a complicated story as to why this happens - and each part becomes a child. Later, Mahadev unites all the six children, who are being brought up by the 6 Krittika sisters in Krittika lok, into one again. It is because he had the Krittikas as his foster mothers that he is called Kartikeya. And since he was rescued at one point, before he assumed human form, by Ganga, he is also called Gangeya. So Kartikeya, Gangeya, Gauri tanaya!

Kartikeya was born for the express purpose of defeating and killing Tarakasur, to whom Lord Shiva had given the boon that no one but a Shivaputra could kill him. He achieves that, and then becomes the senapati of the Devas.

Later, Shiva sends him to the south to protect that land from the rakshasas, which he does very successfully. So he is worshipped, as Murugan, far more in the south than in the north. His vahan is the peacock.

Shyamala Aunty

Originally posted by: Autumn_Rose

He is Parvati's son.

Thank you so much, my dear Harshu. Yes, of course Jodha will win the lep competition. She has never known failure!

Shyamala Aunty

Originally posted by: harshu27

as usul superb review...u r jst spectacular... ⭐️ 👏 and I do agree wid u abt d lep one 😉 😆 as jodha wil b d sole winner in dis competition... 😆 😉

Shyamala Aunty...please hide your belan first 😃

Ok, kiddo, but just this once, like the Licence to Lament once that you little imps have assigned to yourselves!😉

Seriously, this one has turned out well, so do read it, especially the part about Episode 12, and let me know what you feel. It does not matter if it is very late.

The next one, that I hope to get out today, will be fluffier, so you can go easy on those 3 episodes. I will call it The Ruqaiya Enigma.

Shyamala Aunty

Originally posted by: ---Khushi---

Shyamala Aunty...please hide your belan first 😃

Ok...now that it's hidden away, Kaan pakad ke sorry...was totally caught up with first rakhi n then with work this whole of last week...have not been able to watch also regularly...

Will soon catch up...promise 😃

Jalal-Maham Anga 1:

There is a desperate rearguard action by a shell-shocked Bairam Khan, ending in a last ditch attempt to to salvage the situation as he kneels at Jalal's feet and offers an eye for an eye as retribution. Jalal refuses to punish him, but is unyielding in his condemnation of what was done to Zaheer, and as he turns away from his mentor of many years, one can practically hear the door closing in Bairam Khan's face.

He pays the price for imagining that his pupil could be forever controlled and manipulated, like a puppet on a string, even after he had grown in years, stature and wisdom. It was brought home to him, suddenly and without warning, that power by proxy is fundamentally unstable. And that it never pays to take an emperor, even one so young, for granted.

It was striking that it was only today, confronted by a stony-faced, ice cold Jalal, that it occurred to Bairam Khan that the Shahenshah should be addressed as Aap. It was, unfortunately for him, too little too late. The downward slide has begun, and the bell is tolling for Bairam Khan. Mahaam Anga, against whom he rages impotently, is only an instrument in his fall; he has dug his grave with his own hands.

Jalal-Maham Anga 2: It was fascinating to watch her, a master at the game and in the art of dissimulation, play Jalal like a violin. As he watches her, his eyes narrowed in confusion and emotional strain, she lays out for him the principles of statecraft for him with a succinctness and confidence that would have pleased Chanakya.

Ek salah dena chahenge, yaad rakhiyega. Mohabbat insaan ko kamzor kar deti hai ( she is herself a standing example of this, wrt her son Adham) aur rishtey dam ghot dete hain.. Hands grasping his shoulders, she goes on Yeh Mughaliya sultanat sirf aur sirf aapse aur aapki ragon mein daudti shahi khoon ki wajah se kayam hai..

When he protests that Bairam Khan has been his ustad all his life and is like his walid, she instantly presses on a raw wound when she tells him to then forget the atrocity done to his sabse bharosemand Zaheer. As Jalal , racked by indecision, looks away, Maham assesses the situation, her eyes wary and calculating. Then, her mind made up, she moves.

Kaum aap par bharosa karti hai Jalal! Chahti hai aapko. Apne Zill-e-Ilahi ke faisle par unhein yakeen hai.. Kisi din, kisi ki ki huyi gustakhi ki wajah se yeh yakeen toota, to wo din Mughaliya sultanat ke liye sab se bura din hoga.

She withdraws a bit to assess the impact of what she has said so far. Then she delivers her parting coup, clearly aimed at Bairam Khan, though it is innocuous enough on the surface. Itihaas gawah hai Jalal, zulm ki hukumat kabhi aabaad nahin rahi hai. Aage aap khud samajhdaar hain..

Thru this silken monologue that ranges from Panchatantra-style parables to the need for the Emperor to retain the trust of the awaam, Maham Anga smoothly undermines, indeed almost cripples Bairam Khan's standing with the Shahenshah. Her parting shot, that regimes based on oppression do not last, tolls like a warning bell, all the louder, metaphorically, against the sounds of Zaheer's agony.

It is a bravura performance, all the more effective for being so low key.

With my above paragraph lets take a look at Akbar- he lost his father at 13 years, had BK as father till 17 years. He never had a father all life in reality first as hostage, may be the period of 7 years to 17 he had BK. A son learns from father about his relation with outside world to treat women etc. So in house if a mother, sister is treated like second class citizen or their existence does not matter sons tend to learn that and implement it in outside world. They learn its Okkk to misbehave and treat women as commodity. Akbar's Casanova ways, his marrying many girls etc all this is rooted in his initial upbringing. I believe that Akbar did not marry or keep cocubbines only for political reasons and expasion but he was a casanova at large in the first place. What else shall indicate him marrying in his 50s to princess young enough to be his grand daughters. The root of this lies in his childhood his role models be it Humayun or BK or other fatherly figures. Its the same with other mughal emperors and princes.

Originally posted by: Autumn_Rose

With my above paragraph lets take a look at Akbar- he lost his father at 13 years, had BK as father till 17 years. He never had a father all life in reality first as hostage, may be the period of 7 years to 17 he had BK. A son learns from father about his relation with outside world to treat women etc. So in house if a mother, sister is treated like second class citizen or their existence does not matter sons tend to learn that and implement it in outside world. They learn its Okkk to misbehave and treat women as commodity. Akbar's Casanova ways, his marrying many girls etc all this is rooted in his initial upbringing. I believe that Akbar did not marry or keep cocubbines only for political reasons and expasion but he was a casanova at large in the first place. What else shall indicate him marrying in his 50s to princess young enough to be his grand daughters. The root of this lies in his childhood his role models be it Humayun or BK or other fatherly figures. Its the same with other mughal emperors and princes.

]Omg Akbar was a pedophile🥱🤢

Originally posted by: Autumn_Rose

With my above paragraph lets take a look at Akbar- he lost his father at 13 years, had BK as father till 17 years. He never had a father all life in reality first as hostage, may be the period of 7 years to 17 he had BK. A son learns from father about his relation with outside world to treat women etc. So in house if a mother, sister is treated like second class citizen or their existence does not matter sons tend to learn that and implement it in outside world. They learn its Okkk to misbehave and treat women as commodity. Akbar's Casanova ways, his marrying many girls etc all this is rooted in his initial upbringing. I believe that Akbar did not marry or keep cocubbines only for political reasons and expasion but he was a casanova at large in the first place. What else shall indicate him marrying in his 50s to princess young enough to be his grand daughters. The root of this lies in his childhood his role models be it Humayun or BK or other fatherly figures. Its the same with other mughal emperors and princes.

]Omg Akbar was a pedophile🥱🤢