Hypocrisy thy name is royalty

myviewprem thumbnail
15th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail + 3
Posted: 10 years ago
#1

So we are in the Salim-anarkali love track and I just cannot fathom the hypocrisy of this situation

I can understand Jodha, Hamida or anyone opposing Salim love affair with Anarkali a dancer
But not Akbar doing the same. Why?
Because Akbar himself has married so many ladies whether they are commoners, lower class, widows or divorceee etc as long as liked them they were in his harem whether they came willingly or forced it never really mattered to him.
Now the same Akbar who justified getting woman right left and center whether they were willing or not to be in his harem, who forced husbands to divorce their wife(Daulat Shad) just because he wanted her etc is preaching his son lessons on royalty and love is a bit too much to digest
If someone has followed the principles he preached then atleast it can be listened to but here the issue is different. From childhood Salim must have seen his dad marrying girls half age than him, marrying into his 50s, whoever he liked she would be forced in his harem etc and hence he assumed that its Ok to love any class woman.
Now that he loves a rakasha a dancer and wants to marry her and make her his wife suddenly Akbar has caught the high standard of probity in public life saying he is Hindustan's son not Akbar's son. Does that same logic never apply to him ever? Akbar was also not Humayun's son but Hindustan's son by same logic. So why he never maintained high standard of probity in his personal life and expect same from his kids.
This is called hypocrisy practiced by elders, parents and society as large even today when they can do anything but their kids or grand kids(younger generation) dare not dream of doing even much lesser and immediately a probity in public life rule book shall be thrown at the face.
Akbar married Tejwant and Shivani off just to show what a great believer in equal society he was. But when it comes to Salim or Murad or daniyal rule books get thrown at them stating Ok you are royals and you need our permission and approval of girl to get married to.
Ok we can assume elders parents especially fathers are custodian of rules and probity but if only they have followed it in their life they can preach. Some how Akbar preaching Salim to not love anarkali or dream of making her his wife etc reeks of dualism and hypocrisy as Akbar himself never followed all this principles in his life.
Another thing I found that is dual in nature is that royal family men can watch rakasha dance, use them for pleasure even fall in love but not dare marry them as its a prestige issue. When you love someone the ultimate respect you give that lady is by marrying her, giving her your name so she is protected and no society dare abuse her right? Otherwise its not true love you are just using her playing with her and her emotions.
I find many people saying Salim can love her but not dare marry her as she is rakasha. But then if he does not marry her its not really love its lust. In Mughal-e-azam Dilip Kumar's Salim says "If you fear to show your love in public its ayashi not love" and that statement is so true.
What is love that is hidden from world and family? It means its wrong you are doing something illegal so you hide. If its true love you express it in front of world and give honour to that lady whom you love irrespective if she is rakasha, commoner, maid or Queen. In eyes of God all humans are created equal- all are children of God, when God never made any difference its we humans who have made caste, class etc for God all are his kids and he does not treat any human differently. So why not Salim cannot treat Anarkali with respect the same respect his father gives his mom?
For Shah I Iran Jodha was a second hand wife because she was a hindu and Akbar was so angry he went to war to save her honour. For Salim, anarkali is his lover in his soul he consider her his wife after all what is marriage but considering an human as your own with all soul and heart. So why not he fight to save her life and give her honour? even if its against his father. Actually this fight is not really between Salim and Akbar its between society thinking and new thoughts, its between hypocrisy of society and elders and the new generation rather than a father and son.
Next we come to concept of Malika - e - Hindustan(Empress of India) and Akbar have objection to Salim wanting to make her Malika e Hindustan. He says do not compare your mother to anarkali. But why? Like Akbar thinks jodha is great and is fit to be Malika e Hindustan so Salim loves and thinks anarkali has great qualities and is fit to be Malika e Hindustan in future. How come such a big issue on such a matter? A king has right to decide who is the next empress and Salim wants anarkali to be his next. If Humayun was alive may be he have objection to Jodha being Malika e Hindustan over his nieces Ruqaiah and Salima than will Akbar agree to his father? When he has all independence to choose his wives, MEH etc how come he can place restriction on his kids- will
There are many instances of commoner even dancers and raksha being empress or Queen take case of Bajirao marrying Mastani a half muslim Persian lady and making her his Queen or Baz Bahadur marrying a commoner Roopmati and making her his Queen etc Rao Maldoe favourite wife was a dancer(or as Mughals calls a Raksha) so many Mughals had commoner wife and even dancer and raksha as their consorts and wives.
Edited by myviewprem - 10 years ago

Created

Last reply

Replies

18

Views

2.7k

Users

7

Likes

57

Frequent Posters

ghalibmirza thumbnail
12th Anniversary Thumbnail Stunner Thumbnail + 4
Posted: 10 years ago
#2
prem i disagree with you here! first of all we do not know whether this salim anar kissa is true or not..we all know salim's ultimate love was mehrunissa which happened after he was married to other princesses..!..akbar mainly married for political benefits and not out of love..he had his main wives of royal blood and whoever trailed after them are of not much importance and he had numerous concubines..but never i have heard or read him marrying a rakaasa..they were there for entertainment and if i was in place of akbar i too would not allow my son to marry a rakasaa..yes he can have her as his concubine but not the main wife!
Edited by ghalibmirza - 10 years ago
sharmacatty thumbnail
10th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail + 4
Posted: 10 years ago
#3
This is called hypocrisy practiced by elders, parents and society as large even today when they can do anything but their kids or grand kids(younger generation) dare not dream of doing even much lesser and immediately a probity in public life rule book shall be thrown at the face.
Very true Prem
ghalibmirza thumbnail
12th Anniversary Thumbnail Stunner Thumbnail + 4
Posted: 10 years ago
#4
..now you tell me how can a father/emperor who has been entertained by a dancer in every way can accept her as his daughter in law and give her the same respect?..lets say anar was akbar's concubine and lets assume they had a physical relationship then how can he accept a rakaasa as his son's main wife? maanbai had royal blood and was from a respectable family, any sane person would opt her over anar!
Edited by ghalibmirza - 10 years ago
sharmacatty thumbnail
10th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail + 4
Posted: 10 years ago
#5

Originally posted by: ghalibmirza

..now you tell me how can a father/emperor who has been entertained by a dancer in every way can accept her as his daughter in law and give her the same respect?..lets say anar was akbar's concubine and lets assume they had a physical relationship then how can he accept a rakaasa as his son's wife?

hey dear... i totally agree with you..
I was thinking the same.. Akbar too said to jodha that she is a dancer who dance in functions in front of him.. He himself give her that title Shah-e-rakasa.. Basically she is appointed for shehensha's Diljoi.. so how can he accept her as his daughter-in-law..
Everyone has their own point of view regarding this track whether in serial or in real life..

ghalibmirza thumbnail
12th Anniversary Thumbnail Stunner Thumbnail + 4
Posted: 10 years ago
#6

Originally posted by: sharmacatty

hey dear... i totally agree with you..
I was thinking the same.. Akbar too said to jodha that she is a dancer who dance in functions in front of him.. He himself give her that title Shah-e-rakasa.. Basically she is appointed for shehensha's Diljoi.. so how can he accept her as his daughter-in-law..
Everyone has their own point of view regarding this track whether in serial or in real life..



and by accepting her as the next MEH isn't he going to put mughal empire's izzat aabru at stake? he has the responsibility towards the whole empire as he is the representative of mughal khandaan!
Edited by ghalibmirza - 10 years ago
sharmacatty thumbnail
10th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail + 4
Posted: 10 years ago
#7

Originally posted by: ghalibmirza



and by accepting her as the next MEH isn't he going to put mughal empire's izzat aabru at stake? he has the responsibility towards the whole empire as he is the representative of mughal khandaan!

Yes.. Salim could make her his concubine..
PutijaChalhov thumbnail
15th Anniversary Thumbnail Visit Streak 180 Thumbnail + 9
Posted: 10 years ago
#8
I read somewhere that Mughals were very particular that their Heirs and main Queens had Royal blood however many concubines secondary wives or/and harem women they had and their off spring had no right to throne
Edited by PutijaChalhov - 10 years ago
myviewprem thumbnail
15th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail + 3
Posted: 10 years ago
#9

Originally posted by: ghalibmirza

prem i disagree with you here! first of all we do not know whether this salim anar kissa is true or not..we all know salim's ultimate love was mehrunissa which happened after he was married to other princesses..!..akbar mainly married for political benefits and not out of love..he had his main wives of royal blood and whoever trailed after them are of not much importance and he had numerous concubines..but never i have heard or read him marrying a rakaasa..they were there for entertainment and if i was in place of akbar i too would not allow my son to marry a rakasaa..yes he can have her as his concubine but not the main wife!

Akbar may not have had a raksha but his other future generation definetly had consorts and wives who were dancers and so did many other wives.
No mandy Akbar had regular as well as muta marriages(when maulvis objected) with many women who were not royal because he liked them even women who were married and commoners. Its not true that only royal princesses were his wives and that too for political reason. If you read books historical ones in library that go into personal life of Akbar you realize he married many women because he liked them or got them to his harem because he liked/loved them apart from political marriages like Rajputh princesses. Akbar definetly married for political reasons but not for that only he had many wives/cocubbines whom he loved and wanted them in harem at any cost.
And what is cocubbine - a wife who has no legal sanctions that is all usually. In Mughal harems many cocubbines were more powerful than the wives and Queens themselves. Cocubbine is like second wife concept in india in modern times where rich people have a wife and then they like someone and because of society and family and financial constraint cannot divorce their wives and marry them without society approval. That is a cocubbine, if you read Shah Jahan, Aurangzeb etc all their life companions till death were such cocubbines/dancers only who took care of them. So concubine is just a name for a not legally sanctioned wife else she is a wife only and even bore kids for these kings and emperors. Dancers or rakasha were highly qualified and trained in poetry and dancing and even sometimes fighting skills. Its the British who slowly started treating them as second class and lower class women as they actively participated in the first war of independence and this became the norm. Else Akbar and other Mughal emperors had many kids from these cocubbines although many never survived.
If you love someone why not give her a legal sanction why keep her as cocubbine or raksha I feel that is true love where you give your lover respect by marrying especially in 16th century
myviewprem thumbnail
15th Anniversary Thumbnail Sparkler Thumbnail + 3
Posted: 10 years ago
#10

Originally posted by: ghalibmirza

..now you tell me how can a father/emperor who has been entertained by a dancer in every way can accept her as his daughter in law and give her the same respect?..lets say anar was akbar's concubine and lets assume they had a physical relationship then how can he accept a rakaasa as his son's main wife? maanbai had royal blood and was from a respectable family, any sane person would opt her over anar!

Here anarkali is only a dancer who dances on special occasion, Akbar has no relationship with her whatsoever neither any other man. Anyway I doubt anarkali was his cocubbine as Salim would not go all out to get his fathers cocubbine and face society ridicule.
When Akbar can get Daulat Shad to divorce her husband and leave her kid and go to him as his secondary wife(as he had many wives) so why Salim cannot marry anarkali?
Also if you read akbarnama and other Mughal books you realize that Akbar used to tell his gaurds to raid nobels and others houses to get him pretty women and some he kept as his secondary wife. So why Salim cannot marry anarkali and keep her as his secondary wife atleast?
Edited by myviewprem - 10 years ago

Related Topics

Top

Stay Connected with IndiaForums!

Be the first to know about the latest news, updates, and exclusive content.

Add to Home Screen!

Install this web app on your iPhone for the best experience. It's easy, just tap and then "Add to Home Screen".