Was Jaichand really that evil? - Page 4

Originally posted by: nehaneharika

hi nehaneharika,

the points that i have given here r what is given in PR Raso. Even i am not sure abt what happened in history... however since PR Raso is supposed to be the most authentic biography of prithvi.. i have shared all these..

One thing is sure.. after reading pr raso... i don't admire prithvi so much that i used to do before...

Originally posted by: nehaneharika

good discussion............

What Lakshmi said is according to PRC-raso which again written by the court poet of Prithvi & obviously a bit biased.........& there are doubts about the historical truth of what that epic says........

What Neha said is historical truth........According to history there was no Anangpal the king of delhi........Pri's mom & Jaichand's mom were never half sisters........at that time Rajpoots are mainly devided in to two gharanas……& someswar & jaichand belonged to different gharana……the main reason of Prithvi & Jaichand's rivalry was never the throne of delhi……As narrated in the PRC serial PRC & Sanyo both know each other from a very young age……..but in fact they did not meet so many times before their marriage….....& one more thing I want to say in this regard that real PRC was not the one we used to find in this serial……He was exceptionally brave but he lacks in foreseeing the future of his kingdom……Pls don't get hurt but A good king are supposed to act for the greater good even at the cost of his personal pleasure……

^ sigh ! wat a relief finally there r some people who agrees wid me that PRC wasnt a bad king. come one ppl we all know that the sgars have manipulated history a lil bit, but they wudnt show us a completely diff picture of the truth.

Originally posted by: saswatisett

good discussion............

What Lakshmi said is according to PRC-raso which again written by the court poet of Prithvi & obviously a bit biased.........& there are doubts about the historical truth of what that epic says........

What Neha said is historical truth........According to history there was no Anangpal the king of delhi........Pri's mom & Jaichand's mom were never half sisters........at that time Rajpoots are mainly devided in to two gharanas……& someswar & jaichand belonged to different gharana……the main reason of Prithvi & Jaichand's rivalry was never the throne of delhi……As narrated in the PRC serial PRC & Sanyo both know each other from a very young age……..but in fact they did not meet so many times before their marriage….....& one more thing I want to say in this regard that real PRC was not the one we used to find in this serial……He was exceptionally brave but he lacks in foreseeing the future of his kingdom……Pls don't get hurt but A good king are supposed to act for the greater good even at the cost of his personal pleasure……

so very true.. thank you for your support saswatisett.. I agree with each word being written.. Although he was the greatest warrior in that era.. he wasn't the greatest of kings ..as saswatisett put appropriately.. "A good king are supposed to act for the greater good even at the cost of his personal pleasure……" again we intend no offense.. towards any one here... ..

Dear lakshmim_84

I respect your veiws and opinion ..but I don't go by jus Raso.. but many other scriptures and archaeological findings.. coz history can't be based one book..

In that era.. books were only written when a there be a great battle, like the one between PRC and Ghori, by the survivors of the war (the one who lost the war).. which lead these books to glorify their king and make his enemies sound like the greatest evil on the earth.. Its as simple as that.. and once you read these books with this fact in mind.. there will be no complications and confusions..

I really appreciate your post and effort.. please do respond..

I believe the story which Sagars r telling us is true. no matter how much it's exaggerated, it's fine since none of us can possibly know the reality. Historians don't believe PR raso and we don't believe historians completely so let's enjoy PRC ! But one point which worries me is that Prithvi's grave was found in Afghanistan which means that Raso version of PRC-Ghori was correct. And as far as Pri-Sayogita story goes, well I love it the way it's shown in PRC. Whether PRC eloped with Sanyogita or not, it's a fact that they both loved each other and their love story is still famous. Jaichand? well who cares whether he was good or bad 😳

Originally posted by: nehaneharika

so very true.. thank you for your support saswatisett.. I agree with each word being written.. Although he was the greatest warrior in that era.. he wasn't the greatest of kings ..as saswatisett put appropriately.. "A good king are supposed to act for the greater good even at the cost of his personal pleasure……" again we intend no offense.. towards any one here... ..

@ luv_khwaish

historians very much believe Raso.. but they also believe many other scriptures and archaeological findings ..which are as real as Raso.. we are not sayin Raso is based on false info.. merely saying that its exaggerated ..which takes it further away from the actual truth..
" it's fine since none of us can possibly know the reality " ..I agree but fact and finding giv a very good idea as to what actually happened.. Facts tell us that dinosaurs existed ..we weren't there then ..but facts & findings lead us to believe of such happenin... ..

All I ment to say earlier was one cannot paint tru picture with jus one piece of info ..say Raso.. one need to know all fact as well... ..

Originally posted by: luv_khwaish

I believe the story which Sagars r telling us is true. no matter how much it's exaggerated, it's fine since none of us can possibly know the reality. Historians don't believe PR raso and we don't believe historians completely so let's enjoy PRC ! But one point which worries me is that Prithvi's grave was found in Afghanistan which means that Raso version of PRC-Ghori was correct. And as far as Pri-Sayogita story goes, well I love it the way it's shown in PRC. Whether PRC eloped with Sanyogita or not, it's a fact that they both loved each other and their love story is still famous. Jaichand? well who cares whether he was good or bad 😳

Hey dear I am not saying that Sagars are showing all wrong😛……..All PRC fans including me always like this sagar version of PRC than the historical one😊……..becoz of the fact that the serial PRC consists of only the good qualities of real PRC not the loopholes in his character that existed in reality😊……The history may not be full proof but it always has some base & proofs on which it stands………I don't like to deny what history says😕……none can deny the insecurity & trouble the common people of PRC's kingdom faced after his demise……...But u know what in spite of knowing that I like to see the sagar version of PRC😉………I like to remember the great king by what he achieved in that short span of time👏……..his failures has immense historical effect no doubt………but none can change it so better to know his good qualities & learn from that😊……..

again guys pls dont condemn any king of that era based on our conception of good and bad. For us Ghori will always be bad because he attacked India as we know it today. But there was no india to speak of then and no Indian kings, so what he was really doing was behaving like an invader and king and taking whatever wealth necessary to sustain his kingdom. This does not mean that I admire him but he cant be called evil, because if he was evil so was every other king. from Ashoka who completely destroyed the kalinga empire killing everyone in it, to akbar whose numerous conquests must have killed and tortured plenty. Shivaji and the marathat were also not behind in plundering and looting

Originally posted by: shraddhs

again guys pls dont condemn any king of that era based on our conception of good and bad. For us Ghori will always be bad because he attacked India as we know it today. But there was no india to speak of then and no Indian kings, so what he was really doing was behaving like an invader and king and taking whatever wealth necessary to sustain his kingdom. This does not mean that I admire him but he cant be called evil, because if he was evil so was every other king. from Ashoka who completely destroyed the kalinga empire killing everyone in it, to akbar whose numerous conquests must have killed and tortured plenty. Shivaji and the marathat were also not behind in plundering and looting

shraddhs, v r not caling calling ghori evil bcos he invaded.. but it is his actions after he captured prithvi that makes him evil. We know kings invade other kingdoms.. even prithvi did it onhis digvijay.. however after ghori captured prithvi.. the first thing he n his soldiers did was to rape all the women in ajmer. He then forced the hindus to give up their religion n become muslims. Since the ajmer army was destroyed .. he destroyed the temples n people were just looking helplessly.

Next lets see what he did to prithvi.. prithvi did not lower his eyes to ghori.. so he ordered his soldiers to pierce his eyes with hot iron rods... So even after doing all these.... shouldn't we call him evil.

i would like to point out action of another king in India.. U might have of Tipu sultan... also known as Tiger of Mysore.. it is abt him... Tipu defeated a king(sorry forgot that guys name) n this king ran away to save himself leaving his family behind. When Tipu came to know abt this... he ordered his soldiers to protect that king's family n still treat her like a queen.

Humayu, the second mughal ruler.. He defeated a rajput kingdom (forgot that kingdom's name). The princess of that place(padmavathi) came in front of humayu n said that if he wants to enter the palace.. he has to cross her dead body... n humayu said tat he wouldn't fight with women n asked his troops to come back.. that is when padmavathi tied rakhi to him.

Ashoka killed many people in kalinga.. but it was not like he went around killing innocent people.. these people had joined the army to save their motherland n the were killed in the war. Also after ashoka captured kaliga... he did not force anyone to accept buddhism.

These r all marks of good kings.. so that even if they killed people in war.. n won many wars.. v don't call them evil