Looking Through Broken Glass: Rajput Victories In Indian History

[vsdoc]

Had you posted your source before the article , I wouldn't have wasted 20 min of my life reading this bilge. Post it in PDF. You'd be hailed a hero.

Ok, so you did not like the source.

But then buddy, we could never have a debate, if we start "disliking" the sources of points of view that do not find synergy with our own.

Anyways no biggie. This bamman rajput dalit boudh thing is your fight. For me its simply academic.

Cheers, Doc

 

[_Anonymous_]

Ok, so you did not like the source.

But then buddy, we could never have a debate, if we start "disliking" the sources of points of view that do not find synergy with our own.

Anyways no biggie. This bamman rajput dalit boudh thing is your fight. For me its simply academic.

Cheers, Doc

Had this been from the pen of Dr Ambedkar's , I'd have debated the matter . His followers have taken a leaf out of Marxist interpretations of Buddhism and apply that to their own interpretation of Buddhism apart from Indian history & religion creating what may well become a Dalit Marxist Buddhist interpretation of history . A highly contentious , exaggerated and times blatantly false interpretation of history & religion but always incendiary.

 

[vsdoc]

Had this been from the pen of Dr Ambedkar's , I'd have debated the matter . His followers have taken a leaf out of Marxist interpretations of Buddhism and apply that to their own interpretation of Buddhism apart from Indian history & religion creating what may well become a Dalit Marxist Buddhist interpretation of history . A highly contentious , exaggerated and times blatantly false interpretation of history & religion but always incendiary.

Ok, that is your opinion.

But really, questioning the source on a well researched and cross referenced paper is not really novel or unheard of.

Especially when factual rebuttals are hard to come by. I've seen it in academia too often to count.

No one takes author/agenda/ideology-rebuttals seriously.

Neither am I. Just saying ....

Cheers, Doc

 

[RATHORE]

Ok, that is your opinion.

But really, questioning the source on a well researched and cross referenced paper is not really novel or unheard of.

Especially when factual rebuttals are hard to come by. I've seen it in academia too often to count.

No one takes author/agenda/ideology-rebuttals seriously.

Neither am I. Just saying ....

Cheers, Doc

The movie "300" was a far more objective and accurate portrayal of history than this Dalit-Marxist-Buddhist bullshit. Take this garbage to your buddies on PDF - you'll be a shoo-in for the forum equivalent of the Nishaan-e-Pakistan.

 

[vsdoc]

The movie "300" was a far more objective and accurate portrayal of history than this Dalit-Marxist-Buddhist bullshit. Take this garbage to your buddies on PDF - you'll be a shoo-in for the forum equivalent of the Nishaan-e-Pakistan.

A Dalit is an Indian.

A Marxist is an Indian.

A Buddhist is an Indian.

What makes their views any less credible than yours or Anon's?

Cheers, Doc

 

[_Anonymous_]

A Dalit is an Indian.

A Marxist is an Indian.

A Buddhist is an Indian.

What makes their views any less credible than yours or Anon's?

Cheers, Doc

So are Hindu Supremacists , Islamic Supremacists & may I add Parsi Supremacists. That doesn't mean their BS doesn't smell as bad.

Add my version of the full moon to your signature. With a disclaimer , you can get away with anything out here . Otherwise people will carry the wrong impression.

 

[RATHORE]

A Dalit is an Indian.

A Marxist is an Indian.

A Buddhist is an Indian.

What makes their views any less credible than yours or Anon's?

Cheers, Doc

The well known ideological slant. The lack of objectivity, accuracy and integrity in their works and arguments. Their ideological affiliations and the company they keep. Their constant need to provoke and vilify anything "upper caste," or "Hindu;" and a tendency to espouse the most rabidly anti-Indian pov's and arguments and make common cause with Pakistanis, serving as their useful idiots and fifth columnists within India.

I am talking about this very leftist, JNU type combine that is found in alliance with Islamists among other groups, I have nothing against Dalits or Buddhists as individual groups.

 

[vsdoc]

So are Hindu Supremacists , Islamic Supremacists & may I add Parsi Supremacists. That doesn't mean their BS doesn't smell as bad.

Add my version of the full moon to your signature. With a disclaimer , you can get away with anything out here . Otherwise people will carry the wrong impression.

Are you admitting that you an Rathore are Hindu Supremacists?

Cheers, Doc

 

[_Anonymous_]

Are you admitting that you an Rathore are Hindu Supremacists?

Cheers, Doc

RW yes. For the time being . As to whether I'm a Hindu Supremacist like you're a confirmed Parsi Supremacist , please judge me on the content of my posts . I know I don't go about extolling the exploits of the Achaemenids or the Sassanids or how Iran and the surrounding areas will turn Zorastrians again but there'd be a difference between the neo converts and those followers of Zorastrianism like the Parsis or the equally miniscule community in Iran .

 

[vsdoc]

I have nothing against Dalits or Buddhists as individual groups.

Are you sure?

This is what you said -

"Dalit-Marxist-Buddhist bullshit"

You hyphenate the three of them together as if they do not even exist as separate entities with independent ideas and agendas, and place them in a single silo.

I could be wrong.

Cheers, Doc

 

[_Anonymous_]

Are you sure?

This is what you said -

"Dalit-Marxist-Buddhist bullshit"

You hyphenate the three of them together as if they do not even exist as separate entities with independent ideas and agendas, and place them in a single silo.

I could be wrong.

Cheers, Doc

That they do exist as separate entities does not mean that we do not have a hyphenated version of them with their own distinct ideology and agenda . Come up with better reasoning .

 

[vsdoc]

RW yes. For the time being . As to whether I'm a Hindu Supremacist like you're a confirmed Parsi Supremacist , please judge me on the content of my posts . I know I don't go about extolling the exploits of the Achaemenids or the Sassanids or how Iran and the surrounding areas will turn Zorastrians again but there'd be a difference between the neo converts and those followers of Zorastrianism like the Parsis or the equally miniscule community in Iran .

Of course you are a right wing Hindu man.

And what is a right wing Hindu if not a Hindu supremacist?

So it pained you that your Dalits and Boudhs (not yours, though Hindu supremacists do like to paint them and the Sikhs as umbrella "Dharmics" whatever that really means to both ....) have a voice and historical perspective of their own?

Why? Don't be intolerant man ....

Cheers, Doc

 

[RATHORE]

Are you sure?

This is what you said -

"Dalit-Marxist-Buddhist bullshit"

You hyphenate the three of them together as if they do not even exist as separate entities with independent ideas and agendas, and place them in a single silo.

I could be wrong.

Cheers, Doc

Absolutely, this is a very specific combine I was speaking about. And this is not the first time I have seen their attempt at revisionist anti-Hindu, anti-upper caste history.

Dalits as an individual group who don't subscribe to the aforementioned pov/ideology are fine by me, and Buddhists as an individual group who don't subscribe to the aforementioned pov/ideology are also fine by me. Marxists are a different matter because all of them nowadays - at least in India - seem to be ideological fifth columnists and anti-India.

 

[vsdoc]

Absolutely, this is a very specific combine I was speaking about. And this is not the first time I have seen their attempt at revisionist anti-Hindu, anti-upper caste history.

Dalits as an individual group who don't subscribe to the aforementioned pov/ideology are fine by me, and Buddhists as an individual group who don't subscribe to the aforementioned pov/ideology are also fine by me. Marxists are a different matter because all of them nowadays - at least in India - seem to be ideological fifth columnists and anti-India.

Bro what is wrong with you?

Who are you to say an Indian, any Indian, individual or group, is either fine with you or not?

That is your personal bias. What does it have to do with a well researched and cross referenced article - with dozens of references of foreign authors as well.

Now you will say that is the white man sticking it to you?

There is a put down to anybody by that manner of thinking. As I said, there can be no debate then, if you attack the author and not his points. Similar to a forum.

And bro, this is www.ambedkar.com

Are you also going to now villify the great man because he was a Dalit who converted and became a Boudh?

Is this not Brahmanical Hindu Supremacism?

Cheers, Doc

 

[Dagger]

Absolutely, this is a very specific combine I was speaking about. And this is not the first time I have seen their attempt at revisionist anti-Hindu, anti-upper caste history.

Dalits as an individual group who don't subscribe to the aforementioned pov/ideology are fine by me, and Buddhists as an individual group who don't subscribe to the aforementioned pov/ideology are also fine by me. Marxists are a different matter because all of them nowadays - at least in India - seem to be ideological fifth columnists and anti-India.

The doc is slowly morphing into an upgraded infojihadi.
Post commie propaganda and then go on to say don't attack the messenger. Most eager to fan hate against specific sections and people, while continuing to call those very ones hate mongers before he can be recognized as one.

 

[vsdoc]

infojihadi.

commie

You guys are exhibiting more than just the green shoots of a fascist state and mind-process now.

I wish you could get an unbiased non-Indian opinion.

Or take a shot of ketamine and look down at yourselves ....

Cheers, Doc

 

[RATHORE]

Bro what is wrong with you?

Who are you to say an Indian, any Indian, individual or group, is either fine with you or not?

That is your personal bias. What does it have to do with a well researched and cross referenced article - with dozens of references of foreign authors as well.

Now you will say that is the white man sticking it to you?

There is a put down to anybody by that manner of thinking. As I said, there can be no debate then, if you attack the author and not his points. Similar to a forum.

And bro, this is www.ambedkar.com

Are you also going to now villify the great man because he was a Dalit who converted and became a Boudh?

Is this not Brahmanical Hindu Supremacism?

Cheers, Doc

You're an enigma Doc. You talk about being against the Right wing because apparently we're intolerant and divisive and this and that, and yet you come here with this JNU style Dalit-Marxist-Buddhist combine revisionist history and that's not intolerant, bigoted or divisive?

The less said about the article and a lot of its sources the better; as for your point on white historians, I know better than to let Stephen Pollock/Audrey Truschke types teach me about my own history.

And no actually, I have massive respect for Dr. Ambedkar the man, his new age followers however, and the people who use his image and name for their political gains and agendas; I find them insufferable. I can also start a website full of the most incorrect, inaccurate, slanted, inane bullshit and call it www.mahatmagandhi.com. Would that automatically make it respectable?

Aur Brahminical Hindu Supremacism ki baat toh aap rehne hi de, this is starting to sound like a JNU classroom.

 

[_Anonymous_]

Of course you are a right wing Hindu man.

And what is a right wing Hindu if not a Hindu supremacist?

So it pained you that your Dalits and Boudhs (not yours, though Hindu supremacists do like to paint them and the Sikhs as umbrella "Dharmics" whatever that really means to both ....) have a voice and historical perspective of their own?

Why? Don't be intolerant man ....

Cheers, Doc

I seek and appreciate truth . Not individual or group's versions or agendas coloured with their own biases.

 

[Dagger]

You guys are exhibiting more than just the green shoots of a fascist state and mind-process now.

I wish you could get an unbiased non-Indian opinion.

Or take a shot of ketamine and look down at yourselves ....

Cheers, Doc

Well, I have to be on drugs to listen to appreciate you. I agree on that count.

Hilarious, yet another trait of the commie propagandist. Pinning others fascist, supremacist at the drop of a hat. Patting your own back as unbiased, logical. Pulling propaganda articles out and asking for debate. If inconvenient articles crop up, call them communal and hatemongering.Switch it up, Doc. Its too dull.

 

[BlackOpsIndia]

You forgot Raja Man Singh who was given mansab of 5000 highest in court of Akbar and only two people were able to reach that.


Beside him there were numerous able warriors that remained almost sovereign even during Mughal Kingdom. They were too brave to be defeated and everytime mughals tried that they ended up in continuous rebellion so they used treaty very often to avoid constant troubles.


You don't need to worry about those twitter trolls and their equally stupid teachers. Those dumb@$$ probably have never read a history book but fed alternative history of Madarsas as visible by their name. Anyone who read history in depth knowns the truth otherwise on social media people even defend rapists and liars daily.