I agree Chhatrapati Shivaji was Secular.
Early on, he built masjid, he employed Muslims, he gave grant to dargahs..
And then
He carried a Vishnu Murti for his coronation.
He demoted Qazis to juniormost officials
He ensured no Muslim was part of his Ministry
...
Early on, he built masjid, he employed Muslims, he gave grant to dargahs..
And then
He carried a Vishnu Murti for his coronation.
He demoted Qazis to juniormost officials
He ensured no Muslim was part of his Ministry
...
He took 700 Pathana from Bijapur, but...
Just a few years before he died, he asked his brother " Turki fauzet thev liyas Jai milto kaisa ?"
Just a few years before he died, he asked his brother " Turki fauzet thev liyas Jai milto kaisa ?"
Let's have consistency.
You cannot celebrate the Chhatrapati Shivaji who employed Nur Beg for 5 years, and ignore the Shivaji Maharaj who found no place for a Nur Beg for the next twenty.
You cannot celebrate the Chhatrapati Shivaji who employed Nur Beg for 5 years, and ignore the Shivaji Maharaj who found no place for a Nur Beg for the next twenty.
Also, what happens later in life gets precedence over what happens earlier.
So it should be with Chhatrapati Shivaji.
Strangely enough, the Qutub Shahi - Shivaji Maharaj alliance which happened in 1676 is never played up much .. wonder why.
So it should be with Chhatrapati Shivaji.
Strangely enough, the Qutub Shahi - Shivaji Maharaj alliance which happened in 1676 is never played up much .. wonder why.
The problem is not whether Chhatrapati Shivaji was Secular or not (this is point of debate which is very difficult to settle with the modern lens)
The problem lies in our contorted definition of Secularism itself (I tried to write appeasement but it autocorrected)
The problem lies in our contorted definition of Secularism itself (I tried to write appeasement but it autocorrected)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
