Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 155

Thread: Let us Discuss What is History

  1. #21
    A good example of distortion of facts are NCERT history books. In the Class VI History book titled “Our Pasts”, I find many misleading facts which are taught to our young generation:

    http://ncert.nic.in/NCERTS/textbook/...tm?fess1=12-12

    QUOTE
    Page 4 :
    Names of the land
    Two of the words we often use for our country are India and Bharat. The word India comes from the Indus, called Sindhu in Sanskrit. Find Iran and Greece in your atlas. The Iranians and the Greeks who came through the northwest about 2500 years ago and were familiar with the Indus, called it the Hindos or the Indos, and the land to the east of the river was called India. The name Bharata was used for a group of people who lived in the northwest, and who are mentioned in the Rigveda, the earliest composition in Sanskrit (dated to about 3500 years ago). Later it was used for the country.
    UNQUOTE

    MY COMMENTS: Bharata, as we all know, is named after King Bharat. Rigveda is known to be the oldest book of the world. The writer of this books says that it was written just 3500 year ago ! Mahabharata war was fought 5100 year ago and Rigveda was written much before Mahabharata. Any learned Indian scholar can prove this.


    QUOTE
    Page 54:

    The ashvamedha or horse sacrifice was one such ritual. A horse was let loose to wander freely and it was guarded by the raja’s men. If the horse wandered into the kingdoms of other rajas and they stopped it, they had to fight. If they allowed the horse to pass, it meant that they accepted that the raja who wanted to perform the sacrifice was stronger than them. These rajas were then invited to the sacrifice, which was performed by specially trained priests, who were rewarded with gifts. The raja who organised the sacrifice was recognised as being very powerful, and all those who came brought gifts for him.
    UNQUOTE

    MY COMMENTS - The author translates the theme "Ashvamedha Yajna" as "sacrificing the horse to the altar of holy fire of Yajna". Elsewhere, in some other such books, the word "Gomedha" has been translated as "sacrificing a cow to the holy fire of Yajna". Sanskrit term 'medha' (मेध) does not mean "killing" in Vedic Sanskrit. We all know what is meant by Ashvamedha Yajna.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Our Pasts.jpg 
Views:	12 
Size:	41.6 KB 
ID:	14042
    तमसो मा ज्योतिर्गमय

  2. The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to dndeswal For This Useful Post:

    Arvindc (February 28th, 2012), bazardparveen (February 28th, 2012), deependra (February 28th, 2012), deshi-jat (February 28th, 2012), DrRajpalSingh (February 28th, 2012), Fateh (February 28th, 2012), JSRana (February 28th, 2012), Moar (February 28th, 2012), satyenderdeswal (June 4th, 2012), ssgoyat (March 1st, 2012), Sure (February 28th, 2012), vijay (February 28th, 2012)

  3. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRajpalSingh View Post
    Dear Kharab Sahib,

    I welcome your comments but I could not understand fully what do you want to convey: "Dr sahab how about DS solution means your views on the subject please."

    Please further throw some light and oblige.
    Dr sahab, please note the spelling of my gotra is kharb not kharab.
    I wanted your views on the subject, nothing else, In defence services, person who teaches in the class during training, is called directing staff and generally his views are taken finally correct solution to the problem.

  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Fateh For This Useful Post:

    Sure (February 28th, 2012)

  5. #23
    [QUOTE=DrRajpalSingh;298572]Dear Friend,

    Very good point of view.

    Kindly quote distortions to substantiate your hypothesis to prove that it did not haappen as it is presented.

    Dr sahab, It is well known fact that no historical event is put up on paper or some other material without considerable influence of the writer and the the authority concern and not only that, history is burnt/destryed and rewritten with change of ruling power, Dear friend what to talk about distortions, even distortions are distorted many times so there is no point of giving examples I consider our entire history available presently, is untrue, Even you compare a perticular event in old books and new books, you will find many changes and confusion, Brother, it is not understood as to how and why you considered my views as hypothesis, I am really keen to know the reasons for calling my views as hypothesis, If you donot consider me as capable/qualified to share my views on history in that case friend, you shouldnot have asked all of us to express our views. Such utterences/expressions/remarks, strengthen my views that people consider faujis & farmers, totally uneducated irrespective of their qualification/capability/experience etc. However, you being an educated and experienced person and being farmer, atlist you shouldnot have such impression about us.

    regards

  6. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Fateh For This Useful Post:

    DrRajpalSingh (February 28th, 2012), satyenderdeswal (June 4th, 2012), Sure (February 28th, 2012)

  7. #24
    Mere hisaab se aisi baat nahi hai Sir....Rajpal sir toh sabhi ko apni baat prove/elaborate karne ko keh rahe hain..sirf aapko nahi...please don't take it otherwise....we all respect you and your views....
    [QUOTE=Fateh;298601]
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRajpalSingh View Post
    Dear Friend,

    Very good point of view.

    Kindly quote distortions to substantiate your hypothesis to prove that it did not haappen as it is presented.

    Dr sahab, It is well known fact that no historical event is put up on paper or some other material without considerable influence of the writer and the the authority concern and not only that, history is burnt/destryed and rewritten with change of ruling power, Dear friend what to talk about distortions, even distortions are distorted many times so there is no point of giving examples I consider our entire history available presently, is untrue, Even you compare a perticular event in old books and new books, you will find many changes and confusion, Brother, it is not understood as to how and why you considered my views as hypothesis, I am really keen to know the reasons for calling my views as hypothesis, If you donot consider me as capable/qualified to share my views on history in that case friend, you shouldnot have asked all of us to express our views. Such utterences/expressions/remarks, strengthen my views that people consider faujis & farmers, totally uneducated irrespective of their qualification/capability/experience etc. However, you being an educated and experienced person and being farmer, atlist you shouldnot have such impression about us.

    regards

  8. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRajpalSingh View Post
    Dear Dahiya Sahib,

    Please share specific examples of the facts distorted by the allegedly 'Bengali Brahmin Historians.' I bet you will be doing a great service to the nation by setting history in the true form as it happened.

    Hope to see you shortly on this thread through your valued comments and with regards.
    The first distorted fact about our history is the perception made by our history books that the Britishers established their rule in India, because the people were fed up with Indian rulers. The common people did not protest the overthrew of Indian rulers by the Britishers. This perception is true only with Bengal. The british rule was established in India through the Bengal province. The britisher fought the battle of Plassey 23 June 1757 to overthrough Siraj-ud-daulah. In fact, the cowardice of Bengali people was not repeated in other states. The history of Haryana suggests that british military had to fight in every village to take over their control. The people of Haryana fought hard and even the british soldiers armed with weapons were frightened to come to village alone. However, NCERT history books only carries the image of Bengal invasion. Further, our historians do not give the name or incidence suggesting the rule of Jats in the country. We are called “Kshtriyas”, however, I never read anywhere in my school books that any Jat ever ruled in the country. Our NCERT books only tells that the Jat people were goons residing around Delhi. Further take the case of “Tejo Mahalya” thread discussed at Jatland. Why nobody ever tried to find and establish the truth of Taj Mahal. Nobody discuss the contribution made by the Haryanavi people in freedom struggle except the instances of some congressi Brahmin and Baniyas. Further, who tells us the truth about the establishment of the Congress? Our history books regard the congress as an Indian political party engaged in freedom struggle. However, the truth is Congress was established by a british officer just to foil the freedom movement. Their idea was to make a group of rich and elite, but power hungry people of india and associate the feeling/struggle sentiment of people with them, so that instead of handling large masses, they had to just cajole a few greedy people by giving them false sense of respect and authority in the Govt.
    Where did our NCERT books any incidence of brutality inflicted by the Britishers/Muslims on our people? In fact our books laud the british raj for development work. If the incidence of the brutality is brought to the public, the people shall forget the name of Hitler. The Hitler was nothing in cruelty in comparison to the Britishers/Mougals. Our NCERT books defame the Hitler by giving the incidence of cruelty with pictures, why do not it give the same treatment to the Britisher?
    What was Khilafat Movement? Our NCERT tells that Khilafat movement (1919–1924) was a freedom struggle by Muslims in British India. However, the reality is that it was a khalifa movement. The muslims tried to influence the British government to protect the Ottoman Empire during the aftermath of World War I by this movement. The Ottoman empire was governed by the Khalifa, however the britishers partitioned the empire and several new independent muslims states emerged. The independent muslim states were quite happy with the partition. However, the Indian muslim were against it, so they protested. And what was their manner of protest. Thousand of Hindus were beaten to death, cut down to pieces, women were raped and torn off by the muslims. The muslims were protesting against the britishers by making atrocities against the Hindus. Why our history books do not show this ugly realty to us? Who was Mr. Nehru? Where did he come from? What was his surname? What was his source of wealth? Nobody answered.

    In fact, there are so many facts concealed by the Govt, giving a totally different picture of our history, then representing any reality.

  9. The Following 11 Users Say Thank You to dahiyavijay7 For This Useful Post:

    dndeswal (February 28th, 2012), JSRana (February 28th, 2012), mandeep333 (June 3rd, 2012), mpaweria (February 28th, 2012), prateekdhaka (February 28th, 2013), ravinderjeet (February 28th, 2012), satyenderdeswal (June 4th, 2012), ssgoyat (March 1st, 2012), Sure (February 28th, 2012), vijay (February 28th, 2012), vikda (February 28th, 2012)

  10. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by dahiyavijay7 View Post
    The first distorted fact about our history is the perception made by our history books that the Britishers established their rule in India, because the people were fed up with Indian rulers. The common people did not protest the overthrew of Indian rulers by the Britishers. This perception is true only with Bengal. The british rule was established in India through the Bengal province. The britisher fought the battle of Plassey 23 June 1757 to overthrough Siraj-ud-daulah. In fact, the cowardice of Bengali people was not repeated in other states. The history of Haryana suggests that british military had to fight in every village to take over their control. The people of Haryana fought hard and e
    What was Khilafat Movement? Our NCERT tells that Khilafat movement (1919–1924) was a freedom struggle by Muslims in British India. However, the reality is that it was a khalifa movement. The muslims tried to influence the British government to protect the Ottoman Empire during the aftermath of World War I by this movement. The Ottoman empire was governed by the Khalifa, however the britishers partitioned the empire and several new independent muslims states emerged. The independent muslim states were quite happy with the partition. However, the Indian muslim were against it, so they protested. And what was their manner of protest. Thousand of Hindus were beaten to death, cut down to pieces, women were raped and torn off by the muslims. The muslims were protesting against the britishers by making atrocities against the Hindus. Why our history books do not show this ugly realty to us? Who was Mr. Nehru? Where did he come from? What was his surname? What was his source of wealth? Nobody answered.

    In fact, there are so many facts concealed by the Govt, giving a totally different picture of our history, then representing any reality.
    विजेंदर ,आप की इस डाक (पोस्ट) के लिए एक हजार "लाइक्स "|
    :rockwhen you found a key to success,some ideot change the lock,*******BREAK THE DOOR.
    हक़ मांगने से नहीं मिलता , छिना जाता हे |
    अहिंसा कमजोरों का हथियार हे |
    पगड़ी संभाल जट्टा |
    मौत नु आंगालियाँ पे नचांदे , ते आपां जाट कुहांदे |

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ravinderjeet For This Useful Post:

    ssgoyat (March 1st, 2012), Sure (February 28th, 2012)

  12. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRajpalSingh View Post
    Dear friend,

    very interesting issues have been raised by you regarding the uses of history but Dr. S Swamy's talk is not history but contemporary commentary on the issues involved in politics. Therefore it is suggested that after the storm is over on the contemporary issues, events and personalities and all records involved in all this gamut are thrown open, then only they could be analysed and put to use in writing the historical account. Till then, it cannot be called history.

    Regards
    Fact will not be kept as it is, So called analysed and put to use in writing is nothing but distortion with facts in the interest of historians or govt. These will be interpreted to give view what exactly these people want. Historians don’t want to understand the view of people they just want to superimpose their own views.
    Don't judge each day by the harvest you reap, but by the seeds you plant.
    Everyone in Our life is going to hurt us, sooner or later. But we have to decide. what's more important? The Pain Or The Person.

  13. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Sure For This Useful Post:

    DrRajpalSingh (February 28th, 2012), Fateh (February 29th, 2012)

  14. #28

    I admire and respect Dr. Rajpal Singh and all his contributions to JL. Everyone is not in position to elobrate everything, but this does not mean that person don’t have their own views to put in a social debate, another thing about proving, this made almost impossible and distorted with such an extent by rulers and historians by disproving things which were not in their interest. So just take their abusive presentation with presentable words. Dr Rajpal Singh is here at such a respectable age that I don’t think he needs some explanation to understand the post. 99% of population in history were not able to read and write, so there is no written views of them, that dosen't mean they are not existing and those should not be acounted for and only what is written should be acounted with the presentation and distorted facts put by the rulers.
    Last edited by Sure; February 28th, 2012 at 03:56 PM.
    Don't judge each day by the harvest you reap, but by the seeds you plant.
    Everyone in Our life is going to hurt us, sooner or later. But we have to decide. what's more important? The Pain Or The Person.

  15. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Sure For This Useful Post:

    DrRajpalSingh (February 28th, 2012), Fateh (February 29th, 2012)

  16. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Sure View Post
    Fact will not be kept as it is, So called analysed and put to use in writing is nothing but distortion with facts in the interest of historians or govt. These will be interpreted to give view what exactly these people want. Historians don’t want to understand the view of people they just want to superimpose their own views.
    Dear friend,

    It is good to learn about your views on history and historians.

    But to say that historians don't want to understand the view of people, is off the mark. They have to limit their observations on the available sources of History of the period they are dealing with.

    Further, analysis does not mean distortion but this exercise involves comparison and contrast with other facts available on the issue being researched. If one historian, suppose hides or distorts a fact, others will dig it out and use to make it objective history. So none can impose his or her history on others.

    Regards.

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to DrRajpalSingh For This Useful Post:

    Sure (February 28th, 2012)

  18. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by Fateh View Post
    Dr sahab, please note the spelling of my gotra is kharb not kharab.
    I wanted your views on the subject, nothing else, In defence services, person who teaches in the class during training, is called directing staff and generally his views are taken finally correct solution to the problem.
    Respected Kharb Sahib, the inadvertent spelling mistake is regretted and it will not be repeated in future as I shall remain more vigilant while posting my views.

  19. The Following User Says Thank You to DrRajpalSingh For This Useful Post:

    Sure (February 28th, 2012)

  20. #31
    [QUOTE=Fateh;298601]
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRajpalSingh View Post
    Dear Friend,

    Very good point of view.

    Kindly quote distortions to substantiate your hypothesis to prove that it did not haappen as it is presented.

    Dr sahab, It is well known fact that no historical event is put up on paper or some other material without considerable influence of the writer and the the authority concern and not only that, history is burnt/destryed and rewritten with change of ruling power, Dear friend what to talk about distortions, even distortions are distorted many times so there is no point of giving examples I consider our entire history available presently, is untrue, Even you compare a perticular event in old books and new books, you will find many changes and confusion, Brother, it is not understood as to how and why you considered my views as hypothesis, I am really keen to know the reasons for calling my views as hypothesis, If you donot consider me as capable/qualified to share my views on history in that case friend, you shouldnot have asked all of us to express our views. Such utterences/expressions/remarks, strengthen my views that people consider faujis & farmers, totally uneducated irrespective of their qualification/capability/experience etc. However, you being an educated and experienced person and being farmer, atlist you shouldnot have such impression about us. regards
    My respected Friend,

    First let me clarify that the views expressed by me are my hypothesis i.e. that I am trying to test my view point on history. So long as they are not accepted or to say they are rejected, they will become anti-thesis of my views. Then, I will try to find new facts and present them anew before my antagonist to revise his hypothesis; or if I do not have new facts to refute his point view; then the views of both the persons will become a thesis.
    This is what I mean by saying the analysis of the sources or facts or data and this is the procedure to arrive at some acceptable conclusion on a specific issue.

    My valued friend, do not feel offended on minor difference of opinion on any topic. Further, by asking your goodself to point out specific cases of distortion I did not challenge your capacity to do so, but, my intention was to make the debate more lively.

    In earlier post under some other thread I had assured you and once again reiterate that I will be the last man to show disrespect to anyone least to the persons belonging to our defence services like you. I fail to understand what made you to suspect my integrity on the issue.

    Cheers and join the debate with happy mood, my honourable Sir.

    Regards,

  21. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to DrRajpalSingh For This Useful Post:

    Sure (February 28th, 2012), vikda (February 29th, 2012)

  22. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by dahiyavijay7 View Post
    The first distorted fact about our history is the perception made by our history books that the Britishers established their rule in India, because the people were fed up with Indian rulers. The common people did not protest the overthrew of Indian rulers by the Britishers. This perception is true only with Bengal. The british rule was established in India through the Bengal province. The britisher fought the battle of Plassey 23 June 1757 to overthrough Siraj-ud-daulah. In fact, the cowardice of Bengali people was not repeated in other states. The history of Haryana suggests that british military had to fight in every village to take over their control. The people of Haryana fought hard and even the british soldiers armed with weapons were frightened to come to village alone. However, NCERT history books only carries the image of Bengal invasion. Further, our historians do not give the name or incidence suggesting the rule of Jats in the country. We are called “Kshtriyas”, however, I never read anywhere in my school books that any Jat ever ruled in the country. Our NCERT books only tells that the Jat people were goons residing around Delhi. Further take the case of “Tejo Mahalya” thread discussed at Jatland. Why nobody ever tried to find and establish the truth of Taj Mahal. Nobody discuss the contribution made by the Haryanavi people in freedom struggle except the instances of some congressi Brahmin and Baniyas. Further, who tells us the truth about the establishment of the Congress? Our history books regard the congress as an Indian political party engaged in freedom struggle. However, the truth is Congress was established by a british officer just to foil the freedom movement. Their idea was to make a group of rich and elite, but power hungry people of india and associate the feeling/struggle sentiment of people with them, so that instead of handling large masses, they had to just cajole a few greedy people by giving them false sense of respect and authority in the Govt.
    Where did our NCERT books any incidence of brutality inflicted by the Britishers/Muslims on our people? In fact our books laud the british raj for development work. If the incidence of the brutality is brought to the public, the people shall forget the name of Hitler. The Hitler was nothing in cruelty in comparison to the Britishers/Mougals. Our NCERT books defame the Hitler by giving the incidence of cruelty with pictures, why do not it give the same treatment to the Britisher?
    What was Khilafat Movement? Our NCERT tells that Khilafat movement (1919–1924) was a freedom struggle by Muslims in British India. However, the reality is that it was a khalifa movement. The muslims tried to influence the British government to protect the Ottoman Empire during the aftermath of World War I by this movement. The Ottoman empire was governed by the Khalifa, however the britishers partitioned the empire and several new independent muslims states emerged. The independent muslim states were quite happy with the partition. However, the Indian muslim were against it, so they protested. And what was their manner of protest. Thousand of Hindus were beaten to death, cut down to pieces, women were raped and torn off by the muslims. The muslims were protesting against the britishers by making atrocities against the Hindus. Why our history books do not show this ugly realty to us? Who was Mr. Nehru? Where did he come from? What was his surname? What was his source of wealth? Nobody answered.

    In fact, there are so many facts concealed by the Govt, giving a totally different picture of our history, then representing any reality.
    Another interesting point of view to be debated by many, welcome.

  23. #33
    [QUOTE=DrRajpalSingh;298628]
    Quote Originally Posted by Fateh View Post

    My respected Friend,

    First let me clarify that the views expressed by me are my hypothesis i.e. that I am trying to test my view point on history. So long as they are not accepted or to say they are rejected, they will become anti-thesis of my views. Then, I will try to find new facts and present them anew before my antagonist to revise his hypothesis; or if I do not have new facts to refute his point view; then the views of both the persons will become a thesis.
    This is what I mean by saying the analysis of the sources or facts or data and this is the procedure to arrive at some acceptable conclusion on a specific issue.

    My valued friend, do not feel offended on minor difference of opinion on any topic. Further, by asking your goodself to point out specific cases of distortion I did not challenge your capacity to do so, but, my intention was to make the debate more lively.

    In earlier post under some other thread I had assured you and once again reiterate that I will be the last man to show disrespect to anyone least to the persons belonging to our defence services like you. I fail to understand what made you to suspect my integrity on the issue.

    Cheers and join the debate with happy mood, my honourable Sir.

    Regards,
    Respected Friend, neither, the explaination was required nor it answers my quirry, Brother, neither you asked our views with supporting proof nor you gave any such example in your opening post for us to follow, also you have not even given your views which could have been answered by us and naming our views as hypothesis is not only insult of ours but show inner personalty of the person who uses such word, any way the matter of hypothesis is over, but what about your views on history,regards

  24. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Fateh For This Useful Post:

    DrRajpalSingh (February 29th, 2012), satyenderdeswal (June 4th, 2012)

  25. #34
    [QUOTE=Fateh;298696]
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRajpalSingh View Post


    Respected Friend, neither, the explaination was required nor it answers my quirry, Brother, neither you asked our views with supporting proof nor you gave any such example in your opening post for us to follow, also you have not even given your views which could have been answered by us and naming our views as hypothesis is not only insult of ours but show inner personalty of the person who uses such word, any way the matter of hypothesis is over, but what about your views on history,regards



    Dear Friend,
    According to thesaurus, Hypothesis is used synonymously to convey any or all the following words:
    Theory, Premise, Suggestion, Supposition, Proposition, Guess, assumption and so on.
    If I have used this word properly, then, it is requested that nobody should feel offended and, in turn, I need not be condemned for the crime which I have not committed.

    I have been sharing with you all what little I know about the subject of thread and will sum up the discussion in due course of time.


    Thanks

  26. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to DrRajpalSingh For This Useful Post:

    Fateh (March 1st, 2012), satyenderdeswal (June 4th, 2012), Sure (March 1st, 2012), vijay (March 2nd, 2012), vikda (March 1st, 2012)

  27. #35
    [QUOTE=DrRajpalSingh;298803]
    Quote Originally Posted by Fateh View Post




    Dear Friend,
    According to thesaurus, Hypothesis is used synonymously to convey any or all the following words:
    Theory, Premise, Suggestion, Supposition, Proposition, Guess, assumption and so on.
    If I have used this word properly, then, it is requested that nobody should feel offended and, in turn, I need not be condemned for the crime which I have not committed.

    I have been sharing with you all what little I know about the subject of thread and will sum up the discussion in due course of time.


    Thanks
    Dear Brother, it is ok, let us proceed on the discussion, I will waite for your summingup,regards

  28. The Following User Says Thank You to Fateh For This Useful Post:

    DrRajpalSingh (March 2nd, 2012)

  29. #36
    Many people have many perceptions about the meaning of history for me history is the experience gained by our forfathers which tells us to follow a specific path or to avoid certain path as we are much familiar with Jat culture so i am taking the example from our past , we people fought against Taimur which states that we are united for the national cause , We people always more or less respect other castes thats why we accept the refugees from the western India after division with due respect . Though anyone can easily see the imprints of caste system on us but still we respect other castes this teaches me in my history people give more value to repect and documented history is more or less distorted the biggest example is why Alexender the great left India unconquered after defeating Poru raj . For me history is basically a solution book for the problems . The history is better captured in the ancient books which are not written in order to praise some one or by some court writters . The authors like Chanakya , Panini , Mahatma Gandhi can give us correct picture of history becuase they dont have any self praising goals but again the ways to present a specific incident depends from person to person so in the end i can only sum up my words by saying that one must have some analytical skills in order to get maximum out of history .

  30. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to SumitJattan For This Useful Post:

    DrRajpalSingh (March 2nd, 2012), Fateh (March 2nd, 2012), JSRana (March 2nd, 2012), satyenderdeswal (June 4th, 2012), Sure (March 2nd, 2012)

  31. #37
    Friend,

    I agree with your summing up: "in the end i can only sum up my words by saying that one must have some analytical skills in order to get maximum out of history." It would be right thing for anyone interested in history to go deeper and deeper in the subject of his choice for deriving inferences from history. History teaches us to learn from the mistakes made in past so as we can improve upon them in the present and make our future bright. It is also said that history repeats itself but always in different way. So one must remain cautious while learning from historical events.

    Thanks.

  32. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to DrRajpalSingh For This Useful Post:

    lrburdak (March 2nd, 2012), SumitJattan (March 3rd, 2012), Sure (March 8th, 2012)

  33. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by DrRajpalSingh View Post
    Friend,

    I agree with your summing up: "in the end i can only sum up my words by saying that one must have some analytical skills in order to get maximum out of history." It would be right thing for anyone interested in history to go deeper and deeper in the subject of his choice for deriving inferences from history. History teaches us to learn from the mistakes made in past so as we can improve upon them in the present and make our future bright. It is also said that history repeats itself but always in different way. So one must remain cautious while learning from historical events.

    Thanks.
    Sir,

    You are right, but what one takes from it is decided by the way is it presented to us.

    Regards,
    -- Freedom is not worth having if it does not include the freedom to make mistakes.
    -- When you talk, you are only repeating what you already know. But if you listen, you may learn something new.

  34. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Prikshit For This Useful Post:

    DrRajpalSingh (March 2nd, 2012), mpaweria (March 3rd, 2012)

  35. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by SumitJattan View Post
    Many people have many perceptions about the meaning of history for me history is the experience gained by our forfathers which tells us to follow a specific path or to avoid certain path as we are much familiar with Jat culture so i am taking the example from our past , we people fought against Taimur which states that we are united for the national cause , We people always more or less respect other castes thats why we accept the refugees from the western India after division with due respect . Though anyone can easily see the imprints of caste system on us but still we respect other castes this teaches me in my history people give more value to repect and documented history is more or less distorted the biggest example is why Alexender the great left India unconquered after defeating Poru raj . For me history is basically a solution book for the problems . The history is better captured in the ancient books which are not written in order to praise some one or by some court writters . The authors like Chanakya , Panini , Mahatma Gandhi can give us correct picture of history becuase they dont have any self praising goals but again the ways to present a specific incident depends from person to person so in the end i can only sum up my words by saying that one must have some analytical skills in order to get maximum out of history .
    But these days it is presented in a different manner to create chaos and disharmony. Now it is up to the individual to filter out the good.
    -- Freedom is not worth having if it does not include the freedom to make mistakes.
    -- When you talk, you are only repeating what you already know. But if you listen, you may learn something new.

  36. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Prikshit For This Useful Post:

    DrRajpalSingh (March 2nd, 2012), mpaweria (March 3rd, 2012), satyenderdeswal (June 4th, 2012), SumitJattan (March 3rd, 2012)

  37. #40
    Friend, You are right that some 'Historical events' are sometimes presented in twisted form by some people to suit their partisan views. So due attention must be paid to assess/evaluate these writings before accepting them as historical facts.

  38. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to DrRajpalSingh For This Useful Post:

    Sure (March 8th, 2012)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •