Beyond the speed…

5. Ashoka's policy of Dhamma and propagation of perverted non-violence

Mahatma Buddha expressed non-violence as a human sentiment and not as a policy of the individual or the state. He had propounded the policy of peace and non-violence for the individual. But the Dhamma victory established by Emperor Ashoka in Jambudvipa after his violent strategy and the horrific orgy of violence in the Kalinga war, was neither based on Sanatan Dharma nor on Buddhism. It was based only on the repentant self-blame of a violent ruler.

As a result, Sanatan Hindus began to deviate from their original culture, civilization, tradition, valor, valor and knowledge. From the point of view of the security of Hindus and Hindustan, they became so lazy, selfish and submissive that forgetting their weakness, they started memorizing only half incomplete sentences of Ahimsa Paramodharma. Even the original mantra of Dharmarakshati Rakshitah was forgotten and from this the decline of Hindus started. To understand this in more detail, go to the link below and read the article Mahatma Buddha's non-violence, not Emperor Ashoka's Dhamma policy, was the reason for the decline of India and Hindus

The second biggest side effect of Ashoka's policy of Dhamma was that the powerful united Hindus were divided into two different and opposing religious ideas which were also participants of political power. As a result, not only the united power of the Hindus was weakened, but the opposing power was also born in the form of Buddhist states, which weakened the "Bharatvarsha". This is the reason why it proved to be extremely fatal for the Hindus ruling outside the border of India, because there the Hindu, Buddhist state and people proved completely incapable of resisting the attack of violent Christian, Islam and they were easily killed by them. and the Hindu and Buddhist kingdoms were Islamized.

6. Lack of mobilization among Hindus, Buddhists against Muslim invaders

The lack of mutual cohesion and organization between the Hindu and Buddhist states against the Muslim invaders was also the reason for the defeat of the Indians. The Hindu and Buddhist states of India could not unite even against foreign Muslim invaders. The early Hindu kings like Raghuvanshi Sisodia and Gurjar Pratiharas unitedly faced the Muslim invaders and forced them to run away after getting rid of their sixes, but the later Hindu states did not do this and even if they tried, there was lack of organization and leadership due to which The Indians were defeated even after reaching the mouth of victory. Let us understand this with two examples.

The defeat of Anandapala of the Hindushahi dynasty

After Raja Jaipal of the Hindushahi dynasty of Gandhar, his son Anandapala fought a terrible struggle with the Islamic narcissist Mohammad Ghaznavi. The armies of Delhi, Ajmer, Kannauj, Kalinjar, Ujjain, Gwalior also participated in his struggle. The combined army rescued the sixes of Ghaznavi's forces. Muslim soldiers were being cut like carrots and radishes, the Muslim army was retreating fast, Ghaznavi seemed sure of his defeat, only then misfortune played the game and the dice turned.

A gunpowder hit one of the temples of Anandpal's elephant and the elephant started running backwards with Anandpal. The generals of other kings felt that Anandpal was running away from the war, so they also started running. Reaching the gates of victory, the combined army was foolishly defeated and Anandapala had to make a humiliating treaty. Due to the insult of the treaty, Anandpal died within a few days.

If there had been mutual reconciliation among the Hindu states and they had succeeded in forming a strong organization against the invader Mohammad Ghaznavi, then even after reaching the verge of victory, even if the army chief actually ran away from the war, there would be no effect on the war because then the other leadership Would have got ready immediately and would have won the war successfully. But here various states participated not as an organization but only as an ally of Anandapala, which had nothing to do with Anandapala's victory and defeat. It was also possible that military aid was merely an indemnity-based cooperation.

Buddhist state did not support Hindus against Muslims

Secondly, for the aid of Anandapala, the distant states of India had sent military aid, but the neighboring Buddhist states of Swat, Bajur and Kafiristan did not help. After the defeat of Anandpal, it became easy for Ghaznavi to attack those states. He attacked those three Buddhist kingdoms and occupied them without any major struggle. The Buddhist kings there were either killed or became Muslims along with the Buddhist subjects. Peace-loving, non-violent Buddhist women were forced to create violent, bloodthirsty jihadis.

Marathas defeated in the third battle of Panipat

Similarly, when Mohammad Abdali attacked Bharatvarsha in 1761, the Marathas alone fought them and remained in the fields. If the Rajputs had helped them, then the combined powers of both would have become so much that they were able to kill Mohammad Abdali even by entering Afghanistan from across Sindh. We must not forget that the defeat of the Marathas left India to write yet another story of destruction at the hands of the British after the Muslim invaders.

If the Marathas had not lost in Panipat, today India would have been a united Hindu Rashtra

It is known that in the eighteenth century, the Maratha power had become so strong that they almost destroyed the Mughals. Apart from the Nizam of Hyderabad, there was no other Muslim power left at that time and it was nothing in front of the Marathas. If the Marathas had not been defeated in Panipat, the British would never have been able to capture India. The Hindus were close to freeing India from Muslim rule with their own strength and would soon have succeeded. And then India would have been a Hindu nation again, the picture of Bharatvarsh would have been golden. India would not have been torn, dilapidated and ravaged like today.

7. The decay of the concept of India Nation

Another biggest weakness of the medieval Indian states was the lack of the concept of the nation of India. Vedic and Puranic Bharatvarsha was extended at least up to the Kaspiyan Sea and then only Vedic culture was prevalent, so there was no problem. The disintegration and decline of the kingdoms of Vedic culture began after the Mahabharata war in 3138 AD. After which, under the leadership of Chanakya and Chandragupta Maurya, India was established as a nation for the second time by reorganizing the Hindu and Hindu states from Bahlik region (Balkh) to Tamralipti and Kamrup.

For the third time after the re-fragmentation of Bharata Rashtra as a result of Ashoka's foolish Dhamma policy and perverted non-violence, Vikramaditya, the Chakravarti emperor of India, succeeded in organizing India as a Hindu nation from Kamrup to Arbasthan.

Bharatvarsha could not be seen as a great Hindu nation

But in the later Hindu states and Hindu kings, there is a lack of vision which is visible in the nationalist thinking and actions of Chanakya, Chandragupta Maurya and Vikramaditya. One, the later Hindu states began to wage a protective war, then the insight that medieval Hindu states had to see and understand India as a great Hindu nation seems to have been lost.

The result was that when the Arab and Turkish invaders attacked the border Hindu states such as Sindh and Kabul, the inner Hindu states remained restless thinking that it was a case of attack on their states. The result was that the Hindu states went from modern Afghanistan to Pakistan and India to Bangladesh one by one defeated by the Muslim invaders and Islamization of India continued.

Lack of nationalist thinking in Hindu states

The second problem of India was the mutual fight between the Hindu states. There is no doubt that the Rajputs were fiercely brave and they fought the Muslim invaders fiercely and got rid of their sixes. But apart from losing due to the above reasons, they had another drawback and that was the lack of nationalist thinking. The various Hindu states had lost the ability to see India as a nation. If they had seen India as a nation, they might have fought with each other because of ego or political reasons, but when it came to the security of their nation, religion and society from foreign invaders, they would fight unitedly with the invaders. But this did not happen and today the result is in front of everyone.

Along with the states, the lack of nationalist thinking is clearly visible in the people of the state. BC The people of the Indian states, whenever there was a crisis on the state, forgetting everything and leaving them united against the invaders and united with the weapons kept in the houses, they used to crowd themselves with the invaders or fought with the invaders under the leadership of the state-nation army.

In medieval India, the responsibility of the security of the state and the nation was entirely on the soldiers of the state and the state and the general public does not appear to participate in the war against the invaders. The result was that the states were mostly defeated in the absence of full cooperation of the people and on the defeat of the state, the people of the state were also easily destroyed by the invaders.

cooperation of invaders against their own nation, religion and society

Not only this, the more unfortunate thing happened that some Jaichands also took the help of foreign and external invaders for the destruction of their own nation, religion and society and also supported them. The result was that with the cooperation of the Jaichands, the Muslim invaders destroyed the targeted state, religion and society, but they were also easily successful in eliminating the Jaichands who helped them.

The result was that the invading Muslim rule lay in India, which ended India's civilization, culture, religion, society, happiness, peace, prosperity, development, education, knowledge, science, philosophy, and ended India's continuous violence, tyranny, exploitation and Stuck in the shackles of slavery, even after the creation of two additional Muslim nations by partitioning India in 1947, India has not been free from the curse till date.

The above mistakes need to be seriously considered

Now Hindus will have to think why this happened and what will be the future of this broken little left India. To get answers to these questions, one has to consider the historical mistakes made above and rectify them. Only then will we be able to safely save this tiny house left for a hundred crore Hindus. And why only Hindus? All the people who are supporters of secular India will have to consider the above historical mistakes and rectify them and make further strategy, only then they will be able to keep this small India safe and secular for people of all religions or else it is also inevitable to become a religious nation.

I request all the Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jain nationalists, patriots and supporters of humanity in the country to make such a strategy keeping an eye on the above mentioned mistakes and ensure its publicity so that this little left India Hindus, To remain safe land for all time for Buddhists, Jains and Sikhs and above all for all people. Somewhere the coming generations should not read only in books that Hindu Buddhist people once lived in India as we read today that in ancient times there was Vedic religion in Central Asia, in Arbasthan, Iraq also Hindus, Buddhists lived, a few centuries ago Afghanistan and until a few decades ago Pakistan was the home of Hindus and Buddhists etc.