Comments on: Picture of the Day: Reflecting on Lahore http://pakistaniat.com/2006/07/05/picture-of-the-day-reflecting-on-lahore/ Pakistan. Pakistani. Pakistaniat. Mon, 21 May 2012 01:27:57 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Watan Aziz http://pakistaniat.com/2006/07/05/picture-of-the-day-reflecting-on-lahore/comment-page-3/#comment-205695 Watan Aziz Sun, 26 Sep 2010 09:19:55 +0000 http://pakistaniat.com/2006/07/05/picture-of-the-day-reflecting-on-lahore/#comment-205695 On the matter of historical facts, should this be written as <i>Lahore’s greatest Sikh ruler</i> or the greatest Sikh ruler of Lahore? Ranjit Singh hailed from Gujranwala. On the matter of historical facts, should this be written as Lahore’s greatest Sikh ruler or the greatest Sikh ruler of Lahore?

Ranjit Singh hailed from Gujranwala.

]]> By: Shameel Baloch http://pakistaniat.com/2006/07/05/picture-of-the-day-reflecting-on-lahore/comment-page-2/#comment-205694 Shameel Baloch Sun, 26 Sep 2010 08:50:16 +0000 http://pakistaniat.com/2006/07/05/picture-of-the-day-reflecting-on-lahore/#comment-205694 It is great injustice to compare the Badshahi Mosque with the Samadhi of Ranjit Singh. From a pure architectural standpoint, by size and beauty alone, Ranjit Singh's tiny Samadhi does not stand in front of the Badshahi Mosque. Secondly, from an architectural context alone, it is a crime to construct a building, which is out of context, next to a monument of architectural and historical significance. Ranjit Singh's Samadhi is an encroachment built bang in the centre of the Roshnai gate, thereby destroying the entrance to Hazuri Bagh. Could it not have been built anywhere else in Lahore. It's like constructing a building on the front gate of the Louvre or the Taj Mahal. Also, the damage to Lahore's Mughal architecture by the Sikhs is a historical fact even recognized by the British. It was the British who first noted that the inlaid Jewels of Lahore Fort were taken away, indeed, stolen by the Sikhs and placed in the Golden Temple in Amritsar. It is also a fact that Ranjit Singh's Army used the courtyard of the Badshahi Mosque as stables for its horses and placed canons on the four minarets of the Mosque from which they used to do canon practice on the Lahore Fort. It was Ranjit Singh who dismantled the Baradari from nearby Jehangir's Tomb in Shahdara (cracking it in the process) and placing it in the middle of Hazuri Bagh where he used to hold his court. Facts are facts. It is great injustice to compare the Badshahi Mosque with the Samadhi of Ranjit Singh. From a pure architectural standpoint, by size and beauty alone, Ranjit Singh’s tiny Samadhi does not stand in front of the Badshahi Mosque. Secondly, from an architectural context alone, it is a crime to construct a building, which is out of context, next to a monument of architectural and historical significance. Ranjit Singh’s Samadhi is an encroachment built bang in the centre of the Roshnai gate, thereby destroying the entrance to Hazuri Bagh. Could it not have been built anywhere else in Lahore. It’s like constructing a building on the front gate of the Louvre or the Taj Mahal.

Also, the damage to Lahore’s Mughal architecture by the Sikhs is a historical fact even recognized by the British. It was the British who first noted that the inlaid Jewels of Lahore Fort were taken away, indeed, stolen by the Sikhs and placed in the Golden Temple in Amritsar. It is also a fact that Ranjit Singh’s Army used the courtyard of the Badshahi Mosque as stables for its horses and placed canons on the four minarets of the Mosque from which they used to do canon practice on the Lahore Fort. It was Ranjit Singh who dismantled the Baradari from nearby Jehangir’s Tomb in Shahdara (cracking it in the process) and placing it in the middle of Hazuri Bagh where he used to hold his court.

Facts are facts.

]]> By: Nayyar Hashmey http://pakistaniat.com/2006/07/05/picture-of-the-day-reflecting-on-lahore/comment-page-2/#comment-187739 Nayyar Hashmey Fri, 12 Jun 2009 12:41:44 +0000 http://pakistaniat.com/2006/07/05/picture-of-the-day-reflecting-on-lahore/#comment-187739 The comments entered by various readers of ATP are anti Ranjit Singh and I don't blame them. This is what we have been forced to read. Unfortunately most of us Pakistanis do not read much of history books and that too by different writers with different backgrounds. Unfortunately historians too have their own biases. The Muslims try to paint him as a despot who ruined the Muslim especially Mughal constructions in Lahore. The Sikhs believe he was an ideal Raja who had nothing wrong with him. Like any other being, he too had his positive as well as negative sides. But by and large he was a ruler who did justice to his subjects; irrespective of what religion they had. His foreign minister Fakir Syed Aziz-ud-din was a Muslim and he was the person who primarily contributed in framing of his foreign policy matters. His army generals were Sikhs, Hindus and Muslim too. I think barring the fact that he was a non Muslim, he is as much part of Lahore's magnificent past as the one under Muslim rulers was. Again its so unfortunate that we see every thing through a religion tinted lens. We are all proud Muslims and as proud Pakistanis we should equally take pride in what is our Pakistani heritage, be it the Muslim, the Hindu or the Sikh one. Nayyar Hashmey http://wondersofpakistan.wordpres.com/ The comments entered by various readers of ATP are anti Ranjit Singh and I don’t blame them. This is what we have been forced to read. Unfortunately most of us Pakistanis do not read much of history books and that too by different writers with different backgrounds. Unfortunately historians too have their own biases. The Muslims try to paint him as a despot who ruined the Muslim especially Mughal constructions in Lahore. The Sikhs believe he was an ideal Raja who had nothing wrong with him. Like any other being, he too had his positive as well as negative sides. But by and large he was a ruler who did justice to his subjects; irrespective of what religion they had.

His foreign minister Fakir Syed Aziz-ud-din was a Muslim and he was the person who primarily contributed in framing of his foreign policy matters. His army generals were Sikhs, Hindus and Muslim too. I think barring the fact that he was a non Muslim, he is as much part of Lahore’s magnificent past as the one under Muslim rulers was. Again its so unfortunate that we see every thing through a religion tinted lens. We are all proud Muslims and as proud Pakistanis we should equally take pride in what is our Pakistani heritage, be it the Muslim, the Hindu or the Sikh one.

Nayyar Hashmey
http://wondersofpakistan.wordpres.com/

]]>