Entertainment

Why Sheikh Abdullah was the “lion”?

Lions tend to terrorize the forest by their overwhelming power. By that logic, if Sheikh Abdullah is or was a lion, are the NC propagandists comparing Sheikh with a wild animal whose only errand was to hunt for his needs and desires?

Before jumping to any conclusions about Sheikh Abdullah and issuing fatwas ; One must understand the language of those who term S.M Abdullah as the lion of Cashmere. They are in many- NC workers to old folks – who have irritated us with their half researched knowledge and ignorance that we came to the conclusion that you can’t win an argument with an ignorant lot. Let’s not sink into history or the events that unfolded during 1932 or 1939 or post 1947.

Allow me the liberty to shed light on a simple word. Yes, You heard that right. “LION”. Contrary to  what people believe in the vale of Cashmere, I personally agree to the fact that Sheikh Abdullah was a lion. I will give my explanation for comparing him to a lion and put things in perspective. Lion is a horrifying wild animal who according to story tellers rules the forest with his iron fist. His roars send shivers down the spine of every being of the forest. He is not found in dense forests but grasslands or less dense forests and is usually active during the night.

He hunts, tears living flesh into shreds and keeps a strong grip in the forest. Where the pride lingers, no one dares to go . By now you must’ve gotten an idea as what sort of a beast Lion is. Of course, you can accept its existence but to fall in love with an animal who would often turn to its own kind in pursuit to satisfy its greed is hard. For ages lions have been glamourized and remained synonymous with pride and bravery while most people ignore the fact that this beast pounces on its own blood to secure his greed.  Coming back to S.M Abdullah, who is branded as the “Lion of Kashmir”. The title itself is laughable and absurd but surely fitting to him.

Given the record of his political ambitions and draconian ways to keep his power, at the same time supressing the dissent and desires of a hapless population who had trusted in him, he surely used his firm grip to keep his power even at the cost of segregation from his own nation. His betrayal is synonymous with that of a lion who in the pursuit of its desire attacks its own blood in order to acquire the flesh.

Lions tend to terrorize the forest by their overwhelming power. By that logic, if Sheikh Abdullah is or was a lion, are the NC propagandists comparing Sheikh with a wild animal whose only errand was to hunt for his needs and desires?

Leave the discussion of whether he was fitting to be called a lion and dive deep into the Question ; What makes a lion?.  Even by the meaning of a naïve person, Lion is a wild animal who does not have any conscience. He does not care about humanely sentiments and adheres to no such moral code, he is cold blooded and all his charge is to fill his desires and needs. One can pretty much understand the nature of a human when he is compared to wild beasts. No matter how glorifying it may seem to be called a lion, it’s a comparison of human to a beast and if you boast it, then god save you. Those who prefix this word often with the opportunist Sheikh Abdullah should actually understand the language and comparison they’re making. They are comparing their beloved leader to a terrifying wild animal who is hated by all and loved by none. That’s the reality and no matter how small it seems, even in their demagoguery and trickery,  the truth stands out from the lies. It remains to sea as for how long S.M Abdullah is compared to a wild beast by his own kin , let alone natives of Cashmere, because for them he remains a “Hell dweller”. For better or worse, may almighty forgive what he did to the glorious nation of Cashmere.

Show More

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button
Close