So there were motivated conversions besides forceful conversion. What are your views about the idea that many people converted to Islam in India due to social problems like caste system?
Why were Muslims enticing these people, huh? That falls under persecution too!
I have absolutely no qualms looking at a different POV that isn't painting Muslims invaders in a very flattering light, but the way you're coming across it appears as if everything was hunky dory until Muslims appeared and Hindu rulers' only fault was being weak. How can you so sure that your opinion and your sources may not have some inkling of bias in them? I am not saying that Muslim invaders didn't commit any atrocity, but things under their rule can't be as bad as their naysayers are claiming nor were they as exemplary as their cheerleaders would have us believe.
No like I already said, there were barbaric invasion before Islamic conquests as well. But they did not have a religious dimension to it. Do you have any examples of Zoroastrians, jews or Christians invading India and forcing conversions? Even the Greeks invaded and while they enriched our culture, they did not impose their gods on us. Do you deny my contention that India was an economic and educational superpower before the conquests. If u do I would like to hear how any why u think that.
I agree, but since the topic has veered to persecution of Hindus and others by Muslim rulers I wanted to stick to the topic. I dont deny that Muslims in India might have suffered against Muslim invaders from Central Asia but not as much as non-Muslims did.
Exactly. But again I don't agree that all Muslim ruler invaded for religious purposes as I mentioned about the most disliked Ghaznavi that he was behind looted wealth and not to spread Islam.
Exactly. But again I don't agree that all Muslim ruler invaded for religious purposes as I mentioned about the most disliked Ghaznavi that he was behind looted wealth and not to spread Islam.
Why were Muslims enticing these people, huh? That falls under persecution too!
In case of Khilji example as quoted by Ibn e Batoota its a motivated conversion and I'm not sure if its persecution in real sense or not. But again conversion of lower caste people to avoid discrimination under caste system can't be said persecution.
The backward castes of Hinduism suffered worst. Monarchs (belonging to backward castes) such as Khusrau Bhangi Khan, Hemchandra and Garha-Katanga were knocked off their throne and executed. Backward caste saints like Namadeva[SUP][1]](Persecution of Hindus - Wikipedia)[/SUP] were arrested, while women like Kanhopatra were forced to commit suicide. Ghisadis have an “Urdu” title.[SUP][2]](Persecution of Hindus - Wikipedia)[/SUP]
Prof. K.S. Lal, suggests a calculation in his book Growth of Muslim Population in Medieval India which estimates that between the years 1000 AD and 1500 AD the population of Hindus decreased by 80 million. Even those Hindus who converted to Islam were not immune from persecution, which was illustrated by the Muslim Caste System in India as established by Ziauddin al-Barani in the Fatawa-i Jahandari.[SUP][3]](Persecution of Hindus - Wikipedia)[/SUP] where they were regarded as “Ajlaf” caste and subjected to severe discrimination by the “Ashraf” castes.[SUP][4]](Persecution of Hindus - Wikipedia)[/SUP]
And no one has come up with any authentic and reliable historical documents. Sorry but Indo-Pak history is swearword. This thread is full of BS. Hindus have their own distorted version and Muslims have their own. No wonder why the partition took place!
That might have happened too, but the numbers would be much smaller than forced conversions.
How could you assert that the conversion to avoid social discrimination was smaller than the forced conversion? BTW what kind of tools were used for forceful conversion? Which dynasty witnessed bigger conversion?
And no one has come up with any authentic and reliable historical documents. Sorry but Indo-Pak history is swearword. This thread is full of BS. Hindus have their own distorted version and Muslims have their own. No wonder why the partition took place!
Ok hareem leave Indo-Pak history.
You mentioned that Judaism is most persecuted? Who persecuted them and what was the most difficult period for them?
How could you assert that the conversion to avoid social discrimination was smaller than the forced conversion? BTW what kind of tools were used for forceful conversion? Which dynasty witnessed bigger conversion?
History book (Indian as well as Western authors) are replete with stories of forced conversion. There is no mention of conversion motivated by "caste system". Pls share if you come across a source that details this kind of conversion.
If that was the case, then there would be no dalits or lower castes today, they would have all embraced Islam to escape from the dreaded caste system. Brahmins form only a miniscule percentage of the hindu population.
What about the destruction of Nalanda University ?
The Persian historian Minhaj-i-Siraj, in his chronicle the Tabaqat-I-Nasiri, reported that thousands of monks were burned alive and thousands beheaded as Khilji tried his best to uproot Buddhism and plant Islam by the sword[SUP][13]](Nalanda mahavihara - Wikipedia)[/SUP] the burning of the library continued for several months and “smoke from the burning manuscripts hung for days like a dark pall over the low hills.”[SUP][14]](Nalanda mahavihara - Wikipedia)
And no one has come up with any authentic and reliable historical documents. Sorry but Indo-Pak history is swearword. This thread is full of BS. Hindus have their own distorted version and Muslims have their own. No wonder why the partition took place!
Who is a realiable source in your opinion. We have links from the wikipedia and one poster also posted a link to a study that concluded that wikipedia was as factual as Britannica ? What more do you want ? Why don't you post non-biased links if you have any ?
I want to know which dynasty of Muslims in India was most determined to conversion? What about the role of Sufi Muslims and then inter-marriages between locals and invaders in spreading the population of Muslims in India.
I think kerala was not conquered area of Muslims, how it got Muslim population?
No like I already said, there were barbaric invasion before Islamic conquests as well. But they did not have a religious dimension to it. Do you have any examples of Zoroastrians, jews or** Christians **invading India and forcing conversions? Even the Greeks invaded and while they enriched our culture, they did not impose their gods on us. Do you deny my contention that India was an economic and educational superpower before the conquests. If u do I would like to hear how any why u think that.
Huh? Don't we always hear about Christian missionaries in India and their not so ulterior motives all the time? As for India being an economic and educational superpower prior to Muslims invading them, I have to be honest, I am not well read on this but I wouldn't be surprised if it's akin to modern day "India-shining" hyberbole.
In case of Khilji example as quoted by Ibn e Batoota its a motivated conversion and I'm not sure if its persecution in real sense or not. But again conversion of lower caste people to avoid discrimination under caste system can't be said persecution.
I was joking there :( See, for those who don't want to afford a single concession to the Muslim invaders, it doesn't matter whether someone converted to Islam out of their free will, they'll regard it as having Islam being imposed on them.
Again who converted more people? Ghaznavi or Data Ganj Bukhsh?
Whom do the people remember more Ghaznavi or Data Gani Buksh ? :D
I admit that Ghaznavi is infamous even in the south and a cult hero in Pakistan and I have to admit that I had no idea who Data Gani Buksh was till I looked him up now ? :D
Whom do the people remember more Ghaznavi or Data Gani Buksh ? :D
I admit that Ghaznavi is infamous even in the south and a cult hero in Pakistan and I have to admit that I had no idea who Data Gani Buksh was till I looked him up now ? :D
Ghaznavi remained in Lahore after his conquest. Today, Lahore is known as Data ki Nagri and there is no legacy of Ghaznavi in Lahore. :D