Re: RSS on their Conversion Assignment!
Im sure there were people who were compelled to covert for one reason or another, but there were also people who choose to convert. Really it wasnt so simple as if they suddenly turned on a switch and were no longer Hindu. Here is what Richard Eaton has to say on the subject:
"Which is why you also don’t like the use of the word ‘conversions’ for this period? You say conversions suggest a pancake-like flip, which is not how Islam spread. What do you mean by that? "growth of Islam in Punjab, I came across a fascinating text on the Sial community. It traces their history from the 14th to the 19th century. If you look at the names of these people, you will find that the percentage of Arabic names increased gradually between the 14th and 19th centuries. In the early 14th century, they had no Arabic names. By the late 14th century, 5 percent had Arabic names. It’s not until the late 19th century that 100 percent had Arabic names. So, the identification with Islam is a gradual process because the name you give your child reflects your ethos and the cultural context in which you live. The same holds true when you look at the name assigned to god. In the 16th century, the words Muslims in Bengal used for god were Prabhu or Niranjan etc — Sanskrit or Bengali words. It’s not until the 19th century that the word Allah is used. In both Punjab and Bengal, the process of Islamisation is a gradual one. That’s why the word ‘conversion’ is misleading — it connotes a sudden and complete change. All your previous identities are thrown out. That’s not how it happens. When you talk about an entire society, you are talking about a very gradual, glacial experience. "Tehelka.com ](http://www.tehelka.com/its-a-myth-that-muslim-rulers-destroyed-thousands-of-temples/ )
I am clear on how it happened, Sufism versus Indian caste system. The rule of Muslims was wide spread but Islam spread more in those areas where we can find trace of Sufis.