Spread of Islam in Indian sub-continent

[paarsurrey]

Hi

Islam spread peacefully in many parts of the world due to its simple and rational teachings which develop physical, moral and spiritual faculties of a people. This is the main power of this great religion that attracts everybody, the rulers as also the ruled.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spread_of_Islam

Indian sub-continent

Main articles: Islam in India and Muslim conquest in the Indian subcontinent

Islamic influence first came to be felt in the Indian subcontinent during the early 7th century with the advent of Arab traders. Arab traders used to visit the Malabar region, which was a link between them and the ports of South East Asia to trade even before Islam had been established in Arabia. According to Historians Elliot and Dowson in their book The History of India as told by its own Historians, the first ship bearing Muslim travelers was seen on the Indian coast as early as 630 AD.

H.G. Rawlinson, in his book: Ancient and Medieval History of India[21] claims the first Arab Muslims settled on the Indian coast in the last part of the 7th century AD. This fact is corroborated, by J. Sturrock in his South Kanara and Madras Districts Manuals,[22] and also by Haridas Bhattacharya in Cultural Heritage of India Vol. IV.[23]

The Arab merchants and traders became the carriers of the new religion and they propagated it wherever they went.[24] It was however the subsequent expansion of the Muslim conquest in the Indian subcontinent over the next millennia that established Islam in the region.

Considerable controversy exists both in scholarly and public opinion about the conversions to Islam. Embedded within this lies the concept of Islam as a foreign imposition and Hinduism being a natural condition of the natives who resisted, resulting the failure of the project to Islamicize the Indian subcontinent and is highly embroiled with the politics of the partition and communalism in India.[25] These are typically represented by the following schools of thought:[25]

1. That the bulk of Muslims are descendants of migrants from the Iranian plateau or Arabs.[26]
2. That Muslims sought conversion through jihad or political violence[25]
3. A related view is that conversions occurred for non-religious reasons of pragmatism and patronage such as social mobility among the Muslim ruling elite or for relief from taxes[25][26]
4. Conversion was a result of the actions of Sufi saints and involved a genuine change of heart[25]
5. Conversion came from Buddhists and the en masse conversions of lower castes for social liberation and as a rejection of oppressive existent Hindu caste strictures.[26]
6. Was a combination, initially made under duress followed by a genuine change of heart[25]
7. As a socio-cultural process of diffusion and integration over an extended period of time into the sphere of the dominant Muslim civilization and global polity at large.[26]

OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

I love Zoroaster and Socrates as I do love Jesus and Mary

Thanks

 

[cathopologist]

You know paarsurrey, if this was a Muslim-dominant forum and you did the opposite, you’d be banned for trolling or simply out of impatience.

I know it is your ‘mission’ to ‘evangelize’ the ‘peaceful’ spread of Islam in so many of your threads - but they are just as easily refuted with historical facts and eye-witness accounts.

Why don’t you for starters try refuting my doubts and answering questions in the ‘Where is Jesus buried’ thread?

 

[LDNCatholic]

Ask the Sikhs just how peacefully Islam spread into India. I’m sure they have a different view of events.

My ancestry traces back (at least partly) to a warrior group of India who were driven out by invading Muslims. While I bear no malice towards them it is historically innacurate to say Islam came to India in a peaceful way.

 

[Roamin_Xian]

Many people were put to the sword during the Muslim invasions of the Indian subcontinent.

Surrey, you need to quit lying.

 

[Submission]

Many people were put to the sword during the Muslim invasions of the Indian subcontinent.

Surrey, you need to quit lying.

Are you trying to claim that people were forced to convert to Islam during the Muslim invasions in India?

If that is the case;
Muslims ruled India for about a thousand years. If they wanted, they had the power of converting each and every non-Muslim of India to Islam. Today more than 80% of the population of India are non-Muslims. All these non-Muslim Indians are bearing witness today that Islam was not spread by the sword.

Even if you are claiming this, Islam does not permit it under any circumstances;

With which sword was Islam spread? Even if Muslims had it they could not use it to spread Islam because the Qur’an says in the following verse:

“Let there be no compulsion in religion:
Truth stands out clear from error”
[Al-Qur’an 2:256]

There are more facts I can point out to you, for example;
Indonesia is a country that has the maximum number of Muslims in the world. The majority of people in Malaysia are Muslims too, May one ask, “Which Muslim army went to Indonesia and Malaysia?”

I can go on and on with my facts, I am sure these are sufficient enough.

You are definitely mistaken regarding the real sword, which is the Sword of Intellect you are talking about;
The sword that conquers the hearts and minds of people. The Qur’an says in Surah Nahl, chapter 16 verse 125:

“Invite (all) to the way of thy Lord
with wisdom and beautiful preaching;
and argue with them in ways that are
best and most gracious.”
[Al-Qur’an 16:125]

 

[LDNCatholic]

Muslims ruled India for about a thousand years. If they wanted, they had the power of converting each and every non-Muslim of India to Islam. Today more than 80% of the population of India are non-Muslims. All these non-Muslim Indians are bearing witness today that Islam was not spread by the sword.

Don’t feed us that rubbish.

Historical India was never one unified nation. However the territory known as India also contained the lands now known as Pakistan and Bangladesh, if you add their Muslim population to the Muslim
population of India the percentage of Muslims in historically ‘‘Indian’’ lands rises steeply doesn’t it?

Also as mentioned before India was never one unified nation, it was warring kingdoms, Muslims invaded some of these kingdoms and fought long and bloody wars with the original inhabitants (The Sikhs stand out as one such example in the Punjab region). They did not conquer all of what is now known as India, but where they did conquer, they conquered by the sword.

 

[Sister_Amy]

Wasn’t India ruled by Muslims for centuries… without most Indians ever becoming Muslim?

 

[LDNCatholic]

Wasn’t India ruled by Muslims for centuries… without most Indians ever becoming Muslim?

Sister Amy please see my previous post

 

[Submission]

Don’t feed us that rubbish.

Historical India was never one unified nation. However the territory known as India also contained the lands now known as Pakistan and Bangladesh, if you add their Muslim population to the Muslim
population of India the percentage of Muslims in historically ‘‘Indian’’ lands rises steeply doesn’t it?

Also as mentioned before India was never one unified nation, it was warring kingdoms, Muslims invaded some of these kingdoms and fought long and bloody wars with the original inhabitants (The Sikhs stand out as one such example in the Punjab region). They did not conquer all of what is now known as India, but where they did conquer, they conquered by the sword.

Reality can be bitter at times, this is not my fault but reality speaks for itself.
I am talking about the forced conversions which this threads underline statement is, I am not talking about the wars that went on between the Muslims and Non-Muslims which involved ‘Swords’.

They had in their hands, majority of India and over time other parts, for example the Mughal Empire which controlled majority of India and still majority of the population were not Muslims.
A lot of immigrants came into Pakistan from other Muslim countries aswell. Even if you add the other Muslim populations like you are trying to say, the majority is Hindus which is the official state religion of India.
As I said before, the main concept of my statement was that why isn’t there a majority population of Muslims in India?, I have never heard any justified statement which speaks of forced conversions in India to Islam.

De Lacy O’Leary in the book “Islam at the cross road” (Page 8):

“History makes it clear however, that the legend of fanatical Muslims sweeping through the world and forcing Islam at the point of the sword upon conquered races is one of the most fantastically absurd myth that historians have ever repeated.”

What about this statement?

Have you got an answer to the Indonesia and Malaysia fact?

I am just stating facts, and I am not giving any false knowledge to you or anyone against my statements.

 

[spoiltvictorian]

The Muslim conquests of India were bloody, destructive and rapacious. India would not be so poor today if so many of their best ancestors, resources and buildings were not destroyed and stolen so long ago.

 

[LtPaint]

The Muslim conquests of India were bloody, destructive and rapacious. India would not be so poor today if so many of their best ancestors, resources and buildings were not destroyed and stolen so long ago.

If I’m not mistaken, the last people to exploit the Indians were the British, not the Muslims. Some of the British policies in India resulted in famines that resulted in the deaths of millions of people. Muslim conquest of India is not the complete reason for India’s current poverty.

 

[Submission]

The Muslim conquests of India were bloody, destructive and rapacious. India would not be so poor today if so many of their best ancestors, resources and buildings were not destroyed and stolen so long ago.

The British conquests of India were also bloody and destructive. Instead of accusing Muslims of every bloody thing, look at majority of the other conquests.
Please do not use the double standards game.

How can you claim that India would not have been so poor?
During the Mughal Empire, when Muslims ruled India (Majority);
Mughal Empire - 24.5% ($90.8 billion out of $371 billion in 1700)
24.5% = Percentage of World GDP

After the Mughal Empire, the whole economy shattered as it was controlling India efficiently. Power comes and goes, money also comes and goes, nobody can change that cycle.

Give me examples of what was destroyed and stolen?

 

[cathopologist]

As I said before, the main concept of my statement was that why isn’t there a majority population of Muslims in India?

There was no official Muslim census, but reality speaks for itself -Islam is known to spread in the lands they invaded. It is dishonest to emphasize a ‘peaceful’ spread because the Jizya system was meant to subdue non-Muslim inhabitants. They were given the choice to pay taxes or convert. Naturally, people grow tired of paying heavy taxes and to avoid the situation, many were forced to convert.

I have never heard any justified statement which speaks of forced conversions in India to Islam.

Much of Islamic history in India were written by Muslim historians, hence the blotted out facts and biased revisionism. However, names like Qutb Aibak, Alauddin Khilji,Feroz Shah Tughlaq and even Akbar “The Great” are still remembered by many non-Muslim Indians because of their cruelty and tyrannical ways.

The “Tarikh-i-Firuz Shah” is a historical record written during his reign that attests to the systematic persecution of Hindus under his rule. In particular, it records atrocities on Hindu Brahmin priests who refused to convert to Islam:

"An order was accordingly given to the Brahman and was brought before Sultan. The true faith was declared to the Brahman and the right course pointed out. but he refused to accept it. A pile was raised on which the Kaffir with his hands and legs tied was thrown into and the wooden tablet on the top. The pile was lit at two places his head and his feet. The fire first reached him in the feet and drew from him a cry and then fire completely enveloped him. Behold Sultan for his strict adherence to law and rectitude."

Under his rule, Hindus who were forced to pay the mandatory Jizya tax were recorded as infidels, their communities monitored and, if they violated Imperial ordinance and built temples, these were destroyed. In particular, an incident in the village of Gohana in Haryana was recorded in the “Insha-i-Mahry” (another historical record written by Amud Din Abdullah bin Mahru) where Hindus had erected a deity and were arrested, brought to the palace and executed en-masse.

 

[Submission]

There was no official Muslim census, but reality speaks for itself -Islam is known to spread in the lands they invaded.

Did they also invade Indonesia and Malaysia?
Indonesia currently has the largest Muslim population, which Muslim army invaded those lands?

 

[cathopologist]

Did they also invade Indonesia and Malaysia?
Indonesia currently has the largest Muslim population, which Muslim army invaded those lands?

Parameswara converted from Hinduism to Islam when he married a supposed Muslim princess. From then, he made Islam Malaysia’s state religion and many of its inhabitants (who were also practicing Hindus) were forced to convert or be subject to Jizya. Within a period of a couple hundred years, Islam spread from Peninsula Malaysia all the way to Indonesia. Don’t be fooled though. The spread of Islam was never exactly ‘peaceful’. The Balinese Hindus still have to fend themselves from Muslim radicals and missionaries who seek to convert the last remaining of the ‘infidels’. You think the Bali Bombings was intended to target only the Westerners? Think again.

 

[spoiltvictorian]

The British conquests of India were also bloody and destructive. Instead of accusing Muslims of every bloody thing, look at majority of the other conquests.
Please do not use the double standards game.

How can you claim that India would not have been so poor?
During the Mughal Empire, when Muslims ruled India (Majority);
Mughal Empire - 24.5% ($90.8 billion out of $371 billion in 1700)
24.5% = Percentage of World GDP

After the Mughal Empire, the whole economy shattered as it was controlling India efficiently. Power comes and goes, money also comes and goes, nobody can change that cycle.

Give me examples of what was destroyed and stolen?

I didn’t say anything about the British. They were a different kind of wicked, possibly worse, but a) they did their damage later on and so the effects have not compounded as much, and b) the British could have less easily controlled an India with more of its culture and wealth. I especially wonder if characteristically Muslim commercial greed influenced local princes in India and made them more likely to accept those detrimental trade treaties…

Things stolen and destroyed: temples, gold, knowledge, traditions, art, ways of life, crops, women, children, young men, etc. In other words, the inspiration to carry on great traditions and the means to preserve them.

You’re right that India probably would have been invaded by someone anyway, but that does not justify evil.

 

[cathopologist]

The British conquests of India were also bloody and destructive. Instead of accusing Muslims of every bloody thing, look at majority of the other conquests.
Please do not use the double standards game.

Before the Muslim invasion of India, the Rajputs and many of its aristocrats enjoyed immense amount of wealth. All that was confiscated when the Muslims took over. Of course, when the Colonialists arrived, they too exploited - this time the Muslim rulers had a taste of their own medicine. You know, there is such a thing called retribution.

Give me examples of what was destroyed and stolen?

The Kohinoor diamond ring a bell? As for destruction, refer to my previous post. Where Muslims rule, there isn’t a chance for non-Muslim places of worship. Even the Church of the Holy Sepulchre wasn’t spared under Muslim rule.

 

[Submission]

Before the Muslim invasion of India, the Rajputs and many of its aristocrats enjoyed immense amount of wealth. All that was confiscated when the Muslims took over. Of course, when the Colonialists arrived, they too exploited - this time the Muslim rulers had a taste of their own medicine. You know, there is such a thing called retribution.

The Kohinoor diamond ring a bell? As for destruction, refer to my previous post. Where Muslims rule, there isn’t a chance for non-Muslim places of worship. Even the Church of the Holy Sepulchre wasn’t spared under Muslim rule.

Muslims not only allowed non-Muslims to enjoy the freedom of their faith, but also let them follow their way even though some of their practices might conflict with the religion of the majority. Actually, this is the highest degree of tolerance. Muslims tolerated the religious practices of their minorities by not prohibiting even those practices which were contrary to the state ideology.

History bears witness to the fact that Muslims accepted and applied the Islamic laws to an extent that has no parallel in the history of mankind. The fair and tolerant approach they show to other faiths are no secret.

[Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all things.] (Al-Baqarah 2: 256)

Islam establishes a relationship with the people of different faiths on the basis of tolerance, justice, benevolence, and mercy. The basis of this relationship is Allah’s saying in the Qur’an:

[Allah forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) Faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them: for Allah loveth those who are just. Allah only forbids you, with regard to those who fight you for (your) Faith, and drive you out of your homes, and support (others) in driving you out, from turning to them (for friendship and protection). It is such as turn to them (in these circumstances), that do wrong.] (Al-Mumtahinah 60: 8- 9)

Islam protects the places of worship of non-Muslims, and allows them to observe their religious ceremonies. Allah says:

[To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight), because they are wronged;- and verily, Allah is most powerful for their aid;- (They are) those who have been expelled from their homes in defiance of right,- (for no cause) except that they say, “our Lord is Allah”. Did not Allah check one set of people by means of another, there would surely have been pulled down monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques, in which the name of Allah is commemorated in abundant measure. Allah will certainly aid those who aid his (cause);- for verily Allah is full of Strength, Exalted in Might, (able to enforce His Will).] (Al-Hajj 22: 39-40)

 

[cathopologist]

Muslims not only allowed non-Muslims to enjoy the freedom of their faith, but also let them follow their way even though some of their practices might conflict with the religion of the majority. Actually, this is the highest degree of tolerance. Muslims tolerated the religious practices of their minorities by not prohibiting even those practices which were contrary to the state ideology.

History bears witness to the fact that Muslims accepted and applied the Islamic laws to an extent that has no parallel in the history of mankind. The fair and tolerant approach they show to other faiths are no secret.

Non-Muslims around the world disagree with your statement. Not because of hatred for Muslims but because they know there will never be true tolerance under Muslim governance and they know they cannot truly compromise with them. Malaysia is just next door to me. We also have Indonesian Christians in this forum. All you have to do is ask people who live and experience it everyday.

 

[Submission]

Non-Muslims around the world disagree with your statement. Not because of hatred for Muslims but because they know there will never be true tolerance under Muslim governance and they know they cannot truly compromise with them. Malaysia is just next door to me. We also have Indonesian Christians in this forum. All you have to do is ask people who live and experience it everyday.

Isn’t references of the Quran, and what it tells us do enough?
I have explained the logical reasons in the other thread ‘Ask about Islam 2’

I can also say the same if you want, Muslims have been discriminated in Non-Muslim countries too?
We can’t argue over this because it happens all around the world.
But we can only judge religions from its base.