|
|
History of Muslims in India
"The historical phase of India began with the Muslim invasion. Muslims were India's first historians." --- Gustave le Beon : Les Civilisations de L'Inde, Book III, p.146
Muslims in India - An Overview
The Muslims entered Sind, India, in 711 C.E., the same year they entered Spain. Their entry in India was prompted by an attempt to free the civilian Muslim hostages whose ship was taken by sea pirates in the territory of Raja Dahir, King of Sind. After diplomatic attempts failed, Hajjaj bin Yusuf, the Umayyad governor in Baghdad, dispatched a 17-year-old commander by the name Muhammad bin Qasim with a small army. Muhammad bin Qasim defeated Raja Dahir at what is now Hyderabad in Pakistan. In pursuing the remnant of Dahir's army and his son’s supporters (Indian kings), Muhammad bin Qasim fought at Nirun, Rawar, Bahrore, Brahmanabad, Aror, Dipalpur and Multan. By 713 C.E., he established his control in Sind and parts of Punjab up to the borders of Kashmir. A major part of what is now Pakistan came under Muslim control in 713 C.E. and remained so throughout the centuries until some years after the fall of the Mughal Empire in 1857.
Muhammad bin Qasim’s treatment of the Indian population was so just that when he was called back to Baghdad the civilians were greatly disheartened and gave him farewell in tears. There was a Muslim community in Malabar, southwest India as early as 618 C.E. as a result of King Chakrawati Farmas accepting Islam at the hands of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). The Muslim presence as rulers in India dates from 711 C.E. Since then, different Muslim rulers (Turks of Central Asia, Afghans, and the descendants of the Mongol - the Mughals) entered India, primarily fought their fellow Muslim rulers, and established their rule under various dynastic names. By the eleventh century, the Muslims had established their capital at Delhi, which remained the principal seat of power until the last ruler of Mughal Dynasty, Bahadur Shah Zafar, was deposed in 1857 by the British. A few British visitors were given permission by Akbar to stay in Eastern India more than two centuries before. The British abused that privilege, and within a few decades the British began to collaborate with Rajas and Nawabs in military expeditions against the Mughals and Muslim rulers of the east, southeast and south India. After two centuries of fighting, the British succeeded in abolishing the Mughal rule in 1857.
Muslims were a minority when they ruled major parts of India for nearly a thousand years. They were well liked generally as rulers for their justice, social and cultural values, respect for freedom to practice religion as prescribed by the religion of various communities, freedom of speech, legal system in accordance with the dictates and established norms of each religious community, public works and for establishing educational institutions. In their days as rulers, the Muslims constituted about twenty percent of India's population. Today, Indian Muslims constitute about fifteen percent of India's population, about 150 million, and they are the second largest Muslim community in the world.
The region now part of Pakistan and many other parts of India were predominantly Muslim. After the British takeover in 1857, many of these areas remained under loose control of Muslims. When the British decided to withdraw from India without a clear direction for the future of Muslims (former rulers), a political solution was reached for some of the Muslim majority areas. This resulted in the division of India and the creation of Pakistan in 1947.
Among the famous Muslims scientists, historians and travelers who visited and lived, though briefly, in India were Al-Biruni, Al-Masu'di, and Ibn Battuta. Their writings illuminate us with the Indian society and culture. Al-Biruni stayed in India for twenty years. Ibn Battuta, an Andalusian who was born in Morocco, served as a Magistrate of Delhi (1334-1341) during the reign of Sultan Muhammad Tughluk. It is conceivable that Ibn Battuta’s description of Muslim India inspired Ferdinand and Isabella who had taken over the last Muslim kingdom of Granada, Spain in 1492. That same year Columbus received the permission in the Alhambra palace (of Granada) and made his famous voyage bound for India in search of gold and spice but he landed in the Americas.
--- Dr. A. Zahoor
Help us research the history of Muslims in India.
muslims arrived in india during time of Prophet
apparently i was under the same misunderstanding that first muslims to india arrived in sindh and conquered it
...this is nonsense...
long before Sultan Ghaznavi or abbasids
a tale exists about
malik bin dinar & traders (mybe 'sahaba'=a person who believes in muslim creed who has seen prophet in prophets lifetime) arrived in kerela in 628/9 C.E/A.D and met with a saintly hindu king by the name Cheraman Perumal who then travelled to arabia and reportedly converted to islam and also performed last Hajj with nabi S.a.w. however;died on the way back to india...it is reported these traders introduced islam in the south regardless of the fact the king never made it back...
Hinduvta & British imperialists have overlooked this and also many historians have overshadowed Islam in South India, due to British imperial eyes on indias wealth fuelled by colonial desires to emulate the sucess of likes of Ghazni and Babur.
This as the Regal culture of northern Hind brahmins, rajputs etc.. was synonomous with wealth acquiring expedttions of Sultan Ghazni & his Famous hindu commander General Tilak, and the Rich Mughal culture which had its strongholds in northern India.
The British Colonialists of that time viewed with their 'governance by-proxy' and 'Divide & rule' policies to hide cultures by misinformation. Misinformation was resorted to as the anticipated supposed plans for 'christianisation' of india were not as sucessful.then it became possible to as some historians have put it '...divide ,rule, and govern by-proxy..'
more on this chap is here if you feel the urge to read further:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheraman_Perumal
Sayyidina Muhammad may peace be upon him
Sayyidina Muhammad
in hindu scriptures
http://www.ummah.com/Al_adaab/muhammad/hindu.html
Everyone owes to oneself to check out the truth on the website posted on the internet by Dr. Z. Haq. I know about similar research on Veda by Dr.Zakir Naik. It is an interesting finding.
Muhammad in Hindu scriptures
Most of the verses quoted from the Rig Veda as "proof" of Muhammad actually speak of the relation between the body and the mind and the soul - Not of the Kaaba.
The argument that Sanskrit borrowed from Arabic and Hebrew is utter nonsense!
Sanskrit precedes Arabic by atleast a millenium! And it was the Indians who invented Algebra and Trigonometry and Geometry and not the arabs.
Also, Hindus consider the Vedas, Upanishads, The Gita as revered texts and not the puranas. The puranas are like moral science stories - and of all, the Bhavishya Purana sounds the most dubious.
Muslims, wake up and do not be blamed by such hopeless liars doing dawah!
Aurangzeb and Jizya
By Jadu Nath Sarkaar
Of all the Muslim rulers who ruled vast territories of India from 712 to 1857 CE, probably no one has received as much condemnation from Western and Hindu writers as Aurangzeb. He has been castigated as a religious Muslim who was anti-Hindu, who taxed them, who tried to convert them, who discriminated against them in awarding high administrative positions, and who interfered in their religious matters. This view has been heavily promoted in the government approved textbooks in schools and colleges across post-partition India (i.e., after 1947). These are fabrications against one of the best rulers of India who was pious, scholarly, saintly, un-biased, liberal, magnanimous, tolerant, competent, and far-sighted.
Fortunately, in recent years quite a few Hindu historians have come out in the open disputing those allegations. For example, historian Babu Nagendranath Banerjee rejected the accusation of forced conversion of Hindus by Muslim rulers by stating that if that was their intention then in India today there would not be nearly four times as many Hindus compared to Muslims, despite the fact that Muslims had ruled for nearly a thousand years.
Banerjee challenged the Hindu hypothesis that Aurangzeb was anti-Hindu by reasoning that if the latter were truly guilty of such bigotry, how could he appoint a Hindu as his military commander-in-chief?
Surely, he could have afforded to appoint a competent Muslim general in that position.
Banerjee further stated: "No one should accuse Aurangzeb of being communal minded. In his administration, the state policy was formulated by Hindus. Two Hindus held the highest position in the State Treasury.
Some prejudiced Muslims even questioned the merit of his decision to appoint non-Muslims to such high offices. The Emperor refuted that by stating that he had been following the dictates of the Shariah (Islamic Law) which demands appointing right persons in right positions."
During Aurangzeb's long reign of fifty years, many Hindus, notably Jaswant Singh, Raja Rajrup, Kabir Singh, Arghanath Singh, Prem Dev Singh, Dilip Roy, and Rasik Lal Crory, held very high administrative positions.
Two of the highest ranked generals in Aurangzeb's administration, Jaswant Singh and Jaya Singh, were Hindus.
Other notable Hindu generals who commanded a garrison of two to five thousand soldiers were Raja Vim Singh of Udaypur, Indra Singh, Achalaji and Arjuji. One wonders if Aurangzeb was hostile to Hindus, why would he position all these Hindus to high positions of authority, especially in the military, who could have mutinied against him and removed him from his throne?
Most Hindus like Akbar over Aurangzeb for his multi-ethnic court where Hindus were favored. Historian Shri Sharma states that while Emperor Akbar had fourteen Hindu Mansabdars (high officials) in his court, Aurangzeb actually had 148 Hindu high officials in his court. (Ref: Mughal Government) But this fact is somewhat less known.
Some of the Hindu historians have accused Aurangzeb of demolishing Hindu Temples. How factual is this accusation against a man, who has been known to be a saintly man, a strict adherent of Islam? The Qur'an prohibits any Muslim to impose his will on a non-Muslim by stating that "There is no compulsion in religion." (surah al-Baqarah 2:256). The surah al-Kafirun clearly states: "To you is your religion and to me is mine." It would be totally unbecoming of a learned scholar of Islam of his caliber, as Aurangzeb was known to be, to do things that are contrary to the dictates of the Qur'an.
Interestingly, the 1946 edition of the history textbook Etihash Parichaya (Introduction to History) used in Bengal for the 5th and 6th graders states: "If Aurangzeb had the intention of demolishing temples to make way for mosques, there would not have been a single temple standing erect in India. On the contrary, Aurangzeb donated huge estates for use as Temple sites and support thereof in Benares, Kashmir and elsewhere.
The official documentations for these land grants are still extant."
A stone inscription in the historic Balaji or Vishnu Temple, located north of Chitrakut Balaghat, still shows that it was commissioned by the Emperor himself.
The proof of Aurangzeb's land grant for famous Hindu religious sites in Kasi, Varanasi can easily be verified from the deed records extant at those sites.
The same textbook reads: "During the fifty year reign of Aurangzeb, not a single Hindu was forced to embrace Islam. He did not interfere with any Hindu religious activities." (p. 138) Alexander Hamilton, a British historian, toured India towards the end of Aurangzeb's fifty year reign and observed that every one was free to serve and worship God in his own way.
Now let us deal with Aurangzeb's imposition ofthe jizya tax which had drawn severe criticism from many Hindu historians.
It is true that jizya was lifted during the reign of Akbar and Jahangir and that Aurangzeb later reinstated this.
Before I delve into the subject of Aurangzeb's jizya tax, or taxing the non-Muslims, it is worthwhile to point out that jizya is nothing more than a war tax which was collected only from able-bodied young non-Muslim male citizens living in a Muslim country who did not want to volunteer for the defense of the country.
That is, no such tax was collected from non-Muslims who volunteered to defend the country.
This tax was not collected from women, and neither from immature males nor from disabled or old male citizens.
For payment of such taxes, it became incumbent upon the Muslim government to protect the life, property and wealth of its non-Muslim citizens.
If for any reason the government failed to protect its citizens, especially during a war, the taxable amount was returned.
It should be pointed out here that zakat (2.5% of savings) and ushr (10% of agricultural products) were collected from all Muslims, who owned some wealth (beyond a certain minimum, called nisab).
They also paid sadaqah, fitrah, and khums.
None of these were collected from any non-Muslim. As a matter of fact, the per capita collection from Muslims was several fold that of non-Muslims.
Further to Auranzeb's credit is his abolition of a lot of taxes, although this fact is not usually mentioned.
In his book Mughal Administration, Sir Jadunath Sarkar, foremost historian on the Mughal dynasty, mentions that during Aurangzeb's reign in power, nearly sixty-five types of taxes were abolished, which resulted in a yearly revenue loss of fifty million rupees from the state treasury.
While some Hindu historians are retracting the lies, the textbooks and historic accounts in Western countries have yet to admit their error and set the record straight.
Singing praises about the
Singing praises about the blood thirsty aurangzeb is like denying the History of the SIKH gurus .This site must be ashamed.If any blasphemic thing is even mentioned in an islamic stste,people are bludgened,murdered.fanatic Aurangzeb sucks and will always suffer in hell!
Aurengzeb
This seems to be written by a Marxist.-who try to project themselves as secular, by taking anti Hindu and pro Muslim stance. Their objectivity and secularism is vote based and cannot be counted upon.
Aurangzeb was a bigot, a cruel tyrant, who forcibally converted Hindus to Islam. When Guru Teg Bahadur came to the rescue of Kashmiri Hindus, he was brutally tortured by Aurengzeb and then beheaded at Chandni Chowk, where we have Sheesh Ganj Gurudwara at that site.
He got his own brother Dara Sekhoh, who was a favourite of his father Shah Jahan, beheaded to usurp the throne. Dara Shekoh was a scholar and of secular mindset.
He was responsible for destruction of temples. In north India most of major temples have masjids standing next to them, in many instances on temple land!!
True Indian !
Hi Folks,
First of all, good job on creating this site. I just wandered into it, looking for a friend of mine. As usual, we indian strat dog fighting. I read many comments in this thread, that highlight one fact versus the other. We can not re-write history, but certaintly can shape the future. One can not glorify Aurangzeb's rule, however I can not be more proud of Great Ruler like Akbar, Shershah, Nawab Wajid Ali Shah, and Bahadur Shah Jafar. I am as proud of Subhash C. Bose, Bhagat Singh, and Azad as of Asfakullah and Abul Kalam Azad. Believe me, I am not a politician. But I often wonder on these issues. I am a practicing Hindu, and therefore know/respect any other relegion/belief. My own perspective can not be universally right - we can see many different opinions in our own families, let alone two relegions. Its a waste of time to justify Aurangzeb or ignore great contributions of hundreds of Indian muslims. We can generalize anything.
Well, anyways, good luck, and I wish our muslim fellows be a role model for the muslims of the entire world.
- Ajay
Hahaha nice story, who made
Hahaha nice story, who made this up
History, I sometimes think
History, I sometimes think is like a grave and no one loves or accuses the grave. But we are doing exactly that on this board.
It’s the present that matters.
I do not say that all Muslim rulers were just and great. Yes, they were Muslims and in some way must have been guided by the zeal of Quran.
However, the present is that Muslims are part and parcel of India. They are not Pakistanis or Bangladeshis. They are Indians and they are proud of that.
Infact Muslims in this country like Dr Abdul Kalam have done this nation proud and in the coming days there will be many more Muslims who will contribute to this nation enormously.
The biggest issue for any community is to live under fear. The politicians and religious leaders which include Muslim leaders have worked to instil fear in the hearts of both Hindus and Muslims. Many Hindus are made to believe that it’s the Muslims that are the cause of all the poverty and disturbance in this country. Similarly when there is no electricity in a Muslim area it is propagated that it is a ploy of disturbing Muslims. When there is a blast in a mosque Muslim leaders try to indirectly accuse the Hindus and blindly believe that a Muslim could not have done that.
Yes, Hinduism and Islam both have their respective strengths and both have their issues as well. If Hinduism was the only solution for this country then there would not have been so much difference between north and south Indians or People in Mumbai wouldn’t have had issues with biharis. The caste system would not have created so many disharmonies. Similarly if bringing in Islam could have resolved all issues then Iran and Iraq would not have fought so many battles or Bangladesh would not have got separated from Pakistan.
Allah, God or Bhagwaan many say are the same but hardly does anyone believe. If only Hindu, Christian or Muslim God were the truth then those gods would not have allowed people from other religions to take birth or would have made life of other religion people miserable.
Leave all this stupidity. Let us not poison ourselves and also save our children from that poison. It’s our country and us individuals who need to progress. Let’s not live in narrow compartments and lets least of all accuse each other.
Let us work for a strong India.
Jai Hind.
This is a ridiculous recount
This is a ridiculous recount of muslim history in India. Whats sad is that this is doing a disservice to Indians, espescially young Indian muslim.
there is no history of baaz bahadur, king of mandu, M.P. INDIA
Hello dear, i have search your site but didnt get the history of the king of Mandu Madhya Pradesh INDIA. THERE ARE SOME KINGS BEING THERE 1. HOSHANG SHAH HIS SON GHANI KHAN , AND BAAZ BAHADUR. SO PLZ KINDLY TRY TO INCLUD THIS GLORIESE MUSLIM KING IN YOUR WEBSITE
World today
Let's talk about the world today rather than debating on the history. A simple question to all those proud people who say that they are waging a holy war (for what??) - how many poor mouths you could have fed with all the money you and those governments have who are fighting you??
I have high respect for Islam and the principles of the religion. But it's quite unfortunate that the fact remains - people use Islam as a means to spread terrorism. After all faith is each and every individual's choice. What would happen if some one doesn't accept Islam!
Just think, what a place would be our earth today if we don't have this violence in Kashmir,Iraq,Afghanistan,somalia and many other places where we have countless deaths every day!! Don't you agree that it would have been much better!! Isn't there any other means of showing your dissent to those people whom you think are harmful to your religious beliefs??
Unification not Division
I am a Indian Hindu and was doing some research on Islam in the subcontinent when I came across this debate. I feel embarrased as a Hindu when people do not show tolerance. Yes there were forceful conversions but this is not unique to Islam in India, Christianity in Europe was the same. Yes Aurangzeb was a terror he spat on Hindus, but look at Akhbar he was probably the greatest ruler this nation has ever had, he built religious unity and tolerance. The fact is India is a SECULAR country with Islam as much apart of India's history as Hinduism is. Those who dont understand it are usually NRI's, who have understood India through BBC NEWS. The BJP are the flip side of the Muslim League, divise people, agreeing in the two nation theory, pursuing their own greedy ends. I just feel that the scars of 1947 that are apparent in these debates will only be undone by the reunifaction of the subcontient - AKHAND BHARAT. A secular, federal nation is what must happen if there is to be true peace. The prospect of Nuke War would disappear, the Kashmir situation would be resolved, Muslim and Hindu oppersion in India and Pak would seize..
I pose the question, would Indian Muslims welcome a reunified nation?
Why not? But will BJP accept it?
I am India Muslim living in Saudi Arabia and will refute the accusation that NRI do not accept Islam as part of India. WE NRI's do believe that not only Islam is a part of Indian culture but also we believe that the India belong to Muslim as well, as it belong to other religions. We will definitely agree to re-union of Indian subcontinent because we believe that the partition of greater India was a mistake committed by both Hindu and Muslim leadership. But Will BJP accept it? BJP is already scared about growing Muslim population in India, and reunion will further enhance the strength of Indian Muslim. Surely, BJP will resist the idea of reunion. The real problem between Hindu and Muslim is not the religion, both of them do not follow their respective religion that is why they fight each other. Neither Hindus nor Muslims are true follower of their religion.
Partition of India was necessary and correct
The history, present and (foreseeable) future of hindus and muslims in South Asia suggests the 2 communities are better (with fewer clashes and losses) when seperated than united.
The descendants (and supporters) of the 'hardline' muslim dynasties who ruled india and were mostly responsible for the sporadic destruction of the Hindu culture & religion, are now in Pakistan. Don't you think it's better off that way? Having a look at how fundamentalism can play havoc on a society, one has to simply look at Pakistan.
Just imagine if all those fundamentalists were in 'united' India.
So AKAND BHARAT is an illusion. Let's be practical.
Partition of India was necessary and correct
Yes you are right partition of India was correct but the reason is to be found within India as well Hindu fundamentalism has been projected. So the muslims of India also need to be protected by them. Secondly Muhammad Ali Jinnah the founder himself was a secularist and he did not want an idealogical state in the name of Pakistan.Pakistan like India is being slowly hijacked by fundamentalists but Pakistanis have always rejected the fundamentalists in every election since partition.
Why are people in India so enamoured by Western propaganda as fundamentalists never win 5% seats in any election so far in Pakistan while BJP hindu fundamentalist party won the previously in India.
Second Point
To say the partition of India was correct. Is to say the partition of Palestine into Israel and Palestinean teritories was correct. As it gave those far-right Zionists their own land (on Muslim holy land).
who's kidding whom...?
It is said that the Puritans in England, under Cromwell, outlawed bear-baiting, not because they felt sorry for the pain of the bear, but because they wanted to curtail the pleasure of the onlookers.
And that's YOU, Second Point; You don't want Pakistan to be legitimate because that makes Israel legitimate!
Confess! It's just a vacuous, silly argument. An argument like a broken pencil, pointless!
By the way, the only part of Israel that could remotely be called "Muslim Holy Land" (sic) is Jerusalem. And what is the Jewish name for Jerusalem? Why, it's ZION!!
Muslim Holy Land! Chee Chee Chee!!!
Agree to disagree
Firstly I welcome your response, and agree that reunification is not likely in the forseeable future.
But those 'fundamentalists' you speak of are in the minority. My experience of Pakistanis is that those who were born post-1947 and have never had any interaction with Hindus, and only ever heard of the 'oppression' by Indian soldiers in Kashmir, are the one's that are fundamentals. Fundamentalism is something that is heightened, when communities dont meet the 'other'. A secular country would dissolve those fundamentalist arguments
(there was little religious violence during the British Raj until the whole Pakistan thing was leaked).
I give the example of Turkey, a muslim majority country but due to its secular nature, protected by the constituion, thanks to Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, has little to no problem with Fundamentals. It has also preserved Catherdrals and Synangoues, and religious minorities are not persecuted.
Is future Akhand Bharat an illusion?? There was a time when people would have said Pakistan was an illusion, but it happened
Religious or regional seperatist parties must be banned and a charismatic leader that is truely religious blind and strong (e.g. not Gandhi type) but closer to (Tito of Yugoslavia). Its time for the nation to rise but the people have to 'want' it.
can any muslim clarify my doubt ???
how come north india is devoid of any historical temples like we ahve in south india ??? ..how did they vanish ???
hmmmm...... starting from
hmmmm......
starting from Mohammad Ghazni to Aurangzeb, if you can tell me that lakhs of hindus were not persecuted and temples destroyed, then i will only laugh at your ignorance or deliberate propaganda, perhaps.
500,000 Hindus were killed by Timurlane alone when he invaded India.
The alleged fact that moslim
The alleged fact that moslim rulers "were well liked" is nonsense, Saddam hussain could be said to be "well liked" he always got 99% of the vote, its funny you complain of being invaded by foreigners when your leaders do the same to others.
"All is happening because world is afraid of moslims' power n rule. they know that for a long time they hav been around and they can be back any time." Well you know why they are afraid, because islam is the most intolerant religion of our time, an evil photocopy of christianity to control the masses and give Muhammed reason to take non moslims as slaves.
And this evil is to be followed and emulated by all moslims to be a "good muslim" is to follow and do like muhammed. I feel bad for india once moslims become the majority because you indians who have shown tolerance toward islam will find moslims will not do the same for you once they take control.
Reply to "The Alleged fact that Muslim.."
Saddam Hussain was a cruel human being, indeed, let alone a Muslim, atleast during his reign of terror. The people who mistreated him when he was brought to gallows may call themseleves Muslim, did not represent a character of Muslim by any standards. Kindly do not promote hate & rift among Hindus & Muslims by creating fear about Muslims and making assertions about Muslim history, Islam and the prophet, may peace be upon him, about which you seem to be ignorant. With all due respect to you and I requset that it is not good to paint the picture with one large stoke of brush without facts & figures Facts and figures are always needed to back any claim. Islam is the fastest growing religion today in the west and the east. Fifty thousand Non Muslim reverted in the USA & UK last year alone despite the fact missionaries are spending millions of dollars all over the world. There is an inherent truth about Islam that people come into the fold. Allah says in Koran that Koran is guidance for those who are pious. Historically Non Muslims have been living in peace under Muslims in spain and all over. Saladin treated the christians very well and the crusaders massacred masses of Muslims when they got a chance. Muslims are not known to have killed civilians. Muslims have been in wars. Let us refrain from quoting a possible exception and generalize results. Today Phillipinos are reverting back to Islam.Islam is spreadig in Germany, France, europe and Russia. Historically, Islam came to Indonesia and Malaysia in a peaceful manner. Mr. Chakrawati out of Malabar was the first ruler of Malabar to have reverted to Islam during the life of the prophet, may peace be upon him. Mr. Mohammad bin Qasim was invited by Raja Dahir. His Army was able to rescue the prisoners for Raja Dahir. The Armies settled in Inda. It is true Muslim rulers fought among themselves. Mongols from central asia invaded India and massacred millions of Indians and the people further west from India. Their progenitors became Muslims and ruled India and are known as Moguls. We don't have control over the history. These things happened and we cannot deny that. Pleas don't dismiss Islam. It is a genuine creed, just and balanced. Koran is full of wisdom with several scientific and mathematical facts. Check out Dr.Garry Miller, Dr. Yusuf Estez, jamal Badawi, Hamza Yousuf, Dr. Zakir Naik. Torah, Bible and Vedas all testifies to the last prophet, may peace be upon him. Check out
Sayyidina Muhammad
in hindu scriptures
Sayyidina Muhammad
in hindu scriptures
http://www.ummah.com/Al_adaab/muhammad/hindu.html
More than thirty three percent Non Muslim population of the subcontinent has reverted to Islam. Around fifteen percent in India alone.
People who seirously understand Koran find out what they had been hearing in the media about Islam and the last prophet, may peace be upon him is nothing more than myth and not the truth. May Allah give all people of world the light of Islam. Koran devised a system which gradually abolished and eredicated slavery. Islam is the first religion which commanded equality of all races. Islam strictly forbids alcohol, illicit sex and interest. Islam commanded Muslims to pay zakat and non Muslim jizya in place of zakat. Please do not spew hatred and kindly refrain from bad mouthing. Feel free to ask logical questions about Islam and Koran.Koran is loaded with bold scientific claims which have been recently discovered.
Several scientist who have discoverd those revelations in Koran have reverted to Islam. Allah in Koran challenges his creation to disprove a single verse. Allah commands his creation to bring the experts to disprove. Allah commands that if you still persist in arrogance despite you could not disprove, then you would accountable after death. Allah is merciful and forgiving to kind and humble.
1000 years of muslim rule!
You assert:
- Islam ruled over India for 100 years; and
- It was ended by British in 1857
I have to say you are the most ignorant man (or woman) about Indian History!
1000 years rule
================
Depends upon what you mean by India. The city of Delhi and near abouts, it is 700 years. Some parts of of North India 350 years. Western India (Gujarat, parts of Rajasthan, Maharashtra) about 250 year. Near East India (Bengal etc) about 400 years. South India - some parts maximum 350 years but majority never! North east India - never. Nepal and surrounding Hill areas never. Whole of India never.
Ending in 1857
===============
When Afghan invader Ahmed Shah Abdali invaded India in 1761, who fought with him? Was it Mughals? It was Maratha Army under General Sadashiv Rao Bhau assisted with some Rajput, Jat and Sikh columns which met Abdali in the 3rd battle of Panipat, 246 years back exactly on today's date. For record, some insignificant Mughal army also was under Bhau's command.
Who was ruling over Panjab when british arrived? Maharaj Ranjit Singh whose capital was Lahore and his rule extended all over nort west all the way upto Peshavar and Kashmir in north.
Other than 2 strong muslim rules - one was Tipoo Sultan, and the other in Bengal, there was no muslim rule anywhere in India when British came. Other nawabs like Lucknow, Bhopal and so on were name sake, who Mughal "Emporer" used to pay chauth protection tax to Marathas! These 2 also, were dying their death, and would have come under Hindu rule in next 50 years had British not interrupted.
Islam = peace
Look at the Video of Saddam's hanging and you will know what Islam (=peace) means. Those shouting slogans and abuses, when the man is about to meet his end, are the co-religious muslim brothers of his, or someone else? No doubt, Islam is a religion of peace indeed!
May Islam (if it means peace) be upon those peacemakers!
Muslims have not shed the blood of civilians.
There is no historical evidence that Muslim conquerors like Ghanznavi or Subtageen and others have shed the blood of civilians.
Koran strictly forbids killing of a single civilian.
Killing of a single civilian is like killing the entire civilization and, saving the life of one civilian is like saving the entire civilization according to Koran.
Somebody who kills civilians under the name of Islam is not following Koran or Sunna (practices followed by the prophet (May peace be upon him)) of the prophet (May peace be upon him).
Such a behavior may have been a product of frustrations caused by oppression resulting in a freaked out behavior in few instances lately.
Nevertheless, it is not allowed according to Koran teachings and the practices of the prophet (May peace be upon him)
Ghaznavi fought many battles with the army of the Raja who was exploiting his people and had established himself as deity for the people. Ghaznavi conveyed the message that that there is no god but the God, which he turned down. Ghaznavi warned and challenged him on each of his return; if he was god he should be able to protect himself from the defeat. He would find everyone back to the square one on his each return. This had led to multiple battles with the army of the Raja. The Raja was adamant and would have his people go back to square one. Ghaznavi did win every one of the battles, conquered and took the treasure with him; however, the historical fact is, he did not shed the blood of civilians.
Historically Halakoo Khan has shed the blood of millions of civilians.
Historically civilian blood of hundreds and thousands was also shed by Chengez Khan.
The progenitors of these vicious Mongols who shed the blood, however, reverted to Islam later in the history.
Blood of civilians was shed also during Spanish inquisition.
Blood of civilians was shed by Nazis in Germany.
Blood of civilians was shed in Nagasaki and Hiroshima.
The life of every human being is valuable, Muslim or Non Muslim alike.
Blood of civilians was shed in Bosnia in the recent history.
Blood of civilians was shed in Kosovo in the recent history.
Blood of thousands civilian has been shed in Sabra Shatila in the recent history.
Blood of many thousandcivilians has been shed in Lebanon in the recent history.
Blood of almost hundred thousand civilians has been shed in Kashmir over the last many decades.
Blood of civilians shed in Gujrat
Blood of civilians shed.... Babri masjid
Blood of a very large number of Palestinian civilians has been shed over the last many decades..
Blood of hudnreds and thousands Afghan civilians has been shed in the recent history.
Blood of hundreds and thousands Iraqi civilians has been shed in the recent history.
Blood of countless Chechan civilians has been shed in the recent history.
Blood of some Russian civilians in the theater was shed.
Blood of less than three thousand civilians has been shed on September 11, 2006.
Comparative statement would tell you that majority of the civilians killed by the armed forces have historically been Muslims and majority of the armed killers have historically been Non Muslims. There have been few instances where Muslim has also killed civilians. However, there is no justification for shedding the blood of civilians according to Koran and the life of the prophet (May peace be upon him).
One should however, be able to discern the difference between the killing of civilians by the armed and killing of the armed by the armed in a battlefield. Let us not mix oranges and apples.
Any leader, group or a country that allow killing of civilians is indeed a terrorist entity.
Even today Hindus gather around the shrines of Muslim mystics.
Historically Hindus revered the mystics. Hindus along with Muslim have been attending the anniversaries of those mystics to this day.
The mystics played a vital role in the spread of Islam in India. However, one is not supposed to worship these mystics.
Millions of non Muslims reverted to Islam.
We have five hundred million Muslims today, living in the subcontinent.
They are not from Saudi Arabia or a non Indian descent.
Majority of them have Indian forefathers.
I am sure not every Muslim out of these five hundred million is a descent of the untouchable class.
Islam was spread to Malaysia and Indonesia without bloodshed too.
The locals were inspired by the message of Koran, honesty and character of the Muslim traders.
Historically, Muslims have conquered countries far and wide but have not killed civilians
Today one out of three people in the entire subcontinent, the pre partition India, have reverted to Islam.
Is it not true Islam is the fastest growing religion to this day?
Who is forcing these people to become Muslims today?
It is a natural quality in human beings to seek the truth and believe in one and only one creator, so they revert to Islam, which is the natural state of every human being.
Koran is the word of God and has passed the test of time. It is dynamic in that sense. Koran is not a book of science; it is a book of signs. It is absolutely free of contradictions.
Islam is the oldest message. There is no god but the God. This is the only message sent to all civilizations by the creator.
Islam is not a new religion or founded by Mohammad (May peace be upon him) the last messenger.
Though Koran and life of the prophet gives us a complete way of life, Koran validates the original message of unity.
Check out Dr. Garry Miller’s website, whyislam.com, turntoislam.com and islamicity.com to know more about Islam.
Islam is based on Justice, rights and balance.
You surrender to the will of Allah with a firm belief in reward and punishment, though Allah is merciful.
You attain peace by submission to the will of Allah. If you truly belief in Islam, you will be at peace with yourself. You will see the power of your creator closer to your jugular vein. Death will be a continuation for you and not the end. You would only find guidance from Allah if you shun excesses and assume a moderate and pious (avoiding temptations) behavior. You will be a peaceful man with freedom and confidence, however, walking on the straight path, a path to your creator’s blessings.
You pray and remember your creator, his many attributes mentioned in Koran and, don’t forget death, five times a day. You forgive people and serve people to please your creator if you don’t like it. You don’t’ expect reward from people. You reward is with Allah who is the provider. Salvation in the Hereafter is your real and higher goal. The purpose of life is to surrender to the Almighty in all your acts and have good relationship with others for Allah’s pleasure and mercy. Forgive and forget to gain Allah’s blessings and to obey Allah, even if one does not like someone. Always struggle to make oneself a better servant of Allah.
One should glorify God and seek peace and tranquility by following his commands.
Islam means attaining peace with submission.
One should always try to practice good deeds to attain peace, forgiveness and paradise after death with the mercy of Allah.
One motivates oneself and ones companions to persevere and spread truth, stay steadfast and stands up for the rights.
You stand up for every human being irrespective of his religion whose rights are being taken away. You don’t exercise double standards.
Someone who is Muslim by name and practice perversion is following Satan and not submitted to Allah.
One should not listen to people who speak half the truth, refer things out of context, misrepresent, lie and accuse.
One should investigate the life style of the author who criticizes Islam or dismiss Muslim history altogether.
One may find the person writing about Islam to be hypocrite, perverted and deeply inspired by eroticism, gods, mythology, classical music, culture, long term associations, connections, fascinations, dance and things of the sort. How do you expect him to be not biased towards the ancient civilization? How do you expect him to like Islam?
One has to see who the person has been hanging out with and not accept things blindly. One must rule out assertions and look for the Whys or the proofs.
One must look for irrefutable proof to accept and reject things.
One must not accept and reject things based on likes, dislikes and family ties.
Personal dislike and not rationality is mainly the reason behind the accusations. We all owe to ourselves independent thinking and rationality.
Koran’s message and details are rational and scientific.
Koran gives bold statements and they comply with the present day discoveries and knowledge. If you recite and reflect on these verses your perspective in life will change.
Allah openly challenges in the Koran to use the falsification test using experts in the fields and disprove Koran.
Allah in Koran says you won’t be able to disprove.
Koran warns those who are adamant though they are not able to disprove. Allah gives the glad tidings at the same time to those who believe and practice righteousness.
I wonder why in your big
I wonder why in your big statement you have not mentioned the blood of the people shed in Kashmir. The blood of the Indian soldiers who have died to save Muslims in kashmir from the criminals in pakistan ?
Why have you not mentioned the blood shed by the train passengers in mumbai who lost their lives for no reason ? How long will muslims try to deny that the muslims killing so many people in the world today are not doing so because they think they are doing it for Islam ?
I wonder why in your big....
I have clearly denounced double standards. Killing of a civilian by an entity carrying arm is not acceptable, no matter what. Islam strictly forbids killing of even a single civilian life.
Our objective should be to find the number of civilians killed regardless of religion or ethnic background by the people or group of people carrying arms in all places of the world, some of which I have listed earlier.
We know Islam is not silenced on the killings of a single civilian regardless of the race and religion or ethnic background. In fact, Islam equates killing of one civilian to the killing of entire civilization and, saving of one civilian life to rescuing the entire civilization.
Let us put together a comparative statement with civilians on one side and the armed killers on the other side.
When you add up the number of civilians killed on one side of the comparative statement and all the armed combatants killing on the other side, you will find millions of Muslim civilians killed to fall on the civilian side of the comparative statement and, millions of Non Muslim combatants killings on the combatant killers side of the comparative statement.
You will also see some exceptions like Mumbai train station, 911 and theater killing in Russian by Chechens. As a Muslim and a person with a good heart, I strongly condemn killing of civilians by the armed combatants regardless of all factors.
However, it is in public domain and not a secret that Russians soldiers have killed two hundred fifty thousand Chechen civilians, whereas Chechen armed rebels have killed a very small number of Russian civilians.
It is also not a secret that US soldiers have killed more than five hundred thousand civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq on the basis of a false accusation and a suspect, where as the Muslim combatants have killed few thousands American civilians including the victims of 911.
Similarly, Indian Army has killed several thousand Muslim civilians in Kashmir over the last few decades and, the Muslim armed killers have killed few thousand Indian civilians. Killing of civilians is not acceptable regardless of religion. I condemn the killing of civilians in all forms including Mumbai train killing.
Killing of civilians is bad no matter what. It is strictly against the Islamic ethics of war. But we must differentiate between the killings of civilians by the combatants and the killing of the combatant by the combatant. Killing of combatants is generally accepted by everyone in the world.
Killing of civilians by the armed combatants is defined as a terrorist act.
You may include similar data in the comparative statement from places like Bosnia, Lebanon, Palestine, and Kosovo and so forth.
You will see similar results that most of the civilians killed by the armed combatants happen to be Muslims and, most of the armed combatants killing Muslim civilians happen to be Non Muslims. What you see in the news about Muslim combatants or terrorist killing Non Muslim civilians is relatively an exception, though much more publicized.
Don’t get me wrong, killing of civilians is the worst crime, no matter what. But I cannot change the facts. Personally I condemn killing of civilians regardless of any reason. We must not deny the facts and stand up for the truth no matter what. We may use a similar analyses for all events in the present and the past to arrive at a fair conclusion instead of simply blaming Muslims based on our personal likes and dislikes.
why the world is scared of muslims
the reason is very simple. Muslims guided by Quran have to obey the laws and rules . The rules are very simple and if implememnted would bring out the peace imagined only in utopia . so what laws are we talking about. lets state the basic obvious ones
Muslims have to maintain a decent life free from al vices what vices are these. No alchohol or any intoxicants that harm your health. There is no other religion that I came across which forbids it. Imagine if the whole world shuns these half the problems would immediately cease, but that will never happen because the non muslims will never let it happen,even thought they know the truth, its all about ego. anyways, moving further, lets go on to gambling, Islam forbids gambling as well as giving and taking interests on loan or principal. This is the biggest reason why we have so much inequality in the world in terms of rich and poor. Again this will never happen because for non muslims this is only one life and live life to the fullest even if it means eradicating the good because power is everything in the world. Again no religion except Islam forbids these vices. Recently, a freind of mine told me this story, a non muslim preacher or missionary came to a muslim man and started talking about his religion, so our muslim friend said ok, what does your religion have to offer, lets see, being a muslim, I pray five times ie remember Allah five times as prescribed,I dont gamble, nor commit adultery or fornication with other women, I dont give interest or take money on interest. I am honest in my transaction to the best of my ability , I give money to the poor in charity every now and then as prescribed in my religion, I am very respectful to my parents , my elders and show love and mercy to the younger ones. I tend to forgive people for their mistakes, and asks forgiveness if I make mistake.. Now tell me what is something different you can offer me to better my life . listening to this, the non muslim quietly said, if only there are more people like you there would be no problems in the world, hearing this, the muslim said to him whats stopping you from joining me. The Non muslim cried and left . After a few days , he came back with his entire family and told the muslim guy, thanks we are all muslims because of you to which the muslim replied , its not me, its Islam.
so my non muslim friends learn about Islam and REad Quran with open mind. if you read Quran with a negative mind out to critisize, you will never see the good as is said in the Quran. Peace to all
zia
why the world is scared of muslims
"Muslims have to maintain a decent life free from al vices what vices are these. No alchohol or any intoxicants that harm your health".What a load a garbage?Vice of all sorts are rife in the Muslim Community. I am ashame to say this. Do you think wearing a burkha is the solution to disguise what goes on behind?Look how the arabs enjoy great life with the best alcohol and women in those grand hotel. They are even involved in sodomy!Ok, I am telling you something you may know. In the lower economic group too it goes on. Men drink alcohol where they would not be found or hide under the table.
Incest is rife too because of the kind of life we lead.For this reason Muslims in India are better off. You can see that they made a good decision with partition. We have a muslim president. He knows how to respect other religion. We have a Sikh PM. Yes we have the biggest progress in Music and Film Industry. Look how many Pakistanis artists are flocking to realise their potental in India and becoming famous.
religion MUST be a private thing between your four walls and the walls of the mosque, mandir, temples, churches etc etc.
Learn and Live. the more I read about this kind of comments and these sites I wantto go and live in a desert island. Learn to respect and you will get respect!!
Unfortuanely Many Muslims are corrupt today but not all..
Unfortuantely, Muslims are corrupt today like others but not all Muslims are corrupt. You are right about many of these Arabs & Muslims. But, There are still many good Muslims around. Allah helps those who help themsleves. Allah in Koran swears by time that the humans (including Muslims) are in a state of loss (hell bound) except those who have firm belief in Islam, do good deeds,join together in perseverance & spread of truth. TO BE BORN A MUSLIM IS NOT A CONTRACT TO PARADISE. It is a matter of struggle for any human to stay steadfast on the straight path given by Koran regardless of which family the human is born in. It is an irrefutable fact that Veda testifies to the truth of Islam. Bible & Torah testifies to the truth of Islam. Unfortunately, Muslim leadership all over the world today is also Muslim by name and corrupt in general.
Check out the following for your reference:
Sayyidina Muhammad
in hindu scriptures
http://www.ummah.com/Al_adaab/muhammad/hindu.html
Islam was not spread by Sufis
a complete lie.
Sufis spread Sufism.
They do not spread firebrand Sunnism or Shiasm.
The majority of people in Pakistan are not SUfis, neitehr are the majority of Indian Muslims.
Almost NONE of the Indian Muslims can trace their lineage back to any Sufi, especially those Wahhabi idiots.
Again, Sufis spread SUFISM, and this can EASILY be seen in Kashmir and Bangladesh where many SUFI SHRINES exist and where SUFISM is still strong, so yes in those TWO AREAS SUFISM was spread.
Otherwise, it was by force or coercion. Lower-castes could already convert to Buddhism so that excuse doesnt work.
Sufiism is not a sect .. Lineage does matter
Islam was mainly spread by Sufism in the subcontinent. Tableeghi Jamaat have also played an important role. Dr. Zakir Naik is doing a great service to Islam too. May Allah reward him for his good deeds and excellent service for the sake of Allah, Aameen.
One out or three people living in the subcontinent are Muslims.
It adds up to almost five hundred million in the subcontinent.
It is hard to believe half a billion Muslims living in the subcontinent are a product of coercion.
People don't change religions at gun point.
It is a matter of conviction and can not really spread at this rate and magnitude, far and wide, if it is not the truth.
Most of the new Muslims have taken their own initiatives and read Koran on there own and reflected on it. Unfortuantely, most of the born Muslims have not conveyed the message.
We are one point six billion out of six billion total population of the world, which is more than twenty five percent of the world population.
Islam has been the fastest growing religion in the world and is still the fastest to this day. The net direction of conversion has been towards Islam to this day.
Last year alone fifty six thousand non Muslims living in the USA and the UK have reverted to Islam.
It’s a projection Russia would become a Muslim country in the next twenty years, inshaAllah.
It is a real thing happening and cannot be a product of intimidation.
Sufism is not a different sect. Sufis were selfless spiritual Muslims who inspired Indians. They followed Shariat at (5 pillars of Islam).
They bonded all Muslims irrespective of their origins.
As a matter of fact Koran and Sunna (The ways of the prophet (May peace be upon him)) are the sources of Islam for all Muslims regardless of sects.
The bottom line according to Koran, obedience of Allah and the prophet (May peace be upon him)is all what matters regardless of sects.
Prophet (May peace be upon him) is the example for all Muslims to emulate regardless of sects.
It is a promise given by Allah in Koran to all Muslims to hold the rope tight and the rope is the Koran and, dismis split ups among the Muslims as they would not do any good to a Muslims to pass accountability in the hereafter. Our creator is going to hold us accountable for our belief in one creator, Koran and what it commands and the deeds. As a Muslim, Islam is our religion and our prophet (May peace be upon him) was not Shia or Sunni. He was a Muslim. Sufism has nothing to do with the sects. These people taught self control, selflessness and served humanity for the sake Allah's love. They obeyed Allah and the prophet (May peace be upon him) like the Koran commands us. Their conduct was above sectarian divides.
Sufiism is not a sect .. Lineage does matter
"...a projection Russia would become a Muslim country in the next twenty years, inshaAllah.."
When India could not become a muslim country in 1000 years, how Russia can be a muslim country in 20 years. Or are you a typical muslim without logical mind??
Besides, try to mess up with Russia or China and enjoy the result as Chechenyans are enjoying :-)
This article is complete crap
-in the 1700's , Nadir Shah invaded new Delhi and massacred 30,000 people.
- TImur, as stated in his AUTOBIOGRAPHY, massacred 100,000 Hindus in New Delhi
- The Khilji Muslims burned Nalanda ( the most important center of Buddhist center in India) to the ground and massacred all of the inhabitants inside. This set back Indians intellectually speaking at least 100 years.
- Aurangzeb executed a SIkh guru for refusing to convert to Islam and demolished Hindu temples.
- Akbar execute d 40,000 Rajput Hindus
- Mohhamed of Ghazni executed thousands of Hindus and destroyed many temples, as EVIDENCED BY AL-BERUNI IN HIS WRITINGS.
- Mohhamed of Ghori did the same as Ghazni.
- The Afghan Lodhis and Durranis all did the same
- The Chachnama documents half-a-dozen attempts at invading and ruling India before Qusam, who DID Massacre thousands of Hindus who refused to live under his leadership. Its obvious the author of this article has never read the Chachnama.
- THe Jizya tax was used to coerce people into Islam, as evidenced by the book entitled "The human record", 2nd edition I believe. The Jizya was placed on the native Hindus by foreign middle-eastern Muslims who ruled a land they did not belong in. It would be similar to the Americans taxing the Iraqis for no good reason.
this is just the tip of the ice-berg.
Muslims could not convert the entire sub-continent because it was too large and they were always meeting resistance. Even if they wanted to (which some did), it would have been impossible.
ANd here is a link to a HADITH stating that YOUR PROPHET encouraged the invasion of India:
http://archive.muslimuzbekistan.com/eng/islam/2003/01/a28012003.html
Future of Muslims in India ?
Future of Muslims in India ?
Aaj india k ander har
Aaj india k ander har muslaim noujwan ko 1 dahashatgard k najriye se dekha jaata hai.jis watan k aajadi ke liye shahid ashfaqullah khan jaise lakho noujwanone apane aap ko qurban kiya usi m,ulh me aaj hamara noujwan 1 mujrim ki tarah jindagi gujar raha hai. aaj hamari koum hifajat se nahi hai.
hah enjoy life
hi,
if we all just say!
"enjoy life"
and dont ponder over things around us .dont watch our purpose of existence.i think we will all be comparable to animals.and no one.
so u c .
a vast difference between an animal and a humnan being!
a human being is given what is called mind.to regret and to correct mistakes of the past.
chill.
Let's enjoy life
Let's not waste our time talking about man made thing called religion. There is no God.
Human race itself has some issues I guess. They like to fight and they have created a perfect excuse.
A day will come when the mention of term "religion" will be banned and human being will laugh at all this which is happening today.
Look what is happening
Look what is happening in
Afganistam
Bangladesh
Pakistan
Iraq
Why ? Even though they are Islamic countries?
Can you take a poll from indian muslims that if they are given an option to migrate to any muslim country like pakistan or bangladesh whether they will choose such country or choose to stay in India?
Who are the real muslims ?
Sunni , shia , ahamadia or other .
Is it not that the Dawoodi Bohra community are really people who should be called real muslims?
Ultimately most of Indian Muslims are original Hindu poeple and one day they are bound to return to their mother.
A child given in adoption does not cease to be child of natural mother.
Indian muslims must realise that their forefathers had been converted under compelling circumstances and they must know thier roots are in Hinduism.
Turks and Rajputs
Mr. Raj Singh:
That is often true that "child goes back to her natural mother": there was another religion your people, Rajputs, were belong to, so don't you think you should go back to it, and worship Sun, Moon, and Fire....? Those mothers of yours the ones converted to Hinduism by force but you can't admit that in fear of your community. Do not be surprised if some day you find Turkish blood in your veins...!
sistersinhistory
All is happening because
All is happening because world is afraid of muslims' power n rule. they know that for a long time they hav been around and they can be back any time.
if u look at the history then u'll find that islam is the oldest n the first relegion in a way that adam and eve are considered to be the father n mother of all of the muslims(strong islamic belief).
N yes all muslims, they still realize n recognize and they will never decline the fact that children love their parents n will always return to wat their parents were(adam n eve-islamic belief). study islam properly and gather enough knowledge before you make any comment.
Why my comments are removed?
I posted few comments on contributions of muslims to India and world, can anyone update me why were they removed? On your website you say "Please keep coming back for the updated content and if you like you can help us by bringing information about Indian Muslims to the web and educating the whole world about their contribution" which I did. I understand that you are not here to take -ve part along with +ve of the history and show the real picture but only embark on the +ve to show that "Muslims were India's first historians." Its not the way that it should be then? Why are you so selective in presenting the historical facts? I dont say that muslims only contribute worst to India, they have also contributed good things as well. On top of my mind, APJ, the present president of India...all of us know his contribution to India..and most of the Indian muslims feel they are Indians, but remember how much ever your try to hide the -ve history, it still comes out.
All I can say is, its a very funny place to be...its like people around a person treat him as a joker but he still feels as a leader and acts like one, giving scope for more humor...like the funny people whom we meet in our daily lives, isnt it!!!
removing comment
as you can see we leave -ve comments here too. We try to remove offensive comments and comments which have whole articles posted in the comment box which defeats the purpose of the comment section.
Thanks for the reply khasif
Thanks for the reply khasif and offensive and -ve comments are centainly to be removed, agree with you. But you cannot change whats there in the history and what was posted were not my comments but the hisotry.
When you have called for a virtual debate on an issue try to show the clear picture to the readers and defend yourself and try to accept that you dont know.
Empires were expansionist:
Empires were expansionist:
Empires might be expansionist, but were the Muslims Khalifats supposed to run Empires or see the affairs of Muslim Ummah? The invasion was approved by the highest seat of Islam, the Khalipha. Was the Kalipha supposed to be a power drunk Empire builder like another king or a religious leader to handle the affairs of Muslim Ummah?
Religion of Peace:
This is what Islam literally means. But how do u explain the concept of Dar-ul-harb and Dar-ul-Islam wherein Dar-ul-islam is supposed to expand and bring Dar-ul-harb under Dar-ul-Islam? This itself makes Islam an expansionist force. How can there be peace then?
Jizya:
Zakat is fixed 10% while Jizya is orally fixed. But most important of all it is used to demean the non muslims who were taxed Jizya and Kharaj(the land tax).
The imposition of jizya upon non-Muslims is mandated by the Qur'an 9:29:
Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold forbidden that which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.
So while muslims will expand to create Dar-Ul-Islam, they will tax you with Jizya. So people will ultimatley pay for living and believing in their faith to Islamic Rulers?
Empires were expansionist
I would request you not to arrive at conclusions without knowing the whole truth. Feel free to pose your questions on understanding-islam.com to throw away misconceptions and doubts about Islam. By the way, zakat is the fourth pillar of Islam and the commanded rate of zakat is 2 1/2 % and not 10%. Jizya is for the protection for non Muslims and in return they can avoid a draft. Don't have to go to the war front with Muslims. However, they are not required to pay the zakat, only Muslims have the duty to pay zakat in the Islamic government and, defend the honor of Non Muslims in exchange for jizya. Darul harb means nothing more than the country with which you are at war with and, has got nothing to do with expansionism. Muhammad bin Qasim was loved by Indians. They had tears in their eyes when he was returning from his mission. He helped out Raja Dahir. The King of Malabar accepted Islam at the hands of Prophet Muhammad (May peace be upon him) in early 600 AD. Islam was spread mainly by Sufis in India. We have 500 to 600 million Muslims combined in India, Pakistan and Bangladesh. Do you really believe billions of Muslims have been produced as a result of force conversion? You cannot change someone's heart by kicking on one's back. Conversion to Islam is a real phenomenon. It’s the power of Koran and the message. It is the fastest growing religion to this day. It is also the fastest growing religion in the United States, Europe and Russia. More American women are converting to Islam than men. Why is it so if the accusations are true about Islam? You may check out islamicity.com and see the number of non Muslims accepting Islam. We have a town in deep Texas where the entire population has reverted to Islam. The whole nation of northwest frontier province in the present Pakistan decided to accept Islam in one shot after the JIRGA decided early 600 AD that the message of Koran is a real thing. People of Indonesia accepted Islam after they were impressed with the Muslim traders. Muslims ruled India for almost a thousand years. . If we accept for the argument sake that conversion of millions of non Muslims is possible by brute force, then why we have only 15 % Muslims in India and not an overwhelming majority of something like 90 %? Today we have close to 1.5 billion Muslims with much larger population than many of the older religions. It is evident the direction of conversion all over the world is towards Islam and not the other way round. These 1.5 billion Muslims are former Hindus, Buddhist, Christians, Jews, animist, atheist, agnostics and so forth and few Arabs. Arabs, anyway constitute a small minority among the entire population of Muslims. If you really understand the power of Koran with sincerity and not hatred, there is no way you would not accept Islam. Islam means believing in one true God without partners. Islam, in fact, is the same message brought by all messengers before the last messenger (may peace be upon him). There is none worthy of worship but God. Your creator is closer to than your jugular vein. Read Koran carefully, there are no contradictions. Also, check out Dr. Garry Miller’s website, www.thetruecall.com. What is the difference between Islam and other great religions in the simplistic terms? Islam teaches oneness of God without associations while other religions teach worship of God with associations. Basically this association is the prime difference between Islam and other great religions of the world. Is it not true, somehow, those who associate in different ways gang up against Islam and don’t feel threatened by each other. Think about it, something is not right here. I have not mentioned Judaism on purpose, because it’s a different ballgame beyond the scope of our discussion.
Aryan settlement in India:
Aryan settlement in India: Aryans didnt invade India. They migrated to India. Theres no evidence to suggest that Aryans demolished Harrapan Civilization. The archiologists deny that they were massacred. So correct your facts. Aryans did came into conflict with the other inhabitants, but there wasnt a kingdom or a ruler. Aryans came into india in form tribes and not as a single force.
Revolts Against Muslims Rulers:
There had been numerous and the list will go on, so I will name the ones against your very Favourite Aurangzeb.
Persecution of the Sikhs. Death sentence to Guru TegBhadur for not accepting Islam.According to Mughal court orders a person could legally cut of a Sikhs head and exchange it with money at a police station. Sikhs had revolted.
In Maharashtra Hindus under Shivaji had revolted.
Sisodia Rajputs of Udaipur were always in revolt against muslims rulers, they never married their daugthers to Mughal rulers.
And the main reason why the whole of population didnt revolt unitedly was because they were not united. They are divided into smaller kingdom of Rajas or Nawabs. The era of British was different, when communucation was fast and interaction between different parts was more.
""Again if we look at the second world war, Hitler's genocide of Jews resulted in elimination of half of the Jewish Population in Europe in just under 5 years.""
Dear then you must read about Haj Amin, the mufti of Jeruslem who collaborated with Hitler to create Muslim Waffen SS for killing of jews.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amin_al-Husayni
And if even after 1000 years of rule the population is Hindu, its because of their Resilience
The picture is unreal
I think the history you have chosen to write on about muslims in India focuses on only the 'comfortable' history and has left out 'uncomfortable' history. It is true that Northern India was ruled by a minority 20% muslims for a long time and it must mean that the rulers were by and large fair, e.g. Akbar. However, it is also true that the 'great' Aurangzeb that you have refered to above placed 'tax' on the majority non-muslims and some rulers looted temples (where wealth was). So, the history of muslims in India is a mixed history, just like the history of any race in any part of the world.
The problem with the 'rosy' picutre that I see here is that it somehow looks like as if the author is rationalizing or explaining the earlier muslim rulers of India. I want to reiterate that whatever was brought to India by muslims (good or bad) was brought by those people, not today's generations. Therefore, there is no point in being 'selective' in the history.
Your comment has been queued for moderation by site administrato
If Islam was truly a peaceful religion, and your contributions to India were so overwhelmingly positive, you wouldn't have to ""queue messages for moderation.""
Islam's presence in India is the result of illegal invasions, just as you held American presence in Saudi Arabia and now Iraq as illegal, just as you hold Israel's presence as illegal.