Delhi Sultanate Appreciation Thread - Positive Contributions of Delhi Sultanate in Indian Subcontinent

[Rajdeep]

There is no real mature debate as it's all make believe from rss children books but great entertainment.

you talking about maturity after getting regular ownage from me is the irony.

Yet to hear where your ancestor were from? Arab or Turhish?

 

[speed]

You are right that when Mahmud's army ransacked and desecrated Somnath, most of the foot soldiers in his army were Pashtuns. These were taking orders from their overlords. Motivation for the attack is to conquer infidel lands and take their wealth. A part of the wealth goes to the foot soldiers.
The Lodi, Suri, Durrani empires are 400-500 years after the Ghaznavid invasions. Yes, they are native Afghan empires. But they were very short lived ranging from 15-70 years. They assumed the power once the Turkic invaders influence faded in the subcontinent after their initial conquest in the 11th century.
But guess what, the Turkic invaders came back once again with Babur. He was as brutal as the Mahmuds of Ghazna and Ghor. To solidify his power in power in Afghanistan, he massacred thousands in the Pashtun belt of modern day Pak and Afghanistan. Read about the massacre of Bajaur. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bajaur_massacre
Babur made mountains of skulls of the dead Pashtun people. Pretty sure many Punjabis were there in that massacre too.

Turks had no rules when it came to war. Its all about murder, conquer and enslavement. They had no sympathy to conquered people considering they themselves were slaves of the Abbasid Caliphate. Totally messed up.

I know well what babur done its all written in baburnama, He massacred the dilzaks, but was joined by the yusufzais in his invasion of India, different tribes got different treatments.

Mughals are not loved much by Pashtuns( see revolts during akbars time) as compared to the ghaznavids and ghurids, they were the ones who expanded pashtun settlements outside of their home in the suleiman mountains and pashtuns greatly benefited from their constant invasions into India.

 

[Rajdeep]

Yes. Many of them are quite immature. Not just immature but also highly ignorant in basic histories.

It is difficult to debate with someone who constantly resorts to whataboutism and insults.

Bengal Tiger.....let me know when you gather enough courage to debate with me rather than hiding behind other posters as always.

 

[speed]

Indians still carry historical wound, according to Hindutva historians Afghanistan to Bangladesh is all Indian land, they still can't stomach that Muslims have broken their Akhand Bharat into different pieces and taken those lands of them.

They can only cope by calling Local Muslims as 'converted' as if thats a slur lol, All Muslims from the Time of the companions are converted, what did the arabs worship before Islam?.

 

[speed]

If that is your mentality ... then why do you guys cry when the Indian army goes and mauls Kashmiri muslims and rules in Kashmir? What goes around comes around and usually with huge interest ... no ?

Don't worry we haven't finished yet, we will take kashmir back as well.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

I dont live in India but when I read hateful posts from OP and likes of @The Bald Eagle ....I totally understand where the hatred towards muslims comes from in India. This also gives me strong belief what Modi is doing is absolutely right and I hope he may continues.

Glorify Barbaric Islamic rules and then open a thread why you hate muslims.

Aww...choo cute.

Your hatred has nothing to do with what posters write here, you were stoking up anti-Pakistan hatred in the grooming gang threads as well on behalf of white Brits. Now some 80 year old Indian grandfather got beaten to death yesterday because people like you think racial profiling is a good idea.

 

[sweep_shot]

Indians still carry historical wound, according to Hindutva historians Afghanistan to Bangladesh is all Indian land, they still can't stomach that Muslims have broken their Akhand Bharat into different pieces and taken those lands of them.

They can only cope by calling Local Muslims as 'converted' as if thats a slur lol, All Muslims from the Time of the companions are converted, what did the arabs worship before Islam?.

Yes. I don't know why they call us converts. LOL. Modern day Bangladeshis and Pakistanis are born Muslims. Our ancestors converted many generations ago.

Same with Arabs. Their ancestors converted too. Their ancestors were Jews, pagans etc.

Not sure why they think calling us "converts" would irritate us. It is not even factually correct.

Don't worry we haven't finished yet, we will take kashmir back as well.

May Kashmir be free very soon.

Indian army has done many barbaric atrocities in Kashmir. May those people receive justice. May God give them justice.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Alaudding Khilji and Aurangazeb were most cruel kings in the history of India who have killed thousands of Hindus, took their wives and made slaves, forced converted them and broken their places of religion.

Then when I see when my fellow sub continent muslims praise the same Delhi Sultanate and Mughal empire, dont you think as a Hindi I will develop hatred for muslims? If yes, dnt you think your thread why muslim bias exists among hindutvas is a rherorical question?

Please answer this honestly if you have minimum conscience

No need to bring Maratha empire and do whataboutery here. No hindu has opened a thread here glorifying Maratha Empire here or why Hindu bias exists among Islamists.

Atleast the OP is a troll...what is your excuse to lie?

If you are sensible you will be able to contextualise it and understand that these empires were products of their team. You can take out the bad but look at the good.

For example, Brits will lionise Churchill, I too admire him for his war time leadership. But he helped cause the Bengal Famine. We don't need to admire all aspects of him and I can't be angry at Brits for admiring that part of him. If people admire him for The Bengal Famine that is problematic. You can make a judgment on whether the good outweighs the bad.

Similarly people like to bring up Gandhis racism and touchy feely behaviour but nobody admires him because of that, they admire him for his work done to promote peace across India.

I think we can apply similar rules to Aurungzeb, Mughals and Delhi Sultanate, just as you do with Marathas. There is no whatabouttery in this.

 

[Champ_Pal]

I know well what babur done its all written in baburnama, He massacred the dilzaks, but was joined by the yusufzais in his invasion of India, different tribes got different treatments.

Mughals are not loved much by Pashtuns( see revolts during akbars time) as compared to the ghaznavids and ghurids, they were the ones who expanded pashtun settlements outside of their home in the suleiman mountains and pashtuns greatly benefited from their constant invasions into India.

So massacre one tribe by helping another tribe
This is why Babur is a dirtbag. No different to Brits who used yo support one kingdom to defeat other and then eventually take over the entire land.

It’s sad to see people still defending these criminals and scou***** by calling them great and the best thing to have happened to Subcontjent.

 

[sweep_shot]

If you are sensible you will be able to contextualise it and understand that these empires were products of their team. You can take out the bad but look at the good.

For example, Brits will lionise Churchill, I too admire him for his war time leadership. But he helped cause the Bengal Famine. We don't need to admire all aspects of him and I can't be angry at Brits for admiring that part of him. If people admire him for The Bengal Famine that is problematic. You can make a judgment on whether the good outweighs the bad.

Similarly people like to bring up Gandhis racism and touchy feely behaviour but nobody admires him because of that, they admire him for his work done to promote peace across India.

I think we can apply similar rules to Aurungzeb, Mughals and Delhi Sultanate, just as you do with Marathas. There is no whatabouttery in this.

Top post.

This is something Indian posters generally fail to grasp. Maybe it is due to their deep hatred and insecurity.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Yes. I don't know why they call us converts. LOL. Modern day Bangladeshis and Pakistanis are born Muslims. Our ancestors converted many generations ago.

Same with Arabs. Their ancestors converted too. Their ancestors were Jews, pagans etc.

Not sure why they think calling us "converts" would irritate us. It is not even factually correct.




May Kashmir be free very soon.

Indian army has done many barbaric atrocities in Kashmir. May those people receive justice. May God give them justice.

Convert in general has high status in Islam. They are viewing through caste lens of exclusivity.

Many Hindus make fun of concept of Ummah but don't see it on local level. They havent experienced being traveller and recieving a hug and being invited to someones home because of religion, even though there is language barrier, they haven't experienced Eid. Of course some Arabs don't believe in it, and some Pakistanis take it too far but alhumdulilah I am content knowing I can travel the world and am just one "Assalamualikum brother" from being helped and feeling secure.

 

[Champ_Pal]

If you are sensible you will be able to contextualise it and understand that these empires were products of their team. You can take out the bad but look at the good.

For example, Brits will lionise Churchill, I too admire him for his war time leadership. But he helped cause the Bengal Famine. We don't need to admire all aspects of him and I can't be angry at Brits for admiring that part of him. If people admire him for The Bengal Famine that is problematic. You can make a judgment on whether the good outweighs the bad.

Similarly people like to bring up Gandhis racism and touchy feely behaviour but nobody admires him because of that, they admire him for his work done to promote peace across India.

I think we can apply similar rules to Aurungzeb, Mughals and Delhi Sultanate, just as you do with Marathas. There is no whatabouttery in this.

No Indian will have a problem with English lionizing Churchill. He is their hero. But Indians will not.
In the case of these Babur’s, Mahmud’s, they are murders and Lootere. This is why Indians have no respect for them and the animosity is also legit.
What is funny is, the likes of Mahmud’s and Babur’s caused mayhem in Northwwsyern part of India and North India. Yet the people there lionize him just because they now follow the same religion as the invading marauder. Can’t call them bad because they are the fellow Islamic brothas.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

No Indian will have a problem with English lionizing Churchill. He is their hero. But Indians will not.
In the case of these Babur’s, Mahmud’s, they are murders and Lootere. This is why Indians have no respect for them and the animosity is also legit.
What is funny is, the likes of Mahmud’s and Babur’s caused mayhem in Northwwsyern part of India and North India. Yet the people there lionize him just because they now follow the same religion as the invading marauder. Can’t call them bad because they are the fellow Islamic brothas.

Again it's the context. You don't say anything bad about your Hindu kings and leaders.

It's all about Muslims.

When you have different standards for different groups then it's hard to take seriously.

For example you mention harem of Muslim leaders but don't have any issue with Hindu leaders making low caste women expose their breast to humiliate them.

Why Hindus lionise these kind of leaders?

 

[LordJames]

Everyone following Islam or Hinduism is a convert generationaly. Even Hindus were not Hindus once upon a time but converted to Hinduism at some point when Hindusim came along.

The logic of "Ghar-Wapsi" is stupid because if Muslims should return to Hinduism (or whatever) because they were Hindus once upon a time then by following that logic Hindus should return to "whatever they were before Hinduism".

Now watch Hindus apply one principle to Muslims (converts) but another principle to Hindus (not converts)...

 

[Champ_Pal]

Again it's the context. You don't say anything bad about your Hindu kings and leaders.

It's all about Muslims.

When you have different standards for different groups then it's hard to take seriously.

For example you mention harem of Muslim leaders but don't have any issue with Hindu leaders making low caste women expose their breast to humiliate them.

Why Hindus lionise these kind of leaders?

Which Hindu King massacred people and made mountains of skulls? It is a trademark of Turkic marauders. Learned very well from their slave masters Mongols.

Any Hindu leaders making low caste women expose their private parts are A-Grade Dirtbags. No defending that. I don't have different standards for different people. I am yet to see any Hindu defend that.

Putting thousands of women in harems or selling them in open markets like trading goods and making them sex slaves is a terrible practice and must be condemned. Under no circumstances such acts be defended.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

If you are sensible you will be able to contextualise it and understand that these empires were products of their team. You can take out the bad but look at the good.

For example, Brits will lionise Churchill, I too admire him for his war time leadership. But he helped cause the Bengal Famine. We don't need to admire all aspects of him and I can't be angry at Brits for admiring that part of him. If people admire him for The Bengal Famine that is problematic. You can make a judgment on whether the good outweighs the bad.

Similarly people like to bring up Gandhis racism and touchy feely behaviour but nobody admires him because of that, they admire him for his work done to promote peace across India.

I think we can apply similar rules to Aurungzeb, Mughals and Delhi Sultanate, just as you do with Marathas. There is no whatabouttery in this.

He won't ever understand, blind following of some cloud one's judgement

 

[Champ_Pal]

Everyone following Islam or Hinduism is a convert generationaly. Even Hindus were not Hindus once upon a time but converted to Hinduism at some point when Hindusim came along.

The logic of "Ghar-Wapsi" is stupid because if Muslims should return to Hinduism (or whatever) because they were Hindus once upon a time then by following that logic Hindus should return to "whatever they were before Hinduism".

Now watch Hindus apply one principle to Muslims (converts) but another principle to Hindus (not converts)...

Hinduism is not a conversion religion. It has organically grown in India. It is just a common face given to a plethora of practices and beliefs in subcontinent. It includes the teachings of various Saints, Rishis, philosophers who have paved the way to attain relief from this life and the upcoming ones. Yes, they believe in rebirth. This is why we see so many weird practices in some parts of India. It is also Hinduism. No Hindu in Tamilnadu or Gujarat or UP objects to the practices of some dude in Bengal or Bihar or Kashmir. To each their own.

There were definitely some clashes between the Shivite and Vaishnavite sects in South India before. But the differences did not go to an extent where they still fight today. At best they do not intermarry. That's about it.

 

[LordJames]

Convert in general has high status in Islam. They are viewing through caste lens of exclusivity.

Many Hindus make fun of concept of Ummah but don't see it on local level. They havent experienced being traveller and recieving a hug and being invited to someones home because of religion, even though there is language barrier, they haven't experienced Eid. Of course some Arabs don't believe in it, and some Pakistanis take it too far but alhumdulilah I am content knowing I can travel the world and am just one "Assalamualikum brother" from being helped and feeling secure.​

Most Hindus, Christians and others have no concept of "Ummah" and have no reference point or experience of being coreligionists. A Muslim can meet another Muslim (without common knowledge or culture or frame of reference) on the other side of the world and instantly connect without a language.

I have been caught in riots, Terrorist attacks, being sick, arrested and been able to connect with someone just based on religion with no language skills, a "Non-Muslim" cannot fathom this.

When it comes to Arabs then the connection is also there, do not take the Arabs of Khaleej (Saudia, Qatar, Kuwat, UAE etc) as an example but even a large majority of them connection is possible but language is a limitation. You can connect with huge populations of Arabs in Asia & Africa without any issues.​

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Which Hindu King massacred people and made mountains of skulls? It is a trademark of Turkic marauders. Learned very well from their slave masters Mongols.

Any Hindu leaders making low caste women expose their private parts are A-Grade Dirtbags. No defending that. I don't have different standards for different people. I am yet to see any Hindu defend that.

Putting thousands of women in harems or selling them in open markets like trading goods and making them sex slaves is a terrible practice and must be condemned. Under no circumstances such acts be defended.

Ok...but no one even knows how saintly where Hindu Kings
===

Some of the most brutal Hindu kings in Indian history include:

• Pushyamitra Shunga: Known for his violent suppression of Buddhism, he offered rewards for the heads of Buddhist monks and attempted to destroy Buddhist sites like the Kukkutarama monastery
• Mihirakula: A Huna king, he was infamous for destroying Buddhist monasteries and stupas, and his campaigns of violence led to significant suffering across his territories
• Raghoji I Bhonsle: A Maratha ruler, he led campaigns of pillage and slaughter in Bengal, causing widespread devastation and economic hardship

These rulers were known for their brutal policies and actions against various groups


Maharaja Sir Bhupinder Singh of Patiala. He was known for having ten wives and a harem of 350 mistresses, reflecting a lifestyle of grandeur and extravagance. The Vijayanagara Empire, for instance, had rulers who practiced polygamy, but specific details about large harems are not well-documented

 

[JaDed]

Pakistan Cricket Team and Bangladesh Cricket Team..

 

[LordJames]

Hinduism is not a conversion religion. It has organically grown in India. It is just a common face given to a plethora of practices and beliefs in subcontinent. It includes the teachings of various Saints, Rishis, philosophers who have paved the way to attain relief from this life and the upcoming ones. Yes, they believe in rebirth. This is why we see so many weird practices in some parts of India. It is also Hinduism. No Hindu in Tamilnadu or Gujarat or UP objects to the practices of some dude in Bengal or Bihar or Kashmir. To each their own.

There were definitely some clashes between the Shivite and Vaishnavite sects in South India before. But the differences did not go to an extent where they still fight today. At best they do not intermarry. That's about it.

Cut the BS because I have studied Hindusim!

Someone who is a "Jain" is a generational convert to Jainism while someone who is a "Hindu" is a generational convert to Hindu and at some point the person decided to adopt the philosophy of "Jainism" over Hinduism or vice-versa. The person who converted to "Islam" decided to reject both (as an example) and adopt Islam and same can be said about Sikhism.

As a concept, the call to return to "original philosophy" is stupid according to your own response because if you require Muslims to return then apply the principle.

Muslims have no problems with whoever is "not a Muslim" and we don't need to convert anyone, To You, your religion and to Muslims, Islam.

As I said, keep on making ridiculous arguments which make no sense.

 

[LordJames]

Dr Vaniya Abdur-Raheem (1933-2023): Hindu Covert to Islam

1. Converted to Islam (on his own)
2. Learned Arabic (on his own) and then specialized for years and taught.
3. Authored the Arabic course which is taught in most Islamic Institutions around the world
4. Considered a foremost Master of Arabic in our times by all Muslims.

 

[Rajdeep]

If you are sensible you will be able to contextualise it and understand that these empires were products of their team. You can take out the bad but look at the good.

For example, Brits will lionise Churchill, I too admire him for his war time leadership. But he helped cause the Bengal Famine. We don't need to admire all aspects of him and I can't be angry at Brits for admiring that part of him. If people admire him for The Bengal Famine that is problematic. You can make a judgment on whether the good outweighs the bad.

Similarly people like to bring up Gandhis racism and touchy feely behaviour but nobody admires him because of that, they admire him for his work done to promote peace across India.

I think we can apply similar rules to Aurungzeb, Mughals and Delhi Sultanate, just as you do with Marathas. There is no whatabouttery in this.

One cannot take any good part of evil Islamic invaders without discussing their barbarism. They have no good virtues in them. Killing and converting thousands using rampant force is not good. What good shall you expect us to take from them? That they build few monuments and infrastructure? No sir..we will never ignore their barbarism just for these meterialistic stuff. If that is the case why don't Pakistanis praise Israel? Sure they are invaders, albeit less barbaric but have created lots of infrastructure and done development work in Palestine. Are you willing to take their good part ignoring the bad? No. So pls dnt expect us to do the same.

I am not for a moment asking Pakistanis or muslims in general to not praise Delhi Sultanate or Mughals. You can praise who ever you like. All i saying is, dont come tomorrow all surprised asking silly questions like why muslim bias exists amongs Hindutvas etc. That is blatant hypocrisy in my view.

 

[LordJames]

One cannot take any good part of evil Islamic invaders without discussing their barbarism. They have no good virtues in them. Killing and converting thousands using rampant force is not good. What good shall you expect us to take from them? That they build few monuments and infrastructure? No sir..we will never ignore their barbarism just for these meterialistic stuff. If that is the case why don't Pakistanis praise Israel? Sure they are invaders, albeit less barbaric but have created lots of infrastructure and done development work in Palestine. Are you willing to take their good part ignoring the bad? No. So pls dnt expect us to do the same.

I am not for a moment asking Pakistanis or muslims in general to not praise Delhi Sultanate or Mughals. You can praise who ever you like. All i saying is, dont come tomorrow all surprised asking silly questions like why muslim bias exists amongs Hindutvas etc. That is blatant hypocrisy in my view.

Are you claiming that Mughals killed and force converted as a rule OR are you saying that there were incidents during the rule? Can you provide examples and historical evidence for your position?

 

[sweep_shot]

If Mughals and Delhi Sultanate wanted to, they could've forcefully made Indian subcontinent 100% Muslim. But, that was not the goal I guess.

Indian posters often make up stories to suit their agendas. Again, I repeat, there would probably be no India if not for these empires. Prior to these empires, India was divided into many small kingdoms.

 

[Rajdeep]

Are you claiming that Mughals killed and force converted as a rule OR are you saying that there were incidents during the rule? Can you provide examples and historical evidence for your position?

Hopefully you will not ask such amateur questions again. You are POTW poster, remember?

 

[LordJames]

Hopefully you will not ask such amateur questions again. You are POTW poster, remember?

Let me try asking in simpler English so you can understand.

1. Do you think Mughals killed and force converted as a rule OR are you saying that there were incidents during their rule?
2. What is the historical evidence for your position? Please share your evidence

Thanks

 

[DeadlyVenom]

One cannot take any good part of evil Islamic invaders without discussing their barbarism. They have no good virtues in them. Killing and converting thousands using rampant force is not good. What good shall you expect us to take from them? That they build few monuments and infrastructure? No sir..we will never ignore their barbarism just for these meterialistic stuff. If that is the case why don't Pakistanis praise Israel? Sure they are invaders, albeit less barbaric but have created lots of infrastructure and done development work in Palestine. Are you willing to take their good part ignoring the bad? No. So pls dnt expect us to do the same.

I am not for a moment asking Pakistanis or muslims in general to not praise Delhi Sultanate or Mughals. You can praise who ever you like. All i saying is, dont come tomorrow all surprised asking silly questions like why muslim bias exists amongs Hindutvas etc. That is blatant hypocrisy in my view.

You are free to like or dislike whoever you want.

But your post was around that others liking them makes you hate Muslims.

 

[Rajdeep]

Let me try asking in simpler English so you can understand.

1. Do you think Mughals killed and force converted as a rule OR are you saying that there were incidents during their rule?
2. What is the historical evidence for your position? Please share your evidence

Thanks

Asking same question multiple times doesn't make it smart. Is Israel causing genocide and killing Palestinians as a state rule?

So when you invade someones land and rule it for 500 + years, killing and forcing conversion cant be state rule. You can yourself find out historical evidence and brutality of those invaders. Where was Babri Masjid built? On top of what?

Millions of Sub continent muslims like yourself are a walking proof infact.

 

[LordJames]

Asking same question multiple times doesn't make it smart. Is Israel causing genocide and killing Palestinians as a state rule?

So when you invade someones land and rule it for 500 + years, killing and forcing conversion cant be state rule. You can yourself find out historical evidence and brutality of those invaders. Where was Babri Masjid built? On top of what?

Millions of Sub continent muslims like yourself are a walking proof infact.

I appreciate your response but put Israel aside because:

1. It is irrelevant to the discussion.
2. You are wrong on Genocide being state sanctioned.

Lets return back to Mughals and India, shall we?

So far you have admitted that killing and forced conversion by Mughals wasn't a state rule or state sanctioned.

Millions of sub-continent Muslims are a walking proof of what? Please explain and then we will get to Babri Masjid.

 

[JaDed]

Delhi Sultanate’s biggest contribution can be seen painted on walls of Gurudwaras.

Chhota Ghallughara will remain their biggest gift to Sikhs.

 

[Hitman]

Don't worry we haven't finished yet, we will take kashmir back as well.

How? By begging in front of IMF?

 

[LordJames]

Hindu Philosophy vs Islam (way of Life):

Many Hindus regard Hindus as a "philosophy" and Islam as a "religion" and in many books Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon Him) is compared with a philosopher so in summary:​

1. A philosopher brings ideas​
2. A Prophet or specifically Muhammad (Peace be upon Him) brought ideas​

First of all Islam isn't a religion, its a way of life (Deen in Arabic) more on this later some other time but in summary Christianity is a "religion" so a person has some rituals and practices but most of their life is devoid of Christian teachings and they can live however they live.

Second Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon Him) did not bring or invent Islam...

But back to the original Hindu contention and also of the Orientalists.

Philosopher brings ideas, writes a book and in the face of opposition moves away or tones down or migrates. Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon Him) stood by in Makkah (for 13 years) got oppressed, his people got killed YET he stood everyday and gave Dawah (towards 1 God) and Muslims follow that. When the opposition tried to give him (money, position, power) he famously said, If they put sun in my right hand and moon in my left I would not quit.

The "Dawah" towards Islam is severely cracked down in India and if it was a "philosophy" the Muslims would just go away or practice silently in private but Muslims still give Dawah (in India and outside) and this is what Hindus dislike.

In the West, Muslims setup Dawah table and despite the worst opposition after 9/11 week after week turn up and gave Dawah to Islam, all Muslims in the West could have shut up, sat down and practiced in private if this was a philosophy. Look on Social Media where they take hatred and abuse everyday and YET continue to give Dawah, there are dozens of YouTube channels in multiple languages where people from other religions are invited to make their case against Islam.

This is the single most offensive sin of Muslims (according to Hindus and others) they want Muslims to practice their "philosophy" in private and mere appearance of Beard, Hijab etc ticks them off. And giving Dawah is what they describe as forced conversion.

Today, the mere sight of a Muslim in India is a trigger, why can't they shave their Beards, remove their Hijab and just disappear from public eye​

 

[uppercut]

How? By begging in front of IMF?

And advanced Twitter warfare

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

So massacre one tribe by helping another tribe
This is why Babur is a dirtbag. No different to Brits who used yo support one kingdom to defeat other and then eventually take over the entire land.

It’s sad to see people still defending these criminals and scou***** by calling them great and the best thing to have happened to Subcontjent.

But they are different because Indians have spent the last 20 years complaining about the Mughal empire and offer barely a peep against the Brits. British Indians even boast about how well they integrate in the UK. Do you think the Brits would take to them if they moaned about how the Brits became rich at the expense of Indians?

This means either Indians either truly love the British, or that Indians are duplicitous and don't want to attract negative opinion in the western world by expressing their true feelings.

 

[uppercut]

But they are different because Indians have spent the last 20 years complaining about the Mughal empire and offer barely a peep against the Brits. British Indians even boast about how well they integrate in the UK. Do you think the Brits would take to them if they moaned about how the Brits became rich at the expense of Indians?

This means either Indians either truly love the British, or that Indians are duplicitous and don't want to attract negative opinion in the western world by expressing their true feelings.

Before I answer that question could you write down ( in simple straightforward non-ambiguous words ) as to where you stand on the topic of colonialism ? ... this is just to sort out any conflicts of interests/bias ( I am obviously pro India and vehemently anti-British )


Rest assured I will most certainly respond but pretty sure you will not ... or eventually bolt from this thread as usual. Time will tell

 

[The Bald Eagle]

I appreciate your response but put Israel aside because:

1. It is irrelevant to the discussion.
2. You are wrong on Genocide being state sanctioned.

Lets return back to Mughals and India, shall we?

So far you have admitted that killing and forced conversion by Mughals wasn't a state rule or state sanctioned.

Millions of sub-continent Muslims are a walking proof of what? Please explain and then we will get to Babri Masjid.

Brother he won't answer as usual, great and simple questions

 

[sweep_shot]

Brother he won't answer as usual, great and simple questions

When going gets tough, these Indians run.

It is because their base argument has a very weak foundation. Their knowledge come from propagandas and not actual facts.

 

[Champ_Pal]

But they are different because Indians have spent the last 20 years complaining about the Mughal empire and offer barely a peep against the Brits. British Indians even boast about how well they integrate in the UK. Do you think the Brits would take to them if they moaned about how the Brits became rich at the expense of Indians?

This means either Indians either truly love the British, or that Indians are duplicitous and don't want to attract negative opinion in the western world by expressing their true feelings.

No one in India calls British great and make movies like Dyer-e-Azam or CornWallace-e-Azam in India and glorify them. If anyone does that, they will be mocked and criticized too.

Indians do not love Britishraj. But if an Indian man migrates to Britain, they have to adopt to local customs and follow the laws and put Britain over their own faith and beliefs.

Same goes to Indians who migrate to Arab nations. They have to be loyal to their adopted country and follow the laws to the dot. Getting visa of a foreign nation is a privilege. Not a right.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Hindu Philosophy vs Islam (way of Life):

Many Hindus regard Hindus as a "philosophy" and Islam as a "religion" and in many books Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon Him) is compared with a philosopher so in summary:​

1. A philosopher brings ideas​
2. A Prophet or specifically Muhammad (Peace be upon Him) brought ideas​

First of all Islam isn't a religion, its a way of life (Deen in Arabic) more on this later some other time but in summary Christianity is a "religion" so a person has some rituals and practices but most of their life is devoid of Christian teachings and they can live however they live.

Second Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon Him) did not bring or invent Islam...

But back to the original Hindu contention and also of the Orientalists.

Philosopher brings ideas, writes a book and in the face of opposition moves away or tones down or migrates. Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon Him) stood by in Makkah (for 13 years) got oppressed, his people got killed YET he stood everyday and gave Dawah (towards 1 God) and Muslims follow that. When the opposition tried to give him (money, position, power) he famously said, If they put sun in my right hand and moon in my left I would not quit.

The "Dawah" towards Islam is severely cracked down in India and if it was a "philosophy" the Muslims would just go away or practice silently in private but Muslims still give Dawah (in India and outside) and this is what Hindus dislike.

In the West, Muslims setup Dawah table and despite the worst opposition after 9/11 week after week turn up and gave Dawah to Islam, all Muslims in the West could have shut up, sat down and practiced in private if this was a philosophy. Look on Social Media where they take hatred and abuse everyday and YET continue to give Dawah, there are dozens of YouTube channels in multiple languages where people from other religions are invited to make their case against Islam.

This is the single most offensive sin of Muslims (according to Hindus and others) they want Muslims to practice their "philosophy" in private and mere appearance of Beard, Hijab etc ticks them off. And giving Dawah is what they describe as forced conversion.

Today, the mere sight of a Muslim in India is a trigger, why can't they shave their Beards, remove their Hijab and just disappear from public eye​

A few corrections.

Islam is not about ideas. The idea of Monotheism existed for centuries before Islam ever existed.

Prophet Muhammad did not bring in any new idea. He brought rules with him. Islam does not talk about "one of the ways of living". Islam preaches "It is the only way of living". That is where the problem comes. It cannot really coexist with any other faith. Clashes are inevitable.

Regarding conversions, look at the laws in Islamic countries regarding conversions. One cannot convert from Islam to Hinduism or Christianity or Buddhism easily. Leaving Islam is considered Apostasy and punishable by death according to Sharia. You should know that being a Muslim. But Islam wants full on free hand in Kafir nations to spread their religion. If they are not allowed, it is called Islamophobia and what not.

Prosylitizing religons are a dime in a dozen. No matter how much one bans or opposes, the foot soldiers keep spreading their cult. Islam is nothing special. In secular democratic nations, every religion is given a chance to propagate and all proselytizing religions vie for converts. Its a business. More converts, more money they receive.

Go to any Muslim area in India and all you will see are beards and Burkhas. No one is asking them to shave their beard and take off their Burkhas. There will be incidents of religious bigotry and it goes both ways.

 

[Champ_Pal]

When going gets tough, these Indians run.

It is because their base argument has a very weak foundation. Their knowledge come from propagandas and not actual facts.

You should be the last person talking about running. I have quoted you many times exposing you and there is never any comeback or at least response to my questions. You simply ignore and you know it.

 

[LordJames]

A few corrections.

Islam is not about ideas. The idea of Monotheism existed for centuries before Islam ever existed.

Prophet Muhammad did not bring in any new idea. He brought rules with him. Islam does not talk about "one of the ways of living". Islam preaches "It is the only way of living". That is where the problem comes. It cannot really coexist with any other faith. Clashes are inevitable.

Regarding conversions, look at the laws in Islamic countries regarding conversions. One cannot convert from Islam to Hinduism or Christianity or Buddhism easily. Leaving Islam is considered Apostasy and punishable by death according to Sharia. You should know that being a Muslim. But Islam wants full on free hand in Kafir nations to spread their religion. If they are not allowed, it is called Islamophobia and what not.

Prosylitizing religons are a dime in a dozen. No matter how much one bans or opposes, the foot soldiers keep spreading their cult. Islam is nothing special. In secular democratic nations, every religion is given a chance to propagate and all proselytizing religions vie for converts. Its a business. More converts, more money they receive.

Go to any Muslim area in India and all you will see are beards and Burkhas. No one is asking them to shave their beard and take off their Burkhas. There will be incidents of religious bigotry and it goes both ways.

Please read, it says

Second Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon Him) did not bring or invent Islam...

Islam was sent along with the first human being that God is one and then the message repeated as a reminder.

 

[LordJames]

Forced conversion to Islam?

Anyone is requested to provide evidence of systematic forced conversion of Hindus to Islam under Mughuls. If you think millions of Muslims of India are a proof of "forced conversion of Islam", it should be easy for you to prove your point, quote irrefutable historical evidence of these conversions.​

Thanks

Don't want evidence from here...

 

[Champ_Pal]

Please read, it says

Second Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon Him) did not bring or invent Islam...

Islam was sent along with the first human being that God is one and then the message repeated as a reminder.

You said in the 2nd point that - "A Prophet or specifically Muhammad (Peace be upon Him) brought ideas"

So I said Prophet Muhammad's ideas are not new. Those ideas existed for over 1000 years before him.

Islam existed at the time of Adam id a belief. There is no evidence of any Adam or eve ever existing by themselves magically appearing on Earth and with Adam being 90 feet etc. No evidence to any of this. Its a belief. No different to Hindus believing in a flying Hanuman or a Greek God that is half human and half bull.

 

[LordJames]

You said in the 2nd point that - "A Prophet or specifically Muhammad (Peace be upon Him) brought ideas"

So I said Prophet Muhammad's ideas are not new. Those ideas existed for over 1000 years before him.

Islam existed at the time of Adam id a belief. There is no evidence of any Adam or eve ever existing by themselves magically appearing on Earth and with Adam being 90 feet etc. No evidence to any of this. Its a belief. No different to Hindus believing in a flying Hanuman or a Greek God that is half human and half bull.

Again learn to read

I start with

Many Hindus...

And you are proving my point by emphasizing the same point.

The existence of Adam/Eve can be proven by rigorously authenticating the text which is present in the Qur'an which is unaltered and memorized by millions (from Islam) and Hadeeth (a science which is rigorous and all of its narrators authenticated), Hinduism has no such thing and you are right that its fables (unauthenticated)

Adam and eve are also mentioned in previous scriptures but that's a different issue.

If you want to compare the primary sources of Islam (and its associated science) and compare it to mythology of Hinduism lets start on that.

Btw, my intention is not to demean or insult Hinduism as everyone has the right to believe in mythology but Hinduism has no grounding in historical accuracy and neither has any sciences associated with preserving its message.

Keep on quoting Chachnama as that is about your reach.​

 

[Technics 1210]

Wait what, another example of how the Hindutva cult is dividing India?

Excellent! Keep these coming! The world needs to see the truth on who and how India was put on the map - Islam, British, and the sane!

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

No one in India calls British great and make movies like Dyer-e-Azam or CornWallace-e-Azam in India and glorify them. If anyone does that, they will be mocked and criticized too.

Indians do not love Britishraj. But if an Indian man migrates to Britain, they have to adopt to local customs and follow the laws and put Britain over their own faith and beliefs.

Same goes to Indians who migrate to Arab nations. They have to be loyal to their adopted country and follow the laws to the dot. Getting visa of a foreign nation is a privilege. Not a right.

This is what I mean by being duplicitous. If that was the case, why would you get cricket stadiums where British Indians proudly wear Indian shirts when they are playing against England? Why would you get tens of thousands flocking to Wembley stadium to celebrate the leader of an Indian leader who was banned from entering western nations because he was considered guilty of overseeing a massacre of minorities in his own country?

The saying bagal mein churi, mun pe ram ram did not come from thin air.

 

[uppercut]

The existence of Adam/Eve can be proven by rigorously authenticating the text which is present in the Qur'an which is unaltered and memorized by millions (from Islam) and Hadeeth (a science which is rigorous and all of its narrators authenticated), Hinduism has no such thing and you are right that its fables (unauthenticated)

Absolutely not! If you think it can even be done ( let alone using a man made "document" called Hadeeth which you call scientific) then there cannot be any serious conversation that can be had with you.


And if you REALLY are serious about the Quran being unaltered then check this out:

U

Post in thread '[VIDEOS] Why Indian Hindus hate Zakir Naik so profoundly?'

Oct 5, 2024

Co existing does not mean that we will accept others to be correct.

I will give you another possibility:

Accept that there could also be possibly correct and respect their views.

Which of those two thought processes is more amenable to a peaceful co-existence between various religions?

• uppercut

 

[speed]

See the video Above Hindus crying about losing Afghanistan lol, because asoka ruled it for a few years, dosen't make it your land, Imagine going to taliban today and saying this is our historical land, Afghans will look at him like he's lost his mind.

 

[uppercut]

See the video Above Hindus crying about losing Afghanistan lol, because asoka ruled it for a few years, dosen't make it your land, Imagine A pa*eet going to taliban today and saying this is our historical land, Afghans will look at him like he's lost his mind.

Just like Indian Kashmir is ruled by Hindu rulers today ... eh?

 

[uppercut]

Again it's the context. You don't say anything bad about your Hindu kings and leaders.

It's all about Muslims.

Thats because we have NEVER forcibly converted any community and indulged in open bigotry even during the dark ages.

The evidence is in the form of the Parsi community in India. Guess who was responsible for their mass exodus from their Homeland ?

 

[Champ_Pal]

This is what I mean by being duplicitous. If that was the case, why would you get cricket stadiums where British Indians proudly wear Indian shirts when they are playing against England? Why would you get tens of thousands flocking to Wembley stadium to celebrate the leader of an Indian leader who was banned from entering western nations because he was considered guilty of overseeing a massacre of minorities in his own country?

The saying bagal mein churi, mun pe ram ram did not come from thin air.

When you migrate to a foreign country you have to accept the heroes of the new country even if that man persecuted your people in the past.
What is hero in one nation can be villain in the other. If you do not like the heroes and Past of the nation you are trying to become a citizen of, you better stay back in your own country.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Again learn to read

I start with

Many Hindus...

And you are proving my point by emphasizing the same point.

The existence of Adam/Eve can be proven by rigorously authenticating the text which is present in the Qur'an which is unaltered and memorized by millions (from Islam) and Hadeeth (a science which is rigorous and all of its narrators authenticated), Hinduism has no such thing and you are right that its fables (unauthenticated)

Adam and eve are also mentioned in previous scriptures but that's a different issue.

If you want to compare the primary sources of Islam (and its associated science) and compare it to mythology of Hinduism lets start on that.

Btw, my intention is not to demean or insult Hinduism as everyone has the right to believe in mythology but Hinduism has no grounding in historical accuracy and neither has any sciences associated with preserving its message.

Keep on quoting Chachnama as that is about your reach.There is no evidence of any God and there is no evidence of a mythical god ever creating any Adam and then taking his rib to create eve. It’s just a middle eastern folklore.​

Humans evolved from apes. Humans and chimps, gorillas all had a common ancestor. The lineage that led to humans have split off from other great apes millions of years ago. I hope you have studied evolution in science during your schooling days.

Chachnama is all we got regarding the Arab invasion. Where else do you want me to get the source from? Time travel?
Also, why would Muslim historians make up sheet about bin qasim about sex slaves and stuff? Unless you think they hated Mr.Qasim.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

When you migrate to a foreign country you have to accept the heroes of the new country even if that man persecuted your people in the past.
What is hero in one nation can be villain in the other. If you do not like the heroes and Past of the nation you are trying to become a citizen of, you better stay back in your own country.

But why does this not apply to hindutvas abroad?

 

[LordJames]

Humans evolved from apes. Humans and chimps, gorillas all had a common ancestor. The lineage that led to humans have split off from other great apes millions of years ago. I hope you have studied evolution in science during your schooling days.

Chachnama is all we got regarding the Arab invasion. Where else do you want me to get the source from? Time travel?
Also, why would Muslim historians make up sheet about bin qasim about sex slaves and stuff? Unless you think they hated Mr.Qasim.

There is no scientific evidence that humans evolved from Apes and happy to discuss this with you in detail from science in another thread.

If you are think you know what you are talking about, open a thread and lets go but before you begin, read.

I am not talking about "evolution" in general I am talking about humans evolved from "apes" and making a very specific point.

Lets go, put your money where your mouth is and start the discussion on "Humans evolved from Apes"...

 

[Champ_Pal]

There is no scientific evidence that humans evolved from Apes and happy to discuss this with you in detail from science in another thread.

If you are think you know what you are talking about, open a thread and lets go but before you begin, read.

I am not talking about "evolution" in general I am talking about humans evolved from "apes" and making a very specific point.

Lets go, put your money where your mouth is and start the discussion on "Humans evolved from Apes"...

You are so smart man. The first man was made from clay and the first female was made from his rib.

Unfortunately science called it bogus more than a century ago. We have moved on since then.

 

[Champ_Pal]

But why does this not apply to hindutvas abroad?

You can follow any ideology you want provided it does not override the laws and loyalty to the newly adopted country.

If a Hindu in US or Europe thinks that his religion is superior or his loyalty to Hinduism and India is more than the loyalty towards US or UK or Aus, he/she can pack up and move back to India. If a man is not loyal to the country he is living in, he can move to the country where his loyalties are with.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

You can follow any ideology you want provided it does not override the laws and loyalty to the newly adopted country.

If a Hindu in US or Europe thinks that his religion is superior or his loyalty to Hinduism and India is more than the loyalty towards US or UK or Aus, he/she can pack up and move back to India. If a man is not loyal to the country he is living in, he can move to the country where his loyalties are with.

This is basically the same for everyone, but for some reason Indian posters seem to think there are different standards for Muslims.

 

[Champ_Pal]

This is basically the same for everyone, but for some reason Indian posters seem to think there are different standards for Muslims.

In my experience, Indians are loyal to money. Where money is, they follow.

For true Muslims, they are loyal to their religion more than anything. We can see that in many of them living in the West. I am sure you also know that.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

In my experience, Indians are loyal to money. Where money is, they follow.

For true Muslims, they are loyal to their religion more than anything. We can see that in many of them living in the West. I am sure you also know that.

As far as I know an observing Muslim can be loyal to religion and country. For example you could live in England and avoid eating pig, no one will force you. This is the same for a Hindu who doesn't want to eat beef. Nothing stopping him or her from eating turnips instead.