Was the Muslim rule over the Indian subcontinent, the best thing ever to occur to this region?

[The Bald Eagle]

The Indian subcontinent flourished significantly under the Muslim rule. Also the presence of strong Muslim leaders in the Indian subcontinent saved it from incursion from neighboring countries. Like during Khilji rule, India remained safe from the menace of Mongul decimation.

Also Under Muslim rule, roughly between 1000 and 1700, India's annual GDP almost tripled to $90.75 billion. Mortality fell substantially, enabling the population to grow from 75 million to 165 million. This substantially offset GDP growth, so per capita income grew by barely a quarter, from $450 to $550.

India's era of Hindu rule was one of stark poverty, economic stagnation and high mortality. Nothing golden about it.

But still the current government is India is trying to erase the historic achievements under the Muslim rule. So what are your thoughts over Muslim rule in Indian subcontinent?

 

[FearlessRoar]

The Muslim rule over the Indian subcontinent wasn't the best thing ever. they built religious buildings and tombs. They didn't put much effort into things like education or technology. Plus, there were a lot of problems like instability during that time.

 

[Rajdeep]

So true. However, now muslims got their own separate country, right?

Wonder why they are not able to replicate the same economic success like their ancestors and living in IMF bailouts. On the other hand secular India, where 80% are Hindus, is flourishing. Looks like the reason behind historical Muslim rule's success were actually Hindus.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

So true. However, now muslims got their own separate country, right?

Wonder why they are not able to replicate the same economic success like their ancestors and living in IMF bailouts. On the other hand secular India, where 80% are Hindus, is flourishing. Looks like the reason behind historical Muslim rule's success were actually Hindus.

I guess the answer to this is meritocracy which we don't have any these days. Back then in order to be a ruler's advisor the best criteria was supposed to be competency. Things quite opposite now.

 

[JaDed]

Lol The very reason Mughals etc came to India or Columbus wanted to find a route here was due to historically India being extremely well to do with lot of innovation which happened before Muslim rule.

It’s not called Hindu Arabic numerals for nothing.

Pakistan can try to imitate Mughal rule and India can try to imitate Pre Islamic rule and lets see who comes on top?

 

[RexRex]

The muslim rulers in India were just as useless as the hindu rulers that preceded them.

Real civilizational progress began with the Enlightenment and Industrialization era that began in Europe.

 

[JaDed]

The muslim rulers in India were just as useless as the hindu rulers that preceded them.

Real civilizational progress began with the Enlightenment and Industrialization era that began in Europe.

Romans were actually very ahead if anything Europe was in dark ages after them(Catholic era) when Asia and Ottoman empire was actually ahead.

Civilisation progress has always been made by different Civilisations.

 

[anikrc1]

The Indian subcontinent flourished significantly under the Muslim rule. Also the presence of strong Muslim leaders in the Indian subcontinent saved it from incursion from neighboring countries. Like during Khilji rule, India remained safe from the menace of Mongul decimation.

Also Under Muslim rule, roughly between 1000 and 1700, India's annual GDP almost tripled to $90.75 billion. Mortality fell substantially, enabling the population to grow from 75 million to 165 million. This substantially offset GDP growth, so per capita income grew by barely a quarter, from $450 to $550.

India's era of Hindu rule was one of stark poverty, economic stagnation and high mortality. Nothing golden about it.

But still the current government is India is trying to erase the historic achievements under the Muslim rule. So what are your thoughts over Muslim rule in Indian subcontinent?

Why are all the

The Indian subcontinent flourished significantly under the Muslim rule. Also the presence of strong Muslim leaders in the Indian subcontinent saved it from incursion from neighboring countries. Like during Khilji rule, India remained safe from the menace of Mongul decimation.

Also Under Muslim rule, roughly between 1000 and 1700, India's annual GDP almost tripled to $90.75 billion. Mortality fell substantially, enabling the population to grow from 75 million to 165 million. This substantially offset GDP growth, so per capita income grew by barely a quarter, from $450 to $550.

India's era of Hindu rule was one of stark poverty, economic stagnation and high mortality. Nothing golden about it.

But still the current government is India is trying to erase the historic achievements under the Muslim rule. So what are your thoughts over Muslim rule in Indian subcontinent?

Don't know why you guys distort the truth, but as a percentage of world's gdp India's share remained largely the same throughout history until the British rule. Per capita income increases naturally through the progression of time. Now of course the Muslim rule was much better than the British rule. But it has very little intellectual achievements compared to what happened previously. In fact the greatest achievement during the Muslim era the Kerala school of mathematics was all Hindu.

 

[RexRex]

Civilisation progress has always been made by different Civilisations.

True, but in the the last 200 years there was an exponential leap in the standard of human living and freedom. And the two European eras I mentioned had a lot to do with it.

 

[JaDed]

True, but in the the last 200 years there was an exponential leap in the standard of human living and freedom. And the two European eras I mentioned had a lot to do with it.

Its been even more exponential in last 3 decades that way thanks to American and east asians.

My assumption is Innovation improves exponentially

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Lol The very reason Mughals etc came to India or Columbus wanted to find a route here was due to historically India being extremely well to do with lot of innovation which happened before Muslim rule.

It’s not called Hindu Arabic numerals for nothing.

Pakistan can try to imitate Mughal rule and India can try to imitate Pre Islamic rule and lets see who comes on top?

If Indian innovation before Islamic rule was so astounding, why did they not come out on top when Mughals first arrived?

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Why are all the

Don't know why you guys distort the truth, but as a percentage of world's gdp India's share remained largely the same throughout history until the British rule. Per capita income increases naturally through the progression of time. Now of course the Muslim rule was much better than the British rule. But it has very little intellectual achievements compared to what happened previously. In fact the greatest achievement during the Muslim era the Kerala school of mathematics was all Hindu.

The stats that i shared here from below source

India's golden era does not lie in the past. It has just begun

GDP, personal income stagnated during historical era of Hindu rule

asia.nikkei.com

 

[anikrc1]

The stats that i shared here from below source

India's golden era does not lie in the past. It has just begun

GDP, personal income stagnated during historical era of Hindu rule

asia.nikkei.com

Umm, nothing said there contradict what I said ?

 

[anikrc1]

If Indian innovation before Islamic rule was so astounding, why did they not come out on top when Mughals first arrived?

Because the mughal army was better fighters and intellectual superiority was still not enough to offset fighting skills? Last 30-40 years are basically the only time in history when intellectual superiority guarantees superiority in the battle fields too.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Why are all the

Don't know why you guys distort the truth, but as a percentage of world's gdp India's share remained largely the same throughout history until the British rule. Per capita income increases naturally through the progression of time. Now of course the Muslim rule was much better than the British rule. But it has very little intellectual achievements compared to what happened previously. In fact the greatest achievement during the Muslim era the Kerala school of mathematics was all Hindu.

Some achievements of Mughals below let alone other muslim rulers

Brief analysis of the achievements of the Mughal Empire

By Abu Juwairiya Hamad Khan It was in 1206, approximately eight hundred years ago, India produced its first major Muslim ruler for several generations. It was the beginning of the longest reign of …

ahlalbidah.wordpress.com

 

[anikrc1]

Some achievements of Mughals below let alone other muslim rulers

Brief analysis of the achievements of the Mughal Empire

By Abu Juwairiya Hamad Khan It was in 1206, approximately eight hundred years ago, India produced its first major Muslim ruler for several generations. It was the beginning of the longest reign of …

ahlalbidah.wordpress.com

And none of the achievements listed comes even close to what Aryabhata or Brahmagupta or Panini did, or even during that time what Kerala school of mathematics was doing.

 

[anikrc1]

Because the mughal army was better fighters and intellectual superiority was still not enough to offset fighting skills? Last 30-40 years are basically the only time in history when intellectual superiority guarantees superiority in the battle fields too.

In fact to better make that point the greatest scientist of the pre enlightenment era, possibly even the greatest scientist of all time Archimedes was killed by invading army whose total intelligence would probably fell short if Archimedes.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

And none of the achievements listed comes even close to what Aryabhata or Brahmagupta or Panini did, or even during that time what Kerala school of mathematics was doing.

But its funny enough that India is not famous because of above achievements, but because of gains made in Muslim rulers era.

 

[anikrc1]

But its funny enough that India is not famous because of above achievements, but because of gains made in Muslim rulers era.

Probably to your average Joe on the street though I doubt even that, but not to the likes of Nieles Bohr or Heisenberg or George Boole or Voltaire.

 

[Cover Drive Six]

The Muslim rule was one of the darkest periods in Indian subcontinent. It is associated with numerous atrocities against people, including forced conversions, destroying temples, raping women, killings, looting, excessive taxation, and many more.

 

[Cover Drive Six]

But its funny enough that India is not famous because of above achievements, but because of gains made in Muslim rulers era.

Who said that? thats your opinion

None of the illiterate Muslim rulers can come close to what Aryabhata achieved. He discovered theories such as the rotation of the solar system, the approximation of pi, trigonometry, the place value system, zero, and many others.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

The Muslim rule was one of the darkest periods in Indian subcontinent. It is associated with numerous atrocities against people, including forced conversions, destroying temples, raping women, killings, looting, excessive taxation, and many more.

Only one side of the coin and that too as propagated by new anti Muslim Textbooks and rewriting of history.

 

[anikrc1]

The Muslim rule was one of the darkest periods in Indian subcontinent. It is associated with numerous atrocities against people, including forced conversions, destroying temples, raping women, killings, looting, excessive taxation, and many more.

this is the other extreme. what you talked about happened throughout the history in India. The true dark period was the British rule.

 

[Cover Drive Six]

this is the other extreme. what you talked about happened throughout the history in India. The true dark period was the British rule.

Both the Mughals and the Britishers share similarities in certain aspects. Muslim rulers were known to destroy temples, engage in forced conversions, and commit atrocities such as rape and killings. Similarly, the Britishers plundered wealth, brutally suppressed dissent, and caused widespread suffering.
Both regimes inflicted significant harm on the Indian subcontinent, no difference.

 

[Cover Drive Six]

Only one side of the coin and that too as propagated by new anti Muslim Textbooks and rewriting of history.

What is the other side of the coin?
Even though Hitler may have accomplished some positive actions, it does not absolve him of the atrocities he committed.

 

[anikrc1]

Both the Mughals and the Britishers share similarities in certain aspects. Muslim rulers were known to destroy temples, engage in forced conversions, and commit atrocities such as rape and killings. Similarly, the Britishers plundered wealth, brutally suppressed dissent, and caused widespread suffering.
Both regimes inflicted significant harm on the Indian subcontinent, no difference.

Why do you think there is so few Buddhists in the birthplace of Buddhism? What you are accusing Muslim rulers of doing to Hindus Sashanka or Ajatashatru did the same to Buddhists.

 

[JaDed]

If Indian innovation before Islamic rule was so astounding, why did they not come out on top when Mughals first arrived?

Because being war ready doesn't mean they can win a war with swords.

China/Russia can attack and finish off South Korea doesn’t mean they are innovative than them.

 

[JaDed]

This is also the best time of Israel maybe our resident posters should credit them as well for their amazing occupation since last century.

 

[RexRex]

This is also the best time of Israel maybe our resident posters should credit them as well for their amazing occupation since last century.

I agree, most of the islamic middle east and pakistan should be put under Israeli rule. Their tech achievements have been amazing and it will filter down to the local population.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

I agree, most of the islamic middle east and pakistan should be put under Israeli rule. Their tech achievements have been amazing and it will filter down to the local population.

The main criteria is not innovation or such stuff. Its how good one were running the system justly and how well off people were under one rule. A peaceful political and social environment also counts significantly in such criteria.

 

[JaDed]

The main criteria is not innovation or such stuff. Its how good one were running the system justly and how well off people were under one rule. A peaceful political and social environment also counts significantly in such criteria.

Go to Gurudwaras and see the painting to know how peaceful the Mughals were lol, I can’t even tell if you are serious or trolling anymore.

Mughals literally beheaded the 9th Guru and GuruBindji’s all 4 sons killed by Mughals out of which 2 sons were told if they convert to Islam they can escape but on refusal got
killed.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Go to Gurudwaras and see the painting to know how peaceful the Mughals were lol, I can’t even tell if you are serious or trolling anymore.

Mughals literally beheaded the 9th Guru and GuruBindji’s all 4 sons killed by Mughals out of which 2 sons were told if they convert to Islam they can escape but on refusal got
killed.

Its not a mughal thread but of Muslim rule in subcontinent...How peaceful things were before them, plz make a search yourself.

 

[JaDed]

Its not a mughal thread but of Muslim rule in subcontinent...How peaceful things were before them, plz make a search yourself.

And maybe you need to research how peaceful they were?

If peace is the only thing maybe become like Bhutan , most peaceful country.

No one has been involved in more wars than Middle east.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

And maybe you need to research how peaceful they were?

If peace is the only thing maybe become like Bhutan , most peaceful country.

No one has been involved in more wars than Middle east.

OK then state your criteria of being reckoned as a great government. Will see whether Muslim Rule fall good on that criteria or not.

 

[JaDed]

OK then state your criteria of being reckoned as a great government. Will see whether Muslim Rule fall good on that criteria or not.

Monarchy cannot be a good rule, I have said that before as well and that goes for Hindu and Muslim and even Buddhist whether it’s the Caliphs, Ashoka or Marathas.

Democratic Republicans with institutions balancing each other best rule, having a jury. Capitalism on majority systems and socialism on education and semi socialism on Healthcare.

We are doing better as a world now, recounting past glories is just for unification, no way is Hindu society going back to Polygamy, Sati etc.

 

[JaDed]

Last decade has easily been the best time to live in this world and it has come due to Democracy and having a voice, Representation etc.

 

[shaz619]

They started the job, The British Raj finished it.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Monarchy cannot be a good rule, I have said that before as well and that goes for Hindu and Muslim and even Buddhist whether it’s the Caliphs, Ashoka or Marathas.

Democratic Republicans with institutions balancing each other best rule, having a jury. Capitalism on majority systems and socialism on education and semi socialism on Healthcare.

We are doing better as a world now, recounting past glories is just for unification, no way is Hindu society going back to Polygamy, Sati etc.

I disagree with your opinion on monarchy, some monarchs were just too good administrator and leaders even statesman for their nation. I guess by this definition you could only single out Akbar as he had some favorable opinion among the Indians.

Abraham Lincoln is considered as the best US president and if you had studied his life, you will know he was a pseudo dictator too.

 

[Champ_Pal]

Arts and cuisine blossomed. The Ghaznavids followed by Mughals brought gunpowder to India. Use of firearms in warfare was alien to India. That also helped them to take out Rajput kingdoms eventually.

Islamic invaders also brought the Kharif and Rabi agricultural seasonal crops.

They also built giant monuments which were brilliant for their time.

The Delhi Sultanate rulers also introduced the Greek Unani medicine to India.

The biggest blunder they did was to ignore education and development. Masses remained illiterate and ignorant. British saw this and they took over India without much fuss.

No major scientific advancement happened in the 250 year Mughal rule and the previous 200 year Delhi Sultanate rule.

 

[Itachi]

Its not a mughal thread but of Muslim rule in subcontinent...How peaceful things were before them, plz make a search yourself.

We are talking about peaceful or economy or any other x,y,z factor?

Because what I see here is, you are holding on to different matrices as and when your argument requires.

 

[Itachi]

The main criteria is not innovation or such stuff. Its how good one were running the system justly and how well off people were under one rule. A peaceful political and social environment also counts significantly in such criteria.

Define one.

There might be peaceful political and social environment but a revolution waiting to happen.

A revolution occuring for upliftment towards modern infrastructure yet unstable social and political environment due to the transition.

Which one would yield future stability?

This is the issue with arguments like this. You can not hold one particular aspect without context.

Innoivation drives society. Not the other way. How it can not not be main criteria?

 

[CricketCartoons]

Muslim rule was the best thing for muslim civilization. Partition was the worst thing for muslim civilization.

 

[globetrotter]

Then definition of GDP under Muslim rule must be

GDP = conversation of Hindus, destroying Hindu temples

 

[sweep_shot]

Muslim rule over the subcontinent was indeed the best thing to ever happen to the region.

Without a doubt.

 

[Statpadder Inc]

It was, just like the creation of the state of Israel was an incredible thing, the economic growth scientific progess and the rise of the tech industry under the Israelis has been incredible.

May it long continue, the region would be a deserted wasteland under the Palestinians

 

[Champ_Pal]

Muslim rule over the subcontinent was indeed the best thing to ever happen to the region.

Without a doubt.

The masses that converted to Islam under the Islamic rule suffered just as much as their Hindu brethren. Only the elite converts and the imported Persian and Central Asian Ghazis and wazirs had great life. With constant wars, their lives were not that peaceful either.

Unless you are a descendant of the Muslim elite, your ancestors did not have any great life under Islamic rule of India.

 

[Vikram1989]

The masses that converted to Islam under the Islamic rule suffered just as much as their Hindu brethren. Only the elite converts and the imported Persian and Central Asian Ghazis and wazirs had great life. With constant wars, their lives were not that peaceful either.

Unless you are a descendant of the Muslim elite, your ancestors did not have any great life under Islamic rule of India.

U broke his logic less heart

 

[Hitman]

It was, just like the creation of the state of Israel was an incredible thing, the economic growth scientific progess and the rise of the tech industry under the Israelis has been incredible.

May it long continue, the region would be a deserted wasteland under the Palestinians

What the Jews have achieved in Israel, a barren land with basically no resources, is more remarkable than anything the Palestinians or the entire Muslim world can ever dream of. Apart from their treatment of Palestinians, the state of Israel is a precious gift to the world.

Coming to the point, the Muslim rule in the subcontinent for me was the worst thing to have ever happened to us. There is a big reason why those looting invaders are hated by maximum non Muslims in India.

 

[daytrader]

What the Jews have achieved in Israel, a barren land with basically no resources, is more remarkable than anything the Palestinians or the entire Muslim world can ever dream of. Apart from their treatment of Palestinians, the state of Israel is a precious gift to the world.

Coming to the point, the Muslim rule in the subcontinent for me was the worst thing to have ever happened to us. There is a big reason why those looting invaders are hated by maximum non Muslims in India.

The whole western world supported in creating Israel after WW2 because they felt sympathy for the Jews. They couldn't have done it on their own. Just like the whole world is turning a blind eye to the atrocities now.

Recently came across a bollywood clip of Ritik Roshan in my social feeds where he was some Mughal emperor dispensing Justice in his court. At one point bollywood was making movies on mughals and was proud of that history. It's the saffron wave in India that wants to eliminate this glorious period

 

[Hitman]

The whole western world supported in creating Israel after WW2 because they felt sympathy for the Jews. They couldn't have done it on their own. Just like the whole world is turning a blind eye to the atrocities now.

Recently came across a bollywood clip of Ritik Roshan in my social feeds where he was some Mughal emperor dispensing Justice in his court. At one point bollywood was making movies on mughals and was proud of that history. It's the saffron wave in India that wants to eliminate this glorious period

First part of your post, I'm not denying any of that. I'm not speaking of how Israel was formed, I'm speaking of their achievements since they were formed. What Israel has achieved in multiple fields, and what's the merit of the Jewish community worldwide is not a secret to anyone. Just have a look at the number of Jews who have won the Nobel Prize till date.

Second part of your post, Bollywood does not represent common Indians. Those invaders were never liked by us. We see them the same as the British Empire i.e parasites.

 

[daytrader]

Second part of your post, Bollywood does not represent common Indians. Those invaders were never liked by us. We see them the same as the British Empire i.e parasites.

Not true. Bollywood almost always portrays the British Raj in a negative light. The goras are the bad guys while the goris are angels sent from heaven. It's not the same for Mughals until recently

 

[Statpadder Inc]

The whole western world supported in creating Israel after WW2 because they felt sympathy for the Jews. They couldn't have done it on their own. Just like the whole world is turning a blind eye to the atrocities now.

Recently came across a bollywood clip of Ritik Roshan in my social feeds where he was some Mughal emperor dispensing Justice in his court. At one point bollywood was making movies on mughals and was proud of that history. It's the saffron wave in India that wants to eliminate this glorious period

Bollywood isn't representative of india. The mughal era was only a golden period for the central Asian rulers, your ancestors also suffered under them

 

[Vikram1989]

Muslims will not name their kids other than akbar among the Mughals. Itself
shows who stood against time.

 

[daytrader]

Bollywood isn't representative of india. The mughal era was only a golden period for the central Asian rulers, your ancestors also suffered under them

So the looters took wealth back to central Asia? That's a first. The mughals spent more on uniting India than any other rulers. You are Indian today because the Mughals defined those boundaries

 

[Vikram1989]

Not true. Bollywood almost always portrays the British Raj in a negative light. The goras are the bad guys while the goris are angels sent from heaven. It's not the same for Mughals until recently

Who is the angel? Commercial movies only highlights the positives and will not discuss the negatives.its not a documentary to expect fame but not Money

 

[Statpadder Inc]

So the looters took wealth back to central Asia? That's a first. The mughals spent more on uniting India than any other rulers. You are Indian today because the Mughals defined those boundaries

Quoting @Champ_Pal Only the elite converts and the imported Persian and Central Asian Ghazis and wazirs had great life. With constant wars, their lives were not that peaceful either.

The definition of India's boundaries changed after partition too, both my parents were from Lahore, which belongs to present day pak and isn't indian in any way

 

[daytrader]

Muslims will not name their kids other than akbar among the Mughals. Itself
shows who stood against time.

Akbar, Babar, Humayun are all fairly common Muslim names. Yea no one names their kid Shah Jehan anymore but that's understandable

 

[Statpadder Inc]

So the looters took wealth back to central Asia? That's a first. The mughals spent more on uniting India than any other rulers. You are Indian today because the Mughals defined those boundaries

I am not saying that the mughals were irremediable, they had their share of positives but the negatives outnumbered it by a lot

 

[daytrader]

Who is the angel? Commercial movies only highlights the positives and will not discuss the negatives.its not a documentary to expect fame but not Money

Ok so which movies is the British Raj portrayed in a positive light. I'll try to watch it after Ramazan

 

[Vikram1989]

So the looters took wealth back to central Asia? That's a first. The mughals spent more on uniting India than any other rulers. You are Indian today because the Mughals defined those boundaries

Looters were not able to take it back as there was not enough transportation back then.second point is everyone who was under attack from their relatives settled in india. Later on those relatives tried to settle due to the losses in their home land but were unable to do

 

[daytrader]

Quoting @Champ_Pal Only the elite converts and the imported Persian and Central Asian Ghazis and wazirs had great life. With constant wars, their lives were not that peaceful either.

The definition of India's boundaries changed after partition too, both my parents were from Lahore, which belongs to present day pak and isn't indian in any way

So you're basically Pakistani. Welcome brother

 

[daytrader]

Looters were not able to take it back as there was not enough transportation back then.second point is everyone who was under attack from their relatives settled in india. Later on those relatives tried to settle due to the losses in their home land but were unable to do

Yet they had the transportation to bring their armies and weapons to conquer India

 

[Vikram1989]

Ok so which movies is the British Raj portrayed in a positive light. I'll try to watch it after Ramazan

Individual good Britishers are always highlighted positively.example Is sir Arthur cotton, who built a dam in south india. Even his grand son family was facilitated by andhra pradesh government in 2008 I believe

 

[Vikram1989]

Yet they had the transportation to bring their armies and weapons to conquer India

Haven't u read my second point?

 

[daytrader]

Individual good Britishers are always highlighted positively.example Is sir Arthur cotton, who built a dam in south india. Even his grand son family was facilitated by andhra pradesh government in 2008 I believe

We are talking about empires, individually all people are inherently good

 

[Vikram1989]

We are talking about empires, individually all people are inherently good

Thats y empire is always shown as bad either british or mughal

 

[cricketjoshila]

Europe had the dark age. India had the muslim rule.

 

[daytrader]

Haven't u read my second point?

Bro it didn't make sense to me so I didn't address it. Please clarify what you're trying to say

 

[daytrader]

Europe had the dark age. India had the muslim rule.

Yes and you'll probably claim that you lived through it.

India was weak, Muslims made it into a World renowned empire. If it wasn't the Mughals, it would've been another Muslim dynasty that would've conquered India

 

[Vikram1989]

Yes and you'll probably claim that you lived through it.

India was weak, Muslims made it into a World renowned empire. If it wasn't the Mughals, it would've been another Muslim dynasty that would've conquered India

Ranjit Singh - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Definitely he is not a Muslim and ruled today's pak
As @Hitman pointed out Assam was never captured and north east too I believe

 

[daytrader]

Ranjit Singh - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Definitely he is not a Muslim and ruled today's pak
As @Hitman pointed out Assam was never captured and north east too I believe

You're gonna tell me about Ranjit Singh lol. I'm Punjabi dude from that same region he was born.

FYI, Ranjit Singh was ruling at the time when the British were already settled in India. His rule was like 200 years after Babur first conquered India. Most of his campaigns went westward not east

 

[Statpadder Inc]

You're gonna tell me about Ranjit Singh lol. I'm Punjabi dude from that same region he was born.

FYI, Ranjit Singh was ruling at the time when the British were already settled in India. His rule was like 200 years after Babur first conquered India. Most of his campaigns went westward not east

What's the opinion about ranjit singh in West Punjab

 

[Vikram1989]

You're gonna tell me about Ranjit Singh lol. I'm Punjabi dude from that same region he was born.

FYI, Ranjit Singh was ruling at the time when the British were already settled in India. His rule was like 200 years after Babur first conquered India. Most of his campaigns went westward not east

But he was ruling Muslims, is not it ?

 

[daytrader]

But he was ruling Muslims, is not it ?

So was the British Raj. What's your argument here Mr. 85 percentile?

 

[Vikram1989]

So was the British Raj. What's your argument here Mr. 85 percentile?

U dont know anything rt .He was ruling from 1801 to 1827.Aurangajeb was there till 1805.His father was ruling sialkot from 1877.British annexed the empire in 1850.atleast go through the links I posted.

By the way I never thought someone can get so jealous of my mediocre marks

 

[daytrader]

U dont know anything rt .He was ruling from 1801 to 1827.Aurangajeb was there till 1805.His father was ruling sialkot from 1877.British annexed the empire in 1850.atleast go through the links I posted.

By the way I never thought someone can get so jealous of my mediocre marks

What are you on about.? This thread is about Muslim rule over India and whether it was a good thing, not who ruled over Muslims in India.

I'm not jealous of your marks, I'm just questioning the legitimacy because you're not arguing like an 85 percentiler. Always have to ask you to clarify your point of view

 

[Rajdeep]

What is the difference between Muslim invaders and Israel? Both are doing same. West Bank has become one of the most developed places in Israel rule. However we choose to glorify Islamic invasion saying it was economically good for Indian sub continent but at the same time condemn Israel. If only hypocrisy has a face few would be seeing theirs when staring at mirror.

 

[daytrader]

What's the opinion about ranjit singh in West Punjab

Being predominantly a Muslim province most people don't care about him. South Punjabis and Kahmiris hate him due to his war campaigns. Still, some call him the son of the soil as he was not a foreign ruler and actually fought off foreign invaders. Others call him a kana (one eyed) associating him with Dajjal

 

[Rajdeep]

As I said, the best thing about Muslim invaders were they manage to convert millions of people who later demanded and got their own country. That was the best thing to have ever happened in Indian subcontinent. Those countries are flourishing now and a shinning light in the world. I wish the remaining ones move there as well. The day it happens, half of India's problem will be solved.

But, jaate hi nehi hai

 

[daytrader]

Being predominantly a Muslim province most people don't care about him. South Punjabis and Kahmiris hate him due to his war campaigns. Still, some call him the son of the soil as he was not a foreign ruler and actually fought off foreign invaders. Others call him a kana (one eyed) associating him with Dajjal

@Statpadder Inc The violence at the time of partition had a huge negative side effect on the perception of Sikhs in west Punjab.