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

[The Bald Eagle]

To all the posters, who thought there were zero achievements or innovations etc under the Muslim rule in India.
=====

https://www.oneyoungindia.com/cuet-and-upsc-general-studies-notes/science-and-technology-in-mughal-period

 

[CricketCartoons]

Muslims should be proud of babur, he was a warrior for Islam, and he furthered the progress of muslim civilization. In his own words (baburnama translation):

For the sake of Islam I became a wanderer; I battled infidels and Hindus. I determined to become a martyr. Thank God I became a holy warrior.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Muslims should be proud of babur, he was a warrior for Islam, and he furthered the progress of muslim civilization. In his own words (baburnama translation):

For the sake of Islam I became a wanderer; I battled infidels and Hindus. I determined to become a martyr. Thank God I became a holy warrior.

Can you state any organized attempt under any Muslim ruler to force religious conversions in the last millenium. Not aware of any so far, would like to be enlightened on it.

 

[CricketCartoons]

The way babur describes hindus makes one respect him. He was not a vain person looking for personal glory, he was fighting a divine war against the evil infidels. Some excerpts:

Of the infidels, the greater in domain and army is the rajah of Vijayanagar. The other is Rana Sanga, who had recently grown so great by his audacity and sword. His original province was Chitor. When the sultans of Mandu grew weak, he seized many provinces belonging to Mandu, such as Ranthambhor, Sarangpur, Bhilsan, and Chanderi. Chanderi had been in the daru'l-harb for some years and held by Sanga's highest-ranking officer, Medini Rao, with four or five thousand infidels, but in 934 [1528], through the grace of God, I took it by force within a ghari or two, massacred the infidels, and brought it into the bosom of Islam, as will be mentioned.

Through God's grace such a famous fortress was conquered within two or three gharis without standards or drums and without any fighting in earnest. A tower of infidels' skulls was erected on the hill on the northwest side of Chanderi. The chronogram for this victory was found to be fath-i daru'l-harb.

 

[globetrotter]

Under Mughal rule, atrocities against Hindus were at peak in 14th and 15th century…. In 16th century Chhatrapati Shivaji was born…. At that time south India was ruled by Adilshah and rest of India was ruled by Mughals… Chhatrapati Shivaji built his empire from scratch…He founded empire in Maharashtra and extended to south till Tanjaver… From Shivaji empire to Peshwa empire, Marathas extended their empire from Tanjaver to Attok I.e. present day Afghanistan-Pakistan border.

Marathas are responsible for ouster of Mughals from Hindustan

 

[CricketCartoons]

Under Mughal rule, atrocities against Hindus were at peak in 14th and 15th century…. In 16th century Chhatrapati Shivaji was born…. At that time south India was ruled by Adilshah and rest of India was ruled by Mughals… Chhatrapati Shivaji built his empire from scratch…He founded empire in Maharashtra and extended to south till Tanjaver… From Shivaji empire to Peshwa empire, Marathas extended their empire from Tanjaver to Attok I.e. present day Afghanistan-Pakistan border.

Marathas are responsible for ouster of Mughals from Hindustan

There is no right or wrong answer. Any muslim should be proud of mughals and hindus should not deny it. As a hindu, you have all rights to see it as a dark period, just don't expect muslims to agree with you.

 

[daytrader]

But we always had the strength to fight you, look up 1971

We're not your rulers. And if you do have that strength why does Pakistan still exist. In fact why do Muslims still exist in India, I believe their population is even higher than Pakistan's

 

[daytrader]

Dhan aur Dharti bat kar rahega...but apna apna chor ke". It is apt for this discussion.

Translate that as I don't speak hindi

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

That is because both Islamic rulers of India and Israel are invaders who have taken over others land and did some developement work in return. However, the hypocrisy is been highlighted here of those people who condemns Israel but are gloryfying Islamic tyrants at the same time for doing the same with 10 times more intensity. I brought the topic of Israel first bcoz I am clearly aware which string to pull to hit the nerve...LOL

But most Indian posters seem to love Israel and yet hate the Mughals despite making this comparison. Shouldn't you then hate or love both equally?

 

[daytrader]

Errr .... my claim was a fact as well. It's homework for the youtuber, I'm sure he can find. But if you want to help him, you're more than welcome

So original! Guess you guys learn copying and pasting at a young age

 

[daytrader]

But most Indian posters seem to love Israel and yet hate the Mughals despite making this comparison. Shouldn't you then hate or love both equally?

Bro hypocrisy has no bounds. They wanna make comparisons and then conclude it was similar yet don't want to condemn

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

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.

But you claimed pre-Islamic India was far more innovative than the Muslim invaders, so why did they not innovate some better weaponry or war machines? We already know that hindu kingdoms were warmongers who fought with each other so it's not as if they were some veggie peaceniks who wanted nothing to do with conflict when Islam was brought to the east.

 

[Stewie]

Why are Mughal emperors passed off as "Muslim leaders"

They were monarchs who were muslims, but why do we pretend they were representatives of faith?
I think that depiction needs to be revisited. DId they offer anything to the muslim world overall as leaders? They all sounded like rich, aristocrats who indulged in worldly pleasures more than anything. They were not true representatives of Muslims.

 

[anikrc1]

But you claimed pre-Islamic India was far more innovative than the Muslim invaders, so why did they not innovate some better weaponry or war machines? We already know that hindu kingdoms were warmongers who fought with each other so it's not as if they were some veggie peaceniks who wanted nothing to do with conflict when Islam was brought to the east.

Archimedes.

 

[Statpadder Inc]

We're not your rulers. And if you do have that strength why does Pakistan still exist. In fact why do Muslims still exist in India, I believe their population is even higher than Pakistan's

Because some pakistanis tell us that we ruled over you for xyz years, when it wasn't them.

If you want to celebrate them, then yes you have every right to do so but don't expect us to celebrate their rule

 

[cricketjoshila]

Get your facts right first. BD's poverty level is not 40%. It is around 20% (source: https://www.adb.org/where-we-work/bangladesh/poverty#:~:text=In Bangladesh, 20.5% of the,died before their 5th birthday.).

Don't act like there is no poverty in India. LOL.

India has nearly eradicated extreme poverty.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Why are Mughal emperors passed off as "Muslim leaders"

They were monarchs who were muslims, but why do we pretend they were representatives of faith?
I think that depiction needs to be revisited. DId they offer anything to the muslim world overall as leaders? They all sounded like rich, aristocrats who indulged in worldly pleasures more than anything. They were not true representatives of Muslims.

Read baburnama. He called himself a Ghazi. He faught a holy war against infidels. Words right from the horses mouth, no matter how much spin is added by sly people.

Babur would be turning in his grave if he is not called a muslim leader.

 

[CricketCartoons]

But you claimed pre-Islamic India was far more innovative than the Muslim invaders, so why did they not innovate some better weaponry or war machines? We already know that hindu kingdoms were warmongers who fought with each other so it's not as if they were some veggie peaceniks who wanted nothing to do with conflict when Islam was brought to the east.

Because good times make people soft, and bad times make people hard.

Babur had been losing his battles. he even had to give his sister to a victor. But the war techniques he learnt from his victors, he applied with indian rulers and won. Indians viewed war as some kind of game of chivalry, Babur taught them what war really means.

 

[Mesozoic]

But most Indian posters seem to love Israel

"Love" is a strong word. View them in a positive light? Definitely yes. They helped us in 1971 and 1999 in putting a leash on Pakistan when most world powers were against that preposition.

Yes, what they are or have been doing in Palestine is morally reprehensible but we humans are slightly forgiving in that way towards people who favour us.The same way Pakistanis "love" China even when they're busy razing mosques and putting it's Muslim Uyghurs in reeducation camps. Also in the same vein as those who lick the boots of 'The West' online despite them playing a chief role in wrecking the Middle East.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Guys don't derail the thread by off topic discussion. Plz stick with the thread title discourse.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Because good times make people soft, and bad times make people hard.

Babur had been losing his battles. he even had to give his sister to a victor. But the war techniques he learnt from his victors, he applied with indian rulers and won. Indians viewed war as some kind of game of chivalry, Babur taught them what war really means.

Why didn't warring parties of India learn such techniques? Maybe because their fights were with other localities and therefore never introduced to the brutal war machines which were developed further west?

 

[RexRex]

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.

Israel are good at governance, with a strong civil society and a healthy opposition. They're the only democracy in the middle-east so they could teach you some valuable lessons on how conduct an election in your region. Jewish rule in Pakistan will bring immense benefits to your country.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

"Love" is a strong word. View them in a positive light? Definitely yes. They helped us in 1971 and 1999 in putting a leash on Pakistan when most world powers were against that preposition.

Yes, what they are or have been doing in Palestine is morally reprehensible but we humans are slightly forgiving in that way towards people who favour us.The same way Pakistanis "love" China even when they're busy razing mosques and putting it's Muslim Uyghurs in reeducation camps. Also in the same vein as those who lick the boots of 'The West' online despite them playing a chief role in wrecking the Middle East.

Quite a lot to unravel there. Now China and the West are being roped in as well as Israel. But I don't get the comment about bootlicking of 'The West' which has been thrown in there. Are you talking about Muslims or Indians here?

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Israel are good at governance, with a strong civil society and a healthy opposition. They're the only democracy in the middle-east so they could teach you some valuable lessons on how conduct an election in your region. Jewish rule in Pakistan will bring immense benefits to your country.

OK not interested so just try it in your home country.

 

[Mesozoic]

But I don't get the comment about bootlicking of 'The West' which has been thrown in there. Are you talking about Muslims or Indians here?

Well you know... The ones that keep on waxing lyricals about the "Western values" whilst ignoring the various ways they screwed up the lives of millions of Muslims in the middle East? I'm pretty sure you know who I'm talking about here.

 

[daytrader]

Marathas are responsible for ouster of Mughals from Hindustan

Rewriting history now are we? Everyone in Hindustan is a hero when it comes to fighting Muslims. Mughals weren't ousted, they were defeated by the British.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Rewriting history now are we? Everyone in Hindustan is a hero when it comes to fighting Muslims. Mughals weren't ousted, they were defeated by the British.

East India company defeated the nawab of bengal in 1757. Before that the nawab was paying money to the marathas so that they don't invade bengal. So mughals were already defeated before the British came.

 

[Swashbuckler]

So many versions of this thread have popped up recently lol.

Majority SC Muslims will have an answer. Majority SC non-Muslims will have a different answer. Neither side will be able to convince the other side.

 

[daytrader]

East India company defeated the nawab of bengal in 1757. Before that the nawab was paying money to the marathas so that they don't invade bengal. So mughals were already defeated before the British came.

Marathas were not invaders but looters. They didn't attack any major Mughal stronghold. They didn't distinguish between Hindu and Muslim. Quit trying to portray them as some saviors of Hindus.

The British dealt with them as well after they defeated the Nawabs of Bengal. Treachery of Mir Jaffer was the reason the Nawab's lost

 

[Itachi]

So many versions of this thread have popped up recently lol.

Majority SC Muslims will have an answer. Majority SC non-Muslims will have a different answer. Neither side will be able to convince the other side.

It's actually nothing to do with religion.

It just shows how out of touch sone people in UK are by being in a very close community.

 

[uppercut]

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.

You are saying that those horrific things that @Cover Drive Six said did not happen?

 

[uppercut]

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?

What is your take on the burning down of Nalanda university?

 

[globetrotter]

East India company defeated the nawab of bengal in 1757. Before that the nawab was paying money to the marathas so that they don't invade bengal. So mughals were already defeated before the British came.

Even last Bahadur Shah II was also paying money to Marathas for not invading Delhi and de-thrown him…. During that period Marathas were at peak of the power, there 3 commanders i.e. Mahadhji Shinde, Gaikwad and Holkar destroyed Mughal empire

 

[globetrotter]

Marathas were not invaders but looters. They didn't attack any major Mughal stronghold. They didn't distinguish between Hindu and Muslim. Quit trying to portray them as some saviors of Hindus.

The British dealt with them as well after they defeated the Nawabs of Bengal. Treachery of Mir Jaffer was the reason the Nawab's lost

U r wrong …. Marathas built their empire from Tanjaver to Attok, they ruled over 200 years defeated aadilshaah, Mughals.

Marathas were so brave in their last battle in 1818 which was fought at Vadgaon near Pune…. Marathas were in their traditional arm art of sword and shields whereas Britishers were with Rifles… but despite this Marathas defeated Britishers in Vadgaon battle

 

[CricketCartoons]

Marathas were not invaders but looters. They didn't attack any major Mughal stronghold. They didn't distinguish between Hindu and Muslim. Quit trying to portray them as some saviors of Hindus.

The British dealt with them as well after they defeated the Nawabs of Bengal. Treachery of Mir Jaffer was the reason the Nawab's lost

You must be day dreaming because I did not say anything except that it was not the british who ousted mughals. Mughals had declined much before that, that even nawabs were paying marathas tribute money.

 

[Vikram1989]

The powerful Sayyid brothers made Shah Jahan's 18-year-old son Emperor Muhammad Shah (r. 1719-48). They tried to conciliate the factions; "but they were Indian Muslims and were resented by the Irani nobles from Persia and the Turani aristocrats from central Asia".

So much for the support

Marathas and the English Company 1707-1818 by Sanderson Beck

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Well you know... The ones that keep on waxing lyricals about the "Western values" whilst ignoring the various ways they screwed up the lives of millions of Muslims in the middle East? I'm pretty sure you know who I'm talking about here.

So are you talking about posters rather than Muslims generally? That too I am assuming you are using me to represent all the posters on here, because it is me who waxes lyrical about western values because I live in the west.

But now you have to decide where to draw the line in the sand. If I represent all posters and Muslims, then why do Indian posters reprimand Muslims for failing to integrate? Why are Muslims referred to as terrorists who are anti-western? You can't have it both ways. If anything, that you agree with and parrot western terminology for Muslims would in fact suggest that it is the hindus who are the bootlickers, wouldn't you agree?

 

[Mesozoic]

So are you talking about posters rather than Muslims generally? That too I am assuming you are using me to represent all the posters on here, because it is me who waxes lyrical about western values because I live in the west.

But now you have to decide where to draw the line in the sand. If I represent all posters and Muslims, then why do Indian posters reprimand Muslims for failing to integrate? Why are Muslims referred to as terrorists who are anti-western? You can't have it both ways. If anything, that you agree with and parrot western terminology for Muslims would in fact suggest that it is the hindus who are the bootlickers, wouldn't you agree?

Aannnnd the nerve gets hit as expected.


Where and when did I "parrot Western terminology for Muslims" lmao? I guess people do actually imagine things that make them feel better when their insecurities are pointed out. It's okay 'cap'...it's not that serious.

 

[Statpadder Inc]

India's share of the gdp was higher before the mughal rule, the only reason they invaded india was because of it's wealth.

And the wealth remained in the hands of the turkic and persian elite, not the ordinary Joe.

And economic growth is not the only thing that matters, this may sound extreme to many people but destroying temples, raping women and slaughtering innocents is bad actually.

Otherwise we can Israel to take over and rule Pakistan, to give them the benefits of economic development and scientific progress

 

[Rajdeep]

I am planning to go to the next 'From River to the Sea, Palestine will be fee' march in central London. All those misinformed white Corbyn supporters who are dancing in this Fee Fee Palestine tune every weekend along with our Bradford friends thiking it is for the humanitarian cause, I just want to inform them that what do they know. The same guys who does 'Fee Fee Palestine' supported by Mayor of London actually supports barbaric Islamic rulers in India who plundered, raped, killed millions of hindus , invaded their land, destroyed their places of worship and converted them. Humanitarian cause is the biggest topi drama in all these.

#FeeFee

 

[IndoorCricket]

The muslim rule over sub-continent is so good, muslims are the poorest religious groups in India and also have the largest percentage of illiterates. Great job by muslim rulers.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Aannnnd the nerve gets hit as expected.


Where and when did I "parrot Western terminology for Muslims" lmao? I guess people do actually imagine things that make them feel better when their insecurities are pointed out. It's okay 'cap'...it's not that serious.

I just questioned your logic and because you had no answer you had to start mumbling and bumbling about nerves getting hit. Just answer the question, it doesn't really matter who is asking does it?

 

[Mesozoic]

I just questioned your logic and because you had no answer you had to start mumbling and bumbling about nerves getting hit. Just answer the question, it doesn't really matter who is asking does it?

Lol what question?


Doing a lame 'No you' and saying "Oh no I'm not a hypocritical Western bootlicker , it's you Hindus reeeeee " is not really a honest question by any means.

I simply explained the similarity between Indians being supportive of Israel and (some ) online Muslims being positively vocal about the Western ideologies even though both those entities have moral faults. And you somehow took it personally lol...

 

[Mesozoic]

The muslim rule over sub-continent is so good, muslims are the poorest religious groups in India and also have the largest percentage of illiterates. Great job by muslim rulers.

This is exactly what I tried to point out earlier in this thread and that has unfortunately triggered a lot of emotional posters here. Not a single retort to that so far to absolutely no one's surprises.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Lol what question?


Doing a lame 'No you' and saying "Oh no I'm not a hypocritical Western bootlicker , it's you Hindus reeeeee " is not really a honest question by any means.

I simply explained the similarity between Indians being supportive of Israel and (some ) online Muslims being positively vocal about the Western ideologies even though both those entities have moral faults. And you somehow took it personally lol...

You still didn't answer the questions which you raised yourself by using emotional terms such as bootlickers. When the discrepancy here was pointed out you have exploded in a barrage of smileys and attempts to question the poster's intentions, presumably because you don't have any answers. Why go down that road in the first place then?

Do you want me to post the questions again in case they have fled your attention span? Key phrases were integration and terrorism.

 

[KB]

Why are Mughal emperors passed off as "Muslim leaders"

They were monarchs who were muslims, but why do we pretend they were representatives of faith?
I think that depiction needs to be revisited. DId they offer anything to the muslim world overall as leaders? They all sounded like rich, aristocrats who indulged in worldly pleasures more than anything. They were not true representatives of Muslims.

It would be a mistake to view the Mughal empire only through a religious prism. Equally, though we should avoid the opposite, which is to deny and erase any religious import. In the end the Mughals drew simultaneously on a diverse set of sources: Indian, Timurid, Persianate but also Islamic.

This might surprise those that tend to view the Mughals as heretics.

Part of the problem is that we tend to look back with contemporary understandings of Islam rather than seeing the past on its own terms.

We might start with the mind-blowing book of the late Shahab Ahmed: What is Islam? The Importance of Being Islamic. Ahmed’s book is not focused on the Mughal empire specifically but more broadly on what he calls the Balkans-to-Bengal complex, roughly in the years 1350 to 1850.

In the book Ahmed challenges the privileging of a normative text-based core as the supposed orthodoxy. The tendency towards elevating a “legal-supremacist” understanding reduces Islam to a set of prescriptions and proscriptions and underplays the exploratory dimension that has animated the works and thoughts of many Muslims historically. This tendency is partly to do with the “modern historical movement.” As he writes:

“Law is a leitmotif of the modern human condition in a manner and degree unprecedented in any prior period of history. Not only is the fundamental organisational unit of modern human society to which all human subjects belong—that is, the nation state—constituted as a legally-determined entity (as distinct from a divinely- or patrimonially-determined entity)—one might even say that the nation-state is a legal fiction: it is, literally, made up by law—but the modern human condition is more thoroughly pervaded by the technology and force of the structures of law than has been any other human condition.”

The tendency to view Islam through the modern legalist prism relegates expressions of poetry, philosophy, visual arts etc. to mere aspects of ‘culture’ or something belonging to a supposed ‘secular’ sphere, even if they were “Islamically meaningful,” or that they in some way conveyed and embodied Islam to Muslims of the time.

Another remarkable book, more squarely focussed on the Mughal empire, is Azfar Moin’s, The Millennial Sovereign. Moin writes:

“For what may appear as “heresy” from a doctrinal point of view was, in many cases, a ritual engagement with popular forms of saintliness and embodied forms of sacrality that were broadly and intuitively accepted by much of the populace as morally valid and spiritually potent. To make way for this perspective, however, we must set aside many conventional assumptions and timeless truths about Islam.”

Moin recreates what to modern eyes appears a world full of strange beliefs and rituals. A world of divination, of belief in the occult powers of numbers and letters, a world of dream interpretation and astrological calculations. A time when rulers consulted astrologers, soothsayers, and holy men associated with certain shrines. In uncovering the cultural foundations of Mughal political authority he makes the case that Mughal sovereignty rested not on doctrinal Islam but was in fact shaped by Sufi, millennial and cosmic motifs. He points out that in this pre-modern world:

“Islam existed in society primarily in the form of sacred and saintly presences, whether alive in physical form, active in enshrined graves, apparent in dreams, or resurrected in blood descendants and anointed successors. The dominant experience of sacred authority for most people—elite or common—was concrete and embodied rather than abstract and textual. The language for making sense of and articulating this experience, moreover, came from the Sufi traditions of “mysticism” and “sainthood.” This is a point worth emphasising, because modern scholarship tends to resolve questions of sovereign authority in Islam in favour of enduring scriptural texts and legalistic doctrine.”

The scholarship of Shahab Ahmed and Azfar Moin is useful in reminding us that studying societies separated by time means trying to get into the minds of people who lived and thought differently to us.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

What is your take on the burning down of Nalanda university?

Yep that act by Khilji dynasty was condemnable but they weren’t the alone to attack it.

“The second attack in Nalanda happened during the early 7th century. This attack was done by the emperor of Bengal, Goudas Rajvansh. The main reason behind this attack was the political imbalance. At that time, the emperor of Kannuj, Harshavardhana was ruling.”

 

[The Bald Eagle]

What a great article and book by Ms. Thapar​

=====

That Muslims enslaved Hindus for last 1000 yrs is historically unacceptable: Romila Thapar​

P. S: She is not on Muslims pay roll.

That Muslims enslaved Hindus for last 1000 yrs is historically unacceptable: Romila Thapar

The book ‘Inquilab: A Decade of Protest’ chronicles some of the most powerful speeches and articles by Kavita Krishnan, Romila Thapar, Kanhaiya Kumar, Mahua Maitra, and others.

theprint.in

 

[sweep_shot]

What a great article and book by Ms. Thapar​

=====

That Muslims enslaved Hindus for last 1000 yrs is historically unacceptable: Romila Thapar​

P. S: She is not on Muslims pay roll.

That Muslims enslaved Hindus for last 1000 yrs is historically unacceptable: Romila Thapar

The book ‘Inquilab: A Decade of Protest’ chronicles some of the most powerful speeches and articles by Kavita Krishnan, Romila Thapar, Kanhaiya Kumar, Mahua Maitra, and others.

theprint.in

Great from Romila Thapar.

To learn real history of Muslim rules in subcontinent, we should avoid biased BJP sources.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Great from Romila Thapar.

To learn real history of Muslim rules in subcontinent, we should avoid biased BJP sources.

But at least read the most unbiased person, Babur himself. He clearly said that he was fighting the infidels, and was fighting for Islam. Are you saying Babur was lying?

 

[Rajdeep]

How Muslim invaders and British rulers killed over 300 million people in India​

How Muslim invaders and British rulers killed over 300 million people in India — still no memorial for Hindu holocaust

It’s unsettling to see Hindus being largely silent or indifferent about the horrors being unleashed on them for centuries. One wonders why there’s no memorial for the Hindu holocaust of the last 1,000 years

www.firstpost.com

Mughal India ~ The Biggest Holocaust in World History​

With the invasion of India by Mahmud Ghazni about 1000 A.D., began the Muslim invasions into the Indian subcontinent and they lasted for several centuries. Nadir Shah made a mountain of the skulls of the Hindus he killed in Delhi alone. Babur raised towers of Hindu skulls at Khanua when he defeated Rana Sanga in 1527 and later he repeated the same horrors after capturing the fort of Chanderi. Akbar ordered a general massacre of 30,000 Rajputs after he captured Chithorgarh in 1568. The Bahamani Sultans had an annual agenda of killing a minimum of 100,000 Hindus every year.

Mughal India ~ The Biggest Holocaust in World History

The modern World today is facing a global threat from organizations and groups of terrorists such as the ISIS, Taliban and Al-Qaeeda – whose ideology is chillingly similar to that of the perpetrators of the World’s biggest holocaust in India.

www.sikhnet.com

 

[Rajdeep]

How Muslim invaders and British rulers killed over 300 million people in India​

How Muslim invaders and British rulers killed over 300 million people in India — still no memorial for Hindu holocaust

It’s unsettling to see Hindus being largely silent or indifferent about the horrors being unleashed on them for centuries. One wonders why there’s no memorial for the Hindu holocaust of the last 1,000 years

www.firstpost.com

Mughal India ~ The Biggest Holocaust in World History​

With the invasion of India by Mahmud Ghazni about 1000 A.D., began the Muslim invasions into the Indian subcontinent and they lasted for several centuries. Nadir Shah made a mountain of the skulls of the Hindus he killed in Delhi alone. Babur raised towers of Hindu skulls at Khanua when he defeated Rana Sanga in 1527 and later he repeated the same horrors after capturing the fort of Chanderi. Akbar ordered a general massacre of 30,000 Rajputs after he captured Chithorgarh in 1568. The Bahamani Sultans had an annual agenda of killing a minimum of 100,000 Hindus every year.

Mughal India ~ The Biggest Holocaust in World History

The modern World today is facing a global threat from organizations and groups of terrorists such as the ISIS, Taliban and Al-Qaeeda – whose ideology is chillingly similar to that of the perpetrators of the World’s biggest holocaust in India.

www.sikhnet.com

@The Bald Eagle - just curious, do you support these? Or were you aware of these prior to opening this thread?

 

[Hitman]

How Muslim invaders and British rulers killed over 300 million people in India​

How Muslim invaders and British rulers killed over 300 million people in India — still no memorial for Hindu holocaust

It’s unsettling to see Hindus being largely silent or indifferent about the horrors being unleashed on them for centuries. One wonders why there’s no memorial for the Hindu holocaust of the last 1,000 years

www.firstpost.com

Mughal India ~ The Biggest Holocaust in World History​

With the invasion of India by Mahmud Ghazni about 1000 A.D., began the Muslim invasions into the Indian subcontinent and they lasted for several centuries. Nadir Shah made a mountain of the skulls of the Hindus he killed in Delhi alone. Babur raised towers of Hindu skulls at Khanua when he defeated Rana Sanga in 1527 and later he repeated the same horrors after capturing the fort of Chanderi. Akbar ordered a general massacre of 30,000 Rajputs after he captured Chithorgarh in 1568. The Bahamani Sultans had an annual agenda of killing a minimum of 100,000 Hindus every year.

Mughal India ~ The Biggest Holocaust in World History

The modern World today is facing a global threat from organizations and groups of terrorists such as the ISIS, Taliban and Al-Qaeeda – whose ideology is chillingly similar to that of the perpetrators of the World’s biggest holocaust in India.

www.sikhnet.com

I'm waiting for posters to label all of the above as Hindutva propaganda.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Marathas were not invaders but looters. They didn't attack any major Mughal stronghold. They didn't distinguish between Hindu and Muslim. Quit trying to portray them as some saviors of Hindus.

The British dealt with them as well after they defeated the Nawabs of Bengal. Treachery of Mir Jaffer was the reason the Nawab's lost

Marathas sacked Delhi itself in 1771. Shah Alam 2 was installed as the Emperor.

Before that they had captured large areas of North and west India from the Mughals.

Many Hindu temples that were demolished by Muslims, like Tryambakeshwar, Grushneshwar, Mahakaleshwar and many more such temples were rebuilt by the Marathas.

 

[sweep_shot]

@The Bald Eagle - just curious, do you support these? Or were you aware of these prior to opening this thread?

Does anyone need permission from Indians to open a thread? Is this an Indian site?

 

[CricketCartoons]

Does anyone need permission from Indians to open a thread? Is this an Indian site?

Was Babur doing hindutva propaganda when he wrote his book? Why are you ignoring what he wrote?

 

[cricketjoshila]

Does anyone need permission from Indians to open a thread? Is this an Indian site?

Do Indians need permission from Pakistanis and Bangladeshis to rename places named after Invaders?

Why do you guys cry so much when we remove the name of muslim invaders?

 

[cricketjoshila]

Was Babur doing hindutva propaganda when he wrote his book? Why are you ignoring what he wrote?

As per some posters, Babur is a hero.

 

[Rajdeep]

Does anyone need permission from Indians to open a thread? Is this an Indian site?

What do you mean by Indian site? Are you saying just bcoz this is not an Indian site, it is okay to support genocide on Indians/Hindus?

Bro, more you posting or more I am interrogating you...you are exposing yourself more. And then when you go and shed tears on the Israel thread, it gets more funny. If I were you, would just stop embarrassing further rather than hiding behind the nationality of the site.

Pretty sure the thread creator didn't realize it will backfire so badly. Praising muslim rule over India it seems and that too in 2024...Hilarious.

 

[sweep_shot]

What do you mean by Indian site? Are you saying just bcoz this is not an Indian site, it is okay to support genocide on Indians/Hindus?

Bro, more you posting or more I am interrogating you...you are exposing yourself more. And then when you go and shed tears on the Israel thread, it gets more funny. If I were you, would just stop embarrassing further rather than hiding behind the nationality of the site.

Pretty sure the thread creator didn't realize it will backfire so badly. Praising muslim rule over India it seems and that too in 2024...Hilarious.

Genocide of Indians/Hindus? What do you mean? Who is supporting it?

 

[CricketCartoons]

As per some posters, Babur is a hero.

I have no problem with muslims considering him a hero, for he fought for islam against the infidels, and brought infidels land under islam.

I have problem with them trying to secularize him, that he was a religiously tolerant person who was fighting like any other king, and bringing forth distorians articles. At least admit what babur himself accepted.

babur had no shame in accepting that he was killing the infidels for Islam, but his modern day followers would rather call him a liar than admit it.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

@The Bald Eagle - just curious, do you support these? Or were you aware of these prior to opening this thread?

First plz check the history of the author, he is a renowned BJP supporter so that alone makes you doubt his story and on thread if people analyze neutrally then they could unearth the truth themselves...leaving it upto them.

 

[CricketCartoons]

First plz check the history of the author, he is a renowned BJP supporter so that alone makes you doubt his story and on thread if people analyze neutrally then they could unearth the truth themselves...leaving it upto them.

Why go to various historians, when we have the source of Truth. Words right from the horses mouth, in his auto biography.

 

[cricketjoshila]

First plz check the history of the author, he is a renowned BJP supporter so that alone makes you doubt his story and on thread if people analyze neutrally then they could unearth the truth themselves...leaving it upto them.

What about baburnama itself?

 

[Rajdeep]

First plz check the history of the author, he is a renowned BJP supporter so that alone makes you doubt his story and on thread if people analyze neutrally then they could unearth the truth themselves...leaving it upto them.

Yes, Romila Thapar is neutral?

 

[cricketjoshila]

I have no problem with muslims considering him a hero, for he fought for islam against the infidels, and brought infidels land under islam.

I have problem with them trying to secularize him, that he was a religiously tolerant person who was fighting like any other king, and bringing forth distorians articles. At least admit what babur himself accepted.

babur had no shame in accepting that he was killing the infidels for Islam, but his modern day followers would rather call him a liar than admit it.

Problem is that our neighbours cannot live peacefully even when they have their own country.

They have to ram down their opinion about Muslim rule down our throats.

If its rejected, the other side is not secular and is hindutva supporter.

This is a result of the mollycoddling they have received in the West.

There natives are scared, govt is scared of being labelled Islamophobic or racist.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

What about baburnama itself?

Well, Babar did believe he was waging a religious war aka Jihad to propogate the religion of Islam and after the conquest he almost halted all the killings and never made attempts of forced conversions.

 

[Vikram1989]

Why go to various historians, when we have the source of Truth. Words right from the horses mouth, in his auto biography.

Bro one query,India today /Romila thapar argued since 1526 calender year is missing in baburnama,we can't say ram mandir was destroyed by babur.is it true it was missing in baburnama either intentional or not ?

 

[CricketCartoons]

Well, Babar did believe he was waging a religious war aka Jihad to propogate the religion of Islam and after the conquest he almost halted all the killings and never made attempts of forced conversions.

Of course anyone halts killings after conquest. Because to rule, you need people. If you kill everyone, you will rule a barren empty land? You are making it some kind of virtue that he "almost" halted killings after conquest. But during conquest he made tower of skulls of infidels. His contempt for infidels is very much evident in how he describes them.

I mean you should consider him a hero for doing that, but don't be shy and try to show him as being humane with infidels.

 

[cricketjoshila]

Well, Babar did believe he was waging a religious war aka Jihad to propogate the religion of Islam and after the conquest he almost halted all the killings and never made attempts of forced conversions.

If you kill everyone, who will you rule? Who will ally with you?

 

[globetrotter]

Does anyone know in where the descendant of Mughals are living at present? …… any guess?

The descendant of last Mughal Bahadur shah Jaffar is living in Kolkata slums. This is what mughals finally got after they built their empire on cheating, looting, raping and destroying Hindu temples.

 

[CricketCartoons]

Problem is that our neighbours cannot live peacefully even when they have their own country.

They have to ram down their opinion about Muslim rule down our throats.

If its rejected, the other side is not secular and is hindutva supporter.

This is a result of the mollycoddling they have received in the West.

There natives are scared, govt is scared of being labelled Islamophobic or racist.

I don't find any hypocrisy, that they want others to be secular while not being secular themselves. They support anything that helps expand their civilization. Period. This is a great quality to have. Instead of blaming them, we must learn from them. That we should support our civilization and community, no matter what. We should be fully biased towards our community, instead of getting into morality and ethics and right or wrong. Power high ground is better than moral high ground.

 

[Romali_rotti]

Babur our hero..

 

[big_gamer007]

Topics like these make me wonder how little knowledge Pakistanis have about the history of sub continent.

Also it shows how strong a hold religion has over the subconscious minds of Pakistanis which they aren’t even aware of.

 

[Red-Indian]

Bro one query,India today /Romila thapar argued since 1526 calender year is missing in baburnama,we can't say ram mandir was destroyed by babur.is it true it was missing in baburnama either intentional or not ?

It's been many many years since I read the Baburnama but from what I recall he doesn't really mention the destruction of any specific temples. It's mostly a boasting session and very boring in the beginning since there's so many names of chieftains you have no frame of reference for. It gets a bit interesting when he finally reaches 'Hindustan' and suddenly discovers that he's a warrior for God since before that he's been mostly fighting Muslim warlords and kings. I remember the first mention comes out of the blue when he suddenly massacres an entire town (don't remember the name) for straying from the path of Islam.

Pretty hypocritical of him since he keeps discussing his boozy parties and his lusts for a servant boy. He does of course eventually famously give up drinking though he regrets it later.

 

[daytrader]

Topics like these make me wonder how little knowledge Pakistanis have about the history of sub continent.

Also it shows how strong a hold religion has over the subconscious minds of Pakistanis which they aren’t even aware of.

Hindus are pelting foreign Muslim students with stones in India yet it's Pakistanis that have the religion hold over their minds. Get a grip of things and look at the reality

 

[daytrader]

Marathas sacked Delhi itself in 1771. Shah Alam 2 was installed as the Emperor.

Before that they had captured large areas of North and west India from the Mughals.

Many Hindu temples that were demolished by Muslims, like Tryambakeshwar, Grushneshwar, Mahakaleshwar and many more such temples were rebuilt by the Marathas.

So they didn't kill Hindus? The Mahratas fought among themselves as well apparently they were divided into 5 kingdoms? They were not saviors of Hinduism as you would like us to believe

 

[cricketjoshila]

So they didn't kill Hindus? The Mahratas fought among themselves as well apparently they were divided into 5 kingdoms? They were not saviors of Hinduism as you would like us to believe

Marathas were a confedracy and post the Third Anglo Maratha war, the Peshwai was eliminated. Then the bigger Maratha Sardars went their separate ways.

Marathas were saviours of Hindus, Most Hindus in India and in ROW believe that, if a Pakistani Muslims don't believe that, i don't think the punyatma of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj would mind.

 

[Hitman]

Injustice and horrible things have been done by people in history. Except that most people today condemn those people. Do you see Germans glorifying the Nazis despite that they were their own people? Do you see Russians glorifying Joseph Stalin who was one of their own?

However, we Indians are expected to glorify and adore those Muslim tyrants despite the fact that they weren't even our own people. They were invaders who remain a disgrace to humanity and who caused nothing by damage of unmatched proportions to our country and people. And the funniest bit is that it's outsiders from Pakistan and Bangladesh who want us to glorify them in our country.

 

[daytrader]

Marathas were a confedracy and post the Third Anglo Maratha war, the Peshwai was eliminated. Then the bigger Maratha Sardars went their separate ways.

Marathas were saviours of Hindus, Most Hindus in India and in ROW believe that, if a Pakistani Muslims don't believe that, i don't think the punyatma of Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj would mind.

Okay no one stopping you from believing your own lies. Fact is they killed Hindus too, in fact everyone at that time, East India Company, Dutch India Company, the French, Mughals, Afghans, Marathas, Sikhs, Rajas etc were killing Hindus. Yet you guys single out Mughals