What If Series: Would the fate of the Indian subcontinent have been any different or better had Muslim rulers not invaded it?

[The Bald Eagle]

The most common cliche that one heard from gullible Indians is that India would have been a heaven on earth or some kind of utopian state had Muslim rulers not invaded it. They may have some credence in criticizing the rulers who siphoned off the wealth from India but what about those rulers who stayed here developed the Indian administrative and agriculture system.

So the simple question here is what exceptional achievements have Indian subcontinent made, had the Muslims never ruled over it? As in almost 80 years of Independence, India hasn't fared exceptionally as Nehru envisioned and described in 1947.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Poll added Guys!

 

[Itachi]

In order to Answer, let's first discuss the basic question.

How the administrative and agricultural system that of msulim rulers differ from those in non Muslim rulers? Because if you say someone "developed" something, it means some noticeable changes should be there between the systems. So what are those changes?

 

[The Bald Eagle]

In order to Answer, let's first discuss the basic question.

How the administrative and agricultural system that of msulim rulers differ from those in non Muslim rulers? Because if you say someone "developed" something, it means some noticeable changes should be there between the systems. So what are those changes?

Like 3 years ago I watched this video would be helpful for you too.

 

[Rajdeep]

Atleast OP admitted they were invaders. Its a nice start and welcome change from Mughal appreciation thread.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Atleast OP admitted they were invaders. Its a nice start and welcome change from Mughal appreciation thread.

Won't you shed light on the glorious Indian subcontinent without Muslim.lets make your case bro. Have seen you vehemently oppose Muslim contributions in the past.

 

[FearlessRoar]

India might have remained a Hindu dominant society. India's history would have mirrored China's a continuous, unbroken thread of indigenous dynasties with Hinduism shaping art philosophy and governance.

 

[Rajdeep]

Won't you shed light on the glorious Indian subcontinent without Muslim.lets make your case bro. Have seen you vehemently oppose Muslim contributions in the past.

You are missing the point 'bro'. All the invaders in human history has made contribution to the land they are invading. Israel made the land of Palestine one of the most developed nations in the world. British made significant contribution to Indian railway & transportation. Muslim invaders are no different and I am sure they must have made some contributions too. However, one can't hide their barbarism under the garb of contribution.

Had Islamic invaders not looted India, it would probably be a Hindu majority country with less riots & communal frictions with similar development. Bottomline is, muslim invaders of India is nothing to be proud off

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

You are missing the point 'bro'. All the invaders in human history has made contribution to the land they are invading. Israel made the land of Palestine one of the most developed nations in the world. British made significant contribution to Indian railway & transportation. Muslim invaders are no different and I am sure they must have made some contributions too. However, one can't hide their barbarism under the garb of contribution.

Had Islamic invaders not looted India, it would probably be a Hindu majority country with less riots & communal frictions with similar development. Bottomline is, muslim invaders of India is nothing to be proud off

I don't think this is an accurate description of the world at the time. What you refer to as barbarism was probably normal at the time. India itself was run along Hindu principles of caste abuse and burning of widows on the funeral pyre. We know this because many attempts to outlaw these were made by both Mughals and British rulers who followed.

 

[Champ_Pal]

A few things come to my mind right away.

The impact of Arabs on Indian subcontinent after their initial invasion in 7th century on Sindh was very minimal. Arabs converted a few, built a couple of mosques and then left. From 8th century till the 11th century, there were no invasions. Hinduism and Buddhism gained back their prominence all over Indian subcontinent including Afghanistan.

It was only after the Turk invasions starting from 11th century that started the real islamization of the subcontinent. Initially Turks wiped out the Hindushahis ruling Afghanistan. Made Afghanistan their permanent base and used it as a launchpad for further invasions into India. Ghaznavi started it and the subsequent Turks followed his mantra and there were relentless attacks. Turks were brutal and Indian kings did not stand a chance.

Regardless of whether Islamic Turkic invasions happened or not, East India company would have taken over Indian subcontinent from Indian kings just like they did from Mughals with relative ease. Swords and Dhals cannot stop guns.

India would've been taken over by Brits anyway and Bapuji would have given us freedom singlehandedly without raising his hand.

The biggest difference is, India would have been still majority Hindu. But instead of Muslims, India would've had Buddhists as the biggest minority. Everyone talks about the suffering of Hindus under Islamic rule, but no one talks about Buddhists in India. They got completely wiped out of Afghanistan, modern day Pakistan and many parts of India. The birth place of Buddha has such small number of Buddhists today.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

You are missing the point 'bro'. All the invaders in human history has made contribution to the land they are invading. Israel made the land of Palestine one of the most developed nations in the world. British made significant contribution to Indian railway & transportation. Muslim invaders are no different and I am sure they must have made some contributions too. However, one can't hide their barbarism under the garb of contribution.

Had Islamic invaders not looted India, it would probably be a Hindu majority country with less riots & communal frictions with similar development. Bottomline is, muslim invaders of India is nothing to be proud off

So you mean instead India should have been ruled by such rulers' successor.
===

Emperor Ashoka's conquest of Kalinga in 261 BCE resulted in a significant loss of life. Historical records indicate that approximately 100,000 people were killed, and 150,000 were taken as captives during the war1

 

[Rajdeep]

I don't think this is an accurate description of the world at the time. What you refer to as barbarism was probably normal at the time. India itself was run along Hindu principles of caste abuse and burning of widows on the funeral pyre. We know this because many attempts to outlaw these were made by both Mughals and British rulers who followed.

It maybe a norm at that time but people glorifying those barbaric indvaders today in the year 2024 is the issue. No Hindu that I know off glorify burning of widows today. We should condemn the barbarism of the past but some people choose their criticism selectively based on religion.

 

[Rajdeep]

So you mean instead India should have been ruled by such rulers successor.
===

Emperor Ashoka's conquest of Kalinga in 261 BCE resulted in a significant loss of life. Historical records indicate that approximately 100,000 people were killed, and 150,000 were taken as captives during the war1

Your original question is - what will be state of subcontinent without muslim invaders. So the response is clear, it will be much better place to live without any communal riots, hindu muslim divide, less terrorism, no love jihad etc. I am sure it would have been an amazing place where everyone lives in peace and harmony.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Your original question is - what will be state of subcontinent without muslim invaders. So the response is clear, it will be much better place to live without any communal riots, hindu muslim divide, less terrorism, no love jihad etc. I am sure it would have been an amazing place where everyone lives in peace and harmony.

I am ready to believe in #rajdeepspeaks but still can you give us any stat or fact that could second or back your claim. Because examples like Ashoka, emperors from Gupta dynasty suggest otherwise.

 

[Rajdeep]

I am ready to believe in #rajdeepspeaks but still can you give us any stat or fact that could second or back your claim. Because examples like Ashoka, emperors from Gupta dynasty suggest otherwise.

But that is not what you asked on OP right. You question was what will be the condition of present day sub countinent which I already replied. It will be glorious without muslim invasion and also gave the reason. Why will I talk about Ashoka the great here? Off topic, but looks like you have no clue about King Ashoka and his transformation.

 

[Champ_Pal]

I am ready to believe in #rajdeepspeaks but still can you give us any stat or fact that could second or back your claim. Because examples like Ashoka, emperors from Gupta dynasty suggest otherwise.

Ashoka was a great conqueror. He was brutal in his wars and hence remembered as such. No one glorifies Ashoka in Indian history.

There were wars between kingdoms and empires like in any part of the world. But the wars were not religiously motivated. It was all about land and increasing the size of their empires.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Ashoka was a great conqueror. He was brutal in his wars and hence remembered as such. No one glorifies Ashoka in Indian history.

There were wars between kingdoms and empires like in any part of the world. But the wars were not religiously motivated. It was all about land and increasing the size of their empires.

So why Muslims rulers get so much criticism as you yourself claimed it was all about land. Except a few Muslim rulers, majority were more concerned about their territory and Kingdom rather than spreading religion.

 

[Champ_Pal]

So why Muslims rulers get so much criticism as you yourself claimed it was all about land. Except a few Muslim rulers, majority were more concerned about their territory and Kingdom rather than spreading religion.

What Indian kings did in Indian subcontinent does not give the right to Turks to invade India and do the same.

This is like a couple of Pak brothers fighting for property in Pakistan and an unrelated Greek comes in, fights and takes away all the property.

Muslim invasions aka Turkic invasions were motivated by both looting and a Jihadi element in it.

All of these Turkic armies including Mughals had Ghazis in their armies. Their purpose is to fight for Islam and purify earth from polytheism. Before Turkic conquests, Afghanistan, modern day Pakistan , Bangladesh and of course India are the lands of polytheists. That’s a big motivation for those Ghazis and establish Islam in those lands. To their credit, they succeeded partially.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

What Indian kings did in Indian subcontinent does not give the right to Turks to invade India and do the same.

This is like a couple of Pak brothers fighting for property in Pakistan and an unrelated Greek comes in, fights and takes away all the property.

Muslim invasions aka Turkic invasions were motivated by both looting and a Jihadi element in it.

All of these Turkic armies including Mughals had Ghazis in their armies. Their purpose is to fight for Islam and purify earth from polytheism. Before Turkic conquests, Afghanistan, modern day Pakistan , Bangladesh and of course India are the lands of polytheists. That’s a big motivation for those Ghazis and establish Islam in those lands. To their credit, they succeeded partially.

Well as we all may agree, that in past all big dynasties and rulers used to invade other kingdoms for expansionism and power politics. The Muslim rulers had an extra motivation ie to spread Islam. Yeah some Muslims rulers conquest were solely based on expanding Islamic teachings but as many other posters have argued in different threads before that invading other kingdoms was norm back then.

So Turks jumping in Indian affairs wasn't a big deal. As Americans did the same way later after "The Enlightenment" in USA pogroming the red Indians and other aboriginals. The main premise of OP and my concern is was there any Indian ruler who had lead India to super power status if we minus the Muslim rule from their history?

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

It maybe a norm at that time but people glorifying those barbaric indvaders today in the year 2024 is the issue. No Hindu that I know off glorify burning of widows today. We should condemn the barbarism of the past but some people choose their criticism selectively based on religion.

Likewise, no one is glorifying the barbarism of the Mughals today. As has already been demonstrated it was not barbarism compared to Hindu culture of that time. This is about what Mughal culture contributed as part of India's tapestry to present day, which would include many things from education, food, architecture and culture.

 

[Rajdeep]

Likewise, no one is glorifying the barbarism of the Mughals today. As has already been demonstrated it was not barbarism compared to Hindu culture of that time. This is about what Mughal culture contributed as part of India's tapestry to present day, which would include many things from education, food, architecture and culture.

Mughal has zero contribution in India. You may like them for reasons we all know but pls dnt shove their contribution on us. We have no reason to like them. If allowed, I will not even puke at Taj Mahal.

 

[The Bald Eagle]

What an irony, Ashoka has been termed as "the great", "great conqueror" by some posters here while Muslim rulers were "barbaric" just because of their religion.

No wonder that no indian friend hasn't posted even a single big feat by Hindu rulers even before the arrival of Muslims in India that could suggest any alternative glory sans Muslims

 

[sweep_shot]

What an irony, Ashoka has been termed as "the great", "great conqueror" by some posters here while Muslim rulers were "barbaric" just because of their religion.

No wonder that no indian friend hasn't posted even a single big feat by Hindu rulers even before the arrival of Muslims in India that could suggest any alternative glory sans Muslims

Exactly.

It shows their issue is with Islam. It has nothing to do with "invading".

If Mughals were non-Muslims, they probably wouldn't have cared.

 

[Hitman]

Exactly.

It shows their issue is with Islam. It has nothing to do with "invading".

If Mughals were non-Muslims, they probably wouldn't have cared.

Which must be the reason how much we Indians still hate the British rule in India, right?

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Which must be the reason how much we Indians still hate the British rule in India, right?

Well what exactly have India done to show this hate, accepted a British guy as their first governor general?

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Well what exactly have India done to show this hate, accepted a British guy as their first governor general?

Nothing. The Indians in Britain still suck up to the British by telling them "look how much better we integrate than Muslims!"

Many Indians on here used to brag similarly until their mentality was gently pointed out to them. Now not so much.

 

[Hitman]

Well what exactly have India done to show this hate, accepted a British guy as their first governor general?

You want Indians to go to Britain and show their dislike towards them there?

 

[The Bald Eagle]

You want Indians to go to Britain and show their dislike towards them there?

Don't beat around the bush hitman, show us any one serious evidence of Indian disparage against the British government

 

[The Bald Eagle]

You want Indians to go to Britain and show their dislike towards them there?

Your country have shown plenty against Pakistan, so show some against UK too

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Don't beat around the bush hitman, show us any one serious evidence of Indian disparage against the British government

@Hitman keeps telling us Indians hate the British but you will never see them display this. India is seen as a friendly country to Great Britain over here, so if they hate the Brits, they must do it secretly, which would not be a surprise.

 

[Hitman]

Don't beat around the bush hitman, show us any one serious evidence of Indian disparage against the British government

I don’t need to. I’m an Indian and I know more about Indians than you do. We hate Great Britain.

 

[Hitman]

Your country have shown plenty against Pakistan, so show some against UK too

Do we share borders with UK?

 

[Hitman]

@Hitman keeps telling us Indians hate the British but you will never see them display this. India is seen as a friendly country to Great Britain over here, so if they hate the Brits, they must do it secretly, which would not be a surprise.

You lot accuse us of hating Muslims, yet we have friendly relations with almost all Islamic countries bar Pakistan.

How so?​

 

[gani999]

I don't think this is an accurate description of the world at the time. What you refer to as barbarism was probably normal at the time. India itself was run along Hindu principles of caste abuse and burning of widows on the funeral pyre. We know this because many attempts to outlaw these were made by both Mughals and British rulers who followed.

The burning of widows on a funeral pyre was practiced only by one community, and mostly because the widows in question were those of hindu warriors who got killed by 'certain others' who believed in taking the wives of their slain rivals as slaves. So they chose to end their lives rather than taint their honour. It wasn't something that was widely associated with hinduism. And the Mughals did nothing to stop it.

 

[gani999]

You lot accuse us of hating Muslims, yet we have friendly relations with almost all Islamic countries bar Pakistan.

How so?​

Because Pakistan and Bangladesh are converted Hindu countries which only use Islam to hide their insecurities. They have no relation to the real Islam that was created by Prophet Mohammad's (PBUH) arabs.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

It would not have risen to the heights it did today, that is for sure.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

Because Pakistan and Bangladesh are converted Hindu countries which only use Islam to hide their insecurities. They have no relation to the real Islam that was created by Prophet Mohammad's (PBUH) arabs.

It's mainly you guys who have this insecurity and want us to yearn to be Hindus.

I can say with certainty no Pakistani wakes up in the morning torn between Islam and Hinduism or confused whether to pick up Quran or Karma Sutra. No matter how much you try to portray this image.

Anyway, most Muslims are originally converts from polytheism anyway. Whether that is from Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Pakistan or Bangladesh.

 

[DeadlyVenom]

So you mean instead India should have been ruled by such rulers' successor.
===

Emperor Ashoka's conquest of Kalinga in 261 BCE resulted in a significant loss of life. Historical records indicate that approximately 100,000 people were killed, and 150,000 were taken as captives during the war1

Subcontinents flourished under Muslims and Mughal rule and protected the majority of the public from these types of Hindu tyrants.

People really dont understand Mughal rule. The entire bureaucracy or civil service was made up of Hindu Brahmins and Hindu intelligentsia thrived.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

You lot accuse us of hating Muslims, yet we have friendly relations with almost all Islamic countries bar Pakistan.

How so?​

Pretty sure you were liking a post from one of your hindutva buddies on another thread which was pointing to Muslims being the only problem group in India yesterday. Do you want me to quote it?

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Do we share borders with UK?

Do you share borders with Canada too??? And what about Malaysia?

India suspends visas for Canadians as row escalates

Justin Trudeau said he was not trying to "provoke" India in the row over the killing of a Sikh leader.

www.bbc.com

 

[gani999]

It's mainly you guys who have this insecurity and want us to yearn to be Hindus.

I can say with certainty no Pakistani wakes up in the morning torn between Islam and Hinduism or confused whether to pick up Quran or Karma Sutra. No matter how much you try to portray this image.

Anyway, most Muslims are originally converts from polytheism anyway. Whether that is from Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Pakistan or Bangladesh.

So why do so many of you still have Hindu/Sikh surnames like Bajwa, Chowdary, Butt etc?

And I can assure you that no hindu yearns for you lot to be hindus. We have proudly kept our religion and are happy with it.

 

[Hitman]

Do you share borders with Canada too??? And what about Malaysia?

India suspends visas for Canadians as row escalates

Justin Trudeau said he was not trying to "provoke" India in the row over the killing of a Sikh leader.

www.bbc.com

Does the UK shelter extremists and terrorists wanted by India? Or do you expect us to apply for a UK visa and then go over there only to commit some London bombings type of terrorist attack to show our contempt for them? Those are the job of Pakistanis, not Indians.​

 

[Hitman]

Pretty sure you were liking a post from one of your hindutva buddies on another thread which was pointing to Muslims being the only problem group in India yesterday. Do you want me to quote it?

The point I wanted to make is that having good relations with the UK doesn't mean we have forgiven them of anything those bunch of thieves did to us.

 

[uppercut]

Pretty sure you were liking a post from one of your hindutva buddies on another thread which was pointing to Muslims being the only problem group in India yesterday. Do you want me to quote it?

Not just quote it but respond to it and tag me ... I will properly educate you and your Islamic extremist buddies for free. Go ahead don't be shy.

And yes the Muslims are by far the biggest problem group in India. Infact it is rare to find any major religion in the world that does not have any conflict with Muslims

Here is the list

1. Christians - Check
2. Jews - Check
3. Hindus - Check
4. Buddhists- Check

 

[uppercut]

Subcontinents flourished under Muslims and Mughal rule and protected the majority of the public from these types of Hindu tyrants.

People really dont understand Mughal rule. The entire bureaucracy or civil service was made up of Hindu Brahmins and Hindu intelligentsia thrived.

How did that work out in Afghanistan ?

 

[uppercut]

The most common cliche that one heard from gullible Indians is that India would have been a heaven on earth or some kind of utopian state had Muslim rulers not invaded it. They may have some credence in criticizing the rulers who siphoned off the wealth from India but what about those rulers who stayed here developed the Indian administrative and agriculture system.

So the simple question here is what exceptional achievements have Indian subcontinent made, had the Muslims never ruled over it? As in almost 80 years of Independence, India hasn't fared exceptionally as Nehru envisioned and described in 1947.

The answer to your question is in the current situation of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Contrast that to the situation in India and you will get the answers to your question on why embracing Islam was such a bad idea.

In B4 we get told that atleast these two Countries have "seen the light" ... so what if they are living in pitiable conditions.

 

[FearlessRoar]

The point I wanted to make is that having good relations with the UK doesn't mean we have forgiven them of anything those bunch of thieves did to us.

Bhai jo ap keh rhy ho woh sunne ky liye acha hai lekin practical nai hai

If Indians have not forgiven them then why are so many Indians willing to move to the UK? And why do people in India speak English with pride? Why do people in India feel prestigious when they follow their trends and culture?

 

[uppercut]

The biggest difference is, India would have been still majority Hindu. But instead of Muslims, India would've had Buddhists as the biggest minority. Everyone talks about the suffering of Hindus under Islamic rule, but no one talks about Buddhists in India. They got completely wiped out of Afghanistan, modern day Pakistan and many parts of India. The birth place of Buddha has such small number of Buddhists today.

so what if hindus and Buddhists were wiped out of Afghanistan ... cant you see how it has "Enriched" them !! Small price I would say considering the longterm benefits that the Afghans have "enjoyed" for nearly a 1000 years. Cant you see !!

Wait and watch... just matter of time that the usual suspects will show up here and tell you that.

 

[Technics 1210]

India's fate before Islam did them a favour, was sealed. Hinduism has failed. It has contributed very little to humanity. 5000 years head start and Hinduism failed to dominate the world. What did India achieve under Hinduism other than segregation? Its no coincidence Islam pulled India out of the dark ages. The British then made use of Indian resources.

Look at India today, take out the British and Islamic influence and rule of the past 500 years or so, and India is nothing but an emperor with no clothes. A myth. Don't believe me? Go ask the millions whom are desperate to flee 'Incredible' India.

 

[uppercut]

India's fate before Islam did them a favour, was sealed. Hinduism has failed. It has contributed very little to humanity. 5000 years head start and Hinduism failed to dominate the world. What did India achieve under Hinduism other than segregation? Its no coincidence Islam pulled India out of the dark ages. The British then made use of Indian resources.

Look at India today, take out the British and Islamic influence and rule of the past 500 years or so, and India is nothing but an emperor with no clothes. A myth. Don't believe me? Go ask the millions whom are desperate to flee 'Incredible' India.

yup look at all the blinding light that Islam introduced to Afghanistan. Who needs the Bamian Buddha architecture when we can have this instead :

Exhibit A:

@Champ_Pal what did I tell you

 

[Hitman]

Bhai jo ap keh rhy ho woh sunne ky liye acha hai lekin practical nai hai

If Indians have not forgiven them then why are so many Indians willing to move to the UK? And why do people in India speak English with pride? Why do people in India feel prestigious when they follow their trends and culture?

You guys accuse us of hating Muslims, yet Indians move to Islamic countries for $$$$. Does that prove we love Muslims? How about those millions of Muslims who move to the West despite hating Western values. Why exactly do they do that?​

 

[Aang_The_last_airbender]

Won't you shed light on the glorious Indian subcontinent without Muslim.lets make your case bro. Have seen you vehemently oppose Muslim contributions in the past.

One should be respectful of their own ancestors! You are continually degrading your own history.

 

[sweep_shot]

Because Pakistan and Bangladesh are converted Hindu countries which only use Islam to hide their insecurities. They have no relation to the real Islam that was created by Prophet Mohammad's (PBUH) arabs.

LOL. Islam is not just for Arabs. It is for whole of humanity.

Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) said, "All mankind is from Adam and Eve. An Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab. A white has no superiority over a black nor a black has any superiority over a white except by piety and good action."

Islam doesn't have any racism like Hinduism has in the form of caste system.

 

[gani999]

LOL. Islam is not just for Arabs. It is for whole of humanity.

Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) said, "All mankind is from Adam and Eve. An Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab. A white has no superiority over a black nor a black has any superiority over a white except by piety and good action."

Islam doesn't have any racism like Hinduism has in the form of caste system.

Oh there's plenty of caste stuff in Indian Islam, including in Pak and BD. You are all divided into ashrafs, syeds, ismailis, bohras etc etc. There are also the 'lower castes' like the ajlats and the arzals.
And there's plenty of racism and enemity between you lot too. For example, we had a mehtar (low caste muslim) maid who used to work in our house. Her son got badly beaten up by his own fellow muslims as he was caught talking to a rich ashraf muslim girl.
Granted that the caste system in Indian Islam may have come from Hinduism. But the fact that you have kept Hindu names and the Hindu caste system alive for hundreds of years despite adopting 'Islam for humanity' shows how confused you lot are.

And you converted Hindus have the gall to call us real Hindus confused. LOL.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

The point I wanted to make is that having good relations with the UK doesn't mean we have forgiven them of anything those bunch of thieves did to us.

So Indians hate the British but just like to hide it publicly? I wonder what the British would think of their Indian subjects if they knew that?

 

[The Bald Eagle]

Does the UK shelter extremists and terrorists wanted by India? Or do you expect us to apply for a UK visa and then go over there only to commit some London bombings type of terrorist attack to show our contempt for them? Those are the job of Pakistanis, not Indians.​

Do you meant to suggest the Indians national who assassinate people abroad and then cry innocence. Like those in Canada..., or those who organize terrorist attacks in neighborhood like Kulbushan Yadav