Do Pakistanis Regret That India did not convert?

[MastanKhan]

I think many of the people are going away from the true question of the thread. My question is whether Pakistanis regret that Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, Christians, Jains didn't convert to Islam. And how would it have affected the future if they had converted.

Hi,

We already answered you---. The problem is not with our answers---the problem is that you did not expect that answer---and trying every which way for a different answer that you want to believe in---.

We don't regret that they did not convert---. Would that make it a little clearer for you---.

 

[TheGreatMaratha]

this feeling of converting others to own religion is also present in hindu religion as evident from their ghar wapsi like movements for converting people to hinduism forcefully

That's more of a reaction than anything else. And there is no forced conversion in Sanatana Dharma.

Hi,

We already answered you---. The problem is not with our answers---the problem is that you did not expect that answer---and trying every which way for a different answer that you want to believe in---.

We don't f'ckin regret that they did not convert---. Would that make it a little clearer for you---.

If you don't regret, that's fine enough. I'm just talking about the different possibilities if India had converted. Read my original question.

 

[AUz]

Bulgaria, Balkans, and so many other territories didn't convert to Islam even after staying under Muslim rule for centuries.

Unlike Christians, Muslims did not impose Islam and forcefully converted people. So we don't care whether India converted or not. Its Hindus' self mental-masturbation where they think that Hindus "resisted" Muslims and didn't "convert" (Even though there wasn't any effort to convert 100% Hindus to Islam).

Seeing the history of complete and total domination/Humiliation of Hindus at the hands of superior Muslims---Hindus invent such narratives to feel less embarrassed about their history of defeats and losses.

The post below is one such effort, IMO. No Turk thinks "Oh we should have converted entire Greece/Bulgaria to Islam"....Similarly, no Pakistani ever thinks that all of India should have converted to islam.

We don't care either ways

Ok, so this might be a bit of a controversial topic. The mods can close this one down if it gets out of hand. I'm just opening this one for intellectual purposes and so that Pakistanis can think about the possibilities.

The main reason for me to talk about this is that I have observed many Pakistanis talking about Muslim rule. Post Independence, there was the Kashmir dispute that is still going on to this day. Do Pakistanis think that if the whole of India would have been converted to Islam like them by the Turks, Afghans, Uzbeks, etc, that there wouldn't have been any Kashmir headache for them? Do you guys feel that the invaders should have been more serious about Islam and the conversion of kaffirs of the Indian subcontinent to that religion?

Would India and Pakistan still would have been separate? How would the Muslims looked at Hinduism which would have been an extinct religion by now? Would Muslims have an affinity for Hinduism like the Greeks have for the Greek philosophers and the Persians have for the pre-Islamic Persian empires?

Would Indian origin Muslims would have even risen up against foreign Muslim rule? Or would there have been just a continuation of Mughal rule? Would the Turks might have migrated in more numbers to India to consolidate their rule or spread the extent of the Ottoman empire?
Would the Indian Muslims had allowed that?

 

[Aspen]

I don't know, if I have any right to say anything about that;
But I always found it fascinating that india mostly chose to stay as a pagan nation. I mean in human history and revolution, all nations, communities started their life with Paganism. First we worshiped threes and lakes, animals after that thousands of gods born. Egyptians, Greeks, Sumerians...
But after Judaism and Christianity everything has changed. Jews were Jews... Europeans left their pagan believes and became Christians. Middle easterns first became Christians and later muslims.
In one point, most of the nations (Maybe except far east asians, they evolved to irreligion, atheism) every nation passed this similar turning points and most of us became monotheistic. Except India and maybe some african tribes.
Maybe I can understand African tribes but India? It is just so weird, and doesn't even makes sense to me...

Couldn't have said it better myself. I would like to hear what the Indian perspective about this is.

 

[TheGreatMaratha]

I don't know, if I have any right to say anything about that;
But I always found it fascinating that india mostly chose to stay as a pagan nation. I mean in human history and revolution, all nations, communities started their life with Paganism. First we worshiped threes and lakes, animals after that thousands of gods born. Egyptians, Greeks, Sumerians...
But after Judaism and Christianity everything has changed. Jews were Jews... Europeans left their pagan believes and became Christians. Middle easterns first became Christians and later muslims.
In one point, most of the nations (Maybe except far east asians, they evolved to irreligion, atheism) every nation passed this similar turning points and most of us became monotheistic. Except India and maybe some african tribes.
Maybe I can understand African tribes but India? It is just so weird, and doesn't even makes sense to me...

If you think Hinduism is just paganism, then you are fully mistaken my friend.

But coming to why India remained Hindu, I think people had a strong bond with their culture. There were many movements throughout India which kept them within Hinduism. One example is the Bhakti movement which started in South India and spread to the North.

I believe if entire south Asia was Muslim there would be no Pakistan.

Fair enough

 

[AUz]

I don't know, if I have any right to say anything about that;
But I always found it fascinating that india mostly chose to stay as a pagan nation. I mean in human history and revolution, all nations, communities started their life with Paganism. First we worshiped threes and lakes, animals after that thousands of gods born. Egyptians, Greeks, Sumerians...
But after Judaism and Christianity everything has changed. Jews were Jews... Europeans left their pagan believes and became Christians. Middle easterns first became Christians and later muslims.
In one point, most of the nations (Maybe except far east asians, they evolved to irreligion, atheism) every nation passed this similar turning points and most of us became monotheistic. Except India and maybe some african tribes.
Maybe I can understand African tribes but India? It is just so weird, and doesn't even makes sense to me...

Deep backwardness prevails in Africa and India. And these two lands have been the most conquered and dominated by foreigners.

This explains why these two regions didn't leave paganism. They were cut-off from the organized religion and the advancement of humanity around it. Hence, they kept their backward ways and got dominated by the civilizations of organized religion (Islam/Christianity etc)

Btw, so many regions remained under Islamic rule for centuries and did not convert (Bulgaria, Greece, Romania, Hungary, Balkans, Georgia, North Caucus etc) Its just Hindus' self mental-masturbation where they think that Hindus "resisted" Muslims and didn't "convert" (Even though there wasn't any effort to convert 100% Hindus to Islam).

Seeing the history of complete and total domination/Humiliation of Hindus at the hands of superior Muslims---Hindus invent such narratives to feel less embarrassed about their history of defeats and losses. Its hilarious to see lol

 

[-blitzkrieg-]

One big example is East Pakistan. But that's just my opinion.

Ignorance can break away anything even if its an islamic republic.
East Pakistan always had socialist tendencies..Their comrades across the border in indian bengal and KGB helped them get a new nation..
It was one of the chapters of cold war.
It was you can say an islamic republic vs socialism.

Its for Bengalis to understand how majority of them got fooled by its socialist cadre.
Apart from the fact that geographics were not in West Pakistans favor. a piece of land surrounded by enemy from three sides, east wing that had most of its trade with west bengal etc. etc.

 

[SHAH BAAZ]

I don't know, if I have any right to say anything about that;
But I always found it fascinating that india mostly chose to stay as a pagan nation. I mean in human history and revolution, all nations, communities started their life with Paganism. First we worshiped threes and lakes, animals after that thousands of gods born. Egyptians, Greeks, Sumerians...
But after Judaism and Christianity everything has changed. Jews were Jews... Europeans left their pagan believes and became Christians. Middle easterns first became Christians and later muslims.
In one point, most of the nations (Maybe except far east asians, they evolved to irreligion, atheism) every nation passed this similar turning points and most of us became monotheistic. Except India and maybe some african tribes.
Maybe I can understand African tribes but India? It is just so weird, and doesn't even makes sense to me...

No one started life with Paganism. Islam was here when the first man stepped foot on this land.

Even Hinduism, correct me if im wrong, believes there is only One spirit behind their many idolz.

Many, many Prophets came and to each nation they came with One Message and that is the belief of one Allah. The SUPREME AUTHORITY.

There is no God but Allah.

Nations slowly and slowly started worshipping idols and stuff.

 

[Indos]

As a Muslim we believe we are a blessed people, it is why we dont have too much issue about Non Muslim people and dont have any inferiority complex to them. I also think Pakistani felt the same as well.

We dont force them to embrace our religion like how Spain like to do in their colony. It is because our God have spoken clearly in Quran that religion cannot be forced. We teach and spread Islam is due to kindness, not something that is related to geopolitics.

Anyway, Muslim have already become huge and it is not the time to talk about quantity but rather quality.

 

[Turan09]

If you think Hinduism is just paganism, then you are fully mistaken my friend.

But coming to why India remained Hindu, I think people had a strong bond with their culture. There were many movements throughout India which kept them within Hinduism. One example is the Bhakti movement which started in South India and spread to the North.

Hinduism has everything about Paganism. I mean you give special meanings to animals, Cows, and there was a mice temple I saw in youtube and all that... There is a lot of gods, this is what paganism is. I am not saying it is a good or bad thing, it your religion, but this is what it is.
And about culture, same would have been said about greeks, egyptians and armenians, they all resisted a lot... armenians even killed some saints (skinned him alive) but at one point, they gave up. India didn't. This is the most interesting part of the story for me...

 

[samv]

Deep backwardness prevails in Africa and India. And these two lands have been the most conquered and dominated by foreigners.

This explains why these two regions didn't leave paganism. They were cut-off from the organized religion and the advancement of humanity around it. Hence, they kept their backward ways and got dominated by the civilizations of organized religion (Islam/Christianity etc)

I would say beheading people, stoning people to death and cutting of their hands is pretty backward.

 

[Aspen]

I believe if entire south Asia was Muslim there would be no Pakistan.

Tough question: Which is better?

1. Fully Muslim India
2. Pakistan

 

[TheGreatMaratha]

Deep backwardness prevails in Africa and India. And these two lands have been the most conquered and dominated by foreigners.

All regions have been conquered or dominated if you read history impartially. Pakistan converting to Islam didn't stop them from being dominated by foreign Muslims. In fact, Pakistan is the region which has been dominated the most by foreigners than any part of India.

If I'm not wrong, Persia too came under Turkic and Arab domination at certain points of time. The same with Afghanistan.

Middle East converting Islam didn't stop some of their countries from coming under Christian domination.

 

[Raghav_101]

This imaginary question can not be answered because of a simple issue. No one agrees how Islam spread in the subcontinent. I believe there may be some historical accounts which many choose to ignore. Delhi Sultanate engaged in religious conversions with much zeal. Mughals were soft on it.

There may have few conversions out of pure sweet will but it must have been rare. Imagine how religious the people were in that age, even the low caste hindus would not have converted willingly in large numbers.

Despite this I don't hold any grudge against Islam for these forced conversions. That was the order of the day. Christians did the same. I don't know why Muslims are apologetic about forced conversions. It's alright that your ancestors were forcefully converted. You don't need to give it a different colour of choice and will.

 

[Aspen]

I would say beheading people, stoning people to death and cutting of their hands is pretty backward.

99% of Muslims would not advocate it