How would subcontinent look like if there was only Islam and Urdu?

[Nityam]

Mate no offense, but you boyz as a nation have nothing to show for in history. As bad as you think Persians are/ were.......at least we have a legacy. Can you name anything you did in those 800 years when you were colonized?

WE Remained Hindus while your entire lot was converted by the sword to become 100% muslims

A unique achievement in the History of the world.

 

[PakSarzameen5823]

Nope, its the other way around.

No, it wasn't. Ahmed Shah Durrani dealt with the Marathas like a cat deals with rats. He completely removed them from what is now Pakistan and north-west India. Google the Battle of Panipat and what followed.

You can also read about the successes of Hyder Ali, despite being outnumbered heavily by the Marathas, he defeated them numerous times and his son Tipu continued the tradition.

WE Remained Hindus while your entire lot was converted by the sword to become 100% muslims

You can't force someone to change their beliefs. That's physically impossible.

I am questioning claims about Persian intellectual contribution to INDIA.

No, you said Persian contribution in general. Next time, word your opinion more clearly.

 

[Nityam]

Are you stupid or something? If Muslims from Pakistan and north-west India have ancestry from the invaders, then yes, we WERE the invaders. You were the victims since you're not related to them.

Nope, they were the victims of the invaders as the genetic infusion shows.

They were the children of the slaves, the harems, the children of rape and plunder.

Otherwise the genetic code of the invader should show traces of Indian genes in their genetic pool. Not the other way around.

If the child of a rape victim shows the genetic trace of the Rapist, does that make the child the same as the rapist or a victim ?

 

[Tokhme khar]

So you believe Islam was accepted by the Persians under the sword?.......lol......Do you realize that converting anyone to Islam under the sword is strictly forbidden? Surely you can't be that ignorant.

WE Remained Hindus while your entire lot was converted by the sword to become 100% muslims

A unique achievement in the History of the world.

 

[PakSarzameen5823]

Nope, they were the victims of the invaders as the genetic infusion shows.

No, genetic infusion shows that we're their descendants who assimilated into the region.

They were the children of the slaves, the harems, the children of rape and plunder.

Unlikely. A mass-rape of that scale would be clearly mentioned in documents from the time. The absence of such evidence is itself evidence of absence.

Otherwise the genetic code of the invader should show traces of Indian genes in their genetic pool. Not the other way around.

No, either result proves the point.

If the child of a rape victim shows the genetic trace of the Rapist, does that make the child the same as the rapist or a victim ?

The child's genes will be a mixture of the two. That's how genetics works.

I'm honestly surprised you don't know this. How old are you?

So you believe Islam was accepted by the Persians under the sword?.......lol......Do you realize that converting anyone to Islam under the sword is strictly forbidden? Surely you can't be that ignorant.

They made up this lie to try and make our history look as pitifully weak as theirs.

 

[Jaanbaz]

This is boring and not ambitious enough. Since this is about "ifs" how about "What would the world look like with only Urdu and Islam"? Now imagine that !

in that case Altaf Hussain would be the Amirul Momineen.

 

[Tokhme khar]

90% of India is still hindu!....How does converting people under the sword to Islam fly against this fact of life?.....lol

Iran has ruled many gynormous empires for the last 2500 years, off and on/ directly or indirectly, but sure as hell we never converted anyone under the sword to neither Zoroastrianism nor Islam. It is totally against our society/ culture to impose your religion on others.

No, genetic infusion shows that we're their descendants who assimilated into the region.



Unlikely. A mass-rape of that scale would be clearly mentioned in documents from the time. The absence of such evidence is itself evidence of absence.



No, either result proves the point.



The child's genes will be a mixture of the two. That's how genetics works.

I'm honestly surprised you don't know this. How old are you?



They made up this lie to try and make our history look as pitifully weak as theirs.

 

[Nityam]

No, it wasn't. Ahmed Shah Durrani dealt with the Marathas like a cat deals with rats. He completely removed them from what is now Pakistan and north-west India. Google the Battle of Panipat and what followed.

You can also read about the successes of Hyder Ali, despite being outnumbered heavily by the Marathas, he defeated them numerous times and his son Tipu continued the tradition.

This is foolish.

I am talking about post 1759 when The maratha retook Delhi and defeated Hyder Ali and he died in 1772.

You can't force someone to change their beliefs. That's physically impossible.

LOL.... yes you can. History is evidence of that.

You can start by reading the Biography of Timur written by his own court historian.

No, you said Persian contribution in general. Next time, word your opinion more clearly.

Next time take the effort to understand the thread and the debate, before jumping in with your opinion.

 

[punit]

Wasteland

 

[Nityam]

No, genetic infusion shows that we're their descendants who assimilated into the region.

If there was assimilation, there would be no genetic infusion.

Unlikely. A mass-rape of that scale would be clearly mentioned in documents from the time. The absence of such evidence is itself evidence of absence.

LOL.... there is PLENTY of record in almost all islamic sources

Next time take the effort to read historical records.

Why did you think the Mountain range next to you is called "Hindu Kush" ? Why do you think there is a thriving slave market in Afghanistan ?

History is RIPE with account of such rape. WHy did you think Jauhar took place ?

How did you think URDU was born ? The language of the enuchs and prostitutes in the army camps.

No, either result proves the point.

Nope, That is why Indian gene's don't show traces of invaders genetic pool while Pakistani genetic pool shows traces.

The child's genes will be a mixture of the two. That's how genetics works.

I'm honestly surprised you don't know this. How old are you?

Yes it will, that is my point. That is why in Hindu India you do not find genetic trace of the invaders. As proved by your own link. Unless you claim Gujjars were invaders too

So you believe Islam was accepted by the Persians under the sword?.......lol......Do you realize that converting anyone to Islam under the sword is strictly forbidden? Surely you can't be that ignorant.

LOL...... Have you read the Biography of The Ghazi Timur ?

 

[jamahir]

The alternative would be if the whole world were to be atheist and everybody spoke the same language how would the world look like?

That's how future Mars colonization will mostly be like.

Desi Muslims have the mentality of being more Muslim than the Arabs.

That is more true about many modern Indian Muslims than about Bangladeshi and Pakistani ones. I have even seen in India Muslims wearing that Arab men's long dress called Thobe.

 

[PakSarzameen5823]

LOL.... there is PLENTY of record in almost all islamic sources

Such as?

Why did you think the Mountain range next to you is called "Hindu Kush" ?

Because Hindu POW's died as they were being taken over to Afghanistan.

I'm not Hindu, and since my ancestors fought as a part of these Muslim empires, I really don't see why you're using this to try and trigger me.

WHy did you think Jauhar took place ?

Because back then India had a totally backwards society.

How did you think URDU was born ?

It is the result of a mix of local Indian languages with Iranic, Semitic and Turkic languages. This came about because the Muslim populated ended up assimilating into the local one.

That is why Indian gene's don't show traces of invaders genetic pool while Pakistani genetic pool shows traces.

You just refuted your own claim of mass-rape. If mass-rape did occur, doesn't it seem surprising that only the Muslims have ancestry from these invaders? Wouldn't you expect this to be the case with Hindus as well? Since this is not true, your claim of mass-rape can now be rejected.

Unless you claim Gujjars were invaders too

Gujjars, Jats and Rajputs are all descended from the Central Asian invaders (Huns, Sycthians and Kushans) who pillaged and looted the region for hundreds of years. Their clan names prove this, as does their high amount of steppe ancestry.

This is foolish.

I am talking about post 1759 when The maratha retook Delhi and defeated Hyder Ali and he died in 1772.

The Marathas lost to the Mysoreans multiple times, and Ahmed Shah Durrani completely finished them Mortal Kombat style. This cannot be disputed.

yes you can. History is evidence of that.

No you can't, there is no evidence of that. In fact, there is evidence which contradicts it. For once, use your head. If someone doesn't believe in something, there's no way you can force them to change their mind. They can only change their mind by being persuaded through dialogue, physical action will only make them appear as if their mind is changed, but in reality, they still won't believe in whatever's being shoved down their throats.

Next time take the effort to understand the thread and the debate, before jumping in with your opinion.

Oh the irony!

Wasteland

The Delhi Sultanate and the Mughals would disagree with you.

 

[Nityam]

Such as?

Record of Tipu Sulan, Record of Timur, etc.

How about from the beginning of islam ?

Muhammad] said, “Woe to you, Abu Sufyan, isn’t it time that you recognize that I am Allah’s apostle?” He (Abu Sufyan) answered, “As to that I still have some doubt.” I (the narrator) said to him, “Submit and testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the apostle of Allah before you lose your head,” so he did so.(Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 814)

There are plenty more, but posting them will undoubted get me banned due to the famed "tolerance" of the muslims.

Because Hindu POW's died as they were being taken over to Afghanistan.

I'm not Hindu, and since my ancestors fought as a part of these Muslim empires, I really don't see why you're using this to try and trigger me.

lol ... why were teh Hindu "POW" taken to Afghanistan ?

They were not "POW", they were slaves. Women and children.

Because back then India had a totally backwards society.

In that case here is a modern day Jauhar that a Yazdi girl tried to commit when she was captured by the ISIS.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/...e-burns-alive-iraq-refugee-camp-a7208656.html

It is the result of a mix of local Indian languages with Iranic, Semitic and Turkic languages. This came about because the Muslim populated ended up assimilating into the local one.

It is a mix, since it was born in the slave camps, enuches and prostitutes of that age. You can look up the real history of Urdu.

You just refuted your own claim of mass-rape. If mass-rape did occur, doesn't it seem surprising that only the Muslims have ancestry from these invaders? Wouldn't you expect this to be the case with Hindus as well? Since this is not true, your claim of mass-rape can now be rejected.

Any child born of rape would be a Dalit Hindu. The vast majority of population ran away when the invasion happened. Again you can look up the records of Babur and Timur.

Gujjars, Jats and Rajputs are all descended from the Central Asian invaders (Huns, Sycthians and Kushans) who pillaged and looted the region for hundreds of years. Their clan names prove this, as does their high amount of steppe ancestry.

LOL....... this does not even require a serious reply.

The Marathas lost to the Mysoreans multiple times, and Ahmed Shah Durrani completely finished them Mortal Kombat style. This cannot be disputed.

Read up on the Maratha Mysore war. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maratha–Mysore_War

Maratha-Mysore war ended in April 1787, following the finalizing of treaty of Gajendragad, as per which, Tipu Sultan of Mysore was obligated to pay 4.8 million rupees as a war cost to the Marathas, and an annual tribute of 1.2 million rupees, In addition to returning all the territory captured by Hyder Ali.[3][4] Tipu also agreed to pay 4 year's arrears of the tribute, which Mysore owed to the Marathas, which Tipu's father, Hyder Ali had undertaken to pay.[5]

No you can't, there is no evidence of that. In fact, there is evidence which contradicts it. For once, use your head. If someone doesn't believe in something, there's no way you can force them to change their mind. They can only change their mind by being persuaded through dialogue, physical action will only make them appear as if their mind is changed, but in reality, they still won't believe in whatever's being shoved down their throats.

They used to shove BEEF down the throat of the captured Hindus, which made them outcastes and thus easier to convert.

Conversion of Kashmir is one such example. There are records of it.

 

[GHALIB]

It would balkanize.

Hatred for Hindus is keeping South Asian Muslims together.

As soon as you take kuffar out of the picture. You will see Sunni vs Shia, Barelvi vs Deobandi and Punjabi vs Bhaiyyas and so one.

@SuvarnaTeja hope this answers your question.

Lol ..... Expert comnent from a perfect makalu daku.

 

[PakSarzameen5823]

Record of Tipu Sulan, Record of Timur, etc.

How about from the beginning of islam ?

Muhammad] said, “Woe to you, Abu Sufyan, isn’t it time that you recognize that I am Allah’s apostle?” He (Abu Sufyan) answered, “As to that I still have some doubt.” I (the narrator) said to him, “Submit and testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the apostle of Allah before you lose your head,” so he did so.(Ibn Ishaq/Hisham 814)

There are plenty more, but posting them will undoubted get me banned due to the famed "tolerance" of the muslims.

Abu Sufyan was (at that time) a terrible persecutor of Muslims. Issuing him an ultimatum of repent or die is not at all objectable when one considers this.

Not only that, but it doesn't prove your point. If someone was faced with such an ultimatum and caved in, they'd obviously act as if they'd converted, but almost anyone with a brain would know that it's just a stunt. Like I said before, you can't change someone's mind by physical force (unless you inflict enough trauma to significantly harm their brain or something).

Also, not everything in Ibn Ishaq is reliable.

Stop being so weak, I'm not going to cry just because you pose an argument so long as you don't get petty and issue insults. If the latter occurs, only then will I report you.

They were not "POW", they were slaves.

To-may-to
to-mah-to

In that case here is a modern day Jauhar

That's different, Muslim army's from back then were nowhere near as bad as these ragheads.

It is a mix, since it was born in the slave camps, enuches and prostitutes of that age. You can look up the real history of Urdu.

No, there's no evidence of that. You're just making stuff up, and it makes you look stupid.

Any child born of rape would be a Dalit Hindu.

Dalits don't have any admixture from these Islamic invaders either, so your claim still remains refuted.

The vast majority of population ran away when the invasion happened. Again you can look up the records of Babur and Timur.

You're only further proving my point lol.

LOL....... this does not even require a serious reply.

Of course, since you come from a country which rejects the IE migrations, you'll never accept this kind of stuff no matter how obvious it is because it contradicts your ideology.

Go and ask a Rajput, Jat or Gujjar if they think their ancestors are indigenous to the region. Many of them will be revolted by the very idea (especially Rajputs).

Read up on the Maratha Mysore war.

No, YOU need to read up. You've only exposed your ignorance, big time.

Tipu agreed to such terms because he was pre-occuppied with the British and didn't have time to deal with Maratha rats running all over the place. So much for Akhand Bharat, even when faced with a common enemy you guys would rather fight each other. Myopic sight at it's finest.

Also, this still doesn't disprove the fact that Hyder Ali and Ahmed Shah Durrani completely humiliated the Marathas.

They used to shove BEEF down the throat of the captured Hindus, which made them outcastes and thus easier to convert.

Conversion of Kashmir is one such example. There are records of it.

Again, doesn't refute the fact that Muslims from the region have admixture from the Islamic conquerors. Also, I'd like to see those records (not just of the beef being forced down people's throats, but also that this resulted in Hindus being outcasted from society).

 

[Cobra Arbok]

Such as?



Because Hindu POW's died as they were being taken over to Afghanistan.

I'm not Hindu, and since my ancestors fought as a part of these Muslim empires, I really don't see why you're using this to try and trigger me.



Because back then India had a totally backwards society.



It is the result of a mix of local Indian languages with Iranic, Semitic and Turkic languages. This came about because the Muslim populated ended up assimilating into the local one.



You just refuted your own claim of mass-rape. If mass-rape did occur, doesn't it seem surprising that only the Muslims have ancestry from these invaders? Wouldn't you expect this to be the case with Hindus as well? Since this is not true, your claim of mass-rape can now be rejected.



Gujjars, Jats and Rajputs are all descended from the Central Asian invaders (Huns, Sycthians and Kushans) who pillaged and looted the region for hundreds of years. Their clan names prove this, as does their high amount of steppe ancestry.



The Marathas lost to the Mysoreans multiple times, and Ahmed Shah Durrani completely finished them Mortal Kombat style. This cannot be disputed.



No you can't, there is no evidence of that. In fact, there is evidence which contradicts it. For once, use your head. If someone doesn't believe in something, there's no way you can force them to change their mind. They can only change their mind by being persuaded through dialogue, physical action will only make them appear as if their mind is changed, but in reality, they still won't believe in whatever's being shoved down their throats.



Oh the irony!



The Delhi Sultanate and the Mughals would disagree with you.

Wrong on so many accounts. First of all, India was not a backwards society prior to the Mughals. It was onw of the most advanced and prosperous civilizations in the world. The Golden age of India occurred during the Gupta empire, which was when most of the achievements in math, astronomy, philosophy, literature, and architecture were made.

The Marathas were not completely destroyed by the Durranis. The Durranis simply prevented the marathas from expanding past the Indus. So you should be thankful to the Afghans that you were not ruled by india Hindus like you were for over 500 years under the Mauryans and Guptas.

The British had to defeat the Marathas to take over the subcontinent in the Anglo Maratha wars. In fact, the Marathas even defeated the British. With the exception of Mysore, no Muslim Empire did that. And BTW, Mysore was a South Indian born in Karnataka, india.

Here is a picture of the British surrendering to Mahadji Shinde

And as I have explained before, the entirety of the subcontinent was NEVER ruled by Musimes, and the only two who came close were the Tughlaqs and Aurangzeb(who was also born in India). however their empires lasted barely a century, shorter than Mauryan and gupta rule over Pakistan. As for conversion, well even if your ancesstors fought with the invaders, which is fine, they were at one pint a Buddhist or Sikh who were forcefully converted. Fortunately, mine were not. And the reason for that is India was not ruled by Muslims as long as Pakistan, and the only part to be significantly influenced by Muslim rule is North India, espercially UP. That area was ruled for approximately 500 years before it was liberated by the Marathas. Meanwhile South india with the exception of Mysore and Hyderabad were almost NEVER ruled by Muslims, so south India has less Muslims. The State least ruled by Muslims was Tamil Madu, and that has barely any Muslims in it. Same with Odisha and chhattishgarh. The only exception is Kerala, which has a significant Muslim population because of significant trade with the Arab world, so must Kerala Muslims are descended from Arab traders. '

Wow, looks like another troll thread has devolved into a one-sided debate.

Abu Sufyan was (at that time) a terrible persecutor of Muslims. Issuing him an ultimatum of repent or die is not at all objectable when one considers this.

Not only that, but it doesn't prove your point. If someone was faced with such an ultimatum and caved in, they'd obviously act as if they'd converted, but almost anyone with a brain would know that it's just a stunt. Like I said before, you can't change someone's mind by physical force (unless you inflict enough trauma to significantly harm their brain or something).

Also, not everything in Ibn Ishaq is reliable.

Stop being so weak, I'm not going to cry just because you pose an argument so long as you don't get petty and issue insults. If the latter occurs, only then will I report you.



To-may-to
to-mah-to



That's different, Muslim army's from back then were nowhere near as bad as these ragheads.



No, there's no evidence of that. You're just making stuff up, and it makes you look stupid.



Dalits don't have any admixture from these Islamic invaders either, so your claim still remains refuted.



You're only further proving my point lol.



Of course, since you come from a country which rejects the IE migrations, you'll never accept this kind of stuff no matter how obvious it is because it contradicts your ideology.

Go and ask a Rajput, Jat or Gujjar if they think their ancestors are indigenous to the region. Many of them will be revolted by the very idea (especially Rajputs).



No, YOU need to read up. You've only exposed your ignorance, big time.

Tipu agreed to such terms because he was pre-occuppied with the British and didn't have time to deal with Maratha rats running all over the place. So much for Akhand Bharat, even when faced with a common enemy you guys would rather fight each other. Myopic sight at it's finest.

Also, this still doesn't disprove the fact that Hyder Ali and Ahmed Shah Durrani completely humiliated the Marathas.



Again, doesn't refute the fact that Muslims from the region have admixture from the Islamic conquerors. Also, I'd like to see those records (not just of the beef being forced down people's throats, but also that this resulted in Hindus being outcasted from society).

Yes some victory that resulted in both Tipu and Hyder paying tribute to the Marathas. And despite defeating both Tipu Sultan and Hyder Ali, the Marathas also had time to defeat the Purtugueese and British. Pretty impressive. no Muslim Empire has done that

During the rule of the Mughal Empire, the region comprised 25% of the world's total output.

Under India's current government, most people don't have toilets.

Mughals 1, India 0.



The list shows plenty of Indian Muslim mansabs. Not only that, but it makes the strange distinction between Indians and Rajputs, when both should be considered part of the same category.

Also, the foreigners didn't just disappear. Their descendants are the Muslims of Pakistan and north-west India.

Those numbers are hard to measure beause they included the entirety of the subcontinent, and are not accounting for inflation. Not to mention the ordinary people of the subcontinent were poor because the Mughals dkept wasting money on monuments. It is a well known fact that Indian society was at its most prosperous state during the Mauryans and Guptas, where the maharajas cared about the people. In fact even the British built railways and roads, so they did more for Indians than the Mughals ever did.
If you have any more questions, just look at the state of India and modern Pakistan. India is far from perfect but it has the fastest growing economy in the world with GPP comparable with UK and France, which were once the world's superpowers. India has also uplifted more people out of poverty than any country with the exception of CHina. Just look at HDI India ranks 130, Pakistan 150, lower than many African countries.

India 3, Mughals/Paksitan 0

Read the first paragraph, it gives a link to the data. If you want it so bad you can Google Harappa admixture table and it should come up as a Google document file (I'd upload it myself but it keeps glitching).



Are you stupid or something? If Muslims from Pakistan and north-west India have ancestry from the invaders, then yes, we WERE the invaders. You were the victims since you're not related to them.

The only reason you are related to them is because the r***ed you. Nothing to be ashanmed about, just a fact. Th same applies to Hindu Rajputs descended from Central Asians, although most Rajputs are not descended from them. don't know where you got that from.