True enough...though what I analyse is from the present standpoint. As havizultan said and I quote The call for identifying pakistan with "We muslims have a distinct identity and are in no way Indians. Our legends are those of Ahmed Shah Durrani, Mir Chakar Khan Rind, Mahmud Ghaznavi among many others. The more recent laid back attitude of other muslims left in Indian occupied parts and their support to people like Kalam Azad is a threat to the entire well being of our people who must fight for their rights and ask the question why property taken from us in Hyderabad and Lucknow has not been returned to us since the partition.
My parents were born in Lucknow but they are Pakistani and Pakistan will and should forever be in the heart of every muslim left there. We are one body. You can cut the head but it will always belong to one body. We muslims should not become slaves of India specially since they are the killers of our people".
This confusion of culture is deeply rooted in pakistani society, it was especially true in the earlier decades when most pakistani - and to an extent a large Indian contingent identified themselves with arabs or afghans...even mughals. There are many Indian muslims who carry the surname of khan who do not genetically or physically appear anywhere close to the tribals of afghanistan. They adopt the dress and head gear matching the arabs and central asians, they even mimic their culture and their food habits...especially true for the madrasseh bunch or muslims from the lower strata of society.
It has become so a little bit. For e.g.. whilst I do consider people like Sher Shah suri part of my identity.. I would rather take my identity from the Dargah's in Dehli and Ajmer. These people are the ones who truly forged my identity and not royalty which for the most part after invasions was busy hunting rare animals and watching women dance. I certainly do NOT consider the Mughals as having anything to do with the identity of Indian Muslims although they did influence Indian gentry for a long time to come. It is sometimes lost on many and laughably so if you hear a Muslim Rajput idolizing Ghaznavi or Lodhi that many of their own ancestors probably were cut down by what were essentially Turkic peoples.
Yes, their influence is a big reason for the spread of the Muslim faith in India(less so from forced conversion but more so as the preachers were able to roam with more security as compared to before) but they were only part of the inception of these ideals and had very little impact on the cultural dimensions of say a keralite Muslim. The mistake with attempts to forge identities based on conquerors and invaders is that they were just that; aliens. The same goes for an identity based on "bhartism" or otherwise because it will be just alien to their beliefs too.
Indian Muslims hold a distinct identity that is separate from India and yet it is not. To try and sugar coat it for either purpose is only fooling others and themselves. Instead of celebrating it as a symbol of cultural and religious diversity in India, they are trying to apologize for it.