What's new

Muhammad Bin Qasim

It makes perfect sense. Pakistan exists as a separate homeland for Muslims of the region. Islam played a major role in the region once Qasim started his conquests. Therefore, Qasim is the first Pakistani. Also, as started earlier, many people migrated to Pakistan during these conquests, intermarrying with the local people, not to mention we are all Bani Adam (Peace Be Upon Him), so the ethnic link is there to satisfy those of us who want a blood connection.



Asalamu Alaikum

Why do you have to make fun of me man lol
Because you made a ridiculous assertion- it was too tempting to skip.
Mohammad bin Qasim was a fine general and expedition leader but neither did Islam really expand with him nor was it completely alien. His primary focus is still debated to be quelling a threat to the Ummayad trade routes that were going to Ceylon and parts of India.

He had no intention, link or ANYTHING to do with Pakistan- he was an Arab and will be called by his Arab mother’s name on the day of judgeMent.
 
Because you made a ridiculous assertion- it was too tempting to skip.
Mohammad bin Qasim was a fine general and expedition leader but neither did Islam really expand with him nor was it completely alien. His primary focus is still debated to be quelling a threat to the Ummayad trade routes that were going to Ceylon and parts of India.

He had no intention, link or ANYTHING to do with Pakistan- he was an Arab and will be called by his Arab mother’s name on the day of judgeMent.

I disagree.

Pakistan exists as a nation founded on the basis of Islam, which first played a major role in the region once Qasim started his conquests. Therefore, I believe the title is appropriate.
 
He was the first Muslim ruler to gain large amounts of territory of the Indian sub-continent, arguably paving the way for future Islamic conquests and proselytism, as well as large migrations of Muslims to the region. Muhammad Bin Qasim is also considered to be the first Pakistani, as the idea of a Muslim homeland in the Indian sub-continent started after his conquests of the region.

This is wrong history.He is a well respected figure yet wrong stuff associated to him.He was not the first Muslim conqueror of present-day Pakistan.

I had a thread on it some time back regarding how the area up to present-day Karachi was conquered in the days of the third caliph Umar an events following it.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/isla...mohammad-bin-qasim-correcting-history.472924/
 
If Muhammad Bin Qasim is Pakistani then Tariq bin zayad must be Spanish

By the way how long he stayed in his beloved country Pakistan after conquest of Sindh and where was he buried ? was he fluent in speaking Urdu/Punjabi or Pashtu? :D
 
He was the Man who introduced Islam to that land,
Indeed he was the man who led the foundation of Pakistan in that time ,
Look at the map of his campaign - (Small Pakistan isn't it ?)
QASIM.PNG


Indeed he was the First Pakistani.
 
It makes perfect sense. Pakistan exists as a separate homeland for Muslims of the region. Islam played a major role in the region once Qasim started his conquests. Therefore, Qasim is the first Pakistani. Also, as started earlier, many people migrated to Pakistan during these conquests, intermarrying with the local people, not to mention we are all Bani Adam (Peace Be Upon Him), so the ethnic link is there to satisfy those of us who want a blood connection.
It may make sense for you but not for me and by the way Pakistan was formed because Muslim of Sub continent thought that they will not be getting equal social , economic and religious rights in undivided India so there were many factors because of which Muslims demanded separate land and it has nothing to do with Muhammad Bin Qasim . Those Pakistani claiming blood connection with Arabs should do their genetic test to find out how much similarity they have with arabs and finding of this test will burst all their bubbles and fake claims which they are making becaus eof some sort of complexes


http://blogs.dunyanews.tv/17554/

We are told that Muhammad bin Qasim was an Umayyad general who conquered the Sindh and Punjab regions, now a part of Pakistan, along the Indus River. That at the tender age of just seventeen, he was sent by Caliph Al-Walid-I to lead an army towards South Asia to release Muslim women and children who were kidnapped by the Hindu Raja of the time. That it was due to his conquest of Sindh and Punjab that the era of Islamic rule in South Asia was first launched in real earnest. This much we are told. Pakistani children are supposed to memorize and be examined in.

What we are not told is that the kidnapping event of women and children, though a historical happening by itself, may have been only a part of the legend. That the Umayyad interest in the region may have stemmed more from their desire to control the trade route down the Indus River valley to the seaports of Sindh, an important link in the ancient Silk Road, than anything else. That on certain earlier occasions too, they had unsuccessfully sought to gain control of the route, via the Khyber Pass, from the Turki-Shahis of Gandhara. That by taking Sindh, Gandhara’s southern neighbour, they were ultimately able to open a second front against the Gandhara.

We are also not told some of the other possible reasons for this campaign. That the primary reason cited in the Chach Nama, that authentic document that recounts the history of Sindh in great details, for the expedition by the governor of Basra, Al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf, against Raja Dahir was a pirate raid off the coast of Debal resulting in gifts to the caliph from the king of Serendib (today’s Sri Lanka) being stolen. That the Meds, a Sindhi tribe also known as Bawarij, had targeted Sassanid shipping in the past too. That they sniped the trade routes frequently from the mouth of the Tigris to the Sri Lankan coast, from their bases at Kutch, Debal and Kathiawar.

We are also not told that possibly the real reason of the campaign may have been purely economic in which the kidnapping of women and children was but one fateful act of these semi-nomadic tribes whose activities disturbed much of the Empire’s shipping trade in the Western Indian Ocean. That the kidnapping incident may only have provided a ‘just reason’ to the rising power of the Umayyad Caliphate to gain a foothold in the Makran, Baluchistan and Sindh regions–an area the Empire builders had been eyeing for a rather long time by then. That one other possible reason for the campaign could be the policy of the local tribes of providing refuge to Sassanid and Arab rebels who fled the Arab advance and the accompanied Umayyad persecution in a quest to consolidate their rule. This we are not told.

We are told that he treated most kindly his new subjects when he became their governor. What we are not told is that where resistance was strong, long-drawn-out and rigorous, Muhammad bin Qasim’s response was rather ruthless. By credible accounts, he inflicted 6,000 deaths at Rawar, between 6,000 and 26,000 at Brahmanabad, 4,000 at Iskalandah and 6,000 at Multan. And that he built many mosques upon the sites of razed Hindu temples.

We are told that his nemesis Raja Dahir was a cruel and unjust ruler and was involved in piracy. That he was the one that kidnapped and tortured the women and children and refused to recant. That he was an immoral man that married his own sister.

What we are not told is that Raja Dahir is also admired by many present day Sindhi Sunni and Shia Muslims. That he had given shelter in Sindh to a well-known follower of Imam Hussian, Muhammad Bin Allafi–a man much sought by the Umayyad in their deadly hunt for eliminating the last of the Ahl-e-Bait (Prophet Muhammad’s immediate family). That, according to some other sources, Dahir had even offered asylum to Hussain ibn Ali, the grandson of Prophet Mohammed, who was being persecuted at home. That as a result of this offer, Hussain was on his way to Sindh when he was seized at Karbala in Iraq and killed most viciously. That according to G.M. Syed, the grand old man of Sindh, “the Sindhis weep for Hussain ibn Ali and they weep for Raja Dahir Sen.” This we are not told.

But above all what we are not told is the manner of this hero’s death and the events leading up to the occasion.

Chach Nama tells of an intriguing yet widely believed tale of Muhammad bin Qasim’s death. According to this account, when Raja Dahir was killed in the battlefield, his daughters were captured as war booty in the Islamic tradition. The Governor, Muhammad bin Qasim, then sent them as ‘presents’ to the Caliph of the time Khalifa Sulayman ibn Abd al-Malik, to become a part of his vast harem. According to the narration, the women tricked the Khalifa into believing that Muhammad bin Qasim had violated them before sending them on. Reportedly, the Khalifa got so incensed for having been sent ‘tainted’ gifts that he ordered Muhammad bin Qasim returned to Syria wrapped in oxen hides, his exploits notwithstanding. The journey is said to have resulted in his death from suffocation.

The aforementioned version attributes the women’s motive for the ploy to exacting vengeance for their father’s death. It also states that upon discovering the trick after the death of Muhammad bin Qasim, the Khalifa deeply repented his action and ordered the sisters buried alive in a wall as a punishment.

The Persian historian Baladhuri, however, states that the Khalifa Abd al-Malik was a political enemy of Umayyad governor Al-Hajaaj ibn Yusuf, Muhammad bin Qasim’s paternal uncle. He persecuted all those who were considered close to Hajaaj after his death. Muhammad bin Qasim was therefore recalled in the midst of a campaign of capturing more territory up north. An honourable man, he reported to his Caliph despite his loyal friends dissuading him from it. Upon arrival, he was promptly imprisoned in Mosul, Iraq. Intensely cruel torture on him started immediately afterwards. So severe was this torture that on one hot July afternoon Muhammad bin Qasim breathed his last during the most extreme of these sessions.

Whichever account is true, we are told none of these.

Two facts, however, remain undisputed.

First, he was 22 years old when his own Caliph ordered him killed. Second, none have read the tombstone marking his grave for none know where he lies.

No tombstone for the hero?
 
If the premise of the title is true,then what happened to pakistani IVC.I suppose i was misled into thinking pak history began with IVC,its Qasim the founding father of Pakistan i guess.
Just like his convoluted theory about qasim being first pakistani is his personal made up story and wont turn into a fact similarly indians absurd self manufactured claims on ivc and ur bharatvarsha nonsense wont turn out true nor will turn u indians into inheritors of ivc. NOT AT ALL
 
This is wrong history.He is a well respected figure yet wrong stuff associated to him.He was not the first Muslim conqueror of present-day Pakistan.

I had a thread on it some time back regarding how the area up to present-day Karachi was conquered in the days of the third caliph Umar an events following it.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/isla...mohammad-bin-qasim-correcting-history.472924/

Asalamu Alaikum

Muhammad Bin Qasim was the first Muslim to conquer large portions of the Indian sub-continent. The previous Muslim rulers had only made minor incursions.

If Muhammad Bin Qasim is Pakistani then Tariq bin zayad must be Spanish

By the way how long he stayed in his beloved country Pakistan after conquest of Sindh and where was he buried ? was he fluent in speaking Urdu/Punjabi or Pashtu? :D

No, because Spain doesn't owe it's existence to Tariq Ibn Ziyad.

When he entered Pakistan, he spent almost the rest of his life there. He only left once his uncle was executed, and he was then arrested and executed too.

Those languages didn't really exist at the time, and that comment is simply childish.
 
It may make sense for you but not for me and by the way Pakistan was formed because Muslim of Sub continent thought that they will not be getting equal social , economic and religious rights in undivided India so there were many factors because of which Muslims demanded separate land and it has nothing to do with Muhammad Bin Qasim . Those Pakistani claiming blood connection with Arabs should do their genetic test to find out how much similarity they have with arabs and finding of this test will burst all their bubbles and fake claims which they are making becaus eof some sort of complexes


http://blogs.dunyanews.tv/17554/

We are told that Muhammad bin Qasim was an Umayyad general who conquered the Sindh and Punjab regions, now a part of Pakistan, along the Indus River. That at the tender age of just seventeen, he was sent by Caliph Al-Walid-I to lead an army towards South Asia to release Muslim women and children who were kidnapped by the Hindu Raja of the time. That it was due to his conquest of Sindh and Punjab that the era of Islamic rule in South Asia was first launched in real earnest. This much we are told. Pakistani children are supposed to memorize and be examined in.

What we are not told is that the kidnapping event of women and children, though a historical happening by itself, may have been only a part of the legend. That the Umayyad interest in the region may have stemmed more from their desire to control the trade route down the Indus River valley to the seaports of Sindh, an important link in the ancient Silk Road, than anything else. That on certain earlier occasions too, they had unsuccessfully sought to gain control of the route, via the Khyber Pass, from the Turki-Shahis of Gandhara. That by taking Sindh, Gandhara’s southern neighbour, they were ultimately able to open a second front against the Gandhara.

We are also not told some of the other possible reasons for this campaign. That the primary reason cited in the Chach Nama, that authentic document that recounts the history of Sindh in great details, for the expedition by the governor of Basra, Al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf, against Raja Dahir was a pirate raid off the coast of Debal resulting in gifts to the caliph from the king of Serendib (today’s Sri Lanka) being stolen. That the Meds, a Sindhi tribe also known as Bawarij, had targeted Sassanid shipping in the past too. That they sniped the trade routes frequently from the mouth of the Tigris to the Sri Lankan coast, from their bases at Kutch, Debal and Kathiawar.

We are also not told that possibly the real reason of the campaign may have been purely economic in which the kidnapping of women and children was but one fateful act of these semi-nomadic tribes whose activities disturbed much of the Empire’s shipping trade in the Western Indian Ocean. That the kidnapping incident may only have provided a ‘just reason’ to the rising power of the Umayyad Caliphate to gain a foothold in the Makran, Baluchistan and Sindh regions–an area the Empire builders had been eyeing for a rather long time by then. That one other possible reason for the campaign could be the policy of the local tribes of providing refuge to Sassanid and Arab rebels who fled the Arab advance and the accompanied Umayyad persecution in a quest to consolidate their rule. This we are not told.

We are told that he treated most kindly his new subjects when he became their governor. What we are not told is that where resistance was strong, long-drawn-out and rigorous, Muhammad bin Qasim’s response was rather ruthless. By credible accounts, he inflicted 6,000 deaths at Rawar, between 6,000 and 26,000 at Brahmanabad, 4,000 at Iskalandah and 6,000 at Multan. And that he built many mosques upon the sites of razed Hindu temples.

We are told that his nemesis Raja Dahir was a cruel and unjust ruler and was involved in piracy. That he was the one that kidnapped and tortured the women and children and refused to recant. That he was an immoral man that married his own sister.

What we are not told is that Raja Dahir is also admired by many present day Sindhi Sunni and Shia Muslims. That he had given shelter in Sindh to a well-known follower of Imam Hussian, Muhammad Bin Allafi–a man much sought by the Umayyad in their deadly hunt for eliminating the last of the Ahl-e-Bait (Prophet Muhammad’s immediate family). That, according to some other sources, Dahir had even offered asylum to Hussain ibn Ali, the grandson of Prophet Mohammed, who was being persecuted at home. That as a result of this offer, Hussain was on his way to Sindh when he was seized at Karbala in Iraq and killed most viciously. That according to G.M. Syed, the grand old man of Sindh, “the Sindhis weep for Hussain ibn Ali and they weep for Raja Dahir Sen.” This we are not told.

But above all what we are not told is the manner of this hero’s death and the events leading up to the occasion.

Chach Nama tells of an intriguing yet widely believed tale of Muhammad bin Qasim’s death. According to this account, when Raja Dahir was killed in the battlefield, his daughters were captured as war booty in the Islamic tradition. The Governor, Muhammad bin Qasim, then sent them as ‘presents’ to the Caliph of the time Khalifa Sulayman ibn Abd al-Malik, to become a part of his vast harem. According to the narration, the women tricked the Khalifa into believing that Muhammad bin Qasim had violated them before sending them on. Reportedly, the Khalifa got so incensed for having been sent ‘tainted’ gifts that he ordered Muhammad bin Qasim returned to Syria wrapped in oxen hides, his exploits notwithstanding. The journey is said to have resulted in his death from suffocation.

The aforementioned version attributes the women’s motive for the ploy to exacting vengeance for their father’s death. It also states that upon discovering the trick after the death of Muhammad bin Qasim, the Khalifa deeply repented his action and ordered the sisters buried alive in a wall as a punishment.

The Persian historian Baladhuri, however, states that the Khalifa Abd al-Malik was a political enemy of Umayyad governor Al-Hajaaj ibn Yusuf, Muhammad bin Qasim’s paternal uncle. He persecuted all those who were considered close to Hajaaj after his death. Muhammad bin Qasim was therefore recalled in the midst of a campaign of capturing more territory up north. An honourable man, he reported to his Caliph despite his loyal friends dissuading him from it. Upon arrival, he was promptly imprisoned in Mosul, Iraq. Intensely cruel torture on him started immediately afterwards. So severe was this torture that on one hot July afternoon Muhammad bin Qasim breathed his last during the most extreme of these sessions.

Whichever account is true, we are told none of these.

Two facts, however, remain undisputed.

First, he was 22 years old when his own Caliph ordered him killed. Second, none have read the tombstone marking his grave for none know where he lies.

No tombstone for the hero?

We are Muslim because of Muhammad Bin Qasim's conquests, they were the catalyst for further conquests into the region as well as the dawah that followed them.

Genetic testing isn't going to help much here, as the ancestry would be in minute amounts and from over 1000 years ago, so detecting it is unlikely. Not to mention these companies that offer them are not reliable to say the least. All we can do is make the reasonable suggestion that many Pakistanis (especially from down south) will have some levels of Arab ancestry in them, based on the historical facts available to us.

All this propaganda against Qasim is nothing new, these claims have been refuted/explained numerous times before.

People who are antagonised by the state don't often get a tombstone.

How large?
By the end of the reign of first four caliphs , most of the Baluchistan was already conquested.

Check the map Torch posted earlier.
 
Muhammad Bin Qasim, Father of the first Pakistani

No, THE first Pakistani.

He catalysed the even larger conquests that were to follow after him, which would result in Muslims becoming a major power in the sub-continent and eventually culminated in them forming their own separate nation.
 
:pop: Listen folks the impact of Mohamad Bin Qasim was perhaps a mere 20-30 years at most before he died

Died 715 (aged 19–20)


The impact of Civilization / Cultural exchange is larger.


Pakistan was formed by a Moral Awakening of Muslims in region who needed a seperate state by a political and social means

So we have no connection to , a Gentleman named Mr Qasim
That state he represented no longer exist

Sure the religious impact may still be felt


Pakistan Culture influence = Work of almost 2600 Years , various civilizations
Pakistan's National Identity = Work of Political members of Society year 1857 on ward

The initial member of Muslim Party representatives
59350a80543e8.jpg


Almost 50 years Later the Political Struggle resulted in formation of Pakistan by educated people
Muslim_League_leaders_after_a_dinner_party%2C_1940_%28Photo_429-6%29.jpg
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom