I note that you added a caveat of "significant" as a qualifier before the word invention. The use of a vague adjective is deliberate because you know that scientific inventions were present during the Ottomon and Mughal years, you just don't want to give them any credit. Therefore, I don't think it would be wise to provide any examples (a simple google search brings up many), because you will simply dismiss them as non-significant, since obviously you have no interest in looking at this objectively, but rather scoring points.
That brings us to the second point. Universities in pre-Islamic India. Sure there were a few, and like any normal civilization that exists and progresses, centers of education were a must. Nalanda, the most famous one, was a Buddhist center of learning. Taxila and Vikramshila, two other famous ones, were also Buddhist Universities. There were also few less famous one, whose names escape me now, but they were all Buddhist centers of learning.
I am quite perplexed that why did the Hindus not establish great centers of learning? Could it be because of the infamous caste system, where education was reserved for only the Brahmin class? Is it possible that in order to get educated, ancient Indians converted to Buddhism, in order to access education? And perhaps that is why these universities flourished?
You then go on to make the claim that the Muslim empires in India, provided patronage to the madrassas, where scientific invention was scarce, and that is what contributed to the eventual colonization of India.
These are very tall claims that take an element of truth and surround it by lies to further a weak position. While it is true that madrassas were patronized by the ruling Muslims, these were not religious seminaries as they are today. During the Muslim world, madrassas were schools where every science was thought. Education was imparted to both Muslims and non-Muslims. The famous pearls of Akbar's court, all Hindus, were all educated in madrassas.
Like every education system, when closely analyzed, flaws begin to appear. This was no exception. Modern historians have noted some of these flaws, namely that education was stale and narrow. Basically a curriculum once established, was rarely modified to meet the evolving needs of society.
Now I am sure we can say that this was one of the contributors of British rule in the subcontinent, but to claim that this was the only contributor or even a major contributor is a stretch.
I have observed your posts and behavior on this forum for the last few weeks and a few things stand out.
You have studied enough of Islam and Muslims to point out what are their "perceived flaws" in your opinion. Mostly the perceived flaws that you cite are vague generalizations based on a little bit of information.
At the same time, when confronted with flaws within your own society, you brush them aside, mostly citing that you don't care or, as above, are irreligious, so therefore exempt from any criticism.
I just find your behavior curious, and wanted to better understand, why you spend so much effort to on a society, just to malign it at every opportunity you get.
Good informative post...
It was not the Muslim invaders who destroyed the Takshila or Nalanda universities established by the Buddhists...rather the Brahmanical rulers who were against any sage and knowledge delivered to the natives and masses, how can they perpetuate their regime with universities and centers of learning when these are anti thesis to the Brahmanical forces...
Posting a related article, full article attached below.
Buddhist shrines massively destroyed by Brahmanical rulers in "pre-Islamic" era: Historian DN Jha's survey
Providing evidence from Mathura, which was a flourishing town in western Uttar Pradesh during the Kushana period, Jha says, "Some present-day Brahminical temples, such as those of Bhuteshwar and Gokarneshwar, were Buddhist sites in the ancient period. Here, the Katra Mound, a Buddhist centre during Kushana times, became a Hindu religious site in the early medieval period."
Further, at Kaushambi, near Allahabad, "the destruction and burning of the great Ghositaram monastery has been attributed to the Shungas -- more specifically to Pushyamitra", says Jha, adding, "Sarnath, near Varanasi, where the Buddha delivered his first sermon, became the target of Brahminical assault. This was followed by the construction of Brahminical buildings, such as Court 36 and Structure 136, probably in the Gupta period, by reusing Mauryan materials."
Quoting Chinese pilgrim Fa-hsien, who visited India in the early fifth century, during the Gupta period, Jha says, at Sravasti, where the Buddha spent much of his life, "Brahmins seem to have appropriated a Kushana Buddhist site, where a temple with Ramayana panels was constructed during the Gupta period."
Jha notes, "In fact, the general scenario of Buddhist establishments in what is today Uttar Pradesh was so bad that in Sultanpur district alone no less than 49 Buddhist sites seem to have been destroyed by fire when, as described in a paper by the archaeologist Alois Anton Führer, 'Brahminism won its final victories over Buddhism'.”
In the post-Gupta centuries, says Jha, Chinese Buddhist pilgrim and traveller Hsüan Tsang, who visited India between the years 631 and 645, during the reign of Harshavardhana, "states that the sixth-century Huna ruler Mihirakula, a devotee of Shiva, destroyed 1,600 Buddhist stupas and monasteries and killed thousands of Buddhist monks and laity. He further tells us that 1,000 sangharamas in Gandhara were 'deserted'/and in 'ruins,' and describes 1,400 sangharamas in Uddiyana as 'generally waste and desolate'.”
Then, says Jha, "Hsüan Tsang tells us that the king Shashanka of Gauda cut down the Bodhi tree at Bodh Gaya in Bihar -- the place of the Buddha’s enlightenment -- and removed a statue of the Buddha from a local temple, ordering that it be replaced by an image of Maheshvara... Bodh Gaya came under Buddhist control again during the period of the Pala rulers, who were Buddhists, and the place has, in fact, remained a site of religious contestation throughout Indian history."
Referring to the internationally reputed Buddhist university at Nalanda, especially the its vast monastic complex where Hsüan Tsang spent more than five years, Jha says, it's library was set on fire by "Hindu fanatics", insisting, "The popular view, however, wrongly attributes this conflagration to the Mamluk commander Bakhtiyar Khilji, who never went there, but, in fact, sacked the nearby Odantapuri Mahavihara at modern-day Bihar Sharif."
Suspecting that even the Jagannath temple at Puri, one of the most prominent Brahminical pilgrimage centres in eastern India, built in the twelfth century during the reign of the Eastern Ganga ruler Anantavarman Chodaganga Deva, "is said to have been constructed on a Buddhist site" something which "may be contested", Jha says, "There is hardly any doubt that the temples of Purneshvara, Kedareshvara, Kanteshvara, Someshvara and Angeshvara, all in Puri district, were either built on Buddhist viharas, or made of material derived from them."
https://www.counterview.net/2018/06/buddhist-shrines-massively-destroyed-by.html
