Who is the greatest Muslim ruler of the subcontinent and why?

[Clutch]

Who is the greatest Muslim ruler of the subcontinent and why?

I vote for Imran Khan.

 

[Hakikat ve Hikmet]

No Muslim ruler/rule, no Freedom for Muslims, Socio-economic status lower than that of Dalits, termed and treated as Termites...

As for the Muslims in the sub-continent, the worst Muslim ruler is better than the best non-Muslim ruler....

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

Akbar is considered Great by British propagandist. Akbar was proud to trace his timurid ancestory.

Tamerlane struck Europe and thus why the Bad press in most existing Literature.

Cyrus is also considered Great in Western Literature as well as Ramses.

Tamerlane didn't strike Europe.He struck down Bayezid who had struck europe.
Timur destroyed Isfahan,Baghdad,Ankara,Damascus,Delhi,Sarai-Astrakhan.All the greatest cities of the islamic world were destroyed by him,only Cairo survived because he stopped at syria before turning back to defeat bayezid.Timur killed approx 20% of the entire population of the middle east.On their bones he built samarkand as the most beautiful city in the islamic world.

 

[KAMDEV]

Who is the greatest Muslim ruler of the subcontinent and why?

AKBAR the great .

You mean co terminous Afghans...

They were a Turkic people who settled in what is now Afghanistan and mingled with the locals before crossing the Hindu Kush....


Great ..please tell that Modi and co....

Modi is greatest hindu emperor .

 

[Buddhistforlife]

Who is the greatest Muslim ruler of the subcontinent and why?

I would say Akbar because Akbar was the only muslim ruler who was truly secular and cared for the general population. He was probably the only muslim ruler who was not a tyrant and a islamic fanatic like his successor Aurangzeb and his predecessors the Sultans of Delhi. Akbar's court was multireligious and under his rule, many important government posts were held by Sikhs and Hindus even his prime minister being Raja Man Singh which was unthinkable in a muslim court as the subcontinental muslim rulers generally favoured muslims when it comes to a superior government position. Also Akbar openly celebrated Janmashtami and other hindu festivals with hindus which also showed that he integrated with the local population and was not a islamic fanatic.

 

[SuvarnaTeja]

I would say Akbar because Akbar was the only muslim ruler who was truly secular and cared for the general population. He was probably the only muslim ruler who was not a tyrant and a islamic fanatic like his successor Aurangzeb and his predecessors the Sultans of Delhi. Akbar's court was multireligious and under his rule, many important government posts were held by Sikhs and Hindus even his prime minister being Raja Man Singh which was unthinkable in a muslim court as the subcontinental muslim rulers generally favoured muslims when it comes to a superior government position. Also Akbar openly celebrated Janmashtami and other hindu festivals with hindus which also showed that he integrated with the local population and was not a islamic fanatic.

One black spot for Akbar would be he killed 30,000 Rajputs in the Battles for Chittor.

 

[Buddhistforlife]

One black spot for Akbar would be he killed 30,000 Rajputs in the Battles for Chittor.

Listen back in those days wars were brutal and mass murders were pretty common back then. Everyone did it. Even the Hindu Maratha empire killed thousands of rohilla muslim civillians when they conquered Rohillkhand in the 1770s. Basically it was a norm back then however Akbar was far less barbaric and less tyrannical than other muslim rulers of the subcontinent like Alauddin Khilji, Muhammad Tughlaq and Aurangzeb who were far more ferocious.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

One of the great ruler Mughals couldn't have was Darasuko.

Dara Shikoh almost brought the Mughal empire to its knees and would have effectively become a vassal to other powers.

Sultan Aurangzeb Alamgir was a more traditional ruler, relying on the Mughal power base, instead of outside powers.

This is a very blatant rewriting of history in Hindutva India. We know you hate Sultan Aurangzeb Alamgir, but please refrain from rewriting history.

Akbar was far less barbaric and less tyrannical than other muslim rulers of the subcontinent like Alauddin Khilji, Muhammad Tughlaq and Aurangzeb who were far more ferocious.

Historical revisionism at work.

Quaid e Azam, thank you for Pakistan.

Allah swt bless Sultans Khilji, Tughluq, and Aurangzeb Alamgir with the highest paradise and best reward.

We can only aspire to live in the shadow of such great heroes and legends.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

No Muslim ruler/rule, no Freedom for Muslims, Socio-economic status lower than that of Dalits, termed and treated as Termites...

As for the Muslims in the sub-continent, the worst Muslim ruler is better than the best non-Muslim ruler....

“Muslims cry today for palaces and buildings they left behind in Spain, but Muslims left behind even greater palaces and buildings in Hind.

For every piece of land conquered in Hind, thousands of Muslim shuhada lives were given.”

- Saudi scholar Sheikh Muhammad Musa Al shareef

Aurangzeb was a Islamic terrorist and his rule was similar to that of ISIS, Al qaeda and Taliban. Akbar was the best muslim ruler because he was secular and was religiously tolerant. Under his rule, non muslims became army chiefs, prime ministers(Raja Man Singh) etc which was unthinkable in muslim ruled India.


Stop glorifying ISIS and Al qaeda terrorists. Aurangzeb and Baghdadi are brothers.


I would not he surprised if you were one of the mobs who supports khadim hussein rizvi and openly calls for the death of Asia bibi, an innocent christian woman.

Reported your BS.

Alhamdulilah. I am neither ISIS, AL qeda, nor TLP supporter.

Take your anti-Muslim nonsense elsewhere.

 

[Cash GK]

Who is the greatest Muslim ruler of the subcontinent and why?

no muslim ruler only.. we are talk whol of them. Mr khan will be best ever ruler of subcontinent. lol modi will be by far last number

 

[Buddhistforlife]

No Muslim ruler/rule, no Freedom for Muslims, Socio-economic status lower than that of Dalits, termed and treated as Termites...

As for the Muslims in the sub-continent, the worst Muslim ruler is better than the best non-Muslim ruler....

Look who's talking. You Turks under the ottoman empire massacred millions of Armenian christians. We dont need lectures from turkey alright. We know how are christians currently treated in turkey. In India muslims are presidents, religious freedom and have no issues practicing religion. Meanwhile in Turkey Christianity is banned, Christians cannot build churches and cannot join the army ar any government institutions. So its a irony that turks are lecturing indians on human rights.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

Meanwhile in Turkey Christianity is banned, Christians cannot build churches and cannot join the army ar any government institutions. So its a irony that turks are lecturing indians on human rights.

Another false claim. The very opposite is true. Turkey is fairly liberal in this aspect compared to other Muslim countries.

Stop inventing BS.

 

[halupridol]

What an absolute gem of a thread
Bande aaye aur thok ke chale gaye,,,now lets decide who did it gently and gave sweets later
Kya baat hai.damn we r progressive,,gud gud
Lukin at this thread desis shud love the benevolent brits too,,,no sun set empire.

 

[Peaceful Civilian]

Majority of them were thugs and thieves.

Only ruler/darwash who brought sea of change in Sub continent were the migrated family of Holy Prophet PBUH.. who brought Sufism .

I think Mustafa kemal ataturk is greatest Muslim. Progress & human development happened during his government, it didn't happen in 1000 year combine.
Regards

 

[TMA]

I would say Akbar because Akbar was the only muslim ruler who was truly secular and cared for the general population. He was probably the only muslim ruler who was not a tyrant and a islamic fanatic like his successor Aurangzeb and his predecessors the Sultans of Delhi. Akbar's court was multireligious and under his rule, many important government posts were held by Sikhs and Hindus even his prime minister being Raja Man Singh which was unthinkable in a muslim court as the subcontinental muslim rulers generally favoured muslims when it comes to a superior government position. Also Akbar openly celebrated Janmashtami and other hindu festivals with hindus which also showed that he integrated with the local population and was not a islamic fanatic.

Other Mughal emperors had non Muslims in their government and military. This is not unique to Akbar. Even Aurangzeb had this.