What's new

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

Before the advent of the Islamic rulers into India, India was one of the major economies in the world. It had top universities like Takshashila and Nalanda. People from from all over the world came to India for studies. So Arabs, Turks, Persians and Mongols have all translated Sanskrit texts to other languages. Mathematics/Algebra, Science, Philosophies have all spread from India to Europe via the Arab Caliphates who have translated them into Arabic. This translations does not prove ones love or hate for Indian culture. To give an analogy, There are many people who go to US and study while still hating the US.

Having said this, I consider Mughals to be much less brutal than original Arab invaders. Mughals were the least religious of the lot. My reading of Aurangzeb was that when he took over the reigns, the kingdom was totally bankrupt. He had to take loans from Islamic rulers outside India and to please them he went full throttle in implementing Sharia and other taxes on non-Muslims. This is akin to Pakistan taking loans from Gulf which forces them to implement very hardcore right wing policies through their madrassas.



Yes. I had already stated that in the below post. Mughals were also descendants of the Mongols.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/who-...he-subcontinent-and-why.586269/#post-10931858

What is this BS which you are trying to parrot as fact?

Taxila declined long before Muslims came to the region.

Your analysis of both the Mughal Empire under Aurangzeb and modern-day Pakistan is false.

The opposite of what you presented is true, Hind and Sindh rose to preeminence during Muslim rule. Muslims brought many innovations in numerous fields to the region, which increased economic prosperity, established political unity, and most importantly brought peace under strict law and order to the region.
 
.
What is this BS which you are trying to parrot as fact?

Taxila declined long before Muslims came to the region.

Your analysis of both the Mughal Empire under Aurangzeb and modern-day Pakistan is false.

The opposite of what you presented is true, Hind and Sindh rose to preeminence during Muslim rule. Muslims brought many innovations in numerous fields to the region, which increased economic prosperity, established political unity, and most importantly brought peace under strict law and order to the region.

Gupta period is considered the golden age of India.

The Gupta Empire: An Indian Golden Age The Gupta Empire, which ruled the Indian subcontinent from 320 to 550 AD, ushered in a golden age of Indian civilization. It will forever be remembered as the period during which literature, science, and the arts flourished in India as never before. Beginnings of the Guptas Since the fall of the Mauryan Empire in the second century BC, India had remained divided. For 500 years, India was a patchwork of independent kingdoms. During the late third century, the powerful Gupta family gained control of the local kingship of Magadha (modern-day eastern India and Bengal). The Gupta Empire is generally held to have begun in 320 AD, when Chandragupta I (not to be confused with Chandragupta Maurya, who founded the Mauryan Empire), the third king of the dynasty, ascended the throne. He soon began conquering neighboring regions. His son, Samudragupta (often called Samudragupta the Great) founded a new capital city, Pataliputra, and began a conquest of the entire subcontinent. Samudragupta conquered most of India, though in the more distant regions he reinstalled local kings in exchange for their loyalty. Samudragupta was also a great patron of the arts. He was a poet and a musician, and he brought great writers, philosophers, and artists to his court. Unlike the Mauryan kings after Ashoka, who were Buddhists, Samudragupta was a devoted worshipper of the Hindu gods. Nonetheless, he did not reject Buddhism, but invited Buddhists to be part of his court and allowed the religion to spread in his realm. Chandragupta II and the Flourishing of Culture Samudragupta was briefly succeeded by his eldest son Ramagupta, whose reign was short. In 380 AD, a younger son of Samudragupta, Chandragupta II, came to the throne. Like his father, Chandragupta is often called “the Great.” Under his rule, the Gupta Empire reached its zenith, and this is considered the golden age of India. His reign, like his father’s, was marked by religious tolerance and great cultural achievements. Poetry and drama flourished at the court of Chandragupta II, at his new capital of Ujjain. Hindu legend tells of a great king of Ujjain called Vikramaditya, who kept a group of unrivaled poets, known as the Nine Gems, at his court. The Vikramaditya of legend is almost certainly Chandragupta II. The poets at his court included Kalidasa, one of the greatest authors of Sanskrit poetry and drama. His plays are some of the most famous works of Indian literature, and continue to have an influence on playwrights to this day. Visual art also flourished in the reign of Chandragupta II. Hindu art reached new heights, as exemplified in the carved reliefs of the Dashavata Temple. Chandragupta II also patronized Buddhist art. The Ajanta Caves, decorated with images of the life of Buddha, provide a vivid example of Gupta-era Indian painting. Chandragupta II also sponsored work on medicine, mathematics, and science. One of the greatest thinkers of the time was Aryabhatta, who made great contributions Saylor URL: www.saylor.org/courses/hist101/#7.2.1 The Saylor Foundation Saylor.org Page 2 of 2 to mathematics and astronomy. He developed the concept of zero, and accurately described the earth as a sphere and figured out that it rotates on its axis. He may have even realized that it rotates around the sun. The Sushruta Samhita, a work on medicine and surgery, also dates to this period. Besides presiding over a cultural golden age, Chandragupta II expanded the empire through military feats. He conquered many new lands for his empire, and even expanded the empire outside the Indian subcontinent. When he died in 415 AD, the Gupta Empire was at its height. Decline of the Gupta Empire The Gupta Empire declined precipitously under Chandragupta II’s successors. By the middle of the fifth century a new and dangerous enemy to the empire appeared: nomadic-pastoralist warriors from the Eurasian steppe. These invaders were called Huna or Huns by the Indians, and today are commonly called Hephalites or White Huns (to distinguish them from the other Huns, who were attacking the Roman Empire around the same time). In the year 480 AD, the Huns launched a full-scale invasion of India. By the year 500 AD, the Huns had overrun the Gupta Empire. Though the Huns were eventually driven out of India, the Gupta Empire would never recover. The Gupta Dynasty retained only its home territory of Magadha in the chaos, and it had permanently lost control of the rest of India. The subcontinent once again became a patchwork of independent states. However, the legacy of the Gupta Empire, and the cultural renaissance it presided over, has continued to be a source of inspiration for India up to the present day. Summary:  The Gupta Empire is generally held to have begun in 320 AD, when Chandragupta I ascended the throne. He expanded Gupta power from a local royal family in the kingdom of Magadha to a powerful empire.  His son, Samudragupta the Great, conquered much of India for the Gupta Empire. He also sponsored art, music, and other cultural expressions.  Samudragupta’s son and successor, Chandragupta II, presided over the zenith of the Gupta Empire, a golden age for India.  Some of the great artists and thinkers that flourished in the time of Chandragupta II include Kalidasa, one of the greatest authors of Sanskrit poetry and drama, and Aryabhatta, a brilliant and influential mathematician and astronomer.  In the fifth century, the Gupta Empire was overrun by the Huns. Though the Huns were eventually driven out of India, the Gupta Dynasty permanently lost control of India, which returned to a patchwork of independent states.

https://www.saylor.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/HIST101-7.2.1-GuptaDynasty-FINAL1.pdf
 
.
APJ Abdul Kalam was the greatest Muslim democratically elected Ruler of South Asia
 
. . .
WHO?

Can't say the name especially on a Pakistan Defense forum.

WHY?

Because of an ability to rule even when someone else seems to be doing it and furthermore able to toss one for the other like a puppet if signs of misbehavior are detected.
 
.
Pervez Musharraf. After Khalid bin Walid, he was the most brave army chief ever known in history of world.
I doubt there ever will be one like him again in future.
please tell me you are not serious?

that guy bowed down to america after they threatened they will bomb pakistan to atone ages!
 
.
Check the UN description of genocide. Also no matter what the definition of genocide is, no sane person would ever support mass killing of even 10 innocent people.

Maybe you should address this to Myanmar
 
. . .
Why only one golden age?

Muslim rule presented numerous golden ages as well, under various benevolent rulers from Dilli Sultanat to Mughal Sultanat.
India had numerous golden eras. Ashoka's rule was a golden era, the Gupta's rule was a golden era, the Mughal's rule was also a golden era.

Prosperity without peace/harmony cannot be considered Golden Age.
Also the reason why India has got too many muslim heritages in India rather than the 1000 year old hindu heritages is because the muslim rulers of India destroyed almost all of the ancient heritages belonging to the pre-islamic India. Otherwise we would have had monuments and artifacts belonging to the gupta and mauryan era still present in India.

However we hindus did not destroy any muslim monuments in India after the muslim rule in India. So see we hindus are very tolerant and peaceful rather than people of a particular community which claims to be peaceful.
 
.
Before the advent of the Islamic rulers into India, India was one of the major economies in the world. It had top universities like Takshashila and Nalanda. People from from all over the world came to India for studies. So Arabs, Turks, Persians and Mongols have all translated Sanskrit texts to other languages. Mathematics/Algebra, Science, Philosophies have all spread from India to Europe via the Arab Caliphates who have translated them into Arabic. This translations does not prove ones love or hate for Indian culture. To give an analogy, There are many people who go to US and study while still hating the US.

Having said this, I consider Mughals to be much less brutal than original Arab invaders. Mughals were the least religious of the lot. My reading of Aurangzeb was that when he took over the reigns, the kingdom was totally bankrupt. He had to take loans from Islamic rulers outside India and to please them he went full throttle in implementing Sharia and other taxes on non-Muslims. This is akin to Pakistan taking loans from Gulf which forces them to implement very hardcore right wing policies through their madrassas.



Yes. I had already stated that in the below post. Mughals were also descendants of the Mongols.

https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/who-...he-subcontinent-and-why.586269/#post-10931858
I dunno. Like I said who writes the history?

I have read the Mughal India and even under Aurangzeb was the richest state on earth. I don't know how it compares to the Gupta period as that was like two thousand years before...

But let me say this, that Muslim rulers of India were not the only brutes...Dharmic rulers did their fair share of invasions and killings.... I mean if a fellow can control Pakistan and Afghanistan from Bihar, thousands of years ago...then a fellow from Afghanistan can go the other way without being called an invader, right???

But suffice to say that since India (Subcontinent) is and has been very diverse, naturally their will be diverse opinions on the "golden age". Perhaps from the Sanatum Dharmic perspective the Gupta period was the golden age but not necessarily from the Indian (Subcontinent) perspective.

Also the Mughals heavily intermarried with the local nobles...by the time Aurangzeb ruled, he was practically 50% "native".

And he never went full throttle...he nor neither of the Muslim rulers and I include the Dehli Sultunate in this, were fully "Sharia compliant"...

And your analogy about the US.
The Mughals "made" India. They did not go there to study. They in fact went there and instead of the US, who massacred the natives, fused with the local traditions. If they really hated "India". well they did not do a good job of spreading their hate, since most of the Subcontinent is non Muslim.
Indeed this accusation of Muslim genocide against the non muslims of India, is just madness. Most of India is non muslim. And most muslims in India (Subcontinent) are native converts.
If you would like to see a genocide, look at the red Indians in North America....
Unless of course one thinks that conversion is also part of genocide....
 
.
upload_2018-11-13_8-39-23.jpeg
 
.
please tell me you are not serious?

that guy bowed down to america after they threatened they will bomb pakistan to atone ages!

Was he suppose to defend Afghanistan as well?
 
. .

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom