humanfirst
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2009
- Messages
- 2,018
- Reaction score
- 1
That is your bullsh*t version of history.
Critics of the "religion of the sword theory" point to the presence of the strong Muslim communities found in Southern India, modern day Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, western Burma, Indonesia and the Philippines coupled with the distinctive lack of equivalent Muslim communities around the heartland of historical Muslim empires in South Asia as refutation to the "conversion by the sword theory". The legacy of Muslim conquest of South Asia is a hotly debated issue even today. Not all Muslim invaders were simply raiders. Later rulers fought on to win kingdoms and stayed to create new ruling dynasties. The practices of these new rulers and their subsequent heirs (some of whom were borne of Hindu wives of Muslim rulers) varied considerably. While some were uniformly hated, others developed a popular following. According to the memoirs of Ibn Battuta who traveled through Delhi in the 14th century, one of the previous sultans had been especially brutal and was deeply hated by Delhi's population. His memoirs also indicate that Muslims from the Arab world, Persia and Turkey were often favored with important posts at the royal courts suggesting that locals may have played a somewhat subordinate role in the Delhi administration. The term "Turk" was commonly used to refer to their higher social status. However S.A.A. Rizvi points to Muhammad bin Tughlaq as not only encouraging locals but promoting artisan groups such as cooks, barbers and gardeners to high administrative posts. In his reign, it is likely that conversions to Islam took place as a means of seeking greater social mobility and improved social standing.
Muslim conquest in the Indian subcontinent - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
So as you can see there were a number of drivers involved in Muslim rule over India.
Just like how you lie about what Kashmiris think, you lie about your history.
Pathetic people.
I was not at all talking about any "conversions by sword" or anything like that..Just stating the fact that the ancestors of present day pakistanis were hindus and they were the nearest ones to the hindukush..In fact during the time around the birth and expansion of islam,the term hindu was mainly used by arabs to denote the people living near indus river-the kingdom of sindh especially..And in all probability they were the ones who got killed in hindukush..Not the south Indians as you mentioned,who by the way were reigning over an empire spanning the present day South India,Parts of sri lanka,Malasia,singapore and Indonesia(Some thing that they never teach you in your filtered history books)