Question: I would like to understand the Islamic rule in the Indian subcontinent. Although there is evidence to suggest that Islamic rulers were cruel and carried out barbaric practices in the name of religion, most people seem to think otherwise.
Several of my friends have pointed out that there were also conflicts between Hindu rulers prior to the Islamic invasion. Why are Muslims being blamed when people have always engaged in conflict?
The same logic is being applied when the Christians moved to North America and wiped out the native population. The notion is that the world has always engaged in conflict, but that we have progressed by moving away from “religious” wars and conflicts.
Can you please help me to understand why this is wrong? I am not able to counter their logic. I am of the opinion that Abrahamic traditions sowed destruction and chaos in the world. Is this right?
Answer: It is wrong to put Hindu kings fighting with each other and the Islamic invasion on the same level. When a Hindu king attacked another king and conquered him, the victorious king did not disrupt and plunder the kingdom, his soldiers did not rape women, nor did he break temples or convert people forcibly. The Islamic invaders gave their soldiers the freedom to plunder the defeated kingdom and rape their women. They made slaves out of Hindus. The Islam condoned this. But Hindu kings in general followed dharma. When the Pāṇḍavas won the battle of Kurukṣetra, they did not go around plundering and raping the women of Duryodhana’s kingdom.
People do not know the true history of the Islamic invasion because history has been presented incorrectly. You should watch YouTube videos by Sangam Talks, Jaipur Dialogues, etc. regarding the Islamic invasion. It happened even in independent India, in Kashmir. Watch the movie “Kashmir Files” based upon the true history of Hindus in Kashmir in 1990. This will give you an idea what may have happened during the Islamic invasions.
According to Wikipedia, the very meaning of the mountain named “Hindukush” in Afghanistan is “a killer, who kills, slays, murders, oppresses as azhdaha-kush.” The term was used for the first time by Ibn Battuta. According to him, Hindu Kush means “Hindu Killer”, as slaves from the Indian subcontinent died in the harsh climatic conditions of the mountains while being taken from India to Turkestan.
So in my opinion, it is wrong to compare war between Hindu kings with Islamic invaders.
now there is also a weekly episode on national tv every sunday 9 pm to 10 pm in the name of svarajya and showing real history of what westerners, britishers, dutches and, france, and portugese people so called civilized people have done to Bharat bhumi and plundered many many hindu temples, destroyed them and raped millions and millions women. they are on the same par as muslims. like said here, hindu kings were fighting to upheld dharmic principles. this history was kept in dark by the congress for all these years.