When read and observed carefully the actual pattern of entry of Islam into India has been from the northern borders of India. As per E Jawahardatham, reproduced here is ISLAM WAS SPREAD BY FORCE ONLY by Errampalle Jawahardatham on May 19, 2007 06:07 PM | Hide replies
ARGUEMENT: IF ISLAM WAS SPREAD BY FORCE, INDIA WOULD HAVE BEEN A MUSLIM COUNTRY.
ANSWER: THIS ARGUMENT TRIES TO MISLEAD AND CONVINCE PEOPLE THAT ISLAM WAS SPREAD BY PEACE.
THE FACT: 1. WHEN BABUR CAME TO INDIA, HE WAS BUSY ESTABLISHING HIS EMPIRE. SO HIS BUSY OCCUPATION DID NOT GIVE HIM TIME OR SCOPE TO CONVERT PEOPLE. BUT RECORDED THAT HE KILLED THOUSANDS OF KAFIRS DURING HIS CAMPAINGS IN INDIA. 2. HUMAYUN WAS UNLUCKY AND LOST HIS THROWN AND LIFE, AND THERE WAS NO SCOPE FOR COVERSIONS. 3. AKBAR WAS A GENEROUS SECULAR KING [A SEMI-KAFIR AS PER ISLAM]. HE FELT THERE SHOULD BE FREEDOM OF FAITH. 4. JAHANGIR'S MOTHER WAS A PRACTICING HINDU WOMAN. SO JAHANGIR WAS NOT INTERESTED IN CONVERSIONS. 5. SHAHJAHAN WAS A WOMANISER AND LEAD A LUXURIOUS LIFE. MOST OF HIS TIME WAS SPENT IN DRINKING, LICKING AND BUILDING MONUMENTS. SO NO INTEREST IN CONVERSIONS. 5. AURANGZEB, WHO WAS ONE OF THE GREATEST ISLAMIC CRIMINALS, CONVERTED MILLIONS BY FORCE AND HIS EMPIRE THOUGH EXPANDING WAS DISINTEGRATING RAPIDLY.
OVERALL MOGULS COULD NOT CONVERT ALL INDIANS NOT BECAUSE THEY DID NOT BELEIVE IN FORCE, BUT THEY FEARED THAT MORE AND MORE RANAs AND SHIVAJIs WILL BE BORN. PEOPLE WERE NOT INTERESTED.
BUT NAWAB OF BENGAL AND NIZAM OF HYDERABD CONVERTED MANY BY INDIRECT FORCE: THEIR COMMUNITY PEOPLE ENJOYED SPECIAL RIGHTS. LANDS, AND HIGH JOBS WERE GIVEN TO MUSLIMS. IN DISPUTES AND CLASHES LAW FAVORED MUSLIMS. IF A MUSLIM KILLED A NON-MUSLIM IT WAS TREATED AS LEGITIMATE. WHEREAS IF IT HAPPENED THE OTHER WAY ROUND SEVERE PUNISHMENTS WERE GIVEN.
IT WAS ONLY THE BRITISH, FOR THE FIRST TIME, GAVE INDIANS SOME KIND OF LAW, EVEN THOUGH IT HAD A COLONIAL SLANT, THAT PROTECTED PEOPLE IRRESPETIVE OF RELIGION.
IT WAS THE BRITISH WHO NEUTRALISED ISLAMIC DOMINATION IN INDIA. EVEN THOUGH BRITISH RULE DID NOT GIVE RIGHTS COMPARED TO THEIR OWN CITIZENS, BRITISH LAW WAS 1000 TIMES BETTER THAN THE EARLIER BARBARIC LAWS OF ISLAMIC RULERS.
BRITISHERS DID EXPOIT THE INDIA'S NATURAL RESOURCES, BUT THE CONDITIONS BEFORE THAT WERE WORSE.
This almost chronoligised data reveals it's entry, spread, influences and how it got influnced by the Indian conditions is clear Can any one ratify whether it is genuine or not???
Only this please to clear doubts and enlightenment. Thank you.
