to HARRAK - Muslim invaders killed Hindus in millions
Submitted by Proud Hindu (India), May 11, 2006 at 07:44
With the invasion of India by Mahmud Ghazni about 1000 A.D., began the one of the worst Muslim invasions into the Indian subcontinent and they lasted for several centuries. The Muslim invasions continued even when the Muslims were ruling India, like the invasion of the Mongols during the reign of the Khiljis or the invasion of the Mughals in the early sixteenth Century when the Lodis were ruling Delhi. The last notable invasion of the Muslims from outside was the invasion of Nadir Shah in 1739, during which he unleashed a great horror on the native population.
During these seven hundred years of Muslim invasions and their conquest and rule of India, the Hindus were the greatest sufferers. It is difficult to estimate the number of Hindus who lost their lives during these campaigns, the number of Hindus who lost their lives in the religious persecution perpetrated on the native population by the Muslim rulers or the number of Hindus who were forcibly converted to Islam.
According to Prof. K.S. Lal, the author of the Growth of Muslim population in India, the Hindu population decreased by 80 million between 1000 AD, the year Mahmud Ghazni invaded India and 1525 AD, a year before the battle of Panipat.
One can safely add another 20 million Hindus to this list to account for the number that were killed during the Mughal rule or the rule of the Muslim rulers in the Deccan plateau. By all known accounts of world history, as pointed out by Koenard Elst in his book the Negationism in India, destruction of about 100 million hindus is perhaps the biggest holocaust in the whole world history.
Europe never forgot or forgave the atrocities of the Nazi rule under Hitler. We hardly come across any positive reference to either Hitler or his army in the present day text books on European History. No one talks there of the qualities of Hitler as a great commander or an inspiring leader of German people whom he could mould and influence with his hypnotic speeches. No films are made showing Hitler as a romantic hero singing songs and his mistress as a heroine shedding copious tears over her lover! The European consciousness is filled with the evil deeds perpetrated by his regime, thanks to the untiring work of their politicians, journalists, historians and film producers, so much so that the very thought of seeing any virtue in either Hitler or Nazis is abhorrent to the consciousness of the present day Europeans. Europe and America produced at least a few thousand films highlighting the human misery caused by Hitler and his army. The films expose the horrors of Nazi regime and reinforce the beliefs and attitude of the present day generation towards the evils of the Nazi dictatorship.
In contrast look at the Muslims. There is hardly any regret among the Muslims of today for the actions of their ancestors in the past or at present, and a great majority of muhammedans think that they did the right thing by persecuting Hindus and they continue to do so today. All their heroes are rapists, murderers and looters from their leader mulammed to osama bin laden.
It is not difficult to imagine the sufferings of people during such battles as the battle of Tallikota when Hampi, the capital of Vijayanagara empire was systematically destroyed for weeks by the muslim Bahamain sultans. Nadir Shah made a mountain of the skulls of the Hindus he killed in Delhi alone. Babur raised towers of Hindu skulls at Khanua when he defeated Rana Sanga in 1527 and later he repeated the same horrors after capturing the fort of Chanderi. Akbar who was supposed to be one of the few tolerant muslim rulers, ordered a general massacre of 30000 Rajputs after he captured Chithor in 1568. The Bahamani Sultans had an annual agenda of killing a minimum of 100000 Hindus every year. The history of medieval India is full of such instances.
Harrak, if you are unaware with the history of the Indian subcontinent you should study it. I have put some material for you below. We hindus have not appointed Salman Rushdie or American intellectuals to rewrite history for us. The history repeats itself in the actions of our arch eneny the muslim Pakistan who is sponsoring killing of Hindus inside india even today. Todays hindus are strong and determined enough to make any muslim who tries to attack her bite the dust. Pakistan tried four times and failed.
Short course on History for HARRAK
Muhammad bin Qasim
Islam in India existed in communities along the Arab trade routes in Sindh, Ceylon and Southern India. In 711, the Umayyad Caliph in Damascus sent an expedition to Baluchistan (an arid region on the Iranian Plateau in Southwest Asia, presently split between Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan) and Sindh (presently a province of Pakistan bordering on Baluchistan, Punjab, and Rajasthan, India). The nature of the expedition was punitive, and in response to raids carried out by pirates on Arab shipping, operating around Daibul. The allegation was made that The King of Sindh, Raja Dahir was the patron of these pirates. The expedition was led by a 20-year-old Syrian chieftain named Muhammad bin Qasim (for whom Karachi's second port is named). The expedition went as far North as Multan, then called the "City of Gold," that contained the extremely large Hindu temple Sun Mandir housing over six thousand people. Bin Qasim invaded the sub-continent at the orders of Al-Hajjaj bin Yousef, the governor of Iraq. Qasim's armies defeated Raja Dahir at what is now Hyderabad in Sindh in 712. He then proceeded to subdue the lands from Karachi to Multan with a small force of only six thousand Syrian tribesmen, therby establishing the dominion of the Umayyad Caliphate from Lisbon in Portugal to the Indus Valley. Qasim was later recalled to Baghdad, and Muslim rule in South Asia shrank to Sindh and southern Punjab.
In many regions North of Multan, several non-Muslim groups (largely Buddhists and Hindus, as well as followers of folk religions further North) remained numerous. From this period through the year 1000, the conquered area was divided into two parts: the northern region comprising the Punjab remained under the control of Hindu rajas, while the Southern area came under Muslim control and comprised Baluchistan, Sindh, and Multan.
Qasim demolished many temples, shattered "idolatorous" artwork and killing many people in his battles. After the violence, he attempted to establish law and order in the newly-conquered territory through the imposition of Islamic Shariah laws. He also sought control through systematic persecution of Hindus. He wrote an account of such experiences:
O my cousin; I received your life inspiring letter. I was much pleased and overjoyed when it reached me. The events were recounted in an excellent and beautiful style, and I learnt that the ways and rules you follow are conformable to the Law. Except that you give protection to all, great and small alike, and make no difference between enemy and friend. God says, 'Give no quarter to Infidels, but cut their throats." "Then know that this is the command of the great God. You should not be too ready to grant protection, because it will prolong your work. After this, give no quarter to any enemy except to those who are of rank. This is a worthy resolve, and want of dignity will not be imputed to you. Peace be with you. 
Ghazni was a city-state founded in 962 founded Alptigin, once a slave then a Governor of Khorasan eventually divested of power in political intrigues. Under his son-in-law Subuktigin, Ghazni found itself in conflict with the Shahi Raja Jayapala. When Subuktigin died and his son Mahmud ascended the throne in 998, Mahmud was engaged in the North with the Qarakhanid Empire when the Shahi Raja renewed hostilities.
In the early 11th century Mahmud of Ghazni launched 17 expeditions into India. In 1001, Sultan Mahmud Ghaznavi defeated King Jeebal of Kabulistan and marched further into Peshawar and in 1005 made it the center for his forces. From this strategic location Mahmud was able to capture the Punjab in 1007. In 1010, Mahmud captured what is today the Ghowr Province (Ghor) and by 1011 had annexed Baluchistan. Tanseer fell in 1014, Kashmir was captured in 1015, and Qanouch fell in 1017. After defeating Tarnochalpal in 1021, Mahmud formally annexed Punjab. Mahmud of Ghazni sacked Multan twice, destroying the Surya Mandir (Sun Temple). Surya Mandir also known as Somnath, was also allegedly serving the purpose of a war-room of the Rajput Confederacy opposing Mahmud in addition to being a repository of immense wealth.
The Ghaznavid Jihads were directed onto richness of the loot of wealthy temples and monastaries. By 1027, Mahmud had captured most of Northern India and obtained formal recognition of Ghazni's sovreignity from the Abbasid Khalifah, al-Qadir Billah.
Mahmud had already had relationships with the leadership in Balkh through marriage, and its local emir, Abu Nasr Mohammad, offered his services to the sultan and his daughter to Mahmud's son, Muhammad. After Nasr’s death Mahmud brought Balkh under his leadership. This alliance greatly helped him during his expeditions into Northern India.
Ghaznavid rule in North India lasted over 175 years, from 1010 to 1187. It was during this period that Lahore assumed considerable importance as the eastern-most bastion of Muslim power and an outpost for further advance toward the riches of the east. Apart from being the second capital, and later the only capital, of the Ghaznavid kingdom, Lahore had great military and strategic significance: whoever controlled it could look forward to sweeping the whole of East Punjab to Panipat and Delhi.
By the end of his reign, Mahmud's empire extended from Kurdistan in the west to Samarkand in the Northeast, and from the Caspian Sea to the Yamuna. Although his raids carried his forces across Northern and Western India, only Punjab came under his permanent rule; Kashmir, the Doab, Rajasthan, and Gujarat remained under the control of the local Rajput dynasties. The wealth brought back to Ghazni was enormous. Contemporary historians (e.g. Abolfazl Beyhaghi and Ferdowsi) give glowing descriptions of the magnificence of the capital and the conqueror's munificent support of literature.
In 1030, Mahmud fell gravely ill and died at age 59. He had been a gifted military commander and Islam was the enforced religion of his kingdom and the Perso-Afghan dialect Dari was made the official language.
Like other muslim rulers, Mahmud left behind a bitter legacy of genocide and persecution of all who refused forced-conversion to Islam. As with the Turkic invaders of three centuries ago, Mahmud's armies looted and desecrated temples in Varanasi, Mathura, Ujjain, Maheshwar, Jwalamukhi, and Dwarka. There is some evidence from writings of Al-Biruni, Sogidan, Uighur and Manichean texts that the Buddhists, Hindus and Jains were accepted as People of the Book and references to Buddha as Burxan or a prophet can be found. After much initial destruction, genocide and pillage some Buddhists, Jains and Hindus were grudgingly given protected subject status as dhimmis, although they were still subject to the humiliating and persecuting Jizya tax.
In 1191, he invaded the territory of Prithviraj III of Ajmer, who ruled much of present-day Rajasthan and Haryana, but was defeated at Tarain by Govinda-Raja of Delhi, Prithviraj's vassal. The following year, Muhammad assembled 120,000 horsemen and once again invaded the Kingdom of Ajmer. Muhammad's army met Prithviraj's army again at Tarain, and this time Muhammad won; Govinda-Raja was slain, Prithviraj captured and Muhammad advanced onto Delhi. Within a year, Muhammad controlled Northern Rajasthan and Northern Ganges-Yamuna Doab. After these victories in India, and Muhammad's establishment of a capital in Delhi, Multan was also incorporated into his empire. Muhammad then returned east to Ghazni to deal with the threat on his eastern frontiers from the Turks and Mongols, whiles his armies continued to advance through Northern India, raiding as far east as Bengal.
Muhammad returned to Lahore after 1200 to deal with a revolt of the Ghakkar tribe in the Punjab. He suppressed the revolt, but was killed during a Ghakkar raid on his camp on the Jhelum River in 1206. Upon his death his most capable general, Qutb-ud-din Aybak, took control of Muhammad's Indian conquests and declared himself the first Sultan of Delhi.
The Sultans of Delhi enjoyed cordial, if superficial, relations with Muslim rulers in the Near East but owed them no allegiance. They based their laws on the Quran and the sharia and permitted non-Muslim subjects to practice their religion only if they paid the jizya (head tax). They ruled from urban centers, while military camps and trading posts provided the nuclei for towns that sprang up in the countryside.
Perhaps the greatest contribution of the Sultanate was its temporary success in insulating the subcontinent from the potential devastation of the Mongol invasion from Central Asia in the 13th century, which nonetheless led to the capture of Afghanistan and western Pakistan by the Mongols (see the Ilkhanate Dynasty). The Sultanate ushered in a period of Indian cultural renaissance, The resulting "Indo-Muslim" fusion left lasting monuments in architecture, music, literature, and religion. In addition it is surmised that the language of Urdu (literally meaning "horde" or "camp" in various Turkic dialects) was born during the Dehli Sultanate period as a result of the mingling of Sanskritic Hindi and the Persian, Turkish, Arabic favored by the Muslim invaders of India.
The Sultanate suffered from the sacking of Delhi in 1398 by Timur (Tamerlane) but revived briefly under the Lodhis before it was conquered by the Mughals in 1526, who ruled from the sixteenth to the eighteenth centuries.
The Khilji Dynasty is not affiliated politically with the Mughal Dynasty, which started in the 1500s under Babur.
Babur was followed by his great-grandson, Shah Jahan (r. 1628–58), builder of the Taj Mahal and other magnificent buildings. Two other towering figures of the Mughal era were Akbar (r. 1556–1605) and Aurangzeb (r. 1658–1707). Both rulers expanded the empire greatly and were able administrators. However, Akbar was known for his religious tolerance and administrative genius while Aurangzeb was a pious Muslim and fierce advocate of more orthodox Islam.
In the century-and-a-half that followed the death of Aurangzeb, effective Muslim control weakened. Succession to imperial and even provincial power, which had often become hereditary, was subject to intrigue and force. The mansabdari system gave way to the zamindari system, in which high-ranking officials took on the appearance of hereditary landed aristocracy with powers of collecting rents. As Delhi's control waned, other contenders for power emerged and clashed, thus preparing the way for the eventual British takeover.
By the end of the 12th century, following the Islamic conquest of the Buddhist stronghold in Bihar, Buddhism declined as survivors retreated to Nepal, Sikkim and Tibet or escaped to the South of the sub-continent. Hinduism and Jainism survived because they did not have large centers of worship and devotion based around heavily fortified monastaries. Furthermore, many buddhist also converted for social mobility from their status as lower castes in the hindu view. Under the tutelage of various scholars fleeing the ravages of the Mongols, and with a historically extensive familiarity with buddhists in Central Asia many impoverished peasants in East Bengal converted.
The city flourished between the 14th century and 16th century, during the height of the Vijayanagar Empire. During this time, it was often in conflict with the moslem kingdoms which rose in the Northern Deccan, and which are often collectively termed the Deccan Sultanates. In 1565, the empire's armies suffered a massive and catastrophic defeat at by an alliance of the Sultanates, and the capital was taken. The victorious armies then razed, depopulated the hindu population (genocide) and destroyed the city over several months. The empire continued in slow decline, but the original capital was not reoccupied or rebuilt.
The first temple of Somnath is said to have existed before the beginning of the Christian era. The second temple, built by the Maitraka kings of Vallabhi in Gujarat, replaced the first one on the same site around 649. In 725 Junayad, the Arab governor of Sind, sent his armies to destroy the second temple. The Pratihara king Nagabhata II constructed the third temple in 815, a large structure of red sandstone. Mahmud of Ghazni attacked this temple in 1026, looted its gems and precious stones, massacred the worshippers and burned it. It was then that the famous Shivalinga of the temple was entirely destroyed. The fourth temple was built by the Paramara King Bhoj of Malwa and the Solanki king Bhima of Gujarat (Anhilwara) between 1026 and 1042. The temple was razed in 1297 when the Sultanate of Delhi conquered Gujarat, and again in 1394. Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb destroyed the temple again in 1706.
French historian Alain Danielou wrote in his book Histoire de l'Inde:
From the moment when the Muslims arrive in India, the history of India does not have any more great interest. It is long and monotonous series of murder, massacres, spoilations, destruction.
There does not exist a history of ancient India. Their books contain no historical data whatever, except for a few religious books in which historical information is buried under a heap of parables and folk-lore, and their buildings and other monuments also do nothing to fill the void for the oldest among them do not go beyond the third century B.C. To discover facts about India of the ancient times is as difficult a task as the discovery of the island of Atlantis, which, according to Plato, was destroyed due to the changes of the earth... The historical phase of India began with the Muslim invasion. Muslims were India's first historians and were not critical of the muslim invasions.So many of the atrocities against the local hindu population was largely unrecorded
The Mohammadan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precarious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace may at any time be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within.
The conquering army burnt villages, devastated the land, plundered people’s wealth, took Brahmins ( priestly hindu class ) and children and women of all classes captive, flogged with thongs of raw hide, carried a moving prison with it, and converted the prisoners into obsequious slaves.
Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".
Reader comments (276) on this item
Comment on this item
You can help support Daniel Pipes' work by making a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum. Daniel J. Pipes