Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Why did Islam fail in India?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

My question is pretty strait forward. The Muslims ruled India for hundreds of years. Why did they fail to convert most of the Hindus? As of 2016, about 80% of India is Hindu, only 13-14% is Muslim, and less than 3% are Christian. Islamic rulers were often tolerant, but at times very aggressive in their attempt to convert India. This is well documented. Why did Hinduism win out? 

Edited by 6Roman6Catholic6
Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, 6Roman6Catholic6 said:

My question is pretty strait forward. The Muslims ruled India for hundreds of years. Why did they fail to convert most of the Hindus? As of 2016, about 80% of India is Hindu, only 13-14% is Muslim, and less than 3% are Christian. Islamic rulers were often tolerant, but at times very aggressive in their attempt to convert India. This is well documented. Why did Hinduism win out? 

And did islam succeed in Arabia? Islam is a religion of peace, just because moslem ruled for many years, it doesn't mean all hindus should have been so called converted. peace! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
9 hours ago, 6Roman6Catholic6 said:

My question is pretty strait forward. The Muslims ruled India for hundreds of years. Why did they fail to convert most of the Hindus? As of 2016, about 80% of India is Hindu, only 13-14% is Muslim, and less than 3% are Christian. Islamic rulers were often tolerant, but at times very aggressive in their attempt to convert India. This is well documented. Why did Hinduism win out? 

Greetings,

       I just wanted to clarify that the works of the Muslim rulers were never actually done for Islam. Hence it's not a valid assumption that Hinduism won. 

 

[Shakir 2:256] There is no compulsion in religion; truly the right way has become clearly distinct from error; therefore, whoever disbelieves in the Shaitan and believes in Allah he indeed has laid hold on the firmest handle, which shall not break off, and Allah is Hearing, Knowing.

 

As per the above Quranic verse, there is no compulsion in Islam. Rulers who relied on aggressive ways just used the name of religion as a tool to manipulate the people to fight for them. This is the same thing as we see today. All these terrorist groups use the name of Islam to gather support but in reality they are far from following any Islamic principles.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member
21 hours ago, Qa'im said:

Remember that Pakistan and Bangladesh were also a part of the historical India, and altogether the subcontinent would amount to much more than 13% Muslim.

Good observation.  I think the percentage of Muslims would be be closer to 33% if you consider the entire Indian subcontinent prior to partition.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member
On ۱۳۹۵/۳/۱۵ ه‍.ش. at 4:33 AM, 6Roman6Catholic6 said:

My question is pretty strait forward. The Muslims ruled India for hundreds of years. Why did they fail to convert most of the Hindus? As of 2016, about 80% of India is Hindu, only 13-14% is Muslim, and less than 3% are Christian. Islamic rulers were often tolerant, but at times very aggressive in their attempt to convert India. This is well documented. Why did Hinduism win out? 

Salam

Referring to the historical books explains your answer easily.

1. India was captured several times by Iranian kings who were seeking popularity more than spreading Islam.

2. India was a destination of every conqueror to achieve gold, money and trophy. The victors never considered India as a country where has people and religion. The kings who attacked India, had no idea about their culture or situation. Read about "Soltan Mahmud Qaznavi" and "Nader Shah" who attacked several times to India to show their power and to gain the trophy.

3. India was not under the control of Muslims for several years. Read the history, just wen the Islamic king tended to gather gold and some else, he campaigned to India for a period of times and then returned. So India always had its own government and king, except when it was under attack.

Indian people nowadays have Iranian culture in their life, Persian words and Farsi poems and poets (as the past), Showing that Iranian effected them just by their culture.

To know more about it, you can refer to any Islamic history you want which consist of capturing India.

Edited by gentleman.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Moderators

The Sunni Mughals were never able to rule over the entirety of the subcontinent. In terms of territory, Aurangzeb came the closest, but his reckless advancements and hostile policies towards non-Muslims lead to the Mughal Empire declining very soon after his death. It could also be argued that Aurangzeb was the only Mughal who was aggressive in attempting to convert Hindus. The majority of Mughal rulers were not practicing Muslims themselves, and some, like Akbar, are widely considered to have apostatized. The Mughal Emperors were more culturally Muslim than religiously so. In addition, Mughal rule over India, especially the southern Deccan region was fragile at best. Hindu guerrillas such as the Marathas prevented Mughal rule from ever really solidifying in many areas of the subcontinent. The repetitive foreign looting expeditions from Afghanistan and Persia prevented a stable Muslim state from ever forming, and the Mughals were altogether driven from India on more than one occasion.

Another factor to consider is the sheer geographical size and population of the subcontinent. India was, and remains, one of the most populous areas on Earth. Also, in the time before the introduction of technologies such as the telegraph and the railroad, it's size made it very difficult for missionaries and conquerors to spread their ideas into the far reaches of their country. The areas of the subcontinent in which we find the highest concentration of Muslims today (Bengal and Sindh/present-day Pakistan) are those which were exposed to contact with Muslims over a large period of time. In contrast, areas in the deep reaches of India such as those surrounding Chennai, which did not have a thriving trading relationship with Arabia, were not greatly affected by short-lived Mughal rule. In the context of a population of hundreds of millions before the advent of modern transportation technologies, the conversion of 20-30% of the people to Islam is no small feat, when considering the fact that most of the emperors did not take major steps to propagate Islam.

Lastly, Hinduism did not "win out," nor did "Islam fail." Hinduism was the religion of more than 90% of the population before the arrival of Islam and within a few hundred years, had almost lost it's majority, despite the geographical and cultural problems associated with the spread of a new religion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...