Page < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >

Negationism and the Muslim Conquests - by Francois Gautier

Allah's Apostle said "I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy). - Bukhari 4:52:220  

(source: Fighting for the Cause of Allah (Jihad) -  For information on Jihad refer to chapter on Glimpses XVIII


"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it" 

- George Santayana (1863 - 1952) American philosopher. The Life of Reason, Volume 1, 1905. Refer to the Holocaust.


Francois Gautier (1950 - )  Paris-born, he has lived in India for 30 years, is a political analyst for Le Figaro, one of France's largest circulation newspaper. He defends Indian nationalism. He caused a storm of controversy in India by advocating reunification with Pakistan. Author of several books, including A Western journalist on India : The Ferengi's Columns and Rewriting Indian History

 "Muslims invaders did record with glee their genocide on Hindus, because they felt all along that they were doing their duty; that killing, plundering, enslaving and razing temples was the work of God, Mohammed. Indeed, whether it was Mahmud of Ghazni (997-1030), who was no barbarian, although a Turk, and patronised art and literature, would recite a verse of the Koran every night after having razed temples and killed his quota of unbelievers; or Firuz Shah Tughlak (1351-1388) who personally confirms that the destruction of Pagan temples was done out of piety and writes: "on the day of a Hindu festival, I went there myself, ordered the executions of all the leaders AND PRACTITIONERS of his abomination; I destroyed their idols temples and built mosques in their places".

(source: Negationism and the Muslim Conquests - by Francois Gautier). Refer to Will Islam convert itself? – By Francois Gautier - Refer to Ignore this genocide, we're secular - By Rajeev Srinivasan - Refer to Why did Aurangzeb Demolish the Kashi Vishvanath? - By Koenraad Elst. Also refer to Blasts in Varanasi Refer to Islamic Jihad in the chapter on Glimpses XXI and India, Jihad’s Permanent Battleground - By Srdja Trifkovic and The Legacy of Jihad in India - By Andrew G Bostom -

Refer to Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing of Kashmiri Hindu Pandits - And the World Remained Silent - Movie Refer to Ethnic cleansing of Hindus in Bangladesh - Refer to video Statistics on Islamic Terrorism - By B Raman.

In India, a whole literature has developed which denies, minimizes or whitewashes this history.

Note: Contrary to the propaganda of Islamic apologists, many Sufi "saints" were instigators and enthusiastic participants in jihad as documented in R M Easton's scholarly study Sufis of Bijapur - published by Princeton University Press. 1978.

Islam’s Other Victims: India

Serge Trifkovic ( ? )  author of The Sword of the Prophet: History, Theology, Impact on the World has observed in his article:

"India prior to the Moslem invasions was one of the world’s great civilizations. Tenth century Hindustan matched its contemporaries in the East and the West in the realms of philosophy, mathematics, and natural science. Indian mathematicians discovered the number zero (not to mention other things, like algebra, that were later transmitted to a Moslem world which mistaken has received credit for them.) Medieval India, before the Moslem invasion, was a richly imaginative culture, one of the half-dozen most advanced civilizations of all time. Its sculptures were vigorous and sensual, its architecture ornate and spellbinding. And these were indigenous achievements and not, as in the case of many of the more celebrated high-points of Moslem culture, relics of pre-Moslem civilizations that Moslems had overrun.

Moslem invaders began entering India in the early 8th century, on the orders of Hajjaj, the governor of what is now Iraq. (Sound familiar?) Starting in 712 the raiders, commanded by Muhammad Qasim, demolished temples, shattered sculptures, plundered palaces, killed vast numbers of men — it took three whole days to slaughter the inhabitants of the city of Debal — and carried off their women and children to slavery, some of it sexual."

" The mountainous northwestern approaches to India are to this day called the Hindu Kush, "the Slaughter of the Hindu," a reminder of the days when Hindu slaves from Indian subcontinent died in harsh Afghan mountains while being transported to Moslem courts of Central Asia."

(source: Islam’s Other Victims: India - By SergeTrifkovic).  Refer to Why did Aurangzeb Demolish the Kashi Vishvanath? - By Koenraad Elst. Watch History of Ayodhya -  For more refer to chapter on Hindu ArtFor more on Islamic Terrorism refer to chapter on Glimpses XV and Glimpses XVIII Refer to My People, Uprooted: "A Saga of the Hindus of Eastern Bengal"  - By Tathagata Roy. Also refer to India: Putting the Fallouts of the Islamic Invasion and British Occupation in Perspective - by Alamgir Hussain - Refer to Heroic Hindu Resistance to Muslim Invaders (636 AD to 1206 AD) - By Sita Ram Goel. Voice of India, New Delhi. Refer to Islam Under Scrutiny by Ex-Muslims - By Alamgir Hussain -

Amir Timur or Tamerlane (1336 - 1405) Turkmen Mongol conqueror wrote:

"My principal object in coming to Hindustan… has been to accomplish two things. The first was to war with the infidels, the enemies of the Mohammadan religion; and by this religious warfare to acquire some claim to reward in the life to come. The other was… that the army of Islam might gain something by plundering the wealth and valuables of the infidels: plunder in war is as lawful as their mothers’ milk to Musalmans who war for their faith.”

While studying the legacy of Muslim rule in India, it has to be constantly borne in mind that the objectives of all Muslim invaders and rulers were the same as those mentioned above. Timur or Tamerlane himself defines them candidly and bluntly while others do so through their chroniclers.

(source: The Legacy of Muslim Rule in India - By K S Lal). Refer to Romila Thapar’s Kluge Prize – By Dr. Gautam Sen -

For more refer to Rajputs and Invasion of India.

To start with he stormed the fort of Kator on the border of Kashmir. He ordered his soldiers "to kill all the men, to make prisoners of women and children, and to plunder and lay waste all their property".

Next, he "directed towers to be built on the mountain of the skulls of those obstinate unbelievers". Soon after, he laid siege to Bhatnir defended by Rajputs. They surrendered after some fight, and were pardoned. But Islam did not bind Timur to keep his word given to the "unbelievers". His Tuzk-i-Timuri records: "In a short space of time all the people in the fort were put to the sword, and in the course of one hour the heads of 10,000 infidels were cut off. The sword of Islam was washed in the blood of the infidels, and all the goods and effects, the treasure and the grain which for many a long year had been stored in the fort became the spoil of my soldiers. They set fire to the houses and reduced them to ashes, and they razed the buildings and the fort to the ground."

By now Timur had captured 100,000 Hindus. As he prepared for battle against the Tughlaq army after crossing the Yamuna, his Amirs advised him "that on the great day of battle these 100,000 prisoners could not be left with the baggage, and that it would be entirely opposed to the rules of war to set these idolators and enemies of Islam at liberty". Therefore, "no other course remained but that of making them all food for the sword". Tuzk-i-Timuri continues: "I proclaimed throughout the camp that every man who had infidel prisoners should put them to death, and whoever neglected to do so should himself be executed and his property given to the informer. When this order became known to the ghazis of Islam, they drew their swords and put their prisoners to death."

(source: Kashmir Islamic Atrocities in India). Refer to Ignore this genocide, we're secular - By Rajeev Srinivasan - Also refer to Blasts in Varanasi. Refer to video Statistics on Islamic Terrorism - By B Raman.  Refer to Will Islam convert itself? – By Francois Gautier -

Ghazw (plural ghazawāt) is an Arabic word meaning an armed incursion for the purposes of conquest, plunder, or the capture of slaves and is cognate with the terms ghāziya and maghāzī. For the ghāzīs in the marches, it was a religious duty to ravage the countries of the infidels who resisted Islam, and to force them into subjection

(source: Cambridge History of Islam p. 283).

American Historian Abraham Valentine Williams Jackson (1862-1937) wrote:

"At Muhamud's blockade the defenders "fell to the earth like sparrows before the hawk." Immense stores of treasure and jewels, money and silver ingots, were laden upon camels, and a pavilion of silver and a canopy of Byzantine linen reared upon pillars of silver and gold were among the prizes of the Holy War. The booty was displayed in the court of the palace at Ghazni, "jewels and unbored pearls and rubies, shinning like sparks or iced wine, emeralds as it were sprigs of young myrtle, diamonds as big as pomegrantes." The Eastern chronicles tell of seventy million silver dirhams, and hundreds of thousands of pounds weight of silver cups and vessels; and, with every allowance for exaggeration, the spoils must been colossal. All the world flocked to Ghazni to gaze upon the incredible wealth of India. Such rewards were incentives enough to carry on the pious work. Year after year Mahmud swept over the plains of Hindustan, capturing cities and castles, throwing down temples and idols, and earning his titles of "Victor" and "Idol-breaker," Ghazi and But-shikan. 

Zeal for Islam was the dominant role of the tenth-century Turks, as of most new converts. The great missionary creed of Mohammed, which to the Arabs and Persians had become a familiar matter of routine, was a source of fiery inspiration to the untutored men of the steppes. To spread the faith by conquest doubled their natural zest for battle and endowed them with the devoted valor of martyrs. 

Mahamud was a staunch Moslem, and he vowed that every year he would wage a Holy War against the infidels of Hindustan. The sack of Somnath had made Mahmud of Ghazni a champion of the faith in the eyes of every Moslem for nearly nine centuries, and the feat, signal enough in itself, has been embellished with fantastic legends."

Mahmud died in 1030 A. D. and his tomb and two lofty minarets, stand to show Ghazni's life. On one of the minarets one may still read the resonant titles of the Idol-breaker, and on the marble tombstone an inscription entreats "God's mercy for the great Amir Mahmud." Soon India was to witness something very like a repetition of his swift irresistible raids. For more than a century there was peace, at least little war. Probably the Hindu troops and Hindu officials had to some extent Indianized them, and the last descendants of Mahmud made their home at Lahore without difficulty... Mu'izz-ad-din, commonly known as Mohammad Ghori, led a series of campaigns in India which recalled the days of the Idol breaker nearly two centuries before. 

For thirty years Mahmud had ravaged Hindustan from Indus to the Ganges; and for thirty years Mohammed Ghori harried the same country in the same way...full of religious zeal, and eager to send the "groveling crow-faced Hindus to the fire of hell."

(source: History of India - By A V Williams Jackson volume 3  p. 17 - 28 and 52 - 54). 

A few known historical figures can be used to justify this estimate. The Encyclopaedia Britannica recalls that in December 1398 AD, Taimurlane ordered the execution of at least 50,000 captives before the battle for Delhi; likewise, the number of captives butchered by Taimurlane's army was about 100,000.

The Britannica again mentions that Mughal emperor Akbar ordered the massacre of about 30,000 captured Rajput Hindus on February 24, 1568 AD, after the battle for Chitod, a number confirmed by Abul Fazl, Akbar's court historian. Afghan historian Khondamir notes that during one of the many repeated invasions on the city of Herat in western Afghanistan, which used to be part of the Hindu Shahiya kingdoms '1,500,000 residents perished.' '

Thus, 'it is evident that the mountain range was named as Hindu Kush as a reminder to the future Hindu generations of the slaughter and slavery of Hindus during the Moslem conquests.'  

(source: Where's India's holocaust museum? - By Francois Gautier - Refer to Ethnic cleansing of Hindus in Bangladesh -

Jawaharlal Nehru (1889-1964) first prime minister of free India, was more than a deeply moral human being. He wrote in his Discovery of India:

"In Kashmir a long-continued process of conversion to Islam had resulted in 95 per cent of the population becoming Moslems, though they retained many of their old Hindu customs. In the middle nineteenth century the Hindu ruler of the state found that very large numbers of these people were anxious to return en bloc to Hinduism. 

The Moslems who came to India from outside brought no new technique or political or economic structure. In spite of a religious belief in the brotherhood of Islam, they were class bound and feudal in outlook. In technique and in the methods of production and industrial organization, they were inferior to what prevailed in India. Thus their influence on the economic life of India and the social structure was very little."

(source: The Discovery of India - By Jawaharlal Nehru Oxford University Press. 1995. p 267). Refer to Islam: The Arab Imperialism - By Anwar Shaikh. Refer to Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing of Kashmiri Hindu Pandits - And the World Remained Silent - Movie Refer to Kashmiri Pundits : Are they facing a Dodo future? and Kashmiri pandits alienated again - Refer to video Statistics on Islamic Terrorism - By B Raman.  Refer to Will Islam convert itself? – By Francois Gautier -

A section of the Indian intelligentsia is still trying to erase from the Hindus' memory the history of their persecution by the swordsmen of Islam

The Islamic reports on the massacres of Hindus, destruction of Hindu temples, the abduction of Hindu women and forced conversions, invariably express great glee and pride. They leave no doubt that the destruction of Paganism by every means, was considered the God-ordained duty of the Moslem community. Yet, today many Indian historians, journalists and politicians, deny that there ever was a Hindu-Moslem conflict. They shamelessly rewrite history and conjure up centuries of Hindu-Moslem amity; now a growing section of the public in India and the West only knows their negationist version of history. It is not a pleasant task to rudely shake people out of their delusions, especially if these have been wilfully created; but this essay does just that.

Negationism in India: Concealilng the Record of Islam - By Koenraad Elst). Refer to Will Islam convert itself? – By Francois Gautier -  Refer to Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing of Kashmiri Hindu Pandits - And the World Remained Silent - Movie


In fact according to the biography by Vincent Smith, Akbar enjoyed 'a harem consisting of 5000 women, mostly Hindus'.

A section of the Indian intelligentsia is still trying to erase from the Hindus' memory the history of their persecution by the swordsmen of Islam.

(image source: History of India - By A V Williams Jackson). 


Arnold Toynbee (1889-1975) the great British historian. His massive research was published in 12 volumes between 1934 and 1961 as A Study of History.  He was a major interpreter of human civilization in the 20th century and he has said: 

"Aurangzeb's purpose in building those three mosques (Ayodhya, Kashi and Mathura) was the same intentionally offensive political purpose that moved the Russians to build their Orthodox cathedral in the city centre at Warsaw. Those mosques were intended to signify that an Islamic government was reigning supreme, even over Hinduism's holiest of holy places. I must say that Aurangzeb had a veritable genius for picking out provocative sites. Aurangzeb and Philip II of Spain are a pair. They are incarnations of the gloomily fanatical vein in the Christian-Muslim-Jewish family of religions. Aurangzeb -- poor wretched misguided bad man -- spent a lifetime of hard labour in raising massive monuments to his own discredit. Perhaps the Poles were really kinder in destroying the Russians' self-discrediting monument in Warsaw than you have been in sparing Aurangzeb's mosques." 

(source: One World and India - Arnold Toynbee Indian Council for Cultural Relations New Delhi. 1960  p 59 - 60). For more on Arthur Toynbee refer to chapter on Quotes.

Prince Muhammad Dara Shikoh  (1627-1658 AD) the favorite Sufi son of Moghul emperor, Shah Jehan. Known the world over for his unorthodox and liberal views. He was a mystic and a free thinker. Dara Shikoh's most important legacy is the translation of fifty Upanishads, known under the title of Sirr-i-Akbar ("The Great Secret"). 

He was executed on the orders of his brother -  Aurangazeb. For more on Dara Shikoh refer to chapter on Quotes.

If Christians are facing their past. Even in religion class in Catholic schools in Belgium, we gave attention to the gruesome part in Church history. In Latin America, the 500th anniversary of Columbus' arrival has sparked some serious reconsideration both within and outside the Church, about the role of Christianity in the wholesale destruction of all the cultures without exception in the entire New World. But in India, we find the unbelievable situation, that not only Muslim historians and public figures refuse to face the truth about Muslim history : neutral secular historians are also covering up and denying the crimes which Islam has systematically committed, and even many Hindus are denying the crimes committed against their own society.

(source: Ayodhya and After - By Koenraad Elst). Watch History of Ayodhya -   Refer to Romila Thapar’s Kluge Prize – By Dr. Gautam Sen -

Treatment of Hindu Women
Sati - the only way out?

Padmini was the queen of Rana Ratan Singh of Mewar in Rajasthan. She was famous for her exquisite beauty. However, she also has an exalted place in the Rajput chivalry. No woman in the history can match what Padmini did to uphold the honor of Indian womanhood. It is said that one reason for Ala'uddin Khilji's invasion was his infatuation for Padmini. The history records the chivalrous role of Padmini and a number of other women of Mewar at the time when the famous citadel of Chitter was besieged by Ala'uddin.

The historical records show, "The funeral pyre was lighted within the great subterranean retreat, in chambers impervious to the light of the day, and defenders of Chitter beheld in procession the queens, their own wives and daughters, to the number of several thousands. The queen Padmini closed the throng. Then they were conveyed to the cavern, and the opening was closed upon them, leaving them to the final security from dishonor in the devouring fire."

Thus Padmini and other women of Chitter preferred heroic death to disgrace and rape. Rajput women are famed for their beauty and their bravery. 

The mention of Rajput women brings to mind images of the valorous and pure Queen Padmini, who fought to maintain her dignity as a woman.

Rape, genocide and gross human rights violations against ethno-cultural groups induce victims to adopt defensive mechanisms. 

Hindu women in India adopted the Sati traditions to protect themselves from Muslim invaders, who perpetrated the largest holocaust in history against Hindus. 


Place of Valor - Chittorgrah, Rajasthan.

Immolation of the Brave and beautiful Queen Padmini and the entire ladies of the palace who preferred to meet their end through self immolation in a ceremony called 'johar' rather than be part of a Allauddin Khilji's harem and thus avoiding the gross human violations that would have occurred against them. Today she is one of the epitomes of Indian woman-hood and a saga of sacrifice and valor.

Islamic conqueror Allauddin Khilji slaughtered 30,000 Hindus. Even today minstrels sing of this tragic event in the life of Chittorgarh. In fact according to the biography by Vincent Smith, Akbar enjoyed 'a harem consisting of 5000 women, mostly Hindus'. Hindu women in India adopted the Sati traditions to protect themselves from Muslim invaders, who perpetrated the largest holocaust in history against Hindus. 

Sixty years of feel-good negationism - Our Indian History books lyrically hail dead men like Akbar as Akbar the Great. But history is proof that on February 24, 1568, Akbar (the great) called for a pogrom and brutal massacre of 30,000 defenseless Hindus of Chittorgarh, Rajasthan who had refused to convert to Islam.

(Image source: Editor's collection of photos taken during a recent visit).


According to Dr.Younis Shaikh (Pakistani author of the study ‘Islam and Women’), eighty million were slaughtered and millions of women were raped. Sexual violence occurred on a gory and unimaginable scale: it was standard practice for Islamic warlords like Ghori and Ghazni to unleash the mass rape and enslavement of hundreds of thousands of women after the slaughter of all males. A large percentage of Muslims in South Asia today are the progeny of forcible conversions and systematic rape campaigns by marauding Muslim invaders. 



Hindu woman doing Tulsi and Shiv puja in ancient India.

For more on Tulsi puja refer to chapter on Nature Worship.

Sexual violence occurred on a gory and unimaginable scale: it was standard practice for Islamic warlords like Ghori and Ghazni to unleash the mass rape and enslavement of hundreds of thousands of women after the slaughter of all males. The tradition of sati, where Hindu women voluntarily cast themselves onto burning cremation grounds after their husbands’ death, gained widespread acceptance during the Islamic invasions.

(image source: The Splendour That Was 'Ind'  - By K T Shah  p 192).


As a result, Hindu women often veiled themselves in public to avoid the eyes of rapacious Islamic conquerors. This was especially prevalent in regions with high Muslim populations, such as Hyderabad under the Nizams. The tradition of sati, where Hindu women voluntarily cast themselves onto burning cremation grounds after their husbands’ death, gained widespread acceptance during the Islamic invasions. The most famous instance took place when Muslim invaders overran Chattisgarh in 1568: rather than submit to the rape and slavery that would follow, eight thousand heroic Hindu women committed sati en masse.

(source: Veiled Threats to Democracy - By Ron Banerjee -

The famous iron pillar in Delhi belonging to the fourth-fifth century A.D. is a metallurgical wonder. This huge wrought iron pillar, 24 feet in height 16.4 inches in diameter at the bottom, and 6 1/2 tons in weight has stood exposed to tropical sun and rain for fifteen hundred years, but does not show the least sign of rusting or corrosion. Evidence shows that the pillar was once a Garuda Stambha from a Vishnu temple. This pillar was plundered by Islamic hoards from a temple dedicated to Vishnu and added as a trophy in the Quwwat al-Islam mosque in Delhi.  Made of pure iron, which even today can be produced only in small quantities by electrolysis. Such a pillar would be most difficult to make even today. Thus, the pillar defies explanation.

"One does not need to be communally-minded to infer that desecration of Hindu holy sites was held to be meritorious activity in the entire Muslim world, which is why the writers in question felt the need to glorify such acts, whether they actually took place or not." 

Sanitizing Temple Destruction by Islam - By Meenakshi Jain). Refer to An Architect looks at the Taj Mahal Legend - By Marvin Mills, AIA and Taj Mahal an analysis of a great deception – By V S Godbole

Muhammadan Architecture in India 

The Arabs were, indeed, themselves aware of the immense superiority of Indian cultural and artistic achievements over their own. Al Beruni, the famous philosopher and contemporary of Mahmud of Ghazni, familiar with the splendor of Bagdad at its best, was amazed at the excellence of Indian architectural monuments. “Our people”, he says “when they see them wonder at them, and are unable to describe them, much less construct anything like them.” 

Even the iconoclastic fanatic, Mahmud of Ghazni himself, could not restrain his wonder at the triumphs of Indian art he discovered at Mathura. 

Farishta records a letter of the raider to his lieutenant at Ghazni, in which he says: 

“There are here a thousand edifices as firm as the faith of the faithful; nor is it likely that this city has attained its present condition but at the expense of many millions of dinars, nor could such another be constructed under period of two centuries.” 

The first Mussalman conquerors, in India just as much as in Persia and the provinces of the Eastern Roman Empire, adapted to their own use the structure of the conquered. The continuation of the tradition thus involved led easily to the perpetuation of all the builder’s conventions, - himself a fresh convert, if not a persisting alien in faith, - in the architecture that came into vogue after the Muslims had been established in the countries of their conquest. Iconographic ornamentation, or sculptured splendors of the converted Hindu temples, were thus excluded from the mosques, architecturally designed on the same principles as the temple it had replaced. But in the spirit and the essence, in conception and design, the building remained the same, even if it came to be called by another name. 

There is, indeed nothing surprising in this consummation. The Muslims who came with the conquerors were soldiers, not artists. When, therefore, they had to plan work of art, like a Jami Masjid or Cathedral Mosque, they had of necessity to employ the local artists; and the latter unavoidably took at their model the achievements they were themselves most familiar with. Besides, in the countries across the north-western frontiers of India, from which the first Muslim invaders came, Buddhist or Hindu influence had penetrated long ages before, thanks to the missionary zeal of the Buddhist. Now these people, accustomed for centuries to those conventions of building which had satisfied their urge for a thousand years, could not discard their cultural skin merely because they adopted a new creed.  Hence we find the conquerors themselves imperceptibly adopting the Indian rules and conventions of building, in their most solemn and stately structures of public worship or royal habitation. Even those features of the Muhammadan monuments of architecture of India, which have been considered to be peculiarly Saracenic, seem to be, when closely studied, Indian – Hindu – in origin, conception, and execution. The ornamentation by arabesques was no doubt a Muslim contribution in public buildings, as also the intricate geometric patterns, or the ogee curves. But the pointed or trefoiled arch, and the ribbed or spherical dome, - commonly considered to be distinctive features in Muslim architecture, - were in reality of Indian – Hindu origin. 

The pointed arch, was originally the temple niche of the Buddhist and Hindus. The sculptured figures of religious significance were removed by the Mulsim iconoclastic; and the niche, bare and simple, came to serve as the Mihrb in the converted or the new mosque. 

Dr. Ernest Binfield Havell (1861-1934) was a principal to the Madras College of Art in the 1890s and left as principal of the Calcutta College of Art some 20 years later. He wrote several books, including his book, Indian Architecture - Its Psychology, Structure and History from the First Mohammedan Invasion to the Present Day

“The trefoil arch was a compound aureole, or nimbus, make up of a combination of the lotus and papal or banyan tree…..The papal leaf stood for the glory round the head of the Buddha, while the lotus leaf remained as before to indicate the shape of the aura which surrounded the body. The intersection of the two formed the trefoil arch. A very common variety of this was made by the charka, or Wheel of the Law, which was also the emblem of the sun-gods, - Vishnu, Surya and Mitra – taking place of the papal leaf, making the crown of the arch round instead of pointed.”

"The dome that other supposed peculiarity of the Muhammadan architecture, was also known and used in Indian building long before Islam was brought to India, and with a wealth of ornamentation abhorrent to the followers of the Prophet of Arabia. The Stupa was the origin of all such rounded construction; and this, and the different forms of the temple, Shikhara, exemplify to the highest the excellence achieved by Indian builders in this department.

"The oldest Mosque in India, Qutbuddin's Mosque, was originally a Jain temple, which the first Turkish conquerors of Delhi converted to their own use. While, thus, the sides and the entrances were Musalman, the pillars were ancient Jain, as also the roof, domes and other inner ornamentation, where they did not offend the zeal of the true believer."

(source: The Splendour That Was India - By K T Shah  D.B. Taraporevala Sons & Co., Bombay 1930 p. 160 - 162). For more on Ernest Binfield Havell, refer to chapter on Quotes.

The Muslims loved rigid simplicity and were idol-breakers. The Muslims borrowed many features of the Hindu art. According to Sir John Marshall two of the most vital elements borrowed from Hindus were the qualities of strength and grace. In no other country except India are strength and grace so superbly united and harmonized.

(source: Indian Culture Through the Ages - Mohan Lal Vidyarthi  p 295).


Colonnade of Hindu Pillars near Q'utb Minar, Delhi. 

According to British Historian John Keay in the book, History of India, 27 previous Hindu and Jain temples were destroyed and their materials reused to construct the Kutub Minar.

(image source:
The Splendour That Was India - By K T Shah p. 160).


Slavery under Islamic Rule

The poet Amir Khusrau testified that "the Turks, whenever they please, can seize, buy or sell any Hindu."

(source: History of India  - By Elliot & Dawson, vol 3 p. 561. Quoted from Amir Khusrau's Nuh Sipehr).

Shahabuddin al-Umri wrote about the days of Sultan Mohammed bin Tughlaq (1325-51): 

"The Sultan never ceases to show the greatest zeal in making wars upon the infidel....Every day thousands of slaves are sold at a very low price, so great is the number of prisoners."

(source: Muslim Slave System in Medieval India - By K. S. Lal p. 128).

Amir Khusrau (1253 - 1325) Indo-Persian poet. A prolific classical poet associated with royal courts of more than seven rulers of Delhi Sultanate. He described:

"in poetical metaphors the destruction of Hindu temples for the sake of transformation into mosques."

(source: India and Europe: An Essay in Understanding - By Wilhelm Halbfass  p. 31).

Present day India - Apologies for Islamic Evangelism  
shraf, Arjal and Ajlaf 

Many clichés about conversion are kept alive by vested interests that prevent an evaluation of the evangelical agenda. The foremost being that conversion controversy is not a religious issue but a vote-catching device. It is projected as a Hindu Conservative Right versus Progressive Left confrontation. But time has shown that proselytization is not a battle for votes, but a battle for souls with a long history of cultural beliefs and behavior patterns that goes far beyond the smaller fortunes of the Nehru or the Sangh Parivar.  

Another cliché is that conversions have always been a result of the low caste Hindus turning to other faiths to escape the oppression by higher varnas. Christian and Muslim evangelists are never tired of projecting their faiths as truly egalitarian and democratic based upon the ability to provide equal opportunities to all their adherents irrespective of their birth or social class or caste.  

As a matter of fact, caste has little to do with conversion. No Muslim or Christian convert of low caste forgoes his caste and gains a status of even workable equality with upper caste Christians or Muslims. If it was so, Churches of all denominations would not be demanding reservation for Christians on caste basis. The motive to become Muslim or Christian was seldom freedom from caste hierarchy. For vast populations it was always either force or allurement.  

When Christianity arrived in India in the first century, the caste-system had become quite rigid. If Christianity was such a relief for the underdogs why did it not grow in leaps and bounds from its very arrival?

In early centuries, let alone in India , in the Mediterranean as well, Christians were not focusing upon the destitute entirely to multiply their fold. They influenced the highly placed sections of the Roman and Greek bureaucracy and their great expansion came only after the baptism of Constantine, the Roman Emperor. In India , Christianity remained in isolation till the Protestant British gave it an impetus, keeping at bay even the older Orthodox Christians. 

Similarly, Islamic rulers did not target the lower-caste Hindus who were incapable of effectively supporting the Turkish, Afghan and later Mughal elite. They left these poor neoconverts to the Sufis whom they seldom patronized and often persecuted as potential spokesmen of the poor. An unabashed instigator of proselytization, the historian Ziauddin Barni (1285 - 1357) advised the Sultanate to target the Brahmin intelligentsia and the big Hindu landowners and merchants to be cowed into submission and conversion.  

The ruling Muslims in India never objected to the varna-jaati hierarchy as they themselves believed in social status by birth, distinction between lord and slave, ashraf, arjal and ajlaf. The elite class belonged to the royalty and military eminence were ashraf that included Qureshi, Jafri, Hussaini, Alvi, Osmani, Farooqi, Siddiqui, Moghuls, Naqvi, Zaidi, Kazmi, Rizvi, Hashmi, Abbasi, Arabs, Pathans, Sherwani, Shairazi, Isphani, Timizi, Bukhari, Qazi, Mullick, and Mirzas etc. They were originally foreigners and some of them even boasted of ‘blue blood’ as they were able to import Central Asia women. During the days of the Islamic rule in India , they were the high and mighty and even when they married the Hindu princely women whom they converted to their religion and manners, they were known as torch bearers of the clans they originally belonged to before settling in India . The converts to Islam from the Indian artisan, trading and agricultural classes were called ajlaf and were the new middle class of Islamic population in India, who were semi respectable like the Ansari, Mansoori, Mirasi, etc. The lowest category that converted from the Hindu shudra classes were called arjal and did not take any Arabic caste names and continued to be known by their professional  such as dhobi, halal khor, dhuniya, dom etc. To this day the matrimonial columns of the Muslim community reflect this divide.  

Conversion for Colonization  

It is not totally true that the primary motive of Christian missionaries of any denomination is to improve the standards of life for the poor, the marginalized and the aborigines. If this was so, vast populations of the South American and the African continents would not be living even after conversion in poverty and exploitation by the rich Christian West.

(source: India: A Cultural Decline or Revival? - By Bharat Gupta p. 32 - 37). Refer to Debunking Dr. Zakir Naik - Contributed to this website by Dr. Alok Bohara - Professor of Economics - University of New Mexico.


In South Asia, where claims of "egalitarianism" are trump cards in the competition with "caste-ridden" Hinduism, the claim that Islam was the emancipator of the slaves in very popular.



Hindu women of India  

(image source: History of India - By A V Williams Jackson). 


As Marxist historian, Ifran Habib notes: "Slaves were, in effect, deprived of caste and converted to Islam, could be put to almost any task or learn any trade." "The number of slaves in the Sultans' establishments were very high (50,000 under Alaudddin Khilji, and 180,000 under Firuz Tughlaq), Barani judges the level of prices by referring to slave prices, and the presence of slaves were almost all-pervasive."

Foreign travelers in different centuries, including the great globe-trotter, Ibn Batuta, author of Travels in Asia and Africa 1325-1354, testify that Indian slaves were very cheap because they  were very numerous in supply." William Finch, who lived at the Moghul court in c. 1610, testifies that hunting expeditions in the forest brought human as well as animal prey.

B. R. Ambedkar, wrote: "The Hindus have their social evils. But there is one relieving feature about them - namely that some of them are conscious of their existence and a few of them are actively agitating for their removal. The Muslims, on the other hand, do not realize that they are evils and consequently do not agitate for their removal."

(source: Decolonizing the Hindu Mind - By Koenraad Elst p. 414-424). For more refer to chapter on Caste System.

(image source: History of India - By A V Williams Jackson). 


As Nobel laureate V S Naipaul said recently in an interview: 'India has been a wounded civilization because of Islamic violence: Pakistanis know this; indeed they revel in it. It is only Indian Nehruvians like Romila Thapar who pretend that Islamic rule was benevolent. We should face facts: Islamic rule in India was at least as catastrophic as the later Christian rule. The Christians created massive poverty in what was a most prosperous country; the Muslims created a terrorized civilization out of what was the most creative culture that ever existed.' 

(source: You want a plebiscite? Okay, let's do a real one, then! - Rajeev Srinivasan). Refer to
Some observations on Medieval India - History textbook for Class VII by Romila Thapar). For more information please refer to Hindu Holocaust Museum).

Refer to Islamic Jihad in the chapter on Glimpses XXI and India, Jihad’s Permanent Battleground - By Srdja Trifkovic and The Legacy of Jihad in India - By Andrew G Bostom -

Ferdinand Braudel (1902-1985) French historian, author of A History of Civilizations, wrote:

"The conquest, successful after countless setbacks, ended in wholesale military occupation. The Muslims, who were few in number and based solely in the larger towns, could not rule the country except by systematic terror. Cruelty was the norm - burnings, summary executions, crucifixions or impalements, inventive tortures. Hindu temples were destroyed to make way for mosques. On occasions there were forced conversions. If ever there was an uprising, it was instantly and savagely repressed: houses were burned, the countryside laid waste, men were slaughtered and women were taken as slaves."

Usually, the plains were left to be run by native princes or village communities. These intermediate authorities were responsible for paying heavy taxes which were sometimes the counterpart of a certain autonomy, as in the case of the rajahs of Rajputana.

 India survived only by virtue of its patience, its superhuman power and its immense size. The levies it had to pay were so crushing that one catastrophic harvest was enough to unleash famines and epidemics capable of killing a million people at a time. Appalling poverty was the constant counterpart of the conquerors' opulence, including the splendor of the palaces and feasts in Delhi, which the sultans had made their capital, and which was a source of wonder to Muslim travelers such as the famous Ibn Batuta.'

(source: A History of Civilizations - by Ferdinand Braudel - translated by Richard Mayne  p. 232).

Louis-Frederic, French Indologist, author of L'lnde de l'Islam, frequently mentions forced conversions, massacres and temple demolitions.  On pages 42-49 he writes:

“Mohammed Ghori had the Hindu temples of Ajmer demolished and ordered the construction of mosques and Quran schools on their runins…He plundered Kanauj and Kashi and destroyed their temples.” While his generals “destroyed in passing the remaining Buddhist communities of Bihar and destroyed the universities of Nalanda.”  

Bakhtiar Khilji “established a Muslim capital in Lakhanauti (Gaur) on the Ganga and destroyed, in 1197, its basalt temples. In Odantpuri, in 1202, he massacred two thousand Buddhist monks. “ 

Meanwhile, back in Delhi: “This Quwwat-ul-Islam (Might of Islam) was built in a hurry using the debris, chiefly sculpted pillars, of twenty-seven dismantled Hindu temples.” Thirty years later, “Iltutmish did not forget that he was a Muslim conqueror. He showed himself to be very pious, never forgetting to do his five devotional daily….He likewise showed himself totally intolerant vis-à-vis the Hindus who refused to convert, destroying their temples and annihilating Brahmin communities.” 

However, in India a literature has developed which denies, minimizes or white-washes this history.

(source: Decolonizing the Hindu Mind - By Koenraad Elst p. 328).

Alain Danielou (1907-1994), son of French aristocracy, author of numerous books on philosophy, religion, history and arts of India, including Virtue, Success, Pleasure, & Liberation : The Four Aims of Life in the Tradition of Ancient India.

He points out that the sack of the magnificent city of Vijayanagar, which was like an island of civilization, chivalry, and beauty, in the midst of a shattered and bleeding India, by Husain Nizam Shah, was an horror: 

"During nearly FIVE months," reminisces Danielou, "the Muslims set themselves to the task of destroying everything, the temples, the palaces, the magnificent residences. The scenes of terror and massacre were unparalleled and mightier than the imagination can ever fathom. The victors grabbed so much richness in gold, silver, jewels, precious furniture, camels, tents, girls, boys, slaves, weapons, armours, that there were not a single plain soldier who did not depart a rich man. And nothing remained after their departure of the most beautiful and prosperous city of that time, but smoking ruins."


Nadir Shah, of Iran attacked Delhi in 1739 and for a week his soldiers massacred everybody, ransacked everything and razed the entire countryside, so that the survivors would have nothing to eat. He took the fabulous Peacock throne to Iran.

(image source: History of India - By A V Williams Jackson). 


The Priceless Peacock Throne

What is the costliest single treasure made in the last 1,000 years? Wrought out of 1150 kg of gold and 230 kg of precious stones, conservatively in 1999 the throne would be valued at $804 million or nearly Rs 4.5 billion. In fact when made, it cost twice as much as the Tajmahal. On the top of each pillar there were to be two peacocks, thick-set with gems and between each two peacocks a tree set with rubies and diamonds, emeralds and pearls. The ascent was to consist of three steps set with jewels of fine water". Of the 11 jewelled recesses formed around it for cushions, the middle one was intended for the seat it for Emperor. Among the historical diamonds decorating it were the famous Kohinoor (186 carats). It was one of the most splendiferous thrones ever made. it was encrusted with 26,733 precious stones! Ascended by silver steps, it was sheeted with gold encrusted with emeralds and rubies. Its back was a peacock's tail of sapphires, pearls and turquoises. The throne was completed after seven years of unceasing labour by the best craftsmen of the empire and was valued at 10 million rupees or Rs 500 crore today.

(source: As priceless as the Peacock Throne - By K. R. N. Swamy - For more on the Kohinoor diamond refer to chapter on Glimpses VIII.

"Nadir Shah, of Iran attacked Delhi in 1739 and for a week his soldiers massacred everybody, ransacked everything and razed the entire countryside, so that the survivors would have nothing to eat. He went back to Iran taking with him precious furniture, works of art, horses, the Kohinoor diamond, the famous Peacock throne and 150 million rupees in gold." 

Histoire de l' Inde - By Alain Danielou p. 251- 290 or A Brief History of India).


India has been a land of freedom of thought and tolerance from the very dawn of her history. Conformism of any kind, religious or political, is alien to her genius and culture. As a result different schools of philosophy, forms of government and ways of worship have co-existed in it all through the history. Theistic and atheists, spiritualists, and materialists, Shaivas and Vaishanavas, Buddhists, and Jains have flourished here side by side with full freedom to preach their viewpoints and convert others to their line of thinking and way of worship. Even Charwak, the Indian precursor of Karl Marx, has been accepted as a Rishi in the Indian tradition.   

(image source: History of India - By A V Williams Jackson). 

This situation was changed by the advent of Islam in this country. Apart from the fact that it came to India on the wings of foreign invaders one of whose main motivation was spread of Islam in this country, its very character was anti-thesis of Indian thinking and attitude in regard to religion. Unlike the numerous forms of worship and systems of thought that co-existed in India at the time, it stood for a monolithic uniformity and conformism. It had no tolerance for any other form of worship. It not only aimed at converting all the Indian to Islam, on the point of the sword if necessary, but also expected such converts to reject their pre-Islamic past and ancestors.  The Muslim invaders looked upon the people of this country as kafirs or heretics. They behaved towards the Hindus in a barbaric manner. They destroyed temples and libraries and indulged in most heinous type of vandalism. Their cruelty and harshness towards Indian kafirs knew no bounds. When Mahmud of Ghazni saw the temple of Mathura he was so much wonder struck by their splendor, magnificence and art that he exclaimed that they must have been built not by men but by angels who must have taken centuries to complete them. But his Islamic zeal impelled him to raze them to the ground. 

Indians who had been accustomed to wars in which the women, the old, children, the peasants were left untouched and who had never seen temples and other places of worship being desecrated or destroyed like this felt aghast at the conduct of the new invaders. This further explains the notorious declaration of Maulana Mohammed Ali, the President of All-India Congress Committee in 1923 that for him a goonda and an adulterer Muslim was thousand times superior to Mahatma Gandhi.

(source: Indianisation? - By Balraj Madhok).

Sir Vidiadhar S. Naipaul Nobel laureate, has said on the Ayodhya issue that: "Indian intellectuals have a responsibility to the state and should start a debate on the Muslim psyche" and that : "The idea (of the temple) should be welcomed."

In 1739, Nadir Shah carried away from India money, plate, and jewels valued at from thirty to sixty millions sterling.

(source: Economic Conditions of India - By P. P. Pillai p. 12).

V S Naipaul said in 1967:  "Indians are proud of their ancient, surviving civilization. They are, in fact, victims of Islam."

For more on destruction of Hindu temples, refer to Hindu Temples: What Happened to Them : (A Preliminary Survey) - By Arun Shourie.                       

Page < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >



h o m e

 I s l a m i c    o n s l a u g h t

c o n t e n t s

Copyright © 2006 - All Rights Reserved.

Guest Book

Updated -  October 28, 2008