What's new

I am a Muslim of the Indian subcontinent. Let me tell you a story. This is the story of my life.

What you said is verbatim new atheism movement BS.

Atheism is actually the weapon to keep people enslaved and make a good army of worker bees. This is why West promotes new atheism and absolutely crushes religion especially which frees people from government/societal slavery. It’s why communists feel threatened and they use force.

Example of Andrew Tate comes to mind. He was OK when he promoted hedonism which is in line with governments enslavement and consumerism. But as soon as he accepted Islam, he became dangerous. He’s now unlawfully jailed without any reason for months.

Islam is especially a threat because Christianity and other religions have been changed at will and can be changed anytime. Neither do their followers follow it. But Islam is very resistant to change and hence not malleable to government slavery. Muslims make bad consumers.

Do the math and you get people like you who are fed new atheism BS.
enslaved? good army of worker bees?
Liberty, equality, fraternity is a western concept and I'm glad it was adopted universally but apart from that west had nothing to do with it. Extremism of anything is bad.
Religion frees people from government/societal slavery? explain to me what is governmental or societal slavery? you're more of a slave if you blindly follow something. At the end of the day everyone is a slave to something, you need that to keep going ahead.
Andrew tate? don't mention that piece of garbage human here, all he deserves is jail for human trafficking. Also don't for a second think that tate cares about anyone he just cares about himself and his narcissistic ego.
Religion is a card that is played everytime when everything goes to shit or is in the process of going to shit I've noticed it enough in present and from events that occurred in the past.
Same comment right back at you from other perspective.

Idols and ideologies are man-made. Belief in God is natural and logical if one is truthful to oneself. The resulting accountability to God is for our sake, to keep us from straying too far from the path of righteousness. It comes through faith in the Higher Power, our Creator. Only God can make us better people. This is the true meaning of Dharm. Islam is Dharm. Islam is not 'Abrahamic' religion which he invented and others followed. Submission to God began with the first person of the modern human species [Quran 20-115]. Atheism is a 19th century concept. Even Aristotle believed in Higher Power. That is how Arab and Persian Muslims were able to dive into Aristotlean philosophy.
Many humans have always believed in a lot of things. You still have theist and atheist scientists doesn't really prove anything. Human race has always has different ideologies and dogmas.
If you're one of those religion gives me hope, and structures my life for better types then all the more power to you but i hate the extremists on all sides.
I've got my own beliefs but I respect yours.
 
Last edited:
I agree with your explanation, but What Hindu "mumbo jambo" are you referring to ? and how are Hindus putting it as a priority ?

Anyway here is some authentic mughal history by one of India's most distinguished historian.

Whether Islam or Christian or
Hindu , I consider ALL inexplicable rituals mumbo jumbo.
 
The invaders spanned lifetimes , so the next generation was born into Islam; obviously they were too ashamed to admit their parents' cowardice and so the best defence was what you are all doing now.

To be clear, Hindus are stupid as stupid as Muslims in putting religious mumbai jumbo as a priority.

So the logic you putting forward is that they are all ashamed & cowards thats why they don't want to go back to Hinduism?

So please explain this, now there are no invaders, why are hindus still converting to Islam?

 
So the logic you putting forward is that they are all ashamed & cowards thats why they don't want to go back to Hinduism?

So please explain this, now there are no invaders, why are hindus still converting to Islam?

I dunno why, it is dumb to do that imo. But I'm sure they hv their reasons such as
- economic incentives
- somebody insulted them
- some think it makes gulf job easier

Etc etc
 
The invaders spanned lifetimes , so the next generation was born into Islam; obviously they were too ashamed to admit their parents' cowardice and so the best defence was what you are all doing now.

To be clear, Hindus are stupid as stupid as Muslims in putting religious mumbai jumbo as a priority.
Only people forced to convert were early 9-11th century people who faught em,part of previous rulling classes, Thier tribes and were defeated in a war - so the people who were forced to convert were far from cowards as unlike others they faught head on, instead of letting it be, paying taxes, getting by- Muslims historically didn't force anything as long as jiziya, taxes were given and non Muslims did as they were told - you have to be a political opponent, threat for them to take this extreme measure

But Vast majority of people were not forced to do anything, it was because of saints and thier politcal, economic connections with Muslim rulers - same with Turks, to some extent Persians too, you can't force anything on millions of people especially regions with little central authority and instability
The more tribal clansih a society was , the easier it was for them to convert

It's historical revisionism especially considering how it took centeries for people to become Muslims - phenomena world over
 
Last edited:
I dunno why, it is dumb to do that imo. But I'm sure they hv their reasons such as
- economic incentives
- somebody insulted them
- some think it makes gulf job easier

Etc etc

Because Islam and Christianity is superior to Hinduism
 
The suffering part is real. The invaders were cruel and many died.

However living in peace before? These Hindu were just as bad. And look how they treat their own. Their caste system has created slave labor from their people. Majority live in abject poverty whilst the 1% dominate.

If people of Indus were not invaded by Hindus and Arabs it would have eventually formed its own version of monotheis
There were slaves even during your prophet time. Captured women and slaves were even traded and were treated as property.
 
I dunno why, it is dumb to do that imo. But I'm sure they hv their reasons such as
- economic incentives
- somebody insulted them
- some think it makes gulf job easier

Etc etc

Maybe you are right, it could be for any of the reasons you mentioned, but if someone's belief are strong no amount of insult or economic incentive would make them leave their religion. And thats the reason that Muslims are not converting back to the religions of their ancestors. My ancestors were Zoroastrian, me and my people will never go back.
 
Maybe you are right, it could be for any of the reasons you mentioned, but if someone's belief are strong no amount of insult or economic incentive would make them leave their religion. And thats the reason that Muslims are not converting back to the religions of their ancestors. My ancestors were Zoroastrian, me and my people will never go back.

Islam is so superior and confident that the punishment for leaving islam is DEATH.

Don't pretend you have a choice. you DONT.
 
The invaders spanned lifetimes , so the next generation was born into Islam; obviously they were too ashamed to admit their parents' cowardice and so the best defence was what you are all doing now.
Most of the 'invaders' founded dynasties in India and became local over generations. This is no way different than earlier non Muslim invaders like Scythians and Huns. Delhi Sultans and Mughal Emperors were motavated mostly by eartly affairs and they had not much interest to propagate Islam among the vast majority Hindus in the Sub Continent. Otherwise Current India could not have remained 85% non Muslims. They employed a lot Hindus in Empire's important administrative and military posts, often commander-in-Chief of the army.

It is true, that some times sporadic atrocities happened aganist Hindus and their temples got destroyed, but those were sporadic, isolated events happened over many centuries and not organied in nature. To understand what organazied religious persecution and forceful conversion look like, you should learn the history of Reconquesta of Spain in 1492 and subsequent treatment of Muslims and Jews there. Not a single Muslims or Jews were allowed to remain in Spain. Either they were killed, expelled or forcefully converted.

Some Muslim invaders did wrong thing like Timur the lame, he massacred 100,000 people in Dehli, but his victims were both Hindus and Muslims. Sultan Mahmud looted Somnath temple. but his motivation was mainly acquiring wealth, not religious. Oppresive Brahman priests in those times made temples the richest places in India by exploiting the masses and hoarding riches in temples. Those temples became easy and lucrative target for foreign powers who were eager to get wealth.

Most of the conversion to Islam happened in the Sub-Continenet through the influence of Sufi Saints, not through Royal decree. In every Bangladeshi cities there are famous Saints who were very popular and spread Islam through their personality and charsima. The very famous saint in Bangladesh includes Hazrat Shah Jalal in Sylhet, Shah Makhdum in Rajshahi, Bayezid Bostami in Chittagong etc. Khan Jahan Ali was a popular saint in Khulna region of Bangladesh around 1400AD who is still revered by both Muslims and Hindus for his outstanding humanitarian works. He was both a saint and local administrator, he built roads still in use after 600 years! he cleared Sundarban jungle and distributed land among the poor and did many other pro-people works. He was also a great builder, he constructed the famous sixty-dome Mosque which is now a UNESCO World heritage site. Hazrat Shah Jalal and his 360 disciples spread Islam in around Sylhet region of Bangladesh around 1300AD. His influence is still paramount in Sylhet. This is the story repeated over and over again in Bangladesh and I am sure other places in the Sub-Continent where there is a substantial Muslim population.
 
Last edited:
Islam is so superior and confident that the punishment for leaving islam is DEATH.

Don't pretend you have a choice. you DONT.

Even if Muslims had a choice, why would they want to go back to worshipping toy statutes or worshipping fire.
 
Because Islam and Christianity is superior to Hinduism
U just proved my point - it is one thing to be born into it but if even after growing upto age of critical thinking (I assumed you are ) if you still think in terms of superiority that's is proof of your inferiority as a person. Clear indication you need to grow up some more.

Maybe you are right, it could be for any of the reasons you mentioned, but if someone's belief are strong no amount of insult or economic incentive would make them leave their religion. And thats the reason that Muslims are not converting back to the religions of their ancestors. My ancestors were Zoroastrian, me and my people will never go back.
Yes but you shud take that as a reflection of your understanding and maturity rather than anything to do with the religion or ism. Given where we as human race are in 2023, regardless of which God you faith in, if the mumbo jumbo or mist religions don't make you laugh, you need a check up
 
The invaders spanned lifetimes , so the next generation was born into Islam; obviously they were too ashamed to admit their parents' cowardice and so the best defence was what you are all doing now.

To be clear, Hindus are stupid as stupid as Muslims in putting religious mumbai jumbo as a priority.

There is no evidence of state sponsored mass conversion to Islam in the Indus region.

Mass conversions are a feature of monolithic societies and the Indus has always hosted multicultural society.

The native inhabitants went through various degrees of exodus en mass in subsequent decades and centuries.
 
Most of the 'invaders' founded dynasties in India and became local over generations. This is no way different than earlier non Muslim invaders like Scythians and Huns. Delhi Sultans and Mughal Emperors were motavated mostly by eartly affairs and they had not much interest to propagate Islam among the vast majority Hindus in the Sub Continent. Otherwise Current India could not have been remaining 85% non Muslims. They employed a lot Hindus in Empire's important administrative and military posts, often commander-in-Chief of the army.

It is true, that some times sporadic atrocities happened aganist Hindus and their temples got destroyed, but those were sporadic, isolated events happened over many centuries and not organied in nature. To understand what organazied religious persecution and forceful conversion look like, you should learn the history of Reconquesta of Spain in 1492 and subsequent treatment of Muslims and Jews there. Not a single Muslims or Jews were allowed to remain in Spain. Either they were killed, expelled or forcefully converted.

Some Muslim invaders did wrong thing like Timur the lame, he massacred 100,000 people in Dehli, but his victims were both Hindus and Muslims. Sultan Mahmud looted Somnath temple. but his motivation was mainly acquiring wealth, not religious. Oppresive Brahmanist gangs in those times made temples the richest places in India by exploiting the masses and hording riches in temples. Those temples became easy and lucrative target for foreign powers who were eager to get wealth.

Most of the conversion to Islam happened in the Sub-Continenet through the influence of Sufi Saints, not through Royal decree. In every Bangladeshi cities there are famous Saints who were very popular and spread Islam through their personality and charsima. The very famous saint in Bangladesh includes Hazrat Shah Jalal in Sylhet, Shah Makhdum in Rajshahi, Bayezid Bostami in Chittagong etc. Khan Jahan Ali was a popular saint in Khulna region of Bangladesh around 1400AD who is still revered by both Muslims and Hindus for his outstanding humanitarian works. He was both a saint and local administrator, he built roads still in use after 600 years! he cleared Sundarban jungle and distributed land among the poor and did many other pro-people works. He was also a great builder, he constructed the famous sixty-dome Mosque which is now a UNESCO World heritage site. Hazrat Shah Jalal and his 360 disciples spread Islam in around Sylhet region of Bangladesh around 1300AD. His influence is still paramount in Sylhet. This is the story repeated over and over again in Bangladesh and I am sure other places in the Sub-Continent where there is a substantial Muslim population.
Imo it is as wrong to claim it happen ALL by cruel sword as by economic disincentives or any other one factor. Nobody can after this many centuries say for certain. But common sense, applying what we see as the aggressive Islamic groups have done in the past several decades, says violence is part of the playbook.

There is no evidence of state sponsored mass conversion to Islam in the Indus region.

Mass conversions are a feature of monolithic societies and the Indus has always hosted multicultural society.

The native inhabitants went through various degrees of exodus en mass in subsequent decades and centuries.
There's ample evidence if you choose to look for it.

I don't understand your 2nd paragraph at all. Wouldn't mind some elaboration on why you think it has to be monolithic to be converted by sword and what the multiple cultures tht existed after Islam was cavalried in
 
Only people forced to convert were early 9-11th century people who faught em,part of previous rulling classes, Thier tribes and were defeated in a war - so the people who were forced to convert were far from cowards as unlike others they faught head on, instead of letting it be, paying taxes, getting by- Muslims historically didn't force anything as long as jiziya, taxes were given and non Muslims did as they were told - you have to be a political opponent, threat for them to take this extreme measure

But Vast majority of people were not forced to do anything, it was because of saints and thier politcal, economic connections with Muslim rulers - same with Turks, to some extent Persians too, you can't force anything on millions of people especially regions with little central authority and instability
The more tribal clansih a society was , the easier it was for them to convert

It's historical revisionism especially considering how it took centeries for people to become Muslims - phenomena world over
I have no particular affinity or hostility to people from a 1000+ years. They are as alien to me , perhaps even more alien to me than you are.

With that, I have two questions for you:

1. Why do many feel compelled to minimize the extent of violent spread ? They seem to want to believe in the superior/inferior nonsense and somehow if it is forced on you it must be inferior.

2. Any reference on violence having been the m.o only in the first two centuries and nit after ?
 

Back
Top Bottom