Dhimmi No More, one more point

Submitted by Vijay (Germany), Oct 17, 2012 at 07:45

Your 4 points as to why the Muslim invaders did not kill ALL Hindus is correct, to which I would add some more points.

Military Resistance : Right from the very first Muslim invasion, there was a military resistance from Hindus. So, every Mulsim campaign cost quite a bit of Muslim lives . Because Hindus did not go for a military or political federation or confederation, Muslims defeated Hindu kingdoms piecemeal over many centuries.

In the south India, after three centuries of Muslim invasions, a self-consciously Hindu Kingdom of Vijayanagar rose and it prevented large scale conversion of Hindus in south India as long as it lived. The Maratha and Sikh powers rose to challenge Mughals and they succeeded to a considerable extent. Sikh kingdom extended up to Afghanistan. If the British had not appeared in the 18th century as a military power, Hindus would have thrown out the remnants of Muslim rulers in India by their own effort.

Hindus were slow to develop political concepts and institutions to challenge Muslim invaders, who were bent on destroying Hindu people and culture. Hindus did develop concepts, institutions and technology eventually.

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".