The Tragedy of Babri Masjid and Some Truth About Hindustan Shaykh

The Tragedy of Babri Masjid and Some Truth About Hindustan

Shaykh Dr. Yasir Qadhi

Introduction

As most of us are aware, brothers and sisters, yesterday the Indian Prime Minister Indira Modi inaugurated a grand temple to the Hindu god Ram in the iconic city of Ayodhya. And this inauguration was planned for many decades and it was a very lavish ceremony. Some of the most influential iconic figures of the country came.

You had the multi-billionaires, the Ambani's, the Mittal's. You had the sports players, the Tendulkar's. You had the Bollywood stars, the Amitabh Bachchan's.

You had hundreds and hundreds of the creme de la creme of Indian society. And this grand consecration was broadcast live across the country, frankly across the globe and it featured the top notch elite of India. And Mr. Modi gave a speech in which he stated that this wasn't just the inauguration of a temple, rather he heralded a new era for India.

And he proclaimed a victory for the god Ram. And he said that this temple was a manifestation of the untidying of the knots of history, untangling a jumbled past. He's now made it straight.

And he marked the beginning of a new dawn for India. He said a thousand years from now, today's date will be considered a historic date. Now, if we didn't look at the context, if we eliminated the context and the history, without a doubt, the average person would find the speech very inspirational.

But when you take into account the reality of what occurred and you take into account the symbolism of what is taking place, and also by the way, how he dressed and the colors, the saffron colored surrounded by the Brahman, you know, pundits and gurus and the entire ambience of Hinduism. If you understand the symbolism of what exactly took place, rather than feeling inspired, if we didn't have the fear of Allah in our hearts, it would strike terror into our hearts. And so today, inshallah ta'ala, the goal is to unpack what exactly is happening.

Lecture Overview

And of course, as usual, only one lecture can do so much. So I'm gonna summarize three separate aspects. First and foremost, the history of that temple and what happened.

Secondly, a brief refutation of the mythology of the Hindutva. And then thirdly, the political ramifications of what exactly took place. So first, let us begin the history of that temple.

The History of Babri Masjid

The Mythical vs Historical Ayodhya

The city of Ayodhya is actually a legendary mythical city mentioned in the ancient Vedic texts, the Ramayana, the Mahabharata. It's considered to be the city of ancient gods. And in their texts, it is said that the god founder Manu, who is like the main god, founded this legendary city and that one of the main Vishnus, one of the main iterations of God, and that is Rama, was born in Ayodhya.

This is mythic, this is legend. From the perspective of the BJP, what do they believe? They believe that mythical city that is mentioned in the Vedic texts is the actual city of Ayodhya. Okay, that's the first point.

The actual physical city that is now standing, is it actually linked to the mythical city? Most academics say that's just a myth and that's just a city that was named after it. But according to Hindu belief, that city that is physically Ayodhya, which is in UP, it's not too far from the capitals, Delhi and whatnot. From the perspective of the Hindutva, from the BJP, that city is the city mentioned in the Vedic scriptures.

And that city was a holy city from the beginning of time. It is the holiest city according to them. And that city had in it a temple dedicated to the god Rama.

The Hindutva Narrative

According to their understanding, it was a magnificent temple. And then their version of history. In the 16th century, I'm saying from their perspective, an outsider force came, a barbarian, uncivilized, uncouth group of people, the Turkic fanatics, the Muslims, under the command of Babur, one of the descendants of Tamerlane.

And he pillaged and plundered and raped the land of India, this is their perspective. And he demolished their iconic symbol, which is the temple of Rama. And in its place, he built a masjid.

So from their mythology, the destruction of the masjid and the reinstating of the temple has deep symbolic meaning. It is as if they are stripping India of the influence of the foreigner. Again, this is their mythology, please understand.

Understanding Hindutva Ideology

This says, I'm looking at history from their perspective. And these Hindutva groups, primarily the RSS and the BJP, again, I've spoken about these two groups in other lectures, the RSS and the BJP are the two main Hindutva groups. If you don't know what Hindutva is, I have to quickly clarify or explain.

Hindutva is an ideology that is religious, it is political, it is ethnic altogether. It is an ideology that is religious, political and ethnic, and which claims that India should only belong to the Hindus. This is an ideology, Hindutva.

And there are a number of political organizations that are affiliated with the Hindutva. It used to be RSS was number one, RSS went up and down, the BJP came recently, and now the BJP is now the dominant party that is manifesting Hindutva. So from the perspective of Hindutva, the demolishing of the temple and the demolishing of the masjid and the reinstating of the temple is a reclaiming of their original heritage and a manifestation of the erasure of Muslim influence.

The Academic Historical Reality

We're gonna come back to the symbolism. Now, what is the actual history, not the mythology? What is the academic history of this region? The mythical city of Ayodhya has nothing to do with the current city as it stands. This is like, you know, talk about any mythical city in any ancient book, and then a civilization comes and says, you know what, we're gonna name our city after that mythical city.

There's actually no correlation because the Vedas were written thousands of years ago. And this city only got its name a few centuries ago. So actually in reality, firstly, from an academic perspective, the mythical city never really existed, or even if it did, it has nothing to do with the actual city standing here today.

And of course, no person outside of the Hindu faith believes in the existence of Rama and Krishna and whatnot, much less the birth of Rama in a particular temple or city. So obviously this is legend, it's not actual fact. From the perspective of pure history, no religiosity, no mythology, the structure that stood there before the construction of the temple was in fact a masjid.

The Historical Masjid

And it was built by, we don't even know who it was built by, one theory says Babur, another theory says Aurangzeb, and a third theory says by the Delhi Sultans before the coming of Babur. To be very factual, very historic, we are actually not certain who built the masjid. It is an old masjid.

Some say it actually predates the Mughal Empire. And the reason why they say this is because the architectural structure resembles that of the Delhi Sultans more than that of the Mughals. Others say this is from Aurangzeb.

But the majority say that it is from the time of Babur. And they say as for the resembling of the architectural structure, the reason being Babur was the first Mughal, he didn't really start new architecture right now. So he took the existing styles, which is that of the Delhi Sultans, and he constructed a masjid in this region or in this area.

So for sure, we know a masjid has stood there for 500 years. And it was built, we don't know exactly when, one report says 1526. Again, because the beginnings of this masjid are shrouded in history.

Babur and the Historical Record

Now, Babur was the founder of the Mughal dynasty. And Babur was a very literate person, very educated person. In fact, Babur wrote poetry.

And Babur was one of the first people in all of Muslim history to write a detailed autobiography. You know this. Babur wrote his own life and times.

And it is called the Babur Nama. And it is available even in English that has been translated. Babur wrote his own, he literally writes day by day, a journal.

One of the only Muslim rulers in all of our history to write a journal and chronicle. And it is published and available. And he writes in meticulous detail, sometimes even the meals that he had, sometimes even the fun and games, sometimes even the trivial.

In the Babur Nama, he does not mention the building of this masjid. He doesn't mention it. And this is one of the theories why they say, either he didn't build it or maybe it was built in his time, but it wasn't of that importance.

The Naming and Early Records

It's gonna become important later on. And we know historically, the masjid's name was not the Babri Masjid throughout the 15th, 16th, 17th century. It had another name.

And the Babri Masjid, of course, Babri means built by Babur, that's why. The term Babri Masjid only came into vogue in the last 100, 150 years. So historically speaking, we are not even certain who built the masjid.

And this is not a very important point, but academically you should be aware. Historically, the origins are shrouded in antiquity. One of the first mentions we have of this masjid in Western sources is around 1750, a Christian Jesuit priest traveled through India and he wrote a chronicle of his journey.

Joseph Typhon Thaler's Account (1750)

And if you wanna find his name in writings, it is translated in English as well. His name is Joseph Typhon Thaler. Joseph Typhon Thaler.

So this Jesuit priest went through Ayodhya and he mentions, listen to this, the existence of a large masjid, which some say was built by Aurangzeb, he says this, and some say was built by Babur. So he himself writing in 1750, saying, this is a beautiful, nice masjid. Some say Aurangzeb built it, some say Babur built it.

And he describes the masjid. There's three domes on it. You'll be able to see color pictures of the masjid because it was demolished in 1992.

So we have color pictures. So he describes the three domes, he describes some of the beauty inside. He describes one of the unique things that the Delhi Sultanate and also the Mughal Empire was known for.

Architectural Marvels: The Acoustic System

And that is, all the Indian Pakistanis know this. If you go to one of the ancient Mughal and Delhi Sultanate structures and masjids, they have acoustics down to an unbelievable science. How many have visited the Masjid-e-Lahore, that famous Masjid-e-Lahore? You know when you give a whisper in one side, right? The Bachahi Masjid.

When you give a whisper in one side, you can hear it from the other side. By the way, I swear to you, this is so mind-boggling. I mean, I had heard this, I said, come on, it can't be true.

Two years ago when I visited for the first time as an adult, I went as a child before. I went as an adult and I tested it myself. You know, my wife was on the other side of the masjid, I told her to whisper in the corner there.

And I stood there and I could hear crystal clear. Still, how they did this, I have no clue. Even the clock ticking, you hear it.

Yes, you can hear the clock ticking. So, this Jesuit priest describes this phenomenon inside the masjid. That when somebody speaks at a certain place, they're able to project the acoustics to the whole masjid.

The Peaceful Coexistence (1750)

So, he's marveling, I've never seen this in my life. He's chronicling this. So, what is important for us? Back to our story here.

I have to keep tangents to minimum because there's so much to say and time is limited. The Jesuit priest writes, outside of the masjid, there is a raised platform that the local Hindus venerate because they think their god Rama was born there. This is a key historic fact that from 1750, there are two places separate from one another but in visual distance.

No riots, no animosity, no fighting. Here is the masjid and there is a small temple. This is the masjid, beautiful.

This is the temple the Hindus are venerating and thinking that Rama was born there. This clearly indicates that there were two separate facilities in close vicinity to one another and nothing major is going on.

The British Role in Creating Division

Montgomery Martin and the First Claims

And had it not been for them, we would have been America and Europe. This is their notion. Had it not been for them, we would have been the global superpower.

And therefore, it is our job to cleanse India from Muslims. And make India only for the original people, and that is the Hindus. And like all such far-right, fascist ideologies, it combines elements of religion, a version of Hinduism, elements of ethnicity, pure blood and Hindu blood is considered to be outsider and polluted.

Sorry, Muslim blood is considered to be outsider and polluted. And elements of fanatical nation-state, India is for Hindus. So when you combine religion, and you combine ethnicity, and you combine extreme nationalism, this is the recipe for the same type of fascist ideologies like the Nazis, and like other such ideologies.

Understanding the Complete Fabrication

So we as Muslims need to learn our history. And especially the Muslims who are linked to that land, this means all the Muslims of India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, that is our heritage. I've said this multiple times.

Even Nepal include that as well. That is our heritage. We are formed from that land. All of us, we are formed from that land. We need to know our history. And we need to point out that this understanding is a complete, complete fabrication.

It has no basis whatsoever. Fact of the matter is that unfortunately sometimes even some Muslims from that region, they kind of sort of believe this that, oh, India had an empire, and then Muslims came, and then Muslims changed it or whatnot. No, this is not true at all.

Seven Key Points Refuting Hindutva Claims

And to demonstrate this, I'm going to go over six or seven quick points. Every one of them deserves a lecture, but I just want to mention it very briefly. Let us begin historically, historically to claim that Hinduism united India is itself a massive mistake because I need you to understand this very simple point.

Point 1: Hinduism is Not a Unified Religion

Hinduism is not like a religion that we understand. Hinduism is a collection of diverse beliefs, contradictory ideologies. Hinduism is not like Islam or Judaism or Christian set beliefs.

No, Hinduism doesn't have a unified theology. It doesn't have unified rituals. It doesn't even have the same gods.

Actually, Hinduism is the name given to many hundreds of different philosophies, ideologies, theologies. And within one of these strands, you will not view the other strand as being the same as you. You will not.

You might as well view it as an outside religion altogether. It is only the outsiders, and that's the British in particular, who can label all of these different groups as basically being one. Additionally, Hinduism is known for a strict adherence to the caste system.

Point 2: The Caste System Created Division

And the caste system has always caused them to be disunited. It is a very important fact of history that it was the Muslims who acted as a catalyst to bring the caste together under a system of government. This is a very well-known and yet rarely mentioned fact of history.

The Muslims don't care about castes. They don't care if you're a Brahmin, if you're a Shudra, if you're untouchable. Muslims don't care.

So the Muslims acted as a catalyst to bring diverse groups of Hindus together to work under one administration, one group. The Hindus would never have been able to do that of their own.

Point 3: Hindu Temple Destruction Pre-Islam

Also, factually speaking, this notion of Hindus being a tolerant, you know, a vibrant diversity, this has been disproven by many academic books. One of the famous historians of India, one of the professors at the Delhi University, his name is D.N. Jha, D.N. Jha, J-H-A. His books are found at Amazon. He was the main professor of Indian history at Delhi University, and he was very anti-BJP.

He's a Hindu, but he's anti-BJP. He wrote so many books to irritate the BJPs that the BJP literally, you know, they almost, I'm not saying killed him, but they almost like tried to kick him out and whatnot. And he documents that before the coming of Muslims, every Hindu dynasty would regularly demolish the temples of others.

They didn't have any sanctity of religion. And in fact, he mentions the number of temples demolished under Muslims is a fraction of what was demolished pre-coming of Islam. And he and others mentioned that Hindu-Muslim sectarianism only began with the arrival of the British.

Point 4: India Was Never Politically United

We're going to come back to this point multiple times. This is historically. Politically, India was never united, ever.

Even under the Muslims, it was never united. India was always multiple competing dynasties. And the largest dynasty and the largest empire before the coming of the colonizers, the British, was without a doubt the Mughal dynasty.

If India had any unity, it is because of the Mughals. No other dynasty ever conquered even a fraction of the land the Mughals did simultaneously. And the Indian BJP loves to think about the classical ancient

kings like Ashoka.

Ashoka's dynasty in 250 CE was literally one sixth the size of Aurangzeb's. Ashoka had nothing compared to Aurangzeb. So the very notion of a unified India does not exist.

Point 5: The Concepts of "India" and "Hinduism" are Colonial

Hindutva is based on the premise that India belongs to Hindus. There was no India before colonization. And there was no Hindus before colonization.

The very premise falls apart. Do you understand this point as I explained? There was no unified India. The concept of India as being one land is coming from the British.

And the concept of Hinduism as being one theology is once again coming from the outsider.

Point 6: Muslims Ruled as Locals, Not Colonizers

Also politically, the Muslims were never colonizers. The Muslims ruled as locals. They adopted the culture, they gave back to the culture. As for the British, the British ruled as a superior class. The British were distinct.

The British lived separately, acted separately. The British did not learn the language. The British did not care about India.

The British lived as a superior caste amongst all of them. As for the Muslim dynasties, all of them, they lived with the people, like the people. And they took charge as they are a part of the people.

Defending India from External Invaders

And in fact, they defended India from external invaders. One of the iconic battles that every Muslim should mention in these types of discussions, when the Mongols invaded. You know the Mongols sacked Baghdad, 1248.

The Abbasid Khilafah came to an end. When they finished Baghdad, they turned their attention to India. And they attacked India.

Who defended India against the Mongols? Ala ad-Din Khalji. Ala ad-Din Khalji. The Turkic, the Muslim.

This is pre-Mughal. This is way before Babur. If you don't know your history, Babur comes 1450, 1500.

We're talking about Ala ad-Din Khalji in the 1280s, 1290s. This is way before Babur. Khalji is from the Delhi Sultanate, way before them.

He is the one, one of the few generals and leaders in human history who defeats the Mongols. Had it not been for Khalji, the Mongols would have taken India. And truly, India would not have been India anymore.

Hindus need to understand and appreciate. When the Muslims ruled, they ruled as if it is their land. And they defended as if it is their land.

The 1857 War of Independence

That's exactly what they did over here. And that's why in the war of independence, 1847, 1857, when they rebelled against the British. When the Hindus needed an icon to fight behind, the Hindus and the Muslims chose Khan Bahadur Shah Zafar, the last Mughal emperor.

The Hindus rallied the Mughal emperor. You be our leader against the British. They understood.

They were one against the English, against the British. They understood this. And again, one point we're gonna mention over and over again.

British Divide and Conquer Strategy

This division of India into Hindu and Muslim hating one another, it is straight from the British playbook. How does the British play? Divide and conquer. How does the British rule over vast territories? Divide and conquer.

And they manifested this tactic most apparently in India. And the sad reality, BJP is not coming from the Vedic scriptures. BJP is coming from British tactics.

This is the sad reality. Hindutva is not coming from ancient Hinduism. Hindutva is coming from a seed planted by British imperialists.

The notion that India was a great civilization and the Muslims pillaged and whatnot, this notion was first advocated by the British. And they did so. Why? Because the Muslims were the militarily powerful and the elite, but the Hindus were the majority.

So you have to divide between them. You have to create hatred. You have to make it such that this majority does not look up to the Hindu elite to fight against us.

So the British for 200 years kept on preaching this narrative. And what was the tamara, the fruit of this narrative? The RSS. And what is RSS tamara? BJP.

Literally. Literally there is an isnad that BJP becomes RSS. The RSS comes straight out of these tactics.

The Economic Reality: Mughal vs British Rule

The Hindutva believes India was a magnificent superpower. Once again, we stop them. We say, excuse me.

The Mughal Empire was a superpower. If you want to consider Hindustan to be a superpower, it wasn't the Rajputs. It wasn't the Marathas.

It wasn't the Guptas. It was the Mughal Empire. When the British first set foot in India, India's GDP was 25% of the world's GDP.

That is what you call a superpower. India was one fourth of the world's economic power. That's why everybody wanted to go there.

Christopher Columbus wanted to go there. The British wanted to go there. The Portuguese wanted to go there.

The Spanish wanted to go there. The Italians wanted to go there. Why? Not because of those other dynasties.

It was because of the Mughal dynasty. The Mughal dynasty had one fourth of the world's GDP. This is in around 1500.

Fast forward to 1950 when the British leave, and India now has 4% of the world's GDP. Because of the British. The anger that the Hindutva have should not be towards the Mughals who had the GDP.

It should be towards the British who really pillaged and plundered and, as the saying goes, looted. Even the word loot, they looted. Took it from Hindi.

The word loot is from Hindi. And they looted loot. And they took it into their own language.

And the word loot along with some other words comes from Hindi. So, it is the British that the Hindutva should be angry at. Their own basic history they don't even know.

Muslim Contributions to Indian Civilization

Intellectual Achievements

As for intellectually, so much can be said. And Wallahi, we Muslims from that region, we should be so proud, Islamically proud, nothing wrong with that, of our heritage. The types of icons we produced.

If India had only produced Shah Waliullahad-Dahlavi, it is enough of a civilizational gift to the rest of the Ummah. But India produced so much more. India produced, of course, Ahmad said Hindi.

India produced the Dars-e-Nizami, which is one of the most, in fact, today, it is the most taught Islamic curriculum in the whole world. You all know this. The Dars-e-Nizami, where was it produced? It was produced in India.

India produced some of the most classical books. The Fatawa-e-Alamgiriya under Aurangzeb. The father of Shah Waliullah was on the committee.

Shah Waliullah's father was the one who wrote, one of the many, who wrote Fatawa-e-Hindiya, Fatawa-e-Alamgiriya. One of the most iconic books of, it was the canon of law in India for 200 years. India produced a civilization the likes of which, again, it is unparalleled in the time frame.

Literary and Scholarly Contributions

And again, the very fact that Babur is coming and writing an autobiography, and Babur wrote aspects of fiqh even, like the Hanafi fiqh actually writing stuff. Babur, as the ruler, he's writing stuff in this regard. And India, or sorry, the Muslims of India also produced the greatest architectural icons of the country.

Not just the Taj Mahal. But overall, the architecture of India. What is iconic about it? It is the Mughal architecture.

Social Reform: Overcoming the Caste System

It was the Muslims of India who worked to overcome the caste system, beginning with Babur. In fact, in his Babur Nama, Babur is amazed, shocked, astounded to discover the caste system.

And he goes, I don't understand, groups of people are not talking to one another because of their background. Like, he doesn't understand this. And so Babur begins to form alliances between them. You would never have had the glory of Hindustan without the catalyst of the Muslims to bring different groups together.

Language, Cuisine, and Cultural Impact

Language-wise, modern Hindi is 30-40% from Turkic, Farsi and Arabic. Modern Hindi would not exist without the Muslim influence. So many Hindi words, Imarat, Sarkar, Dost, Nazar, Tijarat, Lota, it all comes from Turkic.

Cuisine-wise, Biryani, straight from the Persians. Gulab Jamun is coming from the Persians. Jalebi, coming from the Arabs originally, and then obviously India slides in the way.

Can you imagine India without Gulab Jamun and Biryani and Jalebi? Culturally bankrupt. It's all coming from the Mughal interactions.

Cinema and Cultural Heritage

In fact, I mean, this is going to get me into a lot of trouble from my critics and I have so many of them. May Allah protect me. (سُبْحَانَ اللَّهِ - Subhanallah). Akhi, the critics, I sometimes wonder ya akhi, can you sometimes shoot some arrows towards the BJP or Israel rather than towards your fellow Muslims? I just don't get it.

Like the critics are so gung-ho whatever thing they find, Yasir Qadhi, this, that. Ya akhi, calm down. We have wars going on.

BJP is going to do this. Just calm down. Look at some bigger issues.

So I'm going to say something. I know my critics are going to go crazy with this. But I'm teaching you educational class here.

I'm not endorsing. I'm just teaching you facts. So please understand.

Just because I have a religious background doesn't mean everything I say becomes a stamp of approval. I'm teaching you history and facts. Where am I going with this? Bollywood.

This is going to get me into a lot of trouble. But you wouldn't have the Indian cinema without without what? the Urdu Ghazal. The Urdu Shershairi.

The Urdu Qawwali. (وَاللهِ - Wallahi), this is an academic talk. Please don't misunderstand that I'm endorsing.

Please. I'm being academic. I'm trying to explain Indian culture as we know it is intricately shaped by the Muslims.

That's what I'm trying to say here. Please my critics understand. Don't just say kafir, bid'ah, shirk.

Calm down, ya akhi, please. There's much more going on in the world. (وَاللهِ - Wallahi), as I said, sometimes shoot some arrows outside rather than inside.

Mughal-e-Azam: A Cultural Milestone

But factually speaking, what was the... all of the elders here by the way. You're older than me, some of you. What was the iconic movie that made Indian cinema global? Look at this.

Everybody. You heard what he said, right? Everybody knows this. All of the Indian, Pakistani, Bengalis know this.

The Arabs like, what is this? There was a famous movie released way before me. What is the year? Tell me. No, no, not in the 40s.

I know that much. I think it's 60. I think it's 60.

Sometime in the 60s. I know this because my parents told me they saw it as this young man in Karachi. So I know this.

That they came out on the cinema, so they went to the movie theater. So I know it's in the 60s because my dad told me he saw it as a young man in Karachi. So, Mughal-e-Azam.

Mughal-e-Azam was the first blockbuster movie that made, it wasn't called Bollywood at the time, it made Indian cinema global. Mughal-e-Azam is about the Muslims. The story is written by Muslims.

The director of the movie is a Muslim. And the actor that plays in it, Dilip Kumar, is a Muslim. Dilip Kumar, I know.

You know, I also grew up in the 80s. I mean, come on. Cut me some slack.

I'm totally disconnected, guys. Okay? The entire, you would not have, and by the way, all of those movies are in basically Urdu. It's in Urdu.

The Foundation of Indian Cinema

Imagine this. You could not have Indian cinema without the literature, without the eloquence, without the whole culture of Indian Muslims. They were the ones who brought the whole notion of Ghazal and Sher Shahidi, and the whole characters, and I mean, even I'm really getting into trouble, man, but Gabbar Singh is really getting me in trouble.

May Allah protect me. I'm teaching you history, guys. His character is based off of Urdu novels.

The guy who wrote the script, Muslim. And the guy who played him, Muslim. And the movie name, surely itself is from an Arabic and Farsi word.

I'm sorry, but this is the reality, right? Iconic movies, iconic characters, iconic scripts, they're all coming from which heritage? Muslim heritage of India. What I'm trying to say is very simple.

The Reality of Cultural Integration

This perversion of Hindutva that we had civilization and the Muslims came and destroyed it, it is a figment of imagination. We are not claiming that we did everything. I'm not saying this, but we are claiming that without us, modern India would not be modern India. It would not be recognizable.

The whole culture, the whole language, everything would be totally different. And some of the greatest achievements of Hindustan, not all of them, but some of them, they owe directly to what the Muslims contributed. The shape of India, the culture of India, the language of India, the cuisine of India, the arts of India, the architecture of India, the GDP of India.

What more do you want? Seriously. And this is what makes Muslims different from the British. The British came and robbed and pillaged and took and grabbed.

The Muslims came and built. The Muslims came and gave. The Muslims came and was interaction.

Addressing the "Foreign Religion" Claim

That's the fundamental difference. And one awkward reality. They say, okay, but Islam is a foreign religion.

They say, you guys are born in Arabia. And to respond to that, we need a little bit more academics. Firstly, as I explained, to claim that Hinduism is one religion is a very modern notion.

Classical ancient people who lived there did not view themselves as one faith. You understand this point that the number of gods in Hinduism is in the hundreds of thousands. And when you worship Vishnu versus Rama versus this, you might as well be on a different faith.

There's no commonality between them. And that's why even we understand Southern India, you know, Malayalam types and Kerala is very different from Northern India. Ethnically different, ideologically different, culturally different.

These are very distinct civilizations. So the notion that only us, we are foreign, it doesn't make any sense. Also, Muslims have been in India literally since the time of the Tabi'un.

Literally, 700 CE. It's not as if it's something recent. But they say, oh, but it was the Mughals who spread Islam.

The Truth About Conversion in India

Population Growth Under the Mughals

Before the Mughals, Muslims were 5%. The Mughals, it came to 40%. Firstly, this is true.

When Babur came and enters, Babur comes and Muslims are less than 5% in India. Very small percent. You know, the Delhi Sultanate and whatnot, very small.

Under the Mughal dynasty, in the next 200-250 years, the Muslims grow astronomically. From 5 to 40% when partition happens. Hindutva says forced conversion.

Hindutva says, you stripped our ancestors from their religion and you forced them. And of course, they blame primarily who? One person? Aurangzeb. They primarily blame Aurangzeb.

Professor Richard Eaton's Research

So, one of the most famous researchers in this regard is Professor Richard Eaton, here in America. He's a historian. Richard Eaton has specialized in conversion in India.

He has written books and articles. Very neutral guy. He's not a Muslim.

He's not a Hindu. He's just a historian. And Richard Eaton answers this question in a number of publications very meticulously.

I have glanced over some of them and I didn't read them page by page, but I've glanced over some of them to get an idea of where he's coming from. He literally goes over court documents in every century looking at Muslim Hindu names. He goes over ancient records and he plots out the rate of conversion.

Very, very meticulous work. He plots out the rate of conversion under the Mughals. And to make a long story short, he says that there is no evidence of significant forced conversion.

Organic Conversion Patterns

There's nothing like this. Sure, maybe some crazy person might have done it in some village somewhere, but as a policy, never. Never did any emperor, including Aurangzeb, this is just a myth and a lie, that mass conversion took place.

Rather, according to Professor Richard, according to Professor Richard Eaton, conversion takes place organically around high populations of Muslims. Not where the centers of leadership are. Rather, where there's large groups of Muslims, such as the Punjab, such as the Bengal, you get people converting around there, which indicates conversion was one-on-one organically, and not politically up-down.

Conversion was bottom-up. Conversion took place when the people are interacting with the Muslims. One-on-one.

Simple da'wah. Not forced conversion. This is the conclusion of a Western historian who specializes in this.

Personal Family History

And just FYI, just on a personal anecdote, I have done quite a lot of research on my own family history in this regard, and I found the exact same thing. I'm not at all ashamed to mention, five generations ago from my father's side, literally from my father's side, five generations ago, my ancestor was a Brahmin Hindu in Lucknow. We discovered this fact, and it was something that I didn't know at the time.

It was something that was an eye-opener for me. Five generations ago, 1850. 1850, my own ancestor was a Brahmin, and he converted.

And we know exactly, I visited the village, I saw the house he lived in, I saw the masjid he built. And the story of conversion was exactly this. Anecdotally, that interacting with a Pir, a Sufi Sheikh, interacting with a religious person, and he's impressed with the akhlaq, and he converts.

And from my grandmother's side, we know that, and I thought this was a myth, but I have uncovered it's true, we come from the descendants of the Abbasid Empire, when the Mughals came, the Al-Albayt, the Abbasids fled to India, and so their descendants came. And I'm just saying anecdotally, I am a product of that land, from one side, literally, a Brahmin Hindu, and from another side, literally, the Sayyid. This is exactly what India is, it's the coming together of these cultures and civilizations, that's exactly what India did.

Causes of Conversion

astaghfirullah, astaghfirullah, rapes and rampaging and pillaging and 2 million people dead.

How much houses torn down? How much? That is going to be a fraction of what might potentially happen there now, next. So I wish I had positive news. But still, our iman teaches us, we hope for the best in Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala, but we take our measures.

We take precautions.

Final Call to Action

My final ask to all of you, follow the news, spread awareness, make dua, and for those of you who are experts and can tell us what to do specifically, my job is not to lobby, I don't know, my job is not to politic, but to raise awareness and to educate. For those who know, come to us, come to me, let's see what we can do to try our best to stop what seems to be the path to a very, very dark future.

This is like Nazi Germany in 1930, all over again, literally. Nobody learns from history, we have to try our best to learn. May Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala protect the Muslims of India and all over the world.

May Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala grant them safety and security from these bigots and hatred. May Allah subhanahu wa ta'ala allow us all to do our part to try to minimize any harm and damage. InshaAllah we'll continue another topic next week.

Assalamualaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh. Thank you for watching.