Raja Dahir Sen The Forgotten warrior of SIndh

[El Sidd]

This thread reminds me of Kulbashan Yadev.

 

[Areesh]

**** Raja dahir and f*ck any hindu who loves him today

 

[Mentee]

That is stupid logic. Ask any of these historic experts If Jats of Sindh(who only believed in ancestor worship) banded together to fight your Raja Dahir. He was a tyrant. Those same jats were hounded by the Mughals and even Sikhs hundreds of years later in Northern Punjab.

Read my post again I was explicitly talking about raja dahir. But this doesn't change the fact that bin Qasim was also bringing "democracy" to the region at the behest of a thug, more higher in stature, hajaaj the tyrant.

That being said, he might had established a Muslim political hierarchy in the province but the credit of Dawah solely goes to the Sufi Saints.

Majority of Muslim rulers were not even interested in spreading Islam to begin with as it could potentially reduce the jiziya returns - - - - - - -.

 

[Kompromat]

He married his sister.

 

[El Sidd]

He married his sister.

So did most egyptian and roman rulers and greeks and others too.

Now everytime i hear Dahir i would have this moronic thought instead i was just happy to see him as an oppressing ruler. That worked fine too you know.

 

[New World]

Nothing has stopped and nothing will stop you people from creating and associating the most ridiculous lies with respected personalities ......... lies as its inherent in their nature, however always defy the logic ........ first you made Hazrat Hussain leave Makkah on the day when its Hajj next day ....... and now you come up with another pathetic lie that He would want to go to the land of non believers instead (considering if this whole event is true) going back to Makkah. Do try checking the maps for what's in between Karbala and Sindh .......... and then do try calculating the distance, consider the mode of transportation and the people involved to take that journey.

Seriously ......... gather some courage and do ask the Molvi you follow to provide some explanations for the very obvious contradictions and stupidity they keep feeding you.

 

[El Sidd]

There is documented proof that a King from Sindh took some wise men to Arabia to meet an avatar of their deity. Astrological calculations and the splitting of the moon. Those who made the journey found it tough and as predicted by their scrolls. On their journey back the last survivor died before reaching the ports of Yemen.

The story is similar to the 3 wise Kings who were guided by the stars to frequent Jesus outside Bethelehem. Their relics are enshrined in the Cologne Cathedral.

 

[pak-marine]

I know only the Raja Dahir who was defeated by the 17 year old commander Muhammad bin Qasim with an army that was far outnumbered and was fighting in a foreign land thousands of mile away from its home. His success brought the light and enlightenment to the dark subcontinent rife in tyranny and immorality.

i hear that MBQ was the villian as he was sent to kill the Prophets family who migrated to Sindh when the dynasties wanted to murder them and it was Raja Dahir who offered them safety

 

[padamchen]

I believe islam was spreading by forcing it on people. You see many muslims claim that the ummayuds, rashiduns, abbasids and ottomans were just and fair rulers and treated everybody regardless of their religion with respect and with kindness.

Now my question is that if the muslim rulers were so kind enough to let the non muslims live as they wish, then why did the non muslim population convert to islam in bulk? For example Iran was a zorastrian state and within the first 100 years of Ummayud rule it became a fully muslim state. Now it is impossible that the zoroastrians were not forced to convert because if the Zoroastrians were living a happy life being a zoroastrian in muslim controlled persia then there is no need to convert in bulk.

So definitely the muslim rulers forced islam upon its subjects because if the muslim rulers tolerated the non muslim subjects and had respected them as muslims claim, then they would not need to convert in millions without a serious driving force.

300 years. When the bulk converted.

After they saw that the elite had all converted for political gain.

Make no mistake. The conquest of Persia was political.

As was its conversion.

Its what ensured that Islam became a world religion. And did not remain just another small Arab one.

Of course it also ensured the continuing strife the religion has witnessed non stop for the past 1300+ years. From the same chain of events.

@Sinnerman108

Cheers, Doc

 

[xyxmt]

Then you must watch the above clip , so that you learn facts and real truth of Raja Dahir and remove pakistani textbooked fake story about him from your mind for ever .

so we should believe your fake stories

 

[Maarkhoor]

then why did the non muslim population convert to islam in bulk?

Because religious clergy preach locals to accept Islam and locals accepted it because of teachings of Sufis and noble behavior of rulers. Even today's world Islam is the fastest growing religion.....

If Muslim rulers spread Islam by forces than all Hindu population should be Muslim today because Muslim rule over subcontinent more than 1000 years.

 

[padamchen]

'Its what ensured that Islam became a world religion. And did not remain just another small Arab one'

Stop justifying forced conversions. Forced conversion cannot be a way to turn a religion into a world's dominant faith. There's no difference between the crusaders and your this statement.

I'm not justifying anything.

I'm merely giving you the unvarnished truth.

The Persian elite converted first in the power vacuum post their loss at Al Qadissiya and the slaying of their boy king and the exile of his princes.

There remained pockets of resistance throughout the land that fought on under various Satraps. But in-fighting and power politics prevented that resistance from forming a united front.

Zoroastrianism of course was under attack across the land. As temples and fires were defiled and open worship led to death.

Eventually burdened under social duress and back breaking taxes, with no one flag to rally around, the commoners started converting and taking on Muslim identities to make their lives easier. While still practicing their ancestral faith secretly.

There also started a power struggle between the Arab and Persian elite for the legitimacy of THEIR own narrative.

Islam became Zoroastrianized, because ALL of fledgling Islam's braintrust and literature and fine arts was Persian.

Eventually it softened the blow and over generations people got used to doing the same things they had been doing for 8000 years, only calling Ahura Mazda now Allah. And buying into the "love" for their new prophet. And his family. While continuing to hate the Arabs.

Till by 1000 AD Persia was nearly fully Muslim.

Hope that gives you further light.

Cheers, Doc

 

[M. Sarmad]

300 years. When the bulk converted.

After they saw that the elite had all converted for political gain.

Make no mistake. The conquest of Persia was political.

As was its conversion.

Its what ensured that Islam became a world religion. And did not remain just another small Arab one.

Of course it also ensured the continuing strife the religion has witnessed non stop for the past 1300+ years. From the same chain of events.

@Sinnerman108

Cheers, Doc

From the authors of Sahah Sitta ( Authentic Hadith Collection) to the second most influential Muslim in history after prophet Muhammad SAW ( i.e Imam Ghazali) to the greatest Imam of Fiqh with the highest number of followers (i.e. Imam Abu Hanifa) .. All were Persians. Islam, as we know it today, is more a Persian religion than an Arab one, though most Muslims won't like to admit it

 

[padamchen]

From the authors of Sahah Sitta ( Authentic Hadith Collection) to the second most influential Muslim in history after prophet Muhammad SAW ( i.e Imam Ghazali) to the greatest Imam of Fiqh with the highest number of followers (i.e. Imam Abu Hanifa) .. All were Persians. Islam, as we know it today, is more a Persian religion than an Arab one, though most Muslims won't like to admit it

Read my next post ....

Cheers, Doc

 

[Maarkhoor]

Islamic conquest in India was different than that of Persia. Islam in India was spread by sufis who were lovely people and quite peaceful. But the Caliphs of the first two Khilafah-Rashidun and Ummayuds, were fanatics and they fought anyone who would not accept Islam.

Lols....