Talk:Islam in India/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Do we feel any "SHYNESS" to put the name as "Cheraman Perumal" instead of putting Vague Names

My dear Muslims, Do we feel any inferiority to tell about our Great Ancient Dravidian "Chera King- Cheraman Perumal-and his people" in Kerala who showed a broad generosity to our "Ancestor Muslims" and to "Islam" in those intolerant era of racist "Aryans in North India" by talking for the "Islam" and by being the 1st "Indian King" to be a "Muslim" and by being the 1st Indian King who provided his place for building up a mosque in India even in the middle of so many resistants and humiliations against his decision in those times. As I have been a kodungalloor resident and have been a good "Muslim" , nowadays so many moves I see here from some selfish racist people that try to spread a wrong information about that "King". These people trying to spread that he was an "Aryan King" and was belonged to some castes invaded from North India. But according to historical evidences, these castes started to invade to South India only after his pilgrimage to "Mecca". But when these Aryan castes became rich, for their family dignity and to degrade the sovereignty of "Dravidian Royal Culture" ( which was later declined and was pushed down deliberately by these Aryan people after the pilgrimage of the king to "Mecca"). But these upper castes still not admitting "Islam". At the same time they would like to posses the dignity of other's sacrifice also. The problem is the name used also in the websites(as -"Rama Varma Kulasekhara"-) to tell about that "Chara King" which is confusing to the Surname "Varma", that is used by some other Aryan Castes. Actually according to the histirical evidences in the Mosque, This mosque was built by the king "Cheraman Perumal"-who was from an ancient Dravidian royal culture. And his successors are still lived here called "Ezhavar" with out losing their Majesty that much, and are still very co-operative to "Muslims. Now "Muslims" have gained our status in the world. But it was not like this in the ancient times. Then what I would like to ask is should we also co-operate with this historical manipulation just because of the "slave mentality to the Aryan race" which one is seen very commonly in the modern world. As a "Muslim" I can't help atleast informing our people about this misinformation providing to the world.At least we can provide a correct information in wikipedia just to avoid the misunderstanding amoung the world. Otherwise we can also stand blindly against it to get easily changed our ancestor from a "darkish one to a more whiter one" to become proud of it.I request your comments. I like Aryans . But I can't consider it as enough reason to change the history of my religion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Haji Moideen Kodungaloor (talk • contribs) 22:47, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

majority of indian muslims dont follow sufism

"Most likely Majority of the Muslims follow Sufi traditions known as Sufis" I have no idea which idiot has written this words on the article. To be clear sufism is a shrik and is considered as unislamic and for your kind information majority of muslims are against the ideologies practised by sufism. i have removed these words and please without knowing anything about islam please dont edit or add anything. "The Monasticism which they invented for themselves; We did not prescribe it for them." Qur'an 57:27. Muslims know what this means and i will be removing sufism from the article.

[[1]], [[2]], [[3]], allaahuakbar.net/sufism/index.htm

And one more thing, islam in india did not spread by sufism. Islam came to india during the lifetime of prophet Mohammed PBUH and sufism came to india during 13th century i.e nearly 550 years since islam in india was preached. So therefore i will be removing articles on sufism.

Mujeerkhan 2:00, 30 june 2006 (UTC)

Sufism = Shirk is a debate that has been ongoing in Islam for over a 1000 years now and so that statement that you have made is indeed debateable. Sufism = Monastism is also debateable, and indeed Sufism is of many many shades and no doubt among them are some that many will even find heretical. Regardless this is a debate for someplace else, the point is your statements are contentional. The 13th century was actually the peak of Sufism with people such as Rumi, Saadi and Attar not the birth period of Sufism. Most of the reknowned Sufis from that period actually hailed from areas that today form Afghanistan/ Eastern Iran or Western Pakistan, Data Jang Baksh is present in Lahore under the Ghaznavids in 1039 when Islamic rule was beginning to gain a foothold in India. While the first contact with Muslims did come in the time of Prophet it was only much much later that religion get established in Hind.

Sufism did not come to "India" in the 13th century they were there much earlier though in quite the numbers as after the mongol invasions of Islamic lands, after which they migrated towards "India". Kalabadhi (10th C, Bukhara), author of the Taaruf or even the infamous "Hallaj" is an example of Sufi prescene much earlier. Before coming to India they were responsible for a significant influence in the conversion of Turkish tribes, to Islam in Central Asia and came with them when they invaded India and have played a significant role in influencing conversions to Islam in India.The role tekkes have played in the religious life of the Turks under the Ottaman Empire will also testify to the influence they had. While Sufis may not be only medium or the exclusive reasons they were definitely an important medium especially in the Bengal for the spread of Islam, and islamic philosophy and religious concepts in the sub-continent are more heavily shaped by their ideas in comparision to that of Gulf Arab countries. They have also shaped Islamic conciousness across sub-sharan africa and south-east asia.

More to the point in terms of Wikipedia there is plenty of literature that demonstrates and is accepted in academia and therefore such information belongs in the Wiki Article as much as the Theory of Evolution until generally abandoned as an explanation. If you remove such references because you do not agree with it then it would be POV. However if you wish to refute this you are welcome to bring in alternative references and place them in the article as a competing/alternative Theory or historical account such as Creationism vs. Darwin. I will agree with you that the statement that Muslims follow Sufism is wrong, if it was even possible to follow sufism that would be wrong because do not adhere to any given order.

--Tigeroo 07:48, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

my first point was that majority of indian muslims dont follow sufism and the second point was that sufism was not a major cause of reverting people but due to sahaba and islamic invasion of india.I agree that sufism played a part in spread of islam but not to large extent.

Mujeerkhan 9:00, 1 july 2006 (UTC)

The problem with the Sahaba is that they never came to "India". Under Hazrat Umar there were a few naval raids as such but that was discountinued because it was too far and not mililtarily sound and more emphasis was placed on completing the takeover of the Sassanid Empire of the Persians where the Emperor had taken off to Khorasan, Herat after his initial defeats. Soon after his fall in Hazrat Usman's time there was the fitnah, at anyrate one of the first recorded successul expeditions was by Mohalib under the Omayyads and the Indus Valley and Multan region was only properly conquered by Mohammad bin Qasim after the 712 AD under the Omayyads that is 80 years after the Prophet. Even then within a few years it was only a far away outpost barely held while all the political action and intrigue was happenning in Iran, Khorasan and Afghanistan region as the Abbassids came to power. The Ismailis then moved in and they were the first real significant converters of people to Islam there till Sufis came with the Ghaznis. Somehow I don't think feel you'd want to call the Ismaili, sahaba since one of the reasons that Ghazni came was to fight the Ismaili in the challenge for the Khilafat between the Abbassids and Fatimids.

I will grant that there were small settlements in Sindh, Gujrat, Cochin and Ceylon etc related to trade routes but I am not sure those were the sahaba, plus the spread during that period is small. However if you have some other information let me know because as far as i know or can tell the only way the sahaba influenced the region was by the stories told of them by the sufis.

--Tigeroo 10:25, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

Malik Bin Deenar was one of the companians of Mohammed PBUH and a sahaba and he came to Kerala in 644 AD [4] much before the islamic invasion. Hope this helps.

Mujeerkhan 20:00, 2 july 2006 (UTC)

I am aware of the Cheruman story, and I have already mentioned that there were small trading colonies that and that they did influence the spread of Islam especially along the East African coast, in South - East Asia and parts of India. Similarly I am also aware of the influence of Sufis. Remember, Islam in India came not through just one medium, Sufis played a bigger part in it than those initial settlements, but they were not the whole story either but it would be equally wrong to say Sufis brought Islam to India as well. I would advise you stay away from simplifying stories such as Sufis, Sahaba, Caste or Force. They are all partially true sometimes and false at other times, but a part of a greater whole try adding immigration, syncretism, greed, love, culture, communities, indifference, time to the mix as well. Even those who did not convert were were significantly affected in beleifs and practices. Remeber India was a large place and many different people were involved over many generations, and that it is not just a story of Raja's and Sultans, and wars and treaties, Glory and humiliations, but at the bottom of it all ideas and normal everday people and their personal motivations and prejudices. --Tigeroo 12:41, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

I just wish to add something. I understand what you're saying...that most muslims don't follow sufism in India today, but sufism is a large in comparison in this section. But I think the length is justified, because sufism, although originating within outside of india, was one aspect of islam that both found a strong home in India, but also helped define and shape india culturally--the greatest indian poets and writers in subsequent years were sufi (such as Bullah Shah). I think its length is justified, because Indian Sufism was a section of Islam that that was wholly indian by its end. And was culturally important to Islam's influence in India--even if its numbers began a steady decline in later years. It's cultural influence in the indian subcontinent far outways its population--there isn't a day when I don't hear a new hindi song that isn't ripping off lyrics from Bullah Shah or some other sufi poet.

Regarding Population of muslims in india

There is a discussion on this page by the above name regarding some highly bloated figures of Muslims in India which have been shown (16.4%). This seems to have been corrected as per one of the persons visiting the page. However I can still see the wrong figures. Can the same person actually correct it properly please.

203.166.39.164 00:31, 16 January 2007 (UTC)SDutta

articles to be edited by indian muslims

Well I am sorry to say that only muslims should edit this page as its talking about islam and not about other relegions. Muslims dont edit hindus or hinduism on wiki and i have not seen any muslim name on the discussion form in the above wiki so why are non muslims trying to bother "islam in india". this article should be maintained by muslims. And finally dont edit or add articles which hampers the integrity of india,you know what i mean. This is a humble request and non muslims can also leave their opinion.

Naziakhannum 04:00, 18 june 2006 (UTC)

Hey Nazia..Wikipedia is the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit...nobody is stoping you or me to edit Hindus or Hinduism....and we are here to convey a NPOV... fact is fact... No bias.. we act here as Editors and not as members of our community...btw Im Muslim.. and you can help wikipedia by devloping this article ...itz big mess:) .. --Sartaj beary 19:21, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Anyone can edit. NPOV is what counts. Blnguyen | rant-line 02:02, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

I agree blnguyen completely. It is outright ludicrous to suggest that only muslims should edit this page. Writing an encyclopedia is about gathering facts. It is not about glorifying or abusing a certain community. Hence everyone should have the liberty of contributing to the compilation.

Muslims in present India

This discussion page is too hot, I have noticed a few things and would like to change it.I am not trying to create a hindi muslim conflict in this page but I have a few suggestions and recommendations

1. SIMI was an organisation which could have created voilence among the two communities and was based on the idealogies of Osama.
2. should add up the atrocities committed by the hindutva groups likeshiv sena, RSS etc as they are organisations which sponspor terrorism just like SIMI did.
3. i belive islam in india spread by peace and not by sword and its baseless that population decreased by 80 million ( were there so many poeple at that time, could have been the total population of india at that period).pls give a appropiate stats on population of that period to make this statement to be sensible.
4. should add facts that one of the issues in spread of islam was due to the fact of untouchabilty being implemented by the high caste hindus on the low caste hindus.
5. should add relationship between other relegions with islam(positive points only and if negative there might be a further clash between members).

It is high time that there is a need for diversity in india and common understanding and respect for other relegions but also keep in mind that relegion should not mix with politics..jai hind and zajakallah khair..and peace to everyone... Mujeerkhan 20:00, 17 june 2006 (UTC)

Go Ahead...Mujeerkhan I was trying to compile Hindu Muslim conflict, also article is in very bad shape make sure your article conveys WP:NPOV --Sartaj beary 18:41, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

Mujeerkhan, I am not sure what you are trying to say here? How can one compare RSS and SIMI? 65.242.175.35 01:37, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

haphazard.. ;)

Hey all ... I think order Content of article is haphazard, Jus have to put them back in order... any sugestions??? History of islam in india should come after Arival of Islam then Sufism and spread of Islam --Sartaj beary 01:22, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

---

This whole sections needs a complete overhaul. The same goes for the article actually. I am going to make edits over the next few days and try and improve the article. Kindly do not make this a Hindu v/s Muslim conflict. If you are educated enough to know how to co-author an encyclopedia, you are savvy enough to be tolerant and secular.Sbohra 13:03, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree with Sbohra. This article reflects India's deep rooted communal hatred. Usernames of some Wikipedians tells their feelings towards fellow Indians. This article is a perfect example of how to rewrite history. I hope Indian Muslims will not start vandalise articles on Hindus but they will fight back to make justified correction in articles in Indian Muslims.

It's better to sign your statement in discussions. Holy Ganga 21:21, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Integrity of source

Can materials found on fundamentalist websites be used as proof for writing crap in Wikipedia? Sounds cool. Soon, people would be searching Mein Kampf now to rewrite history. What a Shame!

I have just observed that you are spreding same crap on other Indian Islam related articles also. ANWAR, Why don't you present your point based on reputed source? -Holy Ganga 22:54, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

Islamophobic bent

This article was clearly written by an Islamophobe. He/she claims, without source, 15 million Bangladeshis are illegal immigrants in India. FYI, that's almost 10% of Bangladesh population! Get some common sense lest you become a joke! Anwar saadat 06:11, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

Anwar, don't talk nonsense here. If you don't agree, then present your objection based on reputed sources. Just talking in the air and spreading propaganda will not work on wikipedia.

BBC -- India says it is planning to deport an estimated 20 million Bangladeshi illegal immigrants.

The Home Ministry in Delhi said the illegal immigrant issue had to be tackled with utmost urgency.

In a statement issued after a day-long security meeting of top Indian officials, the ministry said: The presence of a large number of illegal foreign immigrants, particularly from Bangladesh, poses a serious threat to internal security.

India plans migrant crackdown -Holy Ganga 22:49, 14 February 2006 (UTC)

President's name

I changed the President of India's name to Dr A.P.J.Abdul Kalam. Somebody got really peeved and deleted it. :-( Anwar saadat 06:11, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

While he was born a Muslim, In Abdul Kalam own self written book, he declares himself to be an Atheist, can he really be considered Muslim when he has openly declared by his own words that he is an avid Atheist and shuns any religious hierchy! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.63.220.145 (talk) 19:47, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

External link

Kat asked me to comment here about whether the external link was appropriate. It's not ideal but I'd say it's okay. It isn't a blog or a personal website, and some of the writers have professional qualifications. I didn't read that much of it though. Was there a particular concern about it? SlimVirgin ^(talk) 02:24, August 25, 2005 (UTC)

Attention Notice

I feel this article needs broad modernization to properly discuss history, relations with other religious communities and communal conflicts. User: Rama's Arrow, November 23, 2005

Needs major changes

This article has so much incorrect information that it misleads rather than disseminating information. Premji's full name is Azim Hashim and not Hafiz (which means one who knows Quran by heart). Farhan is listed an an actor, Gulzar is listed as Muslim (hello!) and Faiz is listed in the post-independence Muslim category. Faiz was Punjabi (for God's sake) and a Pakistani.

His name was Faiz Ahmed Faiz, if you like the name Faiz please borrow it like you have done so earlier manytimes.

Who is Zoya Hasan? What is the criteria for listing someone as an achiever on this website?

Request interested and knowledgeable people to pool their efforts to help improve this page.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.91.193.6 (talk) 07:44, 3 February 2006‎ (UTC)

NPOV, Attention

There are too many opinionated sentences regarding sensitive information posted here. A lot of copyediting, wikification and the use of encyclopedic language is necessary. Rama's Arrow 22:37, 7 February 2006 (UTC)

What about Long Islamic Rule in India, and associated destruction, which many historians, philosphers have described as greatest deastruction in History? Indian Muslims should not shy away from this, as present day folks have nothing to do with that. It must be condemned by every India, and Muslims should take a lead in that. --Bhaskar Chatterjee

Mr.chaterjee you opinion is wrong about destruction of india by muslim rule, if it was so you would not have born to write this rubbish,because your forefather were kept alive with honour and dignity by muslim rule.You want all indian muslim to condemn the glorious and properous muslim rule of 900 years ? it was the very same muslim rule which united the india which you see in it's present day map.

Actually it was Britain that gave modern India its present map. Except for the bits that Muslim paranoia insisted on breaking away - so Muslims contributed to the present state of Indian disunity. Honor and dignity? Humiliation and shame more like it. Lao Wai 08:31, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Actually Muslims brought a lot more than humiliation, i guess your knowledge about history is very limited. Muslims used the knowledge of Persian, Roman, Greek, Indus Valley Civilization, made the most advanced civilization by taking the best of all. The modern so-called 'western' civilization is inreality is based on the civilization which the Muslims made. Islamic Architectures in India can be seen everywhere, Muslims contributed in Mathematics, Philosophy, Geography , Physics, Chemistry, Medicine department, Universities and many many more, and spread the knowledge in all over its conquered areas (which stretched from India to entire middle-east to north africa to Spain, Portugal, Western France.. see Ummayad Caliphate Empire). However, I do agree that a lot of Hindus were massacred under the Muslim regime, and a lot of muslims condemn it, but that doesn't mean all the muslims did was just killing. Because if that was the case, then today how come over 75% of Indians are still Hindus. And, i dont think the British/Europeans are in any position to say that Muslim caused greatest destruction. What the Europeans did to Native Americans can never be compared to any other crimes. America was found in June 1492 by Columbus. Europeans started conquering, killing, abusing Native Americans from early 1500 and then by 1700, in just 200 years, entire Native Americans (Anglo-Indians) were wiped out of this Huge Continent, and their culture, origin were all replaced by European culture. Today America is mostly a place of descendants of Europeans and India is still a place of Native Indians. The ancestors of Indian Muslims can be traced back to the native of the land, they are not Arabs. Please, do a little bit of history reading before jumping directly to conclusion, Salam/Peace, Watch this documentary by BBC to get a glimpse. Islam in Europe [5] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.109.24.246 (talk) 06:49, 6 March 2007 (UTC).

Connotations to Islamic Insecurity?

-This article seems to propogate the fact that Muslims in India are, by majority, a poor and degenerate lot who long for the old days of Muslim power, with a few notable modern successes. It seems to disregard the Indian background of Pakistani Muslims (of which I am one) and show that Indian Muslims (Muhajirs) helped Pakistan grow (not Pakistanis), suggesting that Indians were a separate entity and that Pakistanis were already separate to begin with. Something needs to be done about the accuracy of this article. -User: Afghan Historian

Can you please pinpoint your concerns. --Spartian 18:50, 1 March 2006 (UTC)

The idea that Pakistanis were separate to begin with can be found in Ancient Pakistan --Hydman 14:35, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

I honestly think that Pakistanis should stay away from this article, as Indian Muslims have a better stance towards this topic. What is ancient Pakistan? There is no ancient Pakistan since Pakistan itself is 60 years old. In Ancient India, during the Indus Valley Civilization, there was no Islam, so to suggest that Pakistan was a seperate entity to begin with is completely baseless and should not at all be included in this article. -- LoopyCootiebrain} 16:43 , June 21 2010

Accusations of Atrocities Against Muslims

I have removed the entire section, while it was long it was: A) Factually innacurate (calling BJP, RSS fascist like Nazis) B) Definitely a POV (telling one side of the story only) C) Wikipedia is Not a place to air your political views D) Completely unsourced and parts were OR E) To have a section such as this is like having a section on Accusations Against Muslims only it is anti-Hindu. Way too fiery a topic to have on an encyclopaedia. Please reply here before reverting me. Nobleeagle (Talk) 01:55, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

ehh .. I understand the new editor (jus couple of weeks old) has been adding own POV, if you ask me it is infact a Muslim Point of view in India about BJP, RSS, VHP, Bajrang dal. That section should be allowed with proper sourceing. I left msg at editors talk page..

Also this article is pretty messed up! Needs section about Hindu Muslim relations, Roits,will fix it soon in some time.. --Sartaj beary 02:13, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

My dear friend Nobleeagle article mention only of Sang Parivar.. being anti sangh pariwar is not Anti Hindu... --Sartaj beary 04:10, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Recent reverts

Indianmuslim and Naziakhannum - this clearly isnt vandalism on either of your parts but differences in opinion/ NPOV guidelines. Recommend instead of reversions, as I myself accidentily did thinking it was vandalism, you discuss the section of Attrocities on Muslims here. The section, before deletion, and the article in a broader sense, are clearly in need of cleaning up. --Gregorof 02:25, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Atrocities on indian muslims

I have been editing and writing this article several times and some people just delete it without any NPOV AND THE ISSUE REGARDING VANDALISAM . I have put the article here and if anyone wants to object it, then pls dont hesitate. I have taken information from newspapers on the web and amnesty international. however there are 2 intances which i have taken from other wiki sources and i will modify them. I will be putting this in 2 days time. Anyways this is wikipedia and we have right to do whatever we want and follow NPOV.

Shiv Sena which is a political party has been accused of collusion in programmes aimed at Muslims in Bombay since the 1980s, and is considered by many to be little better than a Fascist organisation(similar to the nazi party [6] , [7]. Bal Thackeray most recently courted controversy by suggesting that Indian Muslims be deprived of the franchise, and denied the right to vote in local and national elections and the party has long history of voilence and hatred for the minority communities.[8]

The RSS ( the organisation which undertook the assisination of Mahatma Gandhi) was banned in India at least twice, during the 1975 Emergency, and after the 1992 Babri Masjid demolition [9]. The bans were subsequently lifted after the Supreme Court of India declined to uphold the bans. They want only hinduism to prevail in india and wants all minority communities to convert to hinduism.

Shockwaves of fear and anger swept through India's Hindu and Muslim communities. Over 20,000 Hindus and Muslims were killed across the country in the resulting sectarian violence. Many VHP activists were accused of having organised mobs and perpetrated vicious attacks upon innocent Muslims, and likewise for reactionary Muslim groups. The Liberhan Commission headed by Justice Liberhan was constituted to investigate the whole episode. A large number of VHP workers testified before the commission. The incident at the Babri Masjid came as a shock to many Indians, who had known the VHP as a peaceful organization. In its defense, many VHP supporters have claimed that the VHP simply represented the increasing alienation and anger of India's Hindu community in response to marginalization by the government in favor of Muslim and Christian minorities. As far as these sympathizers were concerned, the Babri Masjid demolition was an inevitable consequence of Hindu disaffection. [10].

The Human Right's Watch established facts that VHP and Bajrang Dalwere the ultimate culprits in the hate crimes that followed the several massacres across the country. During Ghodra incident More than 2000 muslims, mostly women and children were violently killed by agents of Hindutva and the state government took no measure to stop the voilence and many politicians were seen to participate.</ref> Amnesty international on gujarat</ref>.

Majority of Indians are against on the idealogies of VHP, Bajrang Dal, RSS and Shiv Sena and cause a threat to a india's future and as a secural country.

Naziakhannum 14:12, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

You will Have to reword the entire section and balance it fairly, it sudnt convey the poit of View... I guess instead of Section header Atrocities on indian muslims we can have Sangh Parivar and Muslims. --Sartaj beary 04:14, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

It is in NO way NPOV. I suggest a thorough rewording. Disputed statements include:

and is considered by many to be little better than a Fascist organisation(similar to the nazi party Not many...few...and nowhere near the Nazi Party.

The RSS ( the organisation which undertook the assisination of Mahatma Gandhi) was banned in India at least twice, during the 1975 Emergency, and after the 1992 Babri Masjid demolition [11]. Is this about Islam in India or the RSS's past history?

They want only hinduism to prevail in india and wants all minority communities to convert to hinduism. POV, the ideology of Hindutva supports ALL Dharmic religions and supports all Muslims that truly accept India.

The entire next paragraph about 20,000 deaths and shockwaves of fear is unsourced POV.

Majority of Indians are against on the idealogies of VHP, Bajrang Dal, RSS and Shiv Sena and cause a threat to a india's future and as a secural country. Majority of Muslims...probably...Indians? No. The BJP were in power a few years back, indicates that a majority supported them doesn't it?

Please conform to WP:NPOV. The section, if it were ever to be added, needs a re-titling such as Hindu-Muslim relations and will need to include terrorism etc. Nobleeagle (Talk) 05:37, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Hindu Muslim Conflict

Two anon ips have been deleteing the section from Hindu Muslim conflict, please dont remove the section from the article, discuss here if there is a issue. --Sartaj beary 23:50, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

This section is biased and probably written by some anti-Muslim fanatic..

I propose the following:

In the first three decades after the India gained independence, Hindu-Muslim conflict was a result of bitterness caused by the bloody partition in 1947 and its subsequent fallout.

But this changed radically since 1980's with the rise of Hindu fundamentalist political outfits such as Jan Sangha and Shiv Sena and in late 1980's creation of hardline Bhartiya Janta Party (BJP). BJP for its electoral gains used militia like fundamentalist outfits such as Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP), Rashtriya Swyamsewak Sangh (RSS), Bajrang Dal (BD) and others. These outfits carried out the demolition of historic 16th century Babri Mosque (which they claim was built upon the ruins of a temple) resulting in large scale Hindu-Muslim riots that led to the killings of thousands accross India.

These outfits which proclaim themselves as Hindu nationalists have contributed immensely to the environment of hatred between the two communities and have been held responsible by many judicial committees for a number of riots that have taken place in India since 1980. The most recent being the genocide of Muslims in Gujarat province in 2002 in which between 2000-5000 Muslims were killed.

A study carried out by a B. Rajeshwari, a research scholar of elite Jawaharlal Nehru University (JNU) in 2004 provides an overview of major riots and their causes along with official death toll (which is much less than pointed out by NGOs and international human rights groups).[Communal Riots in India]

The problems with Pakistan and Muslim majority province of Jammu & Kashmir and the resulting attacks of Kashmiri outfits on Indian cities are other reasons Hindu-Muslim conflict. --User: Khan December 28, 2006 (UTC)

Your edits seem pretty biased too. All topics have been mentioned in the section and Reliable Sources provided. Do you have any? Rumpelstiltskin223 23:13, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I have provided the research paper of a non-Muslim research scholar as a link which tells the same thing about the role of right-wing outfits. What other sources you need, I can put many from international organizations, NGOs and even the reports of western governments who investigated the deaths of their citizens in riots in India. --User: Khan December 28, 2006 (UTC)

The thing is that NGO's etc are also partisan groups with communal biases of their own. We need to rely on completely non-partisan sources like news articles etc to write this section. There must be no anti-Muslim bias. You are correct in that assertion. However, you are trying to counter bias by introducing anti-Hindu bias into it. This only propagates the hatred and should be avoided at all costs. Besides, all your points are mentioned in the section and links to the relevant articles provided so I do not see the problem. Rumpelstiltskin223 23:28, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Whatever that is written there accuses that it is Muslims who attacked and completely ignore the role of Hindu right-wing even in cases where it was Muslims who were the worst sufferers of violence. Putting links of selective news reports is not a proper manner either. Well what do you have to say about this research study report that is written by a Hindu scholar, how can that be biased against Hindus? and also how can NGOs run by Hindus be biased against Hindus? --User: Khan December 28, 2006 (UTC)

Because 90% os anti-Hindus are people claiming to be Hindus (but aren't actually, are communal forces trying to radicalize Hindus and Muslims against each other). You cannot actually establish the religiosity of any of your sources

per WP:Verifiability, and their religiosity is irrelevant in the face of their obvious partisanship . The actions of the Hindu right wing has not been ignored and the actions of RSS, Shiv Sena etc laid out properly and with due prominence. You are trying to hide the fact that some radical Muslim orgs distort the teachings of Islam and are also responsible for violence against Hindus. This is not acceptable per WP:NPOV. Also, by your logic Irshad Manji , Ibn Warraq and Wafa Sultan cannot be "anti-Muslim" because they are "Muslim Scholars". Nonetheless, many Muslims say that the are anti-Muslim. How about them? it is possible to be both a Muslim and an anti-Muslim. Just in the same way, it is possible to be both a Hindu and an anti-Hindu. see my point? Rumpelstiltskin223 23:55, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I am not trying shield anyone and I have no problem with the mention of SIMI, but its really interesting how Muslims have been accused, such as accusing Muslims for attacking Hindus after Babri Mosque demolition, when in reality it was a result of communal atmosphere where both communities were against each other. Why is there no mention of killings of more than 1000 Muslims in Bombay by Shiv Sena cadres in 1992-93 and also killings of 150 Muslims in Bhopal in 1992 post Babri-Mosque riots. --User: Khan December 28, 2006 (UTC)

Please look at the section carefully. Both the 1992 anti-Muslim riots as well as the 2002 Gujarat riots have been mentioned and attributed. As for Bhopal, if you want to bring up every communal incident here, then one can also put up the Malegaon bombings perpetrated by SIMI, and the Coimbatore bombings perpetrated by radical Muslims. One can also talk about Zakir Naik and Ahmed Deedat, both of whom are spreading hate against Hindus and Christians. What we want here are a broad cross-section of the communal conflict. To that end, the 1992 bombings, as well as the 1992 riots, the highly significant Babri Mosque demolition, the 2002 Gujarat violence, as well as the 2006 Mumbai blasts, all have been mentioned. Where is the accusatory tone you claim? You must understand that the subject of this article are Muslims, not Hindus or Hindu nationalists. The actions of Hindu Nationalists are discussed in detail in their respective articles and summarized here. One must follow wikipedia article guidelines in this case. I do not see an accusatory tone at all. In fact, such tones are manifested by wikipedia Words to avoid and I do not see a preponderance of that here. I will look in detail now and try to assail your concerns if I see any merit to them upon a second inspection.Rumpelstiltskin223 00:39, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Population of muslims in india

From the time of independence of india to the current day the indian leaders have said that the muslim population of india is greater than that of pakistan. we should remember that bangladesh was also a part of pakistn before 1971.and in that year the population of west pakistan (that is the current day pakistan) was 80 milliom and that of east pakistan (that is the current day bangladesh) was 90 million if we add that we get apopulation of 170 million in 1971 of which 90% were muslim or 153 million . so how many muslims are today in india ?

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Islam_by_country" —Preceding unsigned comment added by Madman 0014 (talk • contribs)

At least, the population figure for East Pakistan (1971) stated above is *wrong*. The population of independent Bangladesh, according to the 1974 census, was 71.3 million [12]. Even considering the large number of Bengalis (between 1-1.5 million) (both Hindu and Muslims) killed by Pakistan Army in Bangladesh Liberation War of 1971, the number was never above 75 million at that time. The population of west pakistan was lower than this, as Bengalis were 56% of the population of united pakistan. --Ragib 20:49, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

i was reading an interview of the imam of fatih pur mosque delhi imam mufti muhammad mukkaram nakshbandi. In the interview he said that the population of muslims in india was at least more than 300 million.(you can find the interview at http://jang.com.pk/jang/aug2006-daily/12-08-2006/dunia.htm)

The page cites the 2001 government census (http://www.censusindia.net/religiondata/index.html) as its source for the religious composition, yet posts figures that differ from those provided by the census. For example, the census says that Hindus and Muslims make up 80.5% and 13.4% of the population respectively yet this page states 77.7% and 16.2% while still citing the census as its source. What is the real source for these new figures and why are they considered more valid than the 2001 government census figures?

I corrected the figures. ArsalanKhan 05:20, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

The Madman has changed the percentage and population of Muslims in India without giving any credible reference. The census of India in 2001 reported Muslim constitute 13.4% of the population and number 138 million. Reference http://www.censusindia.net/religiondata/Summary%20Muslims.pdf. The Muslims constitute over 97% of Pakistan's population of 166 million people and number 161 million and are the second largest Muslim population in the world.

ArsalanKhan 13:34, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

according to this report the indian muslim population is 30.38% [13]7day 16:23, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

They must have got their numbers mixed up. All other sources say 13-15%.Hkelkar 19:24, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

i think this source should be their on the page since it does not come from islamic sitesMadman 0014 08:20, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

I doubt the validity of the 20-25% figure. The Census of India is a very reliable source of information. To contradict the figure you need facts, not opinions. All we have there as the source of information is one individual's opinion. I have removed the estimate. If it is a widely held belief, then I guess you will have to show that its shared by more that just one individual. Atif(24.60.208.43 16:55, 18 August 2007 (UTC))

Eaxctly, I agree with Atif, census of India provides very reliable figures. Shahi Imam will say anything he wants to get seats in the parliament. In fact the population of muslims in the entire sub continent including bangladesh and pakistan is close to 150 (India) + 90% of 150 (i.e) 135 (Bangladesh) + 160 (pakistan) million in 2007 = 445 million. So their percentage in the entire sub continent is 445 / (1120+150+165) = 31 percent. So I guess Imam bukhari still sees India as United India of India +Pakistan + Bangladesh. But as far Union of India now, the numbers are pretty accurate as provided by census India. In fact in Assam and Border areas of Bangladesh, the census even includes some illegal immigrants who obtained fake voter id cards. So most of these specualtions are baseless. Regarding illegals, more than 60% of them are Hindus who fled in 1971, late 90's after babri and many during khaled zia regime, when we hindus in india openly offered hindu refugees from bangladesh under BJP regime. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Murali83 (talk • contribs) 10:46, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Artocracy Committed by Muslim Rulers

I have some references about the topic which I personally can't veryfy. All these are references from Muslim historians. Can someone verify this and include in the article?

Name Of The Book: Hindustan Islami Ahad mein (India under Islamic Rule)
Name Of The Historian: Maulana Abdul Hai.
About The Author: He is a highly respected scholar and taken as an authority on Islamic history. Because of his scholarship and his services to Islam, Maulana Abdul Hai was appointed as the Rector of the Darul Nadwa Ullum Nadwatal-Ulama. He continued in that post till his death in February 1923.
The following section is taken from the chapter Hindustan ki Masjidein (The mosques of India) of the above mentioned book. Here we can see a brief description of few important mosques in India and how each one of them was built upon plundered Hindu temples.
1. Qawwat al-Islam Mosque at Delhi:
"According to my findings the first mosque of Delhi is Qubbat al-Islam or Quwwat al_Islam which, Qutubud-Din Aibak constructed in H. 587 after demolishing the hindu temple built by Prithvi Raj and leaving certain parts of the temple outside the mosque proper; and when he returned from Ghazni in H. 592 he started building, under orders from Shihabud -Din Ghori, a huge mosque of inimitable red stones, and certain parts of the temple were included in the mosque..."

2. The Mosque at Jaunpur:
"This was built by Sultan Ibrahim Sharqi with chiselled stones. Originally it was a Hindu temple after demolishing which he constructed the mosque. It is known as the Atala Masjid.."

3. The Mosque at Qanauj:
"It is well known that this mosque was built on the foundations of some Hindu temple that stood here. The mosque was built by Ibrahim Sharqi in H. 809 as is recorded in Gharbat Nigar"

4. Jami Masjid at Etwah:
"This mosque stands on the bank of the Jamuna at Etawah. There was a Hindu temple at this place, on the site of which this mosque was constructed.."

5. Babri Masjid at Ayodhya:
"This mosque was constructed by Babar at Ayodhya which Hindus call the birth place of Ramchandraji... Sita had a temple here in which she lived and cooked for her husband. On that very site Babar constructed this mosque in H.963 "

6. Mosque at Benaras:
"Mosque of Benares was built by Alamgir Aurangzeb on the site of Bisheshwar Temple. That temple was very tall and held as holy among Hindus. On this very site and with those very stones he constructed a lofty mosque, and its ancient stones were rearranged after being embedded in the walls of the mosque. It is one of the renowned mosques of Hindustan."

7. Mosque at Mathura:
"Alamgir Aurangzeb built a mosque at Mathura. This mosque was built on site of the Govind Dev Temple which was very strong and beautiful as well as exquisite.."

Name Of The Book: Futuhu'l-Buldan
Name Of The Historian: Ahmed bin Yahya bin Jabir
About The Author: This author is also known as al- Biladhuri . He lived at the court of Khalifa Al- Mutawakkal (AD 847-861) and died in AD 893. His history is one of the major Arab chronicles.
The Muslim Rulers He Wrote About:
1. Ibn Samurah (AD 653)
Siestan (Iran)
"On reaching Dawar, he surrounded the enemy in the mountain of Zur, where there was a famous Hindu temple." "...Their idol of Zur was of gold, and its eyes were two rubies. The zealous Musalmans cut off its hands and plucked out its eyes, and then remarked to the Marzaban how powerless was his idol..."

2. Qutaibah bin Muslim al-Bahili (AD 705-715)
Samarkand (Farghana)
"Other authorities say that Kutaibah granted peace for 700,000 dirhams and entertainment for the Moslems for three days. The terms of surrender included also the houses of the idols and the fire temples. The idols were thrown out, plundered of their ornaments and burned..."

3. Mohammed bin Qasim (AD 712-715)
Debal (Sindh)
"...The town was thus taken by assault, and the carnage endured for three days. The governor of the town, appointed by Dahir, fled and the priests of the temple were massacred. Muhammad marked a place for the Musalmans to dwell in, built a mosque, and left 4,000 Musalmans to garrison the place..." "...'Ambissa son of Ishak Az Zabbi, the governor of Sindh, in the Khilafat of Mu'tasim billah knocked down the upper part of the minaret of the temple and converted it into a prison..."

Multan (Punjab)
"...He then crossed the Biyas, and went towards Multan...Muhammad destroyed the water-course; upon which the inhabitants, oppressed with thirst, surrendered at discretion. He massacred the men capable of bearing arms, but the children were taken captive, as well as ministers of the temple, to the number of 6,000. The Musalmans found there much gold in a chamber ten cubits long by eight broad..."

4. Hasham bin 'Amru al-Taghlabi
Khandahar (Maharashtra)
"He then went to Khandahar in boats and conquered it. He destroyed the Budd (idol) there, and built in its place a mosque."

Name Of The Book: Tarikh-i-Tabari
Name Of The Historian: Abu Ja'far Muhammad bin Jarir at-Tabari
About The Author: This author is considered to be the foremost historian of Islam. The above mentioned book written by him is regarded as the mother of histories.
The Muslim Rulers He Wrote About:
1. Qutaibah bin Muslim al-Bahili (AD 705-715)
Beykund (Khurasan)
"The ultimate capture of Beykund (in AD 706) rewarded him with an incalculable booty; even more than had hitherto fallen into the hands of the Mohammedans by the conquest of the entire province of Khorassaun; and the unfortunate merchants of the town, having been absent on a trading excursion while their country was assailed by the enemy, and finding their habitations desolate on their return contributed further to enrich the invaders, by the ransom which they paid for the recovery of their wives and children. The oranments alone, of which these women had been plundered, being melted down, produce, in gold, 150,000 meskals; of a dram and a half each. Among the articles of the booty, is also described an image of gold, of 50,000 meskals, of which the eyes were two pearls, the exquisite beauty and magnitude of which excited the surprise and admiration of Kateibah. They were transmitted by him, with a fifth of the spoil to Hejauje, together with a request that he might be permitted to distribute, to the troops, the arms which had been found in the palace in great profusion."

Samarkand (Farghana)
"A breach was, however, at last effected in the walls of the city in AD 712 by the warlike machines of Kateibah ; and some of the most daring of its defenders having fallen by the skill of his archers, the besieged demanded a cessation of arms to the following day, when they promised to capitulate. The request was acceded to the Kateibah; and a treaty was the next day accordingly concluded between him and the prince of Samarkand, by which the latter engaged for the annual payment of ten million of dhirems, and a supply of three thousand slaves; of whom it was particularly stipulated, that none should either be in a state of infancy, or ineffective from old age and debility. He further contracted that the ministers of his religion should be expelled from their temples and their idols destroyed and burnt; that Kateibah should be allowed to establish a mosque in the place of the principal temple...."
"...Kateibah accordingly set set fire to the whole collection with his own hands; it was soon consumed to ashes, and 50,000 meskals of gold and silver, collected from the nails which had been used in the workmanship of the images."

2.Yaqub bin Laith (AD 870-871)
Balkh and Kabul (Afghanistan)
"He took Bamian, which he probably reached by way of Herat, and then marched on Balkh where he ruined (the temple) Naushad. On his way back from Balkh he attacked Kabul..."
"Starting from Panjhir, the place he is known to have visited, he must have passed through the capital city of the Hindu Sahis to rob the sacred temple -- the reputed place of coronation of the Sahi rulers -- of its sculptural wealth..."
"The exact details of the spoil collected from Kabul valley are lacking. The Tarikh [-i-Sistan] records 50 idols of gold and silver and Mas'udi mentions elephants. The wonder excited in Baghdad by baghdad by elephants and pagan idols forwarded to the Caliph by Ya'qub also speaks for their high value."
Name Of The Book: Tarikhu'l-Hind
Name Of The Historian: Abu Rihan Muhammad bin Ahmad al-Biruni al-Khwarizmi.
About The Author: This author spent 40 years in India during the reign of Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni (AD 997 - 1030). His history treats of the literature and learning of the Hindus at the commencement of the 11th century.
The Muslim Rulers He Wrote About:
1. Jalam ibn Shaiban (9th century AD)
Multan (Punjab)
"A famous idol of theirs was that of Multan, dedicated to the sun, and therefore called Aditya. It was of wood and covered with red Cordovan leather; in its two eyes were two red rubies. It is said to have been made in the last Kritayuga .....When Muhammad Ibn Alkasim Ibn Almunaibh conquered Multan, he inquired how the town had become so very flourishing and so many treasures had there been accumulated, and then he found out that this idol was the cause, for there came pilgrims from all sides to visit it. Therefore he thought it best to have the idol where it was, but he hung a piece of cow's flesh on its neck by way of mockery. On the same place a mosque was built. When the Karmatians occupied Multan, Jalam Ibn Shaiban, the usurper, broke the idol into pieces and killed its priests..."

2. Sultan Mahmud of Gazni (AD 997-1030)
Thanesar (Haryana)
"The city of Taneshar is highly venerated by Hindus. The idol of that place is called Cakrasvamin, i.e. the owner of the cakra, a weapon which we have already described. It is of bronze, and is nearly the size of a man. It is now lying in the hippodrome in Ghazna, together with the Lord of Somnath, which is a representation of the penis of the Mahadeva, called Linga."

Somnath (Gujrat)
"The linga he raised was the stone of Somnath, for soma means the moon and natan means master, so that the whole word means master of the moon. The image was destroyed by the Prince Mahmud, may God be merciful to him! --AH 416. He ordered the upper part to be broken and the remainder to be transported to his residence, Ghaznin, with all its coverings and trappings of gold, jewels, and embroided garments. Part of it has been thrown into the hippodrome of the town, together with Cakrasvamin , an idol of bronze, that had been brought from Taneshar. Another part of the idol from Somnath lies before the door of the mosque of Ghaznin, on which people rub their feet to clean them from dirt and wet."

Name Of The Book: Kitabu'l-Yamini
Name Of The Historian: Abu Nasr Muhammad ibn Muhammad al Jabbaru'l-Utbi.
About The Author: This author's work comprises the whole of the reign of Subuktigin and that of Sultan Mahmud down to the year AD 1020.
The Muslim Rulers He Wrote About:
1. Amir Sbuktigin Of Ghazni
Lamghan (Afghanistan)
"The Amir marched out towards Lamghan, which is a city celebrated for its great strength and abounding wealth. He conquered it and set fire to the places in its vicinity which were inhabited by infidels, and demolishing idol temples, he established Islam in them. He marched and captured other cities and killed the polluted wretches, destroying the idolaters and gratifying the Musulmans."

2. Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni (AD 997-1030)
Narain (Rajasthan)
"The Sultan again resolved on an expedition to Hind, and marched towards Narain, urging his horses and moving over ground, hard and soft, until he came to the middle of Hind, where he reduced chiefs, who, up to that time obeyed no master, overturned their idols, put to the sword the vagabonds of that country, and with delay and circumspection proceeded to accomplish his design..."

Nardin (Punjab)
"After the Sultan had purified Hind from idolatry, and raised mosques therein, he determined to invade the capital of Hind to punish those who kept idols and would not acknowledge the unity of God...He marched with a large army in the year AH 404 (AD 1013) during a dark night..."
"A stone was found there in the temple of the great Budda on which an inscription was written purporting that the temple had been founded 50,000 years ago. The Sultan was surprised at the ignorance of these people, because those who believe in the true faith represent that only seven hundred years have elapsed since the creation of the world, and the signs of resurrection are even now approaching . The Sultan asked his wise men the meaning of this inscription and they all concurred in saying that it was false, and no faith was to be put in the evidence of a stone."

Thanesar (Haryana)
"The chief of Tanesar was...obstinate in his infidelity and denial of God. So the Sultan marched against him with his valiant warriors, for the purpose of planting the standards of Islam and extirpating idolatry.."
"The blood of the infidels flowed so copiously, that the stream was discoloured, not withstanding its purity, and people were unable to drink it...The victory gained by God's grace, who has established Islam for ever as the best religions, notwithstanding that idolaters revolt against it...Praise be to God, the protector of the world, for the honour he bestows upon Islam and Musulmans."

Mathura (Uttar Pradesh)
"The Sultan then departed from the environs of the city, in which was a temple of the Hindus. The name of this place was Mahartul Hind... On both sides of the city there were a thousand houses, to which idol temples were attached, all strengthened from top to bottom by rivets of iron, and all made of masonry work..."
"In the middle of the city there was a temple larger and firmer than the rest, which can neither be described nor painted. The Sultan thus wrote respecting it: --'If any should wish to construct a building equal to this, he would not be able to do it without expending an 100,000,000 red dinars, and it would occupy 200 years even though the most experience and able workmen were employed'... The Sultan gave orders that all temples should be burnt with naptha and fire, and levelled with the ground."

Kanauj (Uttar Pradesh)
"In Kanauj there were nearly 10,000 temples, which the idolaters falsely and absurdly represented to have been founded by their ancestors two or three hundred thousand years ago...Many of the inhabitants of the place fled and were scattered abroad like so many wretched widows and orphans, from the fear which oppressed them, in consequence of witnessing the fate of their deaf and dumb idols. Many of them thus effected their escape, and those who did not fly were put to death."

Name Of The Book: Diwan-i-Salman
Name Of The Historian: Khawajah Masud bin Sa'd bin Salman
About The Author: Khawajah Masud bin Sa'd bin Salman was a poet. He wrote poems in praise of the Ghaznavid Sultans- Masu'd, Ibrahim and Bahram Shah. He died sometime between AD 1126 and 1131.
The Muslim Rulers He Wrote About:
1. Sultan Abu'l Muzaffar Ibrahim (AD 1059-1099)
"As power and the strength of a lion was bestowed upon Ibrahim by the Almighty, he made over to him the well-populated country of Hindustan and gave him 40,000 valiant horsemen to take the country, in which there were more than 1000 rais...The army of the king destroyed at one time a thousand temples of idols, which had each been built for more than a thousand years. How can I describe the victories of the King..."
Jalandhar (Punjab)
"The narrative of any battles eclipses the stories of Rustam and Isfandiyar...By morning meal, not one soldier, not one Brahmin remained unkilled or uncaptured. Their heads were levelled with the ground with falming fire..Thou has secured the victory to the country and to religion, for amongst the Hindus this achievement will be remembered till the day of resurrection."

Malwa (Madhya Pradesh)
"..On this journey, the army detsroyed a thousand idol-temples and thy elephants trampled over more than a hundred strongholds. Thou didst march thy army to Ujjan; .. The lip of infidelity became dry through fear of thee, the eye of plural-worship became blind.."

Name Of The Book: Chach-Namah
Name Of The Historian: Mohammed Al bin Hamid bin Abu Bakr Kufi
About The Author: The Persian history was translated from arabic by the above mentioned author in the time of Nasiruddin Qabacha , a slave of Mohammed Ghori.
The Muslim Rulers He Wrote About:
1. Mohammed bin Qasim (AD 712-715)
Siwistan and Sisam (Sindh)
Mohammed bin Qasem wrote to al-Hajjaj, the governor of Iraq:
"The forts of Siwistan and Sism have been already taken. The nephew of Dahir, his warriors and principla officers have been despatched, and infidels converted to Islam or destroyed. Instead of idol temples, mosques and other places of worship have been built, pulpits have been erected, the Khutba is read, the call to prayers is raised so that devotions are performed at sacred hours."

Multan (Punjab)
.."Mohammed Qasem arose and with his counsellors, guards and attendants, went to the temple. He saw there an idol made of gold. and its two eye were bright red rubies. "..Muhammed Qasem ordered the idol to be taken up. Two hundred and thirty "mans" of gold were brought to the treasury together with the gems and pearls and treasures which were obtained from the plunder of Multan. "
Name Of The Book: Jamiu'l-Hikayat
Name Of The Historian: Maulana Nuruddin Muhammed `Ufi
About The Author: The author was born in or near the city of Bukhara in Transoxiana. He came to India and lived in Delhi for some time in the reign of Shamsu'd-Din Iltutmish (AD 1210-1236) The Muslim Rulers He Wrote About:
1. Amru bin Laith (AD 879-900)
Sakawand (Afghanistan)
"It is related that Amru Lais conferred the governorship of Zabulistan on Fardaghan and sent him there at the head of four thousand horses. There was a large Hindu place of worship in that country, which was called Sakawand and people used to come on pilgrimage from the most remote parts of Hindustan to the idols of that place. When Fardaghan arrived in Zabulistan he led his army against it, took the temple, broke the idols in pieces and overthrew the idolators..."

Name Of The Book: Taju'l-Ma'sir
Name Of The Historian: Sadru'd-Din Muhammed Hasan Nizamii
About The Author: The author was born at Nishapur in Khurusan. He had to leave his ancestral place because of the Mongol invasion. He came to India and started writing his history in AD 1205.
The Muslim Rulers He Wrote About:
1. Sultan Muhammed Ghuri (AD 1175-1206)
Ajmer (Rajasthan)
"He destroyed the pillars and foundations of the idol temples and built in their stead mosques and colleges, and the precepts of Islam, and the customs of the law were divulged and established..."

Kuhram and Samana (Punjab)
"The Government of the fort of Kohram and Samana were made over by the Sultan to Kutuu-din..He purged by his sword the land of Hind from the filth of infidelity and vice, and freed it from the thorn of God-plurality, and the impurity of idol-worship and by his royal vigour and intrepidity, left not one temple standing..."

Meerut (Uttar Pradesh)
"Kutub-d din marched from Kohran and when he arrived at Meerut which is one of the celebrated forts of the country of Hind, for the strength of its foundations and superstructure, and its ditch, which was as broad as the ocean and fathomless- an army joined him, sent by the dependent chiefs of the country. The fort was captured, and a Kotwal was appointed to take up his station in the fort, and all the idol temples were converted into mosques."

Delhi
"He then marched and encamped under the fort of Delhi...The city and its vicinity were freed from idols and idol-worhips, and in the sanctuaries of the images of the Gods, nosques were raised by the worshippers of one God. Kutub-d din built the Jami Masjid at Delhi and adorned it with stones and gold obtained from the temples which had been demolished by the elephants, and covered it with inscriptions in Toghra, containing the divine commands."

Varanasi (Uttar Pradesh)
"From that place (Asni) the royal armi proceeded towards Benares which is the center of the country of Hind and here they destroyed nearly 1000 temples, and raised mosques on their foundations and the knowledge of the law became promulgated, and the foundations of religion were established.."

Aligarh (Uttar Pradesh)
"There was a certain tribe in the neighbourhood of Kol which had..occasioned much trouble..Three bastions were raised as high as heaven with their heads, and their carcases became the food of beasts of prey. That tract was freed from idols and idol-worship and the foundation of infidelity were destroyed"..

Bayana (Rajasthan)
"When Kutub-d din heard of Sultan's march from Ghazna, he was much rejoiced and advanced as far as Hansi to meet him.. In the year AH 592 (AD 1196), they marched towards Thangar, and the center of idolatry and perdition became the abode of glory and splendour.."

Kalinjar (Uttar Pradesh)
"In the year AH 599 (Ad 1202), Kutub-d din proceeded to the investment Kalinjar, on which expedition he was accompanied by the Sahib-Kiran, Shamsu-d din Altmash... The temples were converted into mosques and abodes of goodness, and the ejaculations of bead counters and voices of summoners to prayer ascended to high heaven, and the very name of idolatry was annihilated.."

2. Sultan Shamsu'd-Din Iltutmish (AD 1210-1236)
Delhi
"The Sultan then returned from Jalor to Delhi..and after his arrival 'not a vestige or name remained of idol temples which had raised their heads on high; and the light of faith shone out from the darkness of infidelity..and the moon of religion and the state became resplendent from the heaven of prosperity and glory."

Name Of The Book: Kamilu't-Tawarikh
Name Of The Historian: Ibn Asir
About The Author: The author was born in AD 1160 in the Jazirat ibn Umar, an island on the Tigris above Mosul.
The Muslim Rulers he Wrote About:
1. Khalifa Al-Mahdi (AD 775-785)
Barada (Gujrat)
"In the year 159 (AD 776) Al Mahdi sent an army by sea under Abdul Malik bin Shahabu'l Musamma'i to India..They proceeded on their way and at length disembarked at Barada. When they reached the place they laid siege on it..The town was reduced to extremities and God prevailed over it in the same year. The people were forbidden to worship the Budd, which the Muhammadans burned."
Name Of The Book: Tarikh-i-Jahan-Kusha
Name Of The Historian: Alaud-Din Malik ibn Bahaud-Din Muhammed Juwaini
About The Author: The author was born a native of Juwain in Khurasan near Nishapur. He was the Halaku during the Mongol campaign against the Ismai'lians and was later appointed the governor of Baghdad. He fell from grace and was imprisoned at Hamadan.
The Muslim Rulers he Wrote About:
1. Sultan Jalalud-Din Mankbarni (AD 1222-1231)
Debal (Sindh)
"The Sultan then went towards Dewal and darbela and Jaisi... The Sultan raised Masjid at Dewal, on the spot where an idol temple stood."

Name Of The Book: Mifathu'l-Futuh
Name Of The Historian: Amir Khusru
About The Author: The author, Amir Khusru was born at Delhi in 1253. His father occupied high positions in the reigns of Sultan Shamsu'd Din Iltutmish (AD 1210-1236) and his successors. Reputed to be the dearest disciple of Shykh Nizamuddin Auliya, he became the lick-spittle of whoever came out victorious in the contest for the throne at Delhi. He became the court poet of Balban's successor, Sultan Kaiqbad.
The Muslim Rulers he wrote About:
1. Sultan Jajalu'd-Din Khalji (AD 1290-1296)
Jhain (Rajasthan)
"The Sultan reached Jhain in the afternoon of the third day and stayed in the palace of the Raya..he greatly enjoyed his stay for some time. Coming out, ho took a round of gardens and temples. The idols he saw amazed him .. Next day he got those idols of gold smashed with stones. The pillars of wood were burnt down by his order... A cry rose from the temples as if a second Mahmud has taken birth. Two idols were made of brass, one of which weighed nearly thousand "mans".He got both of them broken, and the pieces were distributed among his people so that they may throw them at the door of Masjid on their return to Delhi."

2.Sultan Alaud-Din Khilji (AD 1296-1316)
Vidisha (Madhya Pradesh)
"When he advanced from the capital of Karra, the Hindus, in alarm, descended into the earth like ants. He departed towards the garden of Behar to dye that soil with blood as red as tulip. He cleared the road road to Ujjain of vile wretches, and created consternation in Bhilsan. When he affected his conquests in that country, hew drew out of the river the idols which had been conceled in it.

Devagiri (Maharshtra)
"But see the mercy with which he regarded the broken-hearted, for, after seizing the rai, he set him free again. He destroyed the temples of the idolaters, and erected pulpits and arches for mosques. "

Name Of The Book: Nuh Siphir
Name of the Historian: Amir Khusru
About the Author: The above mentioned book is the fourth historical mathnavi which Amir Khusru wrote when he was 67 years old. It celebrates the reign of Sultan Mubarak Shah Khalji. The Muslim Rulers he wrote About:
1. Sultan Mubarak Shah Khalji (AD 1315-1320)
Warrangal (Andhra Pradesh)
"They pursued the enemy to the gates and set everything on fire. They burnt down all those gardens and groves. That paradise of idol-worshippers became like hell. The fire-worshippers of "Bud" were in alarm and flocked round their idols.."

Name of the Book: Siyaru'l-Auliya
Name of the Historian: Sayyed Muhammed bin Mubarak bin Muhammed
About the Author: He was the grandson of an Iranian merchant who traded between Kirman in Iran and Lahore. The family travelled to Delhi after Shykh Farid's death and became devoted to Shykh Nizamu'd-din Auliya.
The Muslim Rulers he wrote About:

1. Shykh Mu'in al-Din Chisti Ajmer (AD 1236)
Ajmer (Rajasthan)
"..Because of his Sword, instead of idols and temples in the land of unbelief now there are mosques, mihrab amd mimbar. In the land where there were the sayings of the idol-worshippers, there is the sound of 'Allahu Akbar'...The descendants of those who were converted to Islam in this land will live until Day of Judgement; so too will those who bring others into the fold of Islam by the sword of Islam. Until the Day of Judgement these converts will be in debt of Shaykh al-Islam Mu'in al-din Hasam Sijzi..."

Name of the Book: Masalik'ul Absar fi Mamalik'ul Amsar
Name of the Historian: Shihabu'd-Din 'Abu'l Abbas Ahmed bin Yahya.
About the Author: He was born in AD 1301. He was educated in Damascus and Cairo. He is considered to be a great man scholar of his time and author of many books. He occupied high positions in Syria and Egypt.
The Muslim Rulers he wrote About:

1. Sultan Muhammed bin Tughlaq (AD 1325-1351) "The Sultan is not slack in Jihad. He never lets go of his spear or bridle in pursuing jihad by land and sea routes. This is his main occupation which engages his eyes and ears. Five temples have been destroyed and the images and idols of "Budd" have been broken, and the lands have been freed from those who were not included in the daru'l Islam that is, those who had refused to become zimmis. Thereafter he got mosques and places of worship erected, and music replaced by call to prayers to Allah... The Sultan who is ruling at present has achieved that which had not been achieved so far by any king. He has achieved victory, supremacy, conquest of countries, destruction of the infidels, and exposure of magicians. He has destroyed idols by which the people of Hindustan were deceived in vain..."

Name of the Book: Rehala of Ibn Battuta
Name of the Historian: Shykh Abu Abdullah Muhammad ibn Ibrahim al-Lawatt at-Tanji al-Maruf be Ibn Battuta .
About the Author: He belonged to an Arab family which was settled in Spain since AD 1312. His grandfather and father enjoyed the reputation of scholars and theologians. He himself was a great scholar who travelled extensively and over many lands. He came to India in 1325 and visited many places. He was very fond of sampling Hindu girls from different parts of India. They were presented to him by the Sultan Mohammed bin-Tughlaq with whom Ibn Battuta came in close contact. He also married Muslim women wherever he stayed and divorced them before his departure.

1. His Travel description:
(Delhi)
"Near the eastern gate of the mosque, lie two very big idols of copper connected together by stones. Every one who comes in and goes out of the mosque treads over them. On the site of this mosque was a bud Khana that is an idol-house. After the conquest of Delhi, it was turned into a mosque..."

Name of the Book: Tarikh-i-Firuz
Name of the Historian: Shams Siraj Alif
About the Author: The author became a courtier of Sultan Firuz Shah Tughlaq and undertook to complete the aforementioned history of Barani who had stopped at the sixth year of Firuz Shah's reign.
The Muslim Rulers he wrote About:
1. Sultan Firuz Shah Tughlaq (AD 1351-1388)
Puri (Orissa)
"The Sultan left Banarasi with the intention of pursuing the Rani of Jajnagar, who had fled to an island in the river...News was then brought that in the jangal were seven elephants, and one old shoe-elephant, which was very fierce. The Sultan resolved upon endeavouring to capture these elephants before continuing the pursuit of the Rai... After the hunt was over, the Sultan directed his attention to the Rai of Jajnagar, and entering the palace where he dwelt he found many fine buildings. It is reported that inside the Rai's fort, there was a stone idol which the infidels called Jagannath, and to which they paid their devotions. Sultan Firoz, in emulation of Mahmud Subuktign, having rooted up the idol, carried it away to Delhi where he placed it in an ignominious position."

2. Nagarkot Kangra(Himachal Pradesh)
"..Sultan Muhammed Shah bin Tughlaq and Sultan Firuz Shah Tughlaq were sovereigns especially chosen by Almighty from among the faithful, and in their whole course of their reigns, wherever they took an idol temple they broke and destroyed it.."

Delhi
"A report was brought to the Sultan that there was in Delhi an old Brahmin who persisted in publicly performing the worship of idols in his house; and that people of the city, both Musalmans and Hindus, used to resort to his house to worhsip the idol. the Brahmin had constructed a wooden tablet which was covered within and without with paintings of demons and other objects..An order was accordingly given that the Brahmin, with his tablet, should be brought into the presence of the Sultan at Firozabad. the judges and doctors and elders and lawyers were summoned, and the case of the Brahaman was submitted for their opinion. Their reply was that the provisions of the Law were clear: the Brahmin must either become a Musalman or be burned. The true faith was declared to the Brahmin, and the right course pointed out, but he refused to accept it. Orders were given for raising a pile of faggots before the door of the darbar (court). The Brahmin was tied hand and foot and cast into it ; the tablet was thrown on top and the pile was lighted. The writer of this book was present at the darbar and witnessed the execution. The tablet of the Brahmin was lighted in two places, at his head and at his feet; the wood was dry and the fire first reached his feet, and drew him a cry, but the flames quickly enveloped his head and consumed him. Behold the Sultan's strict adherence to law and rectitude, how he would not deviate in the least from its decrees !"

Here Sultan Firuz Shah Tughlaq glorifies his own criminal acts in Bharat as sanctioned by the "holy" Koran.
Name of the Book: Futuhat-i-Firuz Shahi
Name of the Historian: Sultan Firuz Shah Tughlaq
About the Author: Sultan had got the eight chapters of his work inscribed on eight slabs of stone which were fixed on eight sides of the octagonal dome of a building near the Jami Masjid at Firuzabad.
1. Prayers of Temple-destroyers in this Book

"The next matter which by God's help I accomplished, was the repetition of names and titles of former sovereigns which had been omitted from the prayers of Sabbaths and Feasts. The names of those sovereigns of Islam, under whose happy fortune and favour infidel countries had been conquered, whose banners had waved over many a land, under whom idol-temples had been demolished, and mosques and pulpits built and exalted..."

Delhi and Evirons
"The Hindus and idol-worshippers had agreed to pay the money for toleration (zar-i zimmiya) and had consented to the poll-tax(jiziya) in return for which they and their families enjoyed security. These people now erected new idol-temples in the city and the enviorns in opposition to the law of the Prophet which declares that such temples are not to be tolerated. Under divine guidance I destroyed these edifices and I killed those leaders of infidelity who seduced others into error, and the lower orders I subjected to stripes and chastisement, until this abuse was entirely abolshed. the following is an instance: In the viallge of Maluh, there is a tank which they call kund (tank). Here they had built idol-temples and on certain days the Hindus were accustomed to proceed thither on horseback, and wearing arms. their women and children also went out in palankins and carts. Then they assembled in thousands and performed idol-worship....when intelligence of this came to my ears my religious feelings propmted me at once to put a stop to this scandal and offence to the religion of Islam. On the day of the assembly I wnet there in person and I ordered that the leaders of these people and the promoters of this abominations should be put to death. I destroyed their idol-temples and instead thereof raised mosques."

Gohana (Haryana)
"Some Hindus had erected a new idol-temple in the village of Kohana and the idolators used to assemble there and perform their idolatrous rites. These people were seized and brought before me. I ordered that the perverse conduct of the leaders of this wickedness should be publicly proclaimed, and that they should be put to death before the gate of the palace. I also ordered that the infidel books, the idols and the vessels used in their worship, which had been taken with idols, should all be publicly burnt. The others were restrained by threats and punishments, as a warning to all men, that no zimmi could follow such wicked practices in a Muslaman country."

Name of the Book: Tarikh-i-Mubarak Shahi
Name of the Historian: Yahya Ammad bin Abdullah Sirhindi
About the Author: The author lived in the reign of Sultan Muizu'd-Din Abu'l Fath Mubarak Shah (AD 1421-1434) of the Sayyid dynasty which ruled at Delhi from AD 1414-1451. The Muslim Rulers he wrote About:
1. Sultan Shamsu'd-Din Iltutmish (AD 1210-1236)
Vidisha and Ujjain (Madhya Pradesh)
"In AH 631 he invaded Malwah, and after supressing the rebels of that place, he destroyed that idol-temple which had existed there for the past three hundred years. Next he turned towards Ujjain and conquered it, and after demolishing the idol-temple of Mahakal, he uprooted the statue of Bikramajit together with all other statues and images which were placed on pedestals, and brought them to the capital where they were laid before the Jami Masjid for being trodden under foot by the people

Name of the Book: Tarikh-i-Muhammadi
Name of the Historian: Muhammed Bihamad Khani
About the Author: The author was the son of the governor of Irich in Bundelkhand. He was a soldier who participated in several wars. His history covers a long period - from Prophet Mohammed to AD 1438-39
The Muslim Rulers he wrote About:
1. Sultan Ghiyasu'd-Din Tughlaq Shah II (AD 1388-89)
Kalpi (Uttar Pradesh)
"In the meanwhile Delhi received news of the defeat of the armies of Islam which were with Malikzada Mahmud bin Firuz Khan ...This Malikzada reached the bank of the Yamuna via Shahpur and renamed Kalpi which was the abode and center of the infidels and the wicked, as Muhammadabad, after the name of Prophet Muhammed. He got mosques erected for the worship of Allah in places occupied by temples, and made that city his capital. "

2. Sultan Nasiru'd-Din Mahmud Shah Tughlaq (AD 1389-1412)
Prayag and Kara (Uttar Pradesh)
"The Sultan moved with the armies of Islam towards Prayag and Arail with the aim of destroying the infidels, and he laid waste both those places. The vast crowd which had collected at Prayag for worshipping false gods was made captive. The inhabitants of Kara were freed from the mischief of rebels on account of this aid from King and the name of this king of Islam became famous by this reason."

Name of the Book: Babur-Nama Name of the Author: Zahiru'd-Din Muhammed Babur
About the Author: The author of this book was the founder of Mughal dynasty in India who proclaimed himself a Padshah (Ruler) after his victory in the First Battle of Panipat (AD 1526), and a Ghazi (killer of kafirs) after the defeat of Rana Sanga in the Battle of Khanwa (AD 1528) While presenting himself as an indefatigable warrior and drug-addict he does not hide the cruelties he committed on the defeated people, particularly his fondness for building towers of the heads of those he captured as prisoners of war or killed in battle. He is very liberal in citing appropriate verses from the Quran on the eve of the battle with Rana Sanga. In order to ensure his victory, he makes a covenant with Allah by breaking the vessels containing wine as also the cups for drinking it, swearing at the same time that "he would break the idols of the idol-worshippers in a similar manner". In the Fath-Nama (prayer for victory) composed for him by Shykh Zain, Allah is described as "destroyers of idols from their foundations" The language he uses for his Hindu adversaries is typically Islamic.
1. Zahirud-Din Muhammed Babur Padshah Ghazi (AD 1526-1530)
Chanderi (Madhya Pradesh)
"In AH 934 (AD 1528), I attacked Chanderi and, by the grace of Allah, captured it in a few hours..We got the infidels slaughtered and the place which had been a daru'l-harb for years, was made into daru'l-Islam."

Gwalior (Madhya Pradesh)
"Next day, at the time of the noon prayer, we went out for seeing those places in Gwalior which we had not seen yet..Going out of the Hathipole Gate of the fort, we arrived at a place called Urwa.. Urwa is not a bad place It is an enclosed space. Its biggest blemish is its statues. I ordered that they should be destroyed..."

                                                       203.197.96.50 10:04, 7 January 2007 (UTC)ADI

The article is extremely NPOV in some part

The article is extremely NPOV in some part and making Muslims look like the bad guy. The article is told from Hindu nationalist perspective. For example, read this

"Embedded within this lies the concept of Islam as a foreign imposition and Hinduism being a natural condition of the natives who resisted, resulting the failure of the project to Islamicize the Indian subcontinent and is highly embroiled with the politics of the partition and communalism in India. Other reasons given for the size of the Muslim expansion are the killings of Hindu's, migrations and the influence of Arab traders along the Indian Ocean"

The second point is that this article is about Indian Muslims, not Arab Muslims or Persian Muslims. Even if there was lot of killing of Hindus, they were not done by Indian Muslims; they were done probably by Arab Muslims or other Muslims. Read this,

An estimate of the number of people killed, based on the Muslim chronicles and demographic calculations, was done by K.S. Lal in his book Growth of Muslim Population in Medieval India, who claimed that between 1000 CE and 1500 CE, the population of Hindus decreased by 80 million.

And for this one, there is no source. Citation 10 is mentioned but if you look under citation 10, there is no real source.

There is no reason to put Muslim-Christian Conflict since there was no real conflict between Muslim society and Christian society. The articles mentions individual conflicts such as Muslims terrorists are threatening Christian convert. Muslim-Christian Conflict is just there to make Muslims the bad guy and to say that Muslims can't along with anyone.

Object to this or I will be removing lot of materials. Tarikur 18:41, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Since there is no objection to remove Muslim-Christian conflict this portion needs speedy deletion. This looks like propaganda by some people and they use wikipedia for this. --Untilwhen1 (talk) 20:50, 29 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Untilwhen1 (talk • contribs) 20:46, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Islam in India

Many Muslims were invited to raid on Hindu Temples as Buddhas and Jains were atheist and oppose Temple system in India. vkvora 11:08, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

In what context are you talking? Give a source? --59.182.20.169 13:12, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Muslims in freedom movement

Eighteenth- and nineteenth-century figures are described in this section as "fighting for a unified India, as opposed to Pakistan" and contrasted with people like Jinnah etc. This, of course, carries a misleading, anachronistic implication. They shouldn't be lumped with Muslims who specifically opposed partition, when partition wasn't even a proposal back then--to the contrary, "India" had been a place politically dominated (generally) by Muslims. The anachronism of describing these people in post-Congress political terms is really glaring with, for example, Tipu Sultan; in what sense did he fight for anything that could be called a "unified India"?

Nevertheless, the section does reflect a truth that should be preserved. It is true that the older figures in this section wanted to liberate Indians of all religions and see them governed as one people. It is noteworthy that this vision of a multireligious community is the older one; and it's noteworthy that the modern Indian republic sees itself as loyal to that vision, and celebrates these figures as heroes for Indians of all faiths. I wish only to clarify the section a bit, if there are no objections. 205.212.74.252 16:51, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

SIKHS and MUSLIMS

Somebody needs to include what happened between Sikhs and Muslims during partition. People writing this article seem to forget that Sikhs are NOT Hindus. It was mainly the Sikhs along with Muslims who suffered during partition and lost their land.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.245.77.239 (talk) 05:19, 30 June 2007‎ (UTC)

Population figure repeatedly being changed to false numbers

The number of Muslims in India is being inflated by user 7day. He/she changed the percentage of Muslims in India from 13.4%, which is the proper figure from the cited source, the 2001 census, to 16.4% without even citing a different source. It is dead obvious that 7day just wanted to inflate the figure by a few percentage points. This is made even more clear by the fact that in table under the section population statistics, the figures for the years 1961 through 1991 are accurate, while the figure for 2001 magically rises to 14.4% from 12.4% for adjusted figures and 16.4% from 13.4% for unadjusted figures. Furthermore, even the math is incorrect. 16.4% puts the number of Muslims in India at 168.6 million, not 174 million. And if India is 80.46% Hindu and 16.4% Muslim, then all other religions put together would have to equal 3.14%. This is impossible considering that Christians and Sikhs alone are at least 2% each. I've tried to change it and it just gets changed back by 7day, who, when confronted on his talk page, just says "please do not add your biase [sic] to this article." Someone please take some action against this guy.12.214.172.85 05:50, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Unnecessary/Biased comments in Population Statistics topic

Vaznav 07:46, 13 October 2007 (UTC) I edited the following text which has definitely not been written from a NPOV. " To the above detailed analysis of demographic statistics with particular reference to Islam in India, and without contradicting it, must be added the fact that the Muslim population in India is growing at a very high rate which is around 5 per cent which is undesirable/ impermissible for any large, modernizing State in the world today, and which is also far higher than the overall growth rate for the total (Islam + Hindu etc. religious) population of India. This sharp growth is due to (a) polygamy (upto five wives per man) permitted by the Shariat which was not yet prohibited by the authors of the Indian Constitution, despite its intention at being secular, even while allowing Muslims at the time of religious partition of a United India in 1947, and which is coerced by the apex Islam religious bodies of India to be faithfully adhered to by the Muslims, and (b) also heavy infiltration of Muslims across the borders, especially from Bangladesh in the east, occurring with the tacit approval of political parties barring the Bharatiya Janata Party, a nationalist party which wants to help protect and preserve the finer features of the hoary Hindu past of India which are worthy of universal acceptance, like indeed those of the other religions of the world, through unbiassed information.

At present, the Muslim population growth rate of 5 per cent. continues to exceed more than double that of overall Indian population (which is currently around two per cent per year). At these prevailing rates, assuming 85% for the non-Muslim population and 15% for the Muslim population in the total, elementary arithmeical extrapolation reveals that India's demographic composition will drastically be altered so that in just six decades, that is to say, by the year 2067, Muslims will likely equal in numbers all the rest of the (non-Muslim) population put together. There is a small tolerant and truly religious section of people among the Muslims of India, who wish to discard because of their inappropriaeness to modern human conditions, those medieval teachings of Islam that preach unfetered and universal polygamy, and cruel killing of non-believers (infidels/ Fakirs) by any means - terrorism included. It is viewed by many patriots of India - many of them not necessarily subscribing to the BJJP ideologies, or not necessarily educated in a formal sense or given to believing that only English medium of instruction can produce meaningful articulation of high thinking - that this prospect only hides the high probability that South Asia thus will have surely grown in religious disturbances largely due to the presence of Islamic terrorism, and within Islam, the Shia versus Sunni element, arising from fundamentalism and fanaticism to a scale far exceeding than of the present, and not yet perceived by even some deep political thinkers.

In addition to scare mongering references. The content is deceptive and definitely not "unbiassed"..

Islam in India

Dear Angelo De La Paz , here i have gatherd some sources for you regarding population of muslims from date July 2007 from CIA website soo far this is the closest number

Total Population in India : 1,129,866,154 (July 2007 est.) Muslim Population in India : 13.4% Revision on Calculator : 1,129,866,154 X 0.14 = 158,181,261.56 Soo population should be rounded off to = 160 Million

Refference is from CIA Government : https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/print/in.html

And heres some Paragraphs / Columns that have been deleted by Vandalism along with Refferences.--HinduMuslim (talk) 20:19, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

• And here is the exact numbers:

• • 1,129,866,154 : 100 = 11,298,661.54
  • 11,298,661.54 X 13.4 = 151,402,064.636

You should read: Islam by country and List of religious populations and stop making wrong, are you jealous with your Muslim neighbour Pakistan???Come on, Please wake up!!!It's cheap!

Angelo De La Paz (talk) 21:22, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

References

POV in different papers as refernece.

This is an encyclopedia. You cannot start citing somebodies opinion as facts. Hence I am removing certain lines doing so. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Residentevil (talk • contribs) 09:42, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

hello everyone

all of u must have read this article...do u think that this conflict between hindus and muslims can bring any change in ur relationships of hindu with a muslim or vice versa...well i dont think so...what u think? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.144.164.235 (talk) 11:08, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

What do Hindus think about ISLAM ??

I just wanted to know what opinion Hindu wikipedians have about Islam. I also want to know what opinion they have about Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) and others like Hazrat Abu bakr(as) and Hazart Ali(as) and Hazrat Hussain Shaheed(as) and Hazrat Umar(as). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fighter65 (talk • contribs) 12:37, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Would these be of any relevance there?

Some recent happenings seem to point some unique characters of Indian Muslims. In my opinion it would be nice to be included here. But, ofcourse, it depends on what the editors involved in this article might think right.

• Declaring fatwa against terrorism
• Refusing to busy the Mumbai gunmen in Muslim graveyards
• Suggestion to avoid cow slaughter on Eid, so as to avoid hurting Hindu sentiments

I leave it for the users who have contributed to this article to decide on it. Cheers Wiki San Roze ^†αLҝ 13:05, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

From an Indian's point-of-view

The article, before my edits, was in poor shape. Though I'm a Hindu, I'm an Indian first and have made edits to improve the article which primarily involved highlighting the success of many Muslims in India and their constructive contribution to India's history, economy and culture. Cheers --128.211.201.161 (talk) 05:31, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your contributions, I've overviewed them and they have been truly constructive. I would really appreciate it someone of your talents and neutral point of view could sign up; all of Wikipedia could really benefit from it. --♥pashtun ismailiyya 05:41, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

History of Islam in India

There is no mention of Mughals in this section. The section ends with Caliphate, and the next section starts with Independence Movement. 800 years are missing —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.58.146.113 (talk) 14:28, 29 July 2009 (UTC)

Zakir naiks picture

Why is Zakir Naik's picture amongst the prominent Muslims. There are a million more accomplished Indian Muslims whose pictures deserve to be shown there. He has made a lot of questionable statements which show Muslims in poor light and has managed to annoy both Muslims and non-Muslims with his rhetoric. Even the article itself has no references to Zakir Naik.

Also it would be ideal if pictures of muslims from non filmi background are given more prominence. The photos make it seem like Indian muslima are present only in Bollywood and do not excel in other fields. Abdul Kalam's picture must be shown prominently instead of being relegated to the end as he is presently the most influential Indian Muslim whom most Indians look up to. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.152.203 (talk) 16:23, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

I second that. Zakir Naik's picture can be replaced by Omar Abdullah.--Shahab (talk) 13:10, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree. Photographs of Bollywood actors and Zakir Naik should be given less prominence(if not altogether removed). Photographs of industrialists, businessman, acdemicians, polticians, etc should be given mor prmninence. --Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider Rizvi^talk! 05:39, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

I agree that Picture of any Controversial person should not be in this Article.Shabiha ^(t) 10:05, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

I have rearranged picture & removed/added few people to it. Any comments/critique/suggestions are welcomed. --Sayed Mohammad Faiz Haider Rizvi^talk! 00:07, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

I think there are too many people in the picture which is undervaluing the importance of important personalities like Abdul Kalam. Only 1 or at most 2 person per field(business, sports, science and tech etc) should be used. Also I think that you should do away with Zakir Naik's altogether and replace it with Maulana Abul Kalam Azad. He is also mentioned in the article and is also recognized as a much bigger scholar.--Shahab (talk) 11:23, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Section Communal Riots needs updating

This section is incorrect: The incident was a planned act carried out by revengeful and extremist Ghanchi Muslims in the region against the Hindu pilgrims according to Gujarat police. The commission appointed to investigate this finding declared that the fire was an accident. In 2006 the High Court decided the constitution of such a committee was illegal as another inquiry headed by Justice Nanavati Shah was still investigating the matter. [14]. The Nanavati Shah commission has already given its first report, in last week of September 2008, where it has said that burning of train in Godhra was pre-planned and petrol of large quantity was bought by a group of Muslim people for this purpose.

The references do not mention anything cited in this article. Please clean up this article. Over 2000 Muslims were killed in the state-sponsored Gujarat violence. The evidence on the Godhra fire showed it was either an accident or caused from inside the coach. No proof for pre-planning was ever produced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tahadude (talk • contribs) 23:17, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

References

Orphaned references in Islam in India

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Islam in India's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "Britannica":

• From Australia: "Australia". Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved 2009-08-22. "Smallest continent and sixth largest country (in area) on Earth, lying between the Pacific and Indian oceans."
• From Qur'an: Nasr, Seyyed Hossein (2007). "Qur'an". Encyclopedia Britannica Online. Retrieved 2007-11-04.
• From Islam in Iran: Encyclopædia Britannica.
• From Indian subcontinent: "Asia" > Overview. Encyclopædia Britannica. Encyclopædia Britannica Online, 2009: "The Indian subcontinent is home to a vast diversity of peoples, most of whom speak languages from the Indo-Aryan subgroup of the Indo-European family."
• From Muhammad: "Muhammad; Encyclopædia Britannica". Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 2010.
• From Scandinavia: "Scandinavia". Encyclopædia Britannica. britannica.com. 2009. Retrieved 2009-10-28.
• From Afghanistan: Ahmad Shah Durrani, Encyclopaedia Britannica.
• From East Asia: Britannica Online Encyclopedia
• From Persecution of Muslims: "Islamic caste." Encyclopædia Britannica. 2006. Encyclopædia Britannica Online. 18 Oct. 2006

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 09:56, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

Muslim-Buddhist conflict

Is it really necessary to have a subsection just because 10 years ago (out of 1200 years of coexistence), there were a few minor incidents possibly communal in nature (that too directly related to a political insurgency in the neighboring region)? Islam has been in Ladakh for 1200 years. The region has always been peaceful in terms of religious issues. What's the point in mentioning it here in an article about Islam in India? Does it meet the notability standards of wikipedia in this context (even for a passive mention in this article, let alone a subsection)?NMKuttiady (talk) 10:03, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Also this fringe incident has no major impact on either Buddhist - Muslim relation in India, or Islam in India in general. So definitely it doesn't deserve a mention here. Hence dropping it.NMKuttiady (talk) 06:23, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Edit request from Shigatse, 9 May 2010

{{editsemiprotected}} there is no part of Ahmedias in muslim movement these ahmedi people are just liar look for mirza ghulam ahmed. this adddition >>( Islam later spread by proselytizing from the Ahmadiyya community and Ahmadiyyas thus make up a large part of the muslim community of India.[10][11][12][13][14)<< its a lie.. nothing true just a small sect living in the town QAadian.

Shigatse (talk) 21:28, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

If you wish to request an edit, please explain exactly what should be changed, supported by reliable sources. If you just wish to comment on the article, then go ahead; you do not need to use an English: editsemiprotected; other editors will be able to read this page.  Chzz  ►  21:58, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

 Not done

Muslim population in India

Its laughable to show such large Muslim population in India based on Pew research; and disrespecting the official figure of India Census. Pew Research is unreliable. For example, it says that

Percentage of Muslims with Unfavorable Views of Jews:

Jordan - 100 percent

Lebanon - 99 percent

Egypt - 98 percent

Morocco - 88 percent

Indonesia - 76 percent

Pakistan - 74 percent

Turkey - 60 percent.

http://judaism.about.com/od/americanworldjewry/a/muslimviews.htm Now will it be OK to state that statistics in the Muslim-Jew relations wikis or like that? Obviously it's ridiculous. So don't exaggerate anything by quoting unverifiable things or forums.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahivarn (talk • contribs) 19:06, 27 August 2010‎ (UTC)

Few important points here

1) Only Government of India census figures will be used while mentioning Muslim population statistics. Other sources such as Pew are not at all credible since their figures are nothing but an estimation as their sample size is relatively small.

2) Zakir Naik is a controversial figure of the highest order. This article can do better without him.

3) Somebody please copy-edit the History and Independence movement sections.

Thanks --King Zebu (talk) 20:24, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Why no Salman Khan?

He is far more recognizable than that small time Tennis player , who anyways has not done anything worthwhile? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.75.201.5 (talk) 08:24, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

I've tried to have as much diversity in the collage as possible. There are a lot of movie stars in there already, and Shah Rukh and Aamir have more credentials than Salman going by the recognitions. Aamir has Oscar nominations under his belly, while Shah Rukh was listed in Newsweek as one of the 50 most powerful in the world. Both of them have received Padma awards too. Sania is the first and only Indian to break into top 30 in international rankings. She's also an Arjuna Award winner. NMKuttiady (talk) 06:13, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Population growth section

It seems that someone conveniently removed most of the material from the concerned section and reworded it rather subjectively to serve his/her pov. I made sure that every bit of information was presented objectively (for example, the sources were specifically stated in the sentence) and both the viewpoints (socio-economic and religious determinism) were put forward.

However, this was changed to a more subjective tone and accuracy was sacrificed (for example, the new text suggested that family planning perception surveys were conducted "in the 1980s" even though the sources given, such as the book by Shakeel Ahmed, mention surveys held in the 1990s).

I suggest the person who changed the text to discuss the matter here first rather than indulging in edit-war. --King Zebu (talk) 20:00, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

I did not remove any references. I trimmed the long winding sentences. Usually comparisons of community statistics are made to the national averages. Don't start a edit war with your baggage of presumptions.Katheeja (talk) 04:24, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Reversion to pre-socking version

The above user is Anwar Sadaat; his socks have been editing this article heavily for the past month. - Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Shinas/Archive. I have reverted to the last clean version before the socks went to work on this article. The reversion means we lose a few images and a bit of copyediting, but when balanced against the pov pushing and socking, it is better we go back to a clean version before this massive socking started.--Sodabottle (talk) 04:18, 14 December 2010 (UTC)