Medieval India: Enslavement of Hindus by Arab & Turkish Invaders

Turks were not the first Muslims to invade India. Prior to the coming of Turks the Arab general Muhammad bin Qasim invaded Sindh in the early years of the eighth century. In conformity with the Muslim tradition, the Arabs captured and enslaved Indians in large numbers. Indeed from the days of Muhammad bin Qasim in the eighth century to those of Ahmad Shah Abdali in the eighteenth, enslavement, distribution, and sale of Hindu prisoners was systematically practised by Muslim invaders and rulers of India. It is but natural that the exertion of a thousand years of slave-taking can only be briefly recounted with a few salient features of the system highlighted.

Enslavement by the Arabs

During the Arab invasion of Sindh (712 C.E.), Muhammad bin Qasim first attacked Debal, a word derived from Deval meaning temple. It was situated on the sea-coast not far from modern Karachi. It was garrisoned by 4,000 Kshatriya soldiers and served by 3,000 Brahmans. All males of the age of seventeen and upwards were put to the sword and their women and children were enslaved.1  700 beautiful females, who were under the protection of Budh (that is, had taken shelter in the temple), were all captured with their valuable ornaments, and clothes adorned with jewels.2 

Muhammad despatched one-fifth of the legal spoil to Hajjaj which included seventy-five damsels, the rest four-fifths were distributed among the soldiers.3 Thereafter whichever places he attacked like Rawar, Sehwan, Dhalila, Brahmanabad and Multan, Hindu soldiers and men with arms were slain, the common people fled, or, if flight was not possible, accepted Islam, or paid the poll tax, or died with their religion. Many women of the higher class immolated themselves in Jauhar, most others became prize of the victors. These women and children were enslaved and converted, and batches of them were despatched to the Caliph in regular installments.

For example, after Rawar was taken Muhammad Qasim halted there for three days during which he massacred 6,000 (men). Their followers and dependents, as well as their women and children were taken prisoner. Later on, the slaves were counted, and their number came to 60,000 (of both sexes). Out of these, 30 were young ladies of the royal blood. Muhammad Qasim sent all these to Hajjaj who forwarded them to Walid the Khalifa. He sold some of these female slaves of royal birth, and some he presented to others.4 

Selling of slaves was a common practice

From the seventh century onwards and with a peak during Muhammad al-Qasim’s campaigns in 712-13, writes Andre Wink, a considerable number of Jats was captured as prisoners of war and deported to Iraq and elsewhere as slaves.5 Jats here is obviously used as a general word for all Hindus. In Brahmanabad, it is said that about six thousand fighting men were slain, but according to others sixteen thousand were killed, and their families enslaved.6  The garrison in the fort-city of Multan was put to the sword, and families of the chiefs and warriors of Multan, numbering about six thousand, were enslaved.

In Sindh female slaves captured after every campaign of the marching army, were converted and married to Arab soldiers who settled down in colonies established in places like Mansura, Kuzdar, Mahfuza and Multan. The standing instructions of Hajjaj to Muhammad bin Qasim were to give no quarter to infidels, but to cut their throats, and take the women and children as captives.7  In the final stages of the conquest of Sindh, when the plunder and the prisoners of war were brought before Qasim, one-fifth of all the prisoners were chosen and set aside; they were counted as amounting to twenty thousand in number (they belonged to high families) and veils were put on their faces, and the rest were given to the soldiers.8 Obviously a few lakh women were enslaved in the course of Arab invasion of Sindh.

Females and young boys provided sexual services. A Dutchman visiting India in the 17th century noted the sexual indulgence of  Muslim rulers and noblemen who were pampered and entertained by concubines and wives and freely ‘enjoyed’ the concubines in the presence of the wife.

All over the Islamic world, the conquered were castrated, including in India. This was done so men could guard harems, provide carnal indulgence for rulers, give devotion to the ruler as they had no hope of a family of their own and of course, this quickly reduced the breeding stock of the conquered. Castration was a common practice throughout Muslim rule possibly contributing to the DECLINE in India’s population from 200 million in 1000 CE to 170 million in 1500 CE. 

Ghaznavid capture of Hindu slaves

If such were the gains of the “mild” Muhammad bin Qasim in enslaving kaniz wa ghulam in Sindh, the slaves captured by Mahmud of Ghazni, that ferocious and insatiable conqueror, of the century beginning with the year 1000 C.E. have of course to be counted in hundreds of thousands. Henry Elliot and John Dowson have sifted the available evidence from contemporary and later sources – from Utbi’s Tarikh-i-Yamini, Nizamuddin Ahmad’s Tabqat-i-Akbari, the Tarikh-i-Alai and the Khulasat-ut-Tawarikh to the researches of early European scholars. Mohammad Habib, Muhammad Nazim, Wolseley Haig and I myself have also studied these invasions in detail.9 All evidence points to the fact that during his seventeen invasions, Mahmud Ghaznavi enslaved a very large number of people in India. Although figures of captives for each and every campaign have not been provided by contemporary chroniclers, yet some known numbers and data about the slaves taken by Mahmud speak for themselves.

When Mahmud Ghaznavi attacked Waihind in 1001-02, he took 500,000 persons of both sexes as captive. This figure of Abu Nasr Muhammad Utbi, the secretary and chronicler of Mahmud, is so mind-boggling that Elliot reduces it to 5000.10 The point to note is that taking of slaves was a matter of routine in every expedition. Only when the numbers were exceptionally large did they receive the notice of the chroniclers. So that in Mahmud’s attack on Ninduna in the Punjab (1014), Utbi says that “slaves were so plentiful that they became very cheap; and men of respectability in their native land (India) were degraded by becoming slaves of common shop-keepers (in Ghazni)”.11  His statement finds confirmation in later chronicles including Nizamuddin Ahmad’s Tabqat-i-Akbariwhich states that Mahmud “obtained great spoils and a large number of slaves”. 

Next year from Thanesar, according to Farishtah, “the Muhammadan army brought to Ghaznin 200,000 captives so that the capital appeared like an Indian city, for every soldier of the army had several slaves and slave girls”.12 Thereafter slaves were taken in Baran, Mahaban, Mathura, Kanauj, Asni etc. When Mahmud returned to Ghazni in 1019, the booty was found to consist of (besides huge wealth) 53,000 captives. Utbi says that “the number of prisoners may be conceived from the fact that, each was sold for from two to ten dirhams. These were afterwards taken to Ghazna, and the merchants came from different cities to purchase them, so that the countries of Mawarau-un-Nahr, Iraq and Khurasan were filled with them”. The Tarikh-i-Alfi adds that the fifth share due to the Saiyyads was 150,000 slaves, therefore the total number of captives comes to 750,000.13

Before proceeding further, let us try to answer two questions which arise out of the above study. First, how was it that people could be enslaved in such large numbers? Was there no resistance on their part? And second, what did the victors do with these crowds of captives?

During war it was not easy for the Muslim army to capture enemy troops. They were able-bodied men, strong and sometimes “demon like”. It appears that capturing such male captives was a very specialised job. Special efforts were made by “experts” to surround individuals or groups, hurl lasso or ropes around them, pin them down, and make them helpless by binding them with cords of hide, ropes of hessian and chains and shackles of iron. Non-combatant males, women and children of course could be taken comparatively easily after active soldiers had been killed in battle. The captives were made terror-stricken. It was a common practice to raise towers of skulls of the killed by piling up their heads in mounds. All captives were bound hand and foot and kept under strict surveillance of armed guards until their spirit was completely broken and they could be made slaves, converted, sold or made to serve on sundry duties.

In a letter Hajjaj instructed Muhammad bin Qasim on how to deal with the adversary. “The way of granting pardon prescribed by law is that when you encounter the unbelievers, strike off their heads, make a great slaughter among them, (Those that survive) bind them in bonds, grant pardon to no one of the enemy and spare none of them, etc., etc.14 The lives of some prisoners could be spared, but they could not be released. That is how the Arab invaders of Sindh could enslave thousands of men and women at Debal, Rawar and Brahmanabad. At Brahmanabad, after many people were killed, “all prisoners of or under the age of 30 years were put in chains”. All the other people capable of bearing arms were beheaded and their followers and dependents were made prisoners.15

That is also how Mahmud of Ghazni could enslave 500,000 “beautiful men and women” in Waihind after he had killed 15,000 fighting men in a “splendid action” in November 1001 C.E. Utbi informs us that Jaipal, the Hindu Shahiya king of Kabul, “his children and grandchildren, his nephews, and the chief men of his tribe, and his relatives, were taken prisoners, and being strongly bound with ropes, were carried before the Sultan (Mahmud) like common evil-doers”. Some had their arms forcibly tied behind their backs, some were seized by the cheek, some were driven by blows on their neck.16 In every campaign of Mahmud large-scale massacres preceded enslavement.

The sight of horrendous killing completely unnerved the captives. Not only were the captives physically tortured, they were also morally shattered. They were systematically humiliated and exposed to public ridicule. When prisoners from Sindh were sent to the Khalifa, “the slaves, who were chiefly daughters of princes and Ranas, were made to stand in a line along with the menials (literally shoe-bearers)”.17  Hodivala gives details of the humiliation of Jaipal at the hands of Mahmud. He writes that Jaipal “was publicly exposed at one of the slave-auctions in some market in Khurasan, just like the thousands of other Hindu captives”. (He) was paraded about so that his sons and chieftains might see him in that condition of shame, bonds and disgrace, inflicting upon him the public indignity of “commingling him in one common servitude”.18 No wonder that in the end Jaipal immolated himself, for such humiliation was inflicted deliberately to smash the morale of the captives. In short, once reduced to such straits, the prisoners, young or old, ugly or handsome, princes or commoners could be flogged, converted, sold for a tuppence or made to work as menials.

It may be argued that Mahmud of Ghazni could enslave people in hundreds of thousands because his raids were of a lightning nature when defence preparedness was not satisfactory. But even when the Muslim position was not that strong, say, during Mahmud’s son, Ibrahim’s campaign in Hindustan when “a fierce struggle ensued, but Ibrahim at length gained victory, and slew many of them. Those who escaped fled into the jungles. Nearly 100,000 of their women and children were taken prisoners”.19  In this statement lies the answer to our first problem. There was resistance and determined resistance so that all the people of a family or village or town resisted the invaders in unison. If they succeeded, they drove away the attackers. If not, they tried to escape into nearby forests.20 If they could not escape at all they were made captives but then all together. They did not separate from one another even in the darkest hour. Indeed adversity automatically bound them together. So they determined to swim or sink together.

Besides, right from the days of prophet Muhammad, and according to his instructions, writes Margoliouth, “parting of a captive mother from her child was forbidden”.  The parting of brothers when sold was similarly forbidden. On the other hand captive wife might at once become the concubine of the conqueror.21 This precept of not separating the captives but keeping them together was motivated by no humanitarian consideration but it surely swelled their numbers to the advantage of the victors. Hence large numbers of people were enslaved.

And now our second question – what did the victors do with slaves captured in large crowds? In the days of the early invaders like Muhammad bin Qasim and Mahmud Ghaznavi, they were mostly sold in the Slave Markets that had come up throughout the Muslim dominated towns and cities. Lot of profit was made by selling slaves in foreign lands. Isami gives the correct position. Muhammad Nazim in an article has translated relevant lines of Isami’s metrical composition.22  “He (Mahmud) scattered the army of the Hindus in one attack and took Rai Jaipal prisoner. He carried him to the distant part of his kingdom of Ghazni and delivered him to an agent of the Slave Market (dalal-i-bazar). I heard that at the command of the king (Mahmud), the Brokers of the Market, (maqiman-i-bazar in the original) sold Jaipal as a slave for 80 Dinars and deposited the money realised by the sale in the Treasury.”23

When Muslim rule was established in India, the sale of captives became restricted. Large numbers of them were drafted for manning the establishments of kings and nobles, working as labourers in the construction of buildings, cutting jungles and making roads, and on so many other jobs. Still they were there, enough and to spare. Those who could be spared were sold in and outside the country, where slave markets, slave merchants and slave brokers did a flourishing business, and the rulers made profit out of their sale.

Mahmud of Ghazni had marched into Hindustan again and again to wage jihad and spread the Muhammadan religion, to lay hold of its wealth, to destroy its temples, to enslave its people, sell them abroad and thereby earn profit, and to add to Muslim numbers by converting the captives. He even desired to establish his rule in India.24 His activities were so multi-faceted that it is difficult to determine his priorities. But the large number of captives carried away by him indicates that taking of slaves surely occupied an anteriority in his scheme of things. He could obtain wealth by their sale and increase the Muslim population by their conversion. 

~ K. S. Lal. excerpted from the book. “Muslim Slave System in Medieval India”.  



1 C.H.I., III, 3.

2 Al Kufi, Chachnama, Kalichbeg, 84.

3 C.H.I., III, 3.

4 Chachnama, Kalichbeg, 154. Raja Dahir’s daughters also were counted among slave girls, 196.  E.D., I, 172-73 gives the number of captives as 30,000.

5 Andre Wink, Al Hind, 161.

6 Mohammad Habib, “The Arab conquest of Sind.” in Politics and Society During the Early Medieval Period, being Collected Works, of Habib, ed.  K.A. Nizami, II, 1-35. Al Biladuri, 122, has 8000 to 26000.

7 Chachnama, Kalichbeg, 155; E.D.I, 173, 211.

8 Ibid., 163; E.D., I, 181.

9 Appendix D, “Mahmud’s invasions of India” in E.D., II, 434-478. 
   Habib, Sultan Mahmud of Ghaznin, 23-59. 
   M. Nazim, The Life and Times of Mahmud of Ghazni, 42-122. 
   Lal, Growth of Muslim Population, 102-04, 211-16.

10 Tarikh-i-Yamini, E.D., II, 26; Elliot’s Appendix, 438; Farishtah, I, 24.

11 Utbi, E.D., II, 39.

12 Farishtah, I, 28.

13 Lai, Growth of Muslim Population in Medieval India, 211-13; also Utbi, E-.D., II, 50 and n. 1.

14 Chachnama, Kalichbeg, 155 and n.

15 Ibid., 83-86, 154, 159, 161 ff.

16 Utbi, E.D., II, 26.  Minhaj, 607, n., 5. Al Utbi and other chroniclers refer to Jaipal on many occasions. H.G. Raverty suggests that “Jaipal appears to be the title, not the actual name, of two or more persons”, Minhaj, 81n.

17 Chachnama, Kalichbeg, 152.

18 Hodivala, 192-93.

19 Maulana Ahmad and others, Tarikh-i-Alfi, E.D., V, 163; Farishtah, I, 49.

20 Lai, Legacy, 263-68.

21 Margoliouth, Muhammad, 461; also Gibbon, II, 693.

22 In his article “Hindu Shahiya kingdom of Ohind”, in J.R.A.S., 1927.

23 Cited in Hodivala, 192-93.

24 C.E. Bosworth, The Ghaznavids, 235. 




Click here to post a comment

  • This is very disturbing article.It is sad that very little attention and historical exploration is concentrated on Muslim atrocities.

  • Our blood boils to read the cruel treatment meted out to our ancestors / forefathers. We can not try Muhammed bin Qasim or Muhammed Ghaznavi or Kiljee and punish them; in any case, we can not undo the harm to our forefathers / foremothers / foresisters and forebrothers! The pitiable attitude of most of them is they swear by the ‘then Arabs, their actions and what they pin as gospel truth’!To put it crudely, the children blaming their parents! But, certainly, we have to put in tremendous efforts to educate our cousins on how our people were dealt with by Arabs and ‘their followers’ in the name of their faith! Equally important is to make Hindus strong physically, economically, committed to Sanatana Dharma and as a social group-there should be no compromise!!

    • Those were the dark times man.. glad we hindus pulled through.. pakistan seems like nothing when compared to the horrors of the mughals.

      • You are wrong… read ‘the forgotten empire’ book tht details abt mughal invaders from 1300 thru 1600… Pakistan atrocities are nothing compared to tht… and ppl in Pakistan who does these now are our converted ancestors only…

  • These pieces of information are not so scarcely available. Read Story of Civilization by Will Durant Vol I, Our Oriental Heritage, or read M A Khan’s book Islamic Jehad Legacy of forced Conversions Imperialism and Slavery. Read Babur Naama, Read translation of ChachNaama, or Biruni’s narrative when Gahzni attacked Inida, there are plenty of resources, by Muslims themselves. Of course our colonized Slaves suffering with Stolck holm syndrome, will keep white washing it and blaming Hindus for all this. But our citizens have not taken th task of educating themselves. Even during Akbar’s time these things of abductions, and selling in Slave markets kept up.

    • It is fact-and reason is our education system.It is always Against Bharat and always Aggrssor’s centric.
      Saddest fate of india is that if Indian tries to recall their past humiliation – we are branded fanatics-none other than our own Hindus while others philosophy by which they have/have been revaging India’s honor are honored,glorified.
      Have read somewhere-dont know what is fact- in google- Pt.Nehru and Ghiyasuddin Ghazi !!

  • Ur numbers don’t add up slaves were taken but in hundreds not thousands as populations in those times were not very large. until railways were available in 19th century supply was a real problem. these numbers are unrealistic. other strange thing is how such a large number of slaves could have all died off without leaving any off springs? even if they mated with arabs we would still see some indian blood. it is not the case. slaves were there but in hundreds. in those days western part of india was empty and major population centers were in Up and bihar. anyway anybody can study capture of 200,000 plus prisoners during second world war. once near kiev then at stalingrad. most did not survive. to feed large number of prisoners is not easy

    • The following excerpt is taken from an Iranian Encyclopedia – as they say, straight from the horse’s mouth:

      Saffarids’ campaigns in eastern Afghanistan and then the Ghaznavids’ ones into the plains of northern India opened up the Indian world as a source of slave manpower, for the eastern Iranian lands at least. A single campaign of Maḥmūd of Ḡazna in 409/1018, that to Qanawj in the Ganges valley, yielded 53,000 captives, causing the price of slaves in the market at Ḡazna to fall as low as 2-10 dirhams a head (C. E. Bosworth, Ghaznavids, p.102); and by the end of the 5th/11th. century, Indian slaves were sufficiently known in Iran at large for Kaykāvūs to discuss the various aptitudes of different Indian social groups and castes for employment as slaves (Qābūs-nāma, p.116; tr. pp. 104-05).

  • Why we were so week that anybody and everybody could enslave us. There has to be a weekness of Hindus which we still refuse to accept. I accept that it is not morally right to enslave others but it is also true that every one has a right to drfend himself. The same is true of a country and of a civilisation. Why we have not learnt that from Chankya and why we are still refusing to learn

    • Buddhism made king like Ashoka a monk and rest followed with no sword or force if Kshatriya , all became hunted like animals. Not only that inter fighting between kings was a major factor and people like jaichand, maan singh were many kings who were traitors like you see today – what u think Gandhi family , MKG, AAP parties/ they will protect terrorists for sake of power. It was there before and now. History did not change much.

    • Its not that Hindus were weak but Arabs & Muslims were very cruel & barbaric. Such barbarism is not the calling of the Santan Dharma. All our wars be it Maha Bhartha or Ram-Ravana war were fought in a very disciplined manner. But the Arabs & Muslims had not such rules that they will not raise arm against an armless person. They were Butchers. And hence Hindus were overpowered and enslaved. That my personal opinion. However whatever may have been our history it must be brought to our education system. There is a very website.. for more insight into our past history with facts & figures. Its by an Art of Living teacher who is French. Thanks.

  • What falsified and distorted history we have been made to read and still continue to do so. It it’s time we reverse it. Only this kind of history will produce men capable of defending our country.

    • The government of India removed history of medieval India from the school syllabus in 1982. Indira Gandhi was the Prime Minister those days. Gandhi Nehru dynasty are not Hindus. They are Muslims.

  • caste system has weakened the hindu community. other divisions of worshipping various deities further creates difference. this may be good for your spiritual journey but not when it comes to protect our people and society.

    let us bring in this aspect of hindus as a one community without caste and creed. the hindu jati

  • Not all indians were slaves of muslims. many Gujjars went willingly with Prithviraj after his capture. to this day Gujjars talk about how their ancestors went to garh ghazni. some converted to islam some did not but they came back and settled in punjab. some went westwards all they way to europe and are known as gypsies. if one has time two pakistani dramas are worth watching. they are ‘Dohari’ and ‘Sukhan’ these dramas show how jats and rajputs who converted to islam are still same as ones who are hindus

    We cant change the history, can we! Today our enemy lives very beside us. It takes a lie to give them a reason to kill humanity. They are not driven by any country, not any cause but a lie. You may call them terrorist, but do you know how can they entered in to your country? They are all slave, they volunteered them selves to the lie provided by the criminal muster minds or the so called terrorist organizations. Now let me come to primary question, as because this person can be your friend, neighbour, or the same person who travels with you every day by any local train. My question is, can you trust the person beside you?

  • There is no doubt that the barbarians from the west (especially Islamic countries) have plundered, looted, maimed, raped, pillaged and ruined our country in those ages. It happened primarily due to the lack of unity, lack of great heroes and unfortunate spread of ‘peaceful’ rulers in India.

    It is a great lesson for us. Never to be under-prepared in the area of defence. Never to allow intolerant religions to gain an upper hand. Never to allow others to dominate or oppress us.

    • This is one place I personally find Narendra Modi is being mis-lead by Arun Jaitely and wily bureaucrats. Armed Forces are being continuously subverted to IAS and one day the country could be made to pay a price for this. The best individuals must join the Armed Forces to serve the country selflessly and with a sense of deep rooted pride.

  • I disagree that caste system weakened us. In fact, we were weakened by the dilution of the caste system. The Kshatriyas seemed to have not focused on their duties and inter-fighting among them weakened us. We should never get confused about the real issues. If we get swayed by propaganda, we will never learn.

    Let someone do an analysis of the Indian army today and we will find that the predominant portion of the army and its heroes are, in fact, Kshatriyas.

    • Cast devides us. When we are devided there will be political division too. So you can have stronger state. You better to understand. You are getting this response itself is indicate how we are devided on opinion. In similarly it divides whole society.

    • Definitely it was caste system…today Indian army is one of the strongest in the world only because army is not divided on caste lines.even in Rajputana rifles caste is not the basis for being a soldier in that regiment…let me clarify u one thing …n that’s the truth children of sc -st are much tougher mentally n physically as they see hardship frm the beginning….u can see arnd……the thing u r talkin abt is bullshit….khatriyas protected Hinduism from the beginning . n every single race which invaded India succeeded in some extent or other… think before…..punch hurts much more than a finger

    • The so called `Kshatriya’ are manning only the 26 Batallions of Rajput regiment. In addition, 50% of the the Raj Rif troops are Rajputs. Unfortunately Jats, Jat Sikhs, Guzars, Ahirs of north western India and Gorkhas (who never formed part of Manu’s caste system) who form the main punch of the Indian Army today were never part of the Kshatriya clan. These communities were not taken in to the medieval Indian armies by the Rajputs. This could be one of the reasons why we were enslaved. Most of the rulers were `AIYAASH’ and never concentrated on good governance. In addition to this…we are never short of traitors.

  • @Kanwarjit Singh:
    yes, pakistani Drama “dohari’ and Sukhan talk about how they converted to Islam and all.. but what you are talking about is very specific narrative.. in general discourse of pakistani people, they think they have and should have nothing in common with hindus.. dats the problem

  • I have no sympathy for theses conquerors who happened to be muslim. They humiliated my ancestors and have no respect for them.For me they were in pursuits of their self interests nothing do with religion directly. Otherwise, Mughals attacked an other kingdom whose rulers were muslim. Sher Shah Suri defested mughals who were muslims etc. Likewise, when Aryans attacked India by defeating locals and introduced Hinduism they were also working for their self interests. The only thing which hurts me as being local and son of the soil is that why were we so weak always.India/south asia was divided then and it is divided today on the very same lines as we were since last 3000 years ago. It is caste, creed, religion, langauge etc.

      • I would say it has come under criticism but we can say it has, altogether, been disapproved. My point is that Hinduism was also adopted like Islam by replacing some religion(s). After all, the people from Mohenjo-daro (I was born in a neighbouring city of this site) did not practice Islam or Hinduism as both did not exist at that time. I am proud of my roots in Indus Civilization and love present day South Asia where I value all the major religions of the region. It is fatal to think India/South Asia for Hinduism. My roots and love for India predates these religions. It is time to move on, and who knows an other Guru Nanik or Guatam Budha, in future, may introduce new philosophy which replaces present day religons!

        • Sorry Asad but I don’t agree with your argument.

          Who says Hinduism is a religion? did you read anywhere? Can you please give me Pramana or any valid source which says it is a religion?

          Few points:

          1. Hinduism is not started or propagated by anyone
          2. Hinduism never pushed anyone
          3. Hinduism teaches about life, culture, tradition and let me tell you it does not teaches any specific but in general i.e. Common to all
          4. Hinduism does not cover a group, community or area whosoever is willing can follow

          Now VHP, RSS, and other groups comes into existence where there are threats to their lifestyle, when there is a threat to their living. If you read any authentic book or paper you will find out not even 1% of Indian Muslims or Muslims living in India are from Indian Origin i.e. either they are converted or their ancestors are from persia, afgan, turks or mongolia

          Whereas we know who started Islam, Sikh, Buddhism like Muhammad, Guru Nanak and Gautam…

          I am sorry, I am not in favor or in against of any religion as I follow all. I read Geeta, Rama Katha, Quran, Bible and other religious books

        • I appreciate ur understanding Mr Azad.but I beg to differ on one particular line” Hinduism was adopted,”.
          Hinduism is the only religion which has been prevalent since ages and through different yugs.
          From Hinduism rose all the other different branches under various seers and saints.
          As we know that Christianity was found by Jesus and Islam by the prophet,you cannot mark a particular person or date to Hinduism.which proves that since the time of the creation of this universe Hinduism is prevalent

    • Yes. first of all the Dravidian invasion theory is a baseless propaganda.
      Secondly, you need not feel hurt at the diversity of India on the basis of factors like religion, language, caste, creed, etc. Rather, you should feel proud at the diversity of India. you should also appreciate the pluralism of the sanatan dharm which has also accepted the invaders – muslims and christians – in one melting pot of culture.

    • Aryan invasion is shit… was never a fact….its just to misguide people as they do with these moghal conquests in our text books…

    • Agreed. Mis-information or lack of information is another issue which is still harming the country. The Muslims in India must know that they were forcibly converted to Islam and they share their bloodline and common ancestry with the Hindus. By the way Hindu is not a religion brought in by the invaders but a way of life which has gradually evolved on this very land.

  • The Arabs made something like 47 attempts to invade before succeeding. The people from Pakistan still think they are descendants from these Arabs, rather then accepting they may be a half-race. The irony many were forcibly converted by the sword to Islam or though economic means such as threatened with loss of land or possessions. Perhaps, if Pakistanis understood this, they would not be so hostile. Their history books have been re-written, for instance before Partition 25% of the population was Hindus, but most had to leave due to violence. Hindus who remain in Pakistan are constantly attacked or face racism or treated as third class citizens. Even today in Pakistan, Hindu girls are kidnapped are forcibly converted to Islam. If it were the other way around, Muslims girl been kidnapped their people would be in up-roar.

    India needs to become more paranoid. Yes, they are out to get India. The fact terrorist could just walk into Mumbai, just said it all about the Indian security services. When the Malaysian airliner MH370 went missing, the Indian said their radar was ‘turned-off’ at the ANdaman and Nicobar Island, but that is where India has it military R&D.

    I read accounts of Pakistan trying to stir up problems in Punjab, to turn the Sikhs against India. Pakistan already has half of the Punjab, they seem keen to get the other half.

    Saudi sends them many books,

    In today’s world India needs to be on its guard.

  • this article has one serious truth deficit or flaw,how maney where there from the aggressor,some where they mentioned that prisoners were hogg tied with ropes,how much rope.. was impossible to make available. what I am trying to say Indian were docile and rendered law abiding, in front of real slaughtering they just accepted what a rape survivor does with life

  • Such a distrubing peice of hitory. But thanks for bringing it to light. After reading this I reounted the words of Kavi Raj Bhushan who had said Sivaji na hot toh sunnat hot sabki, If it would not had been fot SHIVAJI, all Indians would have ben made to undergo Sunnat. Thanks yo that divine embodiment on earth Chatrapati Shivaji we are able to to read this today as hindus and uprooted the Mughal rule

  • its quite strange to see still muslims all over sub-continent defend these fools..
    Hindus need to rise before they perish again…i would die like a king rather than living like slaves…


  • Am I only one think that we punish upper casts of Hindu society with reservations(and other abuses) for historic deeds of their forefathers, while giving away two countries for those who indulged in violence at a level that cannot be matched by any imagination of human beings across the world and still worshipping them as minorities? Complete nonsense!

  • Makes one’s blood boil and we allow them to live in India. Congress, the British and Muslims rewrote our history to make these evil people look good. Unite and lets reclaim our Motherland, no more Pakistan or Bangladesh.

  • @ Asad. As someone who goes by outdated knowledge perhaps you need to be reminded of the following. the AIT/AMT has been factually disproven. Yes disproven. Being disproven you can not try and act cunning and say that a faith which you do not follow is foreign. Perhaps you don’t know one thing which comprehensive disproves your quarter baked statement. The Sarasvathi civilisation itself is part of the cultural continuity of Sanatana Dharma. You saying it as being adopted is also factually not true. It was through a homogeneous (yes homogeneous) synthesis of the local cultural customs which resulted in the organic fruition of what i known today. You’re completely incorrect by even the mention to say ‘introduce’ (which you have no proof of whereas the proof of homogeneous continuity is clearly there). What you are saying is in the case of the other religions. Not Sanatana Dharma. The Semitised perspective interpretation of yours is wrong and disproven. Sanatana Dharma was always here (a proven truth) as the cultural and civilisational continuity is there and the components of it were within the nation. It is very common to make this mistake of thinking falsely (which is disproven anyway) and making assumptions based on things which you have read (false Marxist based books which have enforced totalitarian ignorance) and making incorrectly brash statements without even thinking of seeing the other side (which is the original narrative itself which people are realising and the textbooks are being rectified). You don’t know the background of this fake theory (which would help in completely discarding it and appreciate the opposite). The OIT is emerging to be more correct (which data from all the scientific and textual evidence). Sanatana Dharma, Buddh dharma, Sikh Dharma and Jain Dharma as well as most of the other animistic faiths are all homogeneous to the region. The others have been replaced by foreign ideologies. You need not continue down the path of trying to feel foreign and act as if you know about what the culture is when in fact it is disproven to be wrong (which is what you have been reading). The truth is finally starting to reach the mainstream now and is disproving the misnomers now.

  • This Is All But Fake, Might Be Few Soldiers And Some Mughal Rulers of the late were cruel, but Mahmud Ghaznawi And Muhammad Bin Qasim! Both Were Kind Rulers! We Didn’t And Don’t Believe In Attacking The Unarmed!
    This Article Is Just To Build Tension In The East, So That West May Progress! Totally Fake!

  • No one can match this, even todays world ISIS has some limits but not the days back when India was invaded from Muslims. We should not forget how much blood we have shed to protect our identity as a Hindu. Those who converted to Muslims were cowards, braves either fought and win or become martyr for the nation. Now we should understand how costly it is for us to remain Hindus. Few sickular people who does not know the history talk about scularism whereas we very well understand that there is no word called secularism in Islamic dictionary. Only non-Muslims are forced to follow this till the time they outnumber us. Prey to God that everyone of us understand how important it is to understand our identity and our past.

  • A very mind disturbing truth, a very beautifully presented article indeed. Basically being a genetic and character analyst, I have repeatedly understood from our history that certain greedy and materialistic lovers of our own creed (Hindus) sold our country for their personal benefits and helped invaders to infiltrate and capture. Our soul enemy has been these kind of selfish individuals, even today money and materials remain to be on the supreme weighing of an individuals social status, everyone like to earn respect and ends up selling not only oneself for a selfish cost but sells his colleagues and countrymen along with. Unless each of us think collectively with selflessness and for our collective betterment we will continue to be exploited and continue to experience and read a history like this for further more.. Our Sanathana Dharma has to be understood much better and well communicated among our future generations.. We will be able to create a joyful history for all.. If we dont learn from our past we are not worthy to be human beings..

  • All so-called historians or chroniclers of Muslim invaders were prone to exaggerate and so one must exercise caution when encountering the numbers – numbers of slaves taken, numbers of men slaughtered, etc. The populations of those days were probably not as many as in these days. For instance, to take 500,000 people as prisoners, one might have had to round up people from several towns! And di these people meekly surrender to these invaders, however beastly they were? By giving only the descriptions gleaned from Muslim accounts, we are doing a disservice to the valour and fighting spirit of the Hindus of those times.
    Try to present a balanced picture, please.

    • Population of India was around 170 million in 1000 AD which came down to 100 million in 1500 AD because of the biggest holocaust.

  • LoL. Thats a perfect lie. You say that you wont attack unarmed people but look at the current brutualities of ISIS. They are killing unarmed civilians, disrobing women and enslaving women. There was a mass annihilation of unarmed civilians of bangladesh by pakistani army. Now coming to your hero ghaznavi, there was a historian of ghaznavi, Al biruni. He has mentioned with utmost proud and glory the brutual and barbarian acts committed by ghaznavi on kafirs and non believers ( infidels). But ghaznavi was not the first or last one to do that. Almost all islamic invaders were brutual towards the hindus. THere are many persian historians of that era who had mentioned their brutual acts with utmost proud and glory

  • Can we teach truth in our schools and colleges? We cant. Everyone should ask oneself why.
    Can you tell your children that some races have genes of brutality in them? can you teach them comparative histories of Hindus and ptherreligions? Why has it become a mark of social acceptability to deride Hinduism,which has had no history of invading others, enslaving anyone,converting to its faith with or without force? And,why has Hinduism become such an easy and open target of criticism? Something is rotten with the society.


  • While the atrocities committed on our ancestors by the Arabs, Turks and the later stage balkan muslims can not be forgotten, we need to formulate our education curricullam in a such a way that these events are portrayed in our History Text Books with great emphasis. Every growing Indian from the age of 5 when he starts schooling till he finishes his secondary schooling should realize and develop a conviction on the erstwhile invaders for their life time. The whole generation decade after decade having developed such a hatred filled conviction shall transform the entire youth and working population of the country with enormous strength mentally and physically to grow into a menacingly unconquerable force in the future centuries to come.

    Our ancestors had also been most passive civilization in this earth having no trace of external invasion and territory conquering effort.

  • Why no bollywood movies has been made on this topic? It has all he elements of success, sex, passion, fight, action, war, etc…. so many hollywood and turkish movies as well as serials have been made on enslavement of european women by muslim invaders… But, in India, this topic is a kind of untouchable. Another interesting topic is “Muslim Harem”. How the women were enslaved and kept in those Harem? How was the life in those Harems? etc…

  • 1.Even if David/Aryan invasion theory is right, we can not support a grudge now and consider anyone enemy now for the wrongs perpetrated by forefathers of present generation. 2.It is clear that most Pak after Muslims are turk-arab descendent s from at least father side OR Sindhi -ganga native female war-booty.( We were first called hindus by invaders who could not pronounce s. ) 3Yes. we were weak, fighting with eachother,esp nonviolence preached by budh jain system. 4. Caste system might have helped in creating great scholars and artisans, but it deprived us of warrior s.Three fourth of population just couldn’t hold a sword, because it was not their profession.5.Now the times have changed.Wehave to live peacefully.Indian Muslims and hindus have to live peacefully in harmony. Forget the old Hindu caste system.Remember old wrong s of forefathers but to create harmony.Amen.Jai hind.

    • Actually, these reports are a lie and are just making you weaker, first of all, Rajputs and Jatts who are genetically of martial origins repelled Arabs and other invaders for milleniums which is why Hindus exist till this day but Zoroastrianism is dead now.

  • Casteism (Unch- Neech or Jativaad) among Hindus has always been a major dividing factors of Hindus and even after loosing Pakistan, Afghanistan, Kashmir , Bangladesh or letting theses states converted to Islamic Countries . Hindus still have not changed themsevles and KEEP PRATICING THIS JATIVAAD VERY STEADILY.
    Now a days in UP, Bihaar ,West Bengaal , Kerala , Assam ,Tripura Muslims keep multiplying themseves exponentially and Hindus are divided and fighting each other on castes line as always .
    Now a days Hindus are doing one more Blunder by producing one or two children only which is just half than Muslims . So Minority muslims are slowly but steadily going towards 50 % or greater of population in just few DECADES.

    • This article is a lie, the Ummayad Caliphate ended in Rajasthan when 6,000 Gujjars killed 30,000 Arabs, I like to also say that martial should rule India and not Brahmin or Bania people.

  • Horrible article..feel sad at plight of our ancestors….Many people dnt know the atrocities of these arabi invaders….sad that once hinduism extended until Pakistan and even Afghanistan (Gandhari and kekeyi belonged there) and was placated by sword…and islamic rule is glorified in our textbooks…! If somebody questions they are labeled as religious fanatics,mad and anti-indians…