Did ISLAM spread on the point of sword?How???

Question

If Islam spread on the point of sword then which army went to Indonasia to spread Islam,it's the largest muslim populated country.Which army went to USA that the third largest religeon there is Islam..

Answer 1

it came by trades and immigration.

and about what people say that Islam force people to believe it's totally ignorant. they can't actually believe that people convert to Islam from their own self. absolutly clear in the Quran there is no force to believe in this religion. they are too jelous to see many people convert to Islam. oh yes this religion is true and strong and people still convert to it. not with force but with believe and understanding.

and some with sword for those countries that attacked muslims unfairly such are the people from macca. the macca government before turning to Islam used to torture anyone who convert to Islam. they used to capture any muslim and give him hard time. so God ordered Muhammad to fight them and take over.

Answer 2

Well islam was not established under point of sword, Prophet Mohammed sent his disciples to various parts of the world to preach islam, well yes it is true that some muslims invaders who later became kings in different part of the world made people accept islam on point of sword - especially in inda

Answer 3

no, islam did not expand by sword, in quraan, a verse says "no coarsion in embracing Isalm",
jews and christians were left safely to live side by side with muslims as long as they paid tributes, much like rental fees or taxes for letting them stay in islamic land, and they were not forced whatsoever to join the islamic religion.
wars were only fought with those who tried to harm islam and muslims, and they were many, on top of them were/still are jews.
on the other hand a verse in quraan mentions that christians are the friendliest people towards muslims, because they are nice and down-to-earth.

Answer 4

As far as I know, which isn't a lot, there were only a few instances of that type of missions.
I know they usually kept the 'people of the book' safe. There were a couple massacres though where Christians were slaughtered by those people who wear the funny hat that's red with the tassel on top like the Shriners. It's red because they said something about dipping their hats in Christian blood.

Answer 5

Which army? What army?
Put a sword on their necks and tell them to say the syahadah?
For what?

Laa Iqrahaa fid diin..
for there is no compulsion in religion

Answer 6

yes by the sword
in us there wasnt moslem at the begining og islam
now it`s different these moslem in us came from arab countires
the islam assault was commanded by Muhamed and even after Muhamed his followers continue assaults
specialy the middle east where it all started

middle east jews and christians who could not pay the tribute(Jizia) turned to islam
and jews who got money they were paying
to Muhamed tribute (Jizia) to maintain the judaism
Christians who got money they were paying
to Muhamed tribute (Jizia) to maintain the Christianity as a thier religon

according to the chapter in quran
------------------------------------------
Quran-9:29, Fight those who believe neither in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth (Islam), of the People of the Book (Christians and Jews), until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued


Muhamed said "dont curse my followers because they turned to islam cause of the fear of God and the people turned to islam cause of the fear of the sword"

Answer 7

wht about christians?were there any christians in latin america or in africa before your army go there?...
you know...nobody can accept a religion by sword from the buttom of his/her heart...

Answer 8

yes i agree to you that it is the meaningless to say this

Answer 9

You mentioned largest and third largest. You conviniently left out second largest Muslim pupulated nation- INDIA.

If you count Pakistan , Bangladesh and Afganistan along with it, which were very much part of India, when Islam entered India , You will have your answer.

"Hindu Kush" - does that word rings a bell? The mountain range in afganistan was named after the thousands of hindus killed by islamic conquerers.
OR
Ever read words "BUT" SHIKAN", "BUT SHIKANI" AND "GAWZI." Read related history and you will know. "But" is Arabic for Buddha and Shikan means destroyer , that will give you a hint.

It was not an isolated incident. First attack on India in name of Islam was made in 712 AD. It actually never stopped since then!!

"The Mohammedan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history". The Islamic historians and scholars have recorded with great glee and pride of the slaughters of Hindus, forced conversions, abduction of Hindu women and children to slave markets and the destruction of temples carried out by the warriors of Islam during 800 AD to 1700 AD. Millions of Hindus were converted to Islam by sword during this period. "

(source: The Story of Civilization: Our Oriental Heritage - By Will Durant page 459). For more on Will Durant refer to chapter on Quotes.

Alberuni , court historian of Gazani, Muslim scholar from Central Asia. He wrote a very comprehensive book "Indica" in1030 AD. He diligently went into the specifics of the invasion:

"...they (the Hindus) frighten their children with us, our dress and our ways and customs" and decree us as "devil's breed". "They regard everything we do as opposite of all that is good and proper". (Sachau: 20)

And, regarding the effect of Mahmud's raids, he says:

"Mahmud utterly ruined the prosperity of the country, and performed those wonderful exploits, by which the Hindus became like atoms of dust scattered in all directions, and like a tale of old in the mouth of the people."
"their (the Hindus') scattered remains cherish, of course, the most inveterate aversion towards all Muslims." (Sachau: 22).

(source: Alberuni's India. - By C Edward Sachau trans. New Delhi: Low Price Publications, 1993).

Irfan Husain, a freelance columnist from Pakistan has observed:

”While historical events should be judged in the context of their times, it cannot be denied that even in that bloody period of history, no mercy was shown to the Hindus unfortunate enough to be in the path of either the Arab conquerors of Sindh and south Punjab, or the Central Asians who swept in from Afghanistan.

The Muslim heroes who figure larger than life in our history books committed some dreadful crimes. Mahmud of Ghazni, Qutb-ud-Din Aibak, Balban, Mohammed bin Qasim, and Sultan Mohammad Tughlak, all have blood-stained hands that the passage of years has not cleansed. Indeed, the presence of Muslim historians on their various campaigns has ensured that the memory of their deeds will live long after they were buried.

Seen through Hindu eyes, the Muslim invasion of their homeland was an unmitigated disaster. Their temples were razed, their idols smashed, their women raped, their men killed or taken slaves. When Mahmud of Ghazni entered Somnath on one of his annual raids, he slaughtered all 50,000 inhabitants. Aibak killed and enslaved hundreds of thousands. The list of horrors is long and painful.

These conquerors justified their deeds by claiming it was their religious duty to smite non-believers. Cloaking themselves in the banner of Islam, they claimed they were fighting for their faith when, in reality, they were indulging in straightforward slaughter and pillage. When these warriors settled in India, they ruled as absolute despots over a cowed Hindu populace. For generations, their descendants took their martial superiority over their subjects for granted. "... And a substantial number of Pakistani Muslims are secretly convinced that they are inherently superior to the Hindus. One irony, of course, is that contrary to their wishful thinking, the vast majority of Muslims in the subcontinent have more Hindu blood in their veins than there is Arab, Afghan, Turkish or Persian blood. Many of the invaders took Hindu wives and concubines."

(source: Demons from the past - By Ifran Husain - dailytimes.com.pk). Refer to chapter on Glimpses XV

Colonel James Tod (1782-1835) Late British political agent to the Western Rajpoot State, author of Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan: or the Central and Western Rajput States of India.

He wrote in 1829:

"After eight centuries of galling subjection to conquerors totally ignorant of the classical language of the Hindus; after almost every capital city had been repeatedly stormed and sacked by barbarians, bigotted, and exasperated foes, it is too much to expect that the literature of the country should not have sustained..." "

(source: Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan: or the Central and Western Rajput States of India - By Colonel James Tod p. viii). For more on Colonel Tod refer to chapter on Quotes.

Aldous Huxley (1894-1963) also notices:

"Islam's black record of holy wars and persecution - a record comparable to that of later Christianity."

He mention in his book, Ends and Means, "It is an extremely significant fact that, before the coming of the Mohammedans, there was virtually no persecution in India. The Chinese pilgrim Hiuen Tsang, who visited India in the first half of the seventh century and has left a circumstantial account of his 14 years in the country, makes it clear that Hindus and Buddhist lived side by side without any show of violence. Neither Hinduism or Buddhism is disgraced by anything corresponding to the Inquisition; neither was ever guilty of such iniquities as the Albigensian crusade or such criminal lunacies as the religious wars of the 16th and 17the centuries."

(source: On Hinduism Reviews and Reflections - By Ram Swarup p.150-151). For more Aldous Huxley on refer to chapter on Quotes.

Alain Danielou (1907-1994) , in his book, Histoire de l' Inde writes:

"From the time Muslims started arriving, around 632 AD, the history of India becomes a long, monotonous series of murders, massacres, spoliations, and destructions. It is, as usual, in the name of 'a holy war' of their faith, of their sole God, that the barbarians have destroyed civilizations, wiped out entire races." Mahmoud Ghazni, continues Danielou, "was an early example of Muslim ruthlessness, burning in 1018 of the temples of Mathura, razing Kanauj to the ground and destroying the famous temple of Somnath, sacred to all Hindus. His successors were as ruthless as Ghazni: 103 temples in the holy city of Benaras were razed to the ground, its marvelous temples destroyed, its magnificent palaces wrecked." Indeed, the Muslim policy vis a vis India, concludes Danielou, seems to have been a conscious systematic destruction of everything that was beautiful, holy, refined."

(source: Histoire de l' Inde - By Alain Danielou p. 222 or A Brief History of India).

Hindu Kush Mountains - " Slaughter of the Hindus "

Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists have also suffered a terrible holocaust, probably without parallel in human history. Take the Hindu Kush for instance, probably one of the biggest genocides of Hindus. There is practically no serious research ever done about it and no mention in history books. Yet the name Hindu Kush appears many times in the writings of Muslim chroniclers in 1333 AD. Ibn Battutah, the medieval Berber traveller, said the name meant 'Hindu Killer,' a meaning still given by Afghan mountain dwellers.

Afghanistan was a full part of the Hindu cradle up till the year 1000, and in political unity with India until Nadir Shah separated it in the 18th century. The mountain range in Eastern Afghanistan where the native Hindus were slaughtered, is still called the Hindu Kush (Persian: "Hindu Slaughter").

(Note: To the Hindus, this mountain range was known as Paariyaatra Parvat. But when the last Hindu king of Kabul was killed Muslims ruled this land and then called these mountains the Hindu Kush -- "Slaughter of the Hindus" ).

It is significant that one of the very few place-names on earth that reminds us not of the victory of the winners but rather of the slaughter of the losers, concerns a genocide of Hindus by the Muslims.

A few known historical figures can be used to justify this estimate. The Encyclopaedia Britannica recalls that in December 1398 AD, Taimurlane ordered the execution of at least 50,000 captives before the battle for Delhi; likewise, the number of captives butchered by Taimurlane's army was about 100,000.

The Britannica again mentions that Mughal emperor Akbar ordered the massacre of about 30,000 captured Rajput Hindus on February 24, 1568 AD, after the battle for Chitod, a number confirmed by Abul Fazl, Akbar's court historian. Afghan historian Khondamir notes that during one of the many repeated invasions on the city of Herat in western Afghanistan, which used to be part of the Hindu Shahiya kingdoms '1,500,000 residents perished.' 'Thus, 'it is evident that the mountain range was named as Hindu Kush as a reminder to the future Hindu generations of the slaughter and slavery of Hindus during the Moslem conquests.'

(source: Where's India's holocaust museum? - By Francois Gautier - rediff.com).

Muslims invaders did record with glee their genocide on Hindus, because they felt all along that they were doing their duty; that killing, plundering, enslaving and razing temples was the work of God, Mohammed. Indeed, whether it was Mahmud of Ghazni (997-1030), who was no barbarian, although a Turk, and patronised art and literature, would recite a verse of the Koran every night after having razed temples and killed his quota of unbelievers; or Firuz Shah Tughlak (1351-1388) who personally confirms that the destruction of Pagan temples was done out of piety and writes: "on the day of a Hindu festival, I went there myself, ordered the executions of all the leaders AND PRACTITIONERS of his abomination; I destroyed their idols temples and built mosques in their places".

(source: Negationism and the Muslim Conquests - by Francois Gautier)

Amir Timur or Tamerlane (1336 - 1405) Turkmen Mongol conqueror wrote:

"My principal object in coming to Hindustan… has been to accomplish two things. The first was to war with the infidels, the enemies of the Mohammadan religion; and by this religious warfare to acquire some claim to reward in the life to come. The other was… that the army of Islam might gain something by plundering the wealth and valuables of the infidels: plunder in war is as lawful as their mothers’ milk to Musalmans who war for their faith.”

While studying the legacy of Muslim rule in India, it has to be constantly borne in mind that the objectives of all Muslim invaders and rulers were the same as those mentioned above. Timur or Tamerlane himself defines them candidly and bluntly while others do so through their chroniclers.

(source: The Legacy of Muslim Rule in India - By K S Lal).

The poet Amir Khusrau testified that "the Turks, whenever they please, can seize, buy or sell any Hindu."

(source: History of India - By Elliot & Dawson, vol 3 p. 561. Quoted from Amir Khusrau's Nuh Sipehr).

Shahabuddin al-Umri wrote about the days of Sultan Mohammed bin Tughlaq (1325-51):

"The Sultan never ceases to show the greatest zeal in making wars upon the infidel....Every day thousands of slaves are sold at a very low price, so great is the number of prisoners."

(source: Muslim Slave System in Medieval India - By K. S. Lal p. 128).

Amir Khusrau (1253 - 1325) Indo-Persian poet. A prolific classical poet associated with royal courts of more than seven rulers of Delhi Sultanate. He described:

"in poetical metaphors the destruction of Hindu temples for the sake of transformation into mosques."

(source: India and Europe: An Essay in Understanding - By Wilhelm Halbfass p. 31).

The first Muslim invasion of India came from the north-west by the Arabs who were led by Mahommad Bin Qasim. It took place in 711 A.D.Muhammad of Ghazni (the idol breaker) in 1001 A.D. Muhammad died in 1030 A.D., but within the short span of 30 years, he invaded India 17 times. He was followed by Mahommed Ghori, who began his career as an invader in 1173. He was killed in 1206. For thirty years Muhammad of Ghazni ravaged India and for thirty years Mahommad Ghori harried the same country in the same way.

Then followed the incursions of the Moghul hordes of Chenghiz Khan. They first came in 1221. They then stayed on the border of India but did not enter it. Twenty years later, they marched on Lahore and sacked it. Of their inroads, the most terrible was under Timur in 1398. Then comes on the scene a new invader in the person of Babar who invaded India in 1526. The invasion of India did not stop with that of Babar. There occurred two more invasions. In 1738 Nadir Shah’s invading host swept over the Punjab like a flooded river “furious as the ocean”. He was followed by Ahmad Shah Abdali who invaded India in 1761, smashed the forces of the Marathas at Panipat and crushed for ever the attempt of the Hindus to gain the ground which they had lost to their Muslim invaders.

These Muslim invasions were not undertaken merely out of lust for loot or conquest, but also to strike a blow at the idolatry and polytheism of Hindus and establishing Islam in India.

Muhammad of Ghazni also looked upon his numerous invasions of India as the waging of a holy war. Al’Utbi, the historian of Muhammad, describing his raids writes:

“He demolished idol temples and established Islam. He captured ……cities, destroyed the idolaters, and gratifying Muslims. He then returned home and promulgated accounts of the victories obtained for Islam……..and vowed that every year he would undertake a holy war against Hind.”

(source: Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Writings and Speeches.

"In 1193, when the Muslim conquerors reached Bihar and massacred the 'idolatrous unbelievers', the Buddhists were still in the majority on the lower Ganges. According to an 11th century inscription, the great temple of Bodh Gaya had been restored by the Burmese - an indication that the native population had lost all interest.

(source: India - By Martin Hurlimann p. 224).

Sultan Mahmood Ghaznavi, who rampaged across most of northern India converting Hindus to Islam and smashing Hindu statues. He is said to have taken Hindu statues and put them at the entrance to a mosque in Ghazni so the Muslim faithful could use them as stepping stones.

(source: Associated Press).

The Quwwat ul-Islam or 'Might of Islam' Mosque, erected on the site of Delhi's largest Hindu temple, and it contains on three sides, by rows of stone columns pillaged from some 27 local Hindu and Jain shrines. To the southeast was erected the great Qutb (pole or axis) Minar. It was haughtily erected as a tower of victory, and its inscriptions proclaim its purpose - to cast a long shadow of God over the conquered city of the Hindus. Qutub-ud-din employed the local Hindu craftsmen of Delhi, and their beautifully detailed stonework is everywhere in evidence. The pointed arches of the mosque's western screen were constructed using only traditional Hindu corbelling techniques; and around these arches and on the decorative band encircling the minar the craftsmen carved inscriptions, in elegant Naskhi script, interspersed with floral designs of Indian origin.

(source: Indian Art - By Roy C. Craven p. 195-196).

What the invaders really did - By Rizwan Salim
Rizwan Salim reviewer, New York Tribune, Capitol Hill reporter, Engineering Times, assistant editor, American Sentinel, published in Hindustan Times has wisely observed:

" Savages at a very low level of civilization and no culture worth the name, from Arabia and west Asia, began entering India from the early century onwards. Islamic invaders demolished countless Hindu temples, shattered uncountable sculpture and idols, plundered innumerable palaces and forts of Hindu kings, killed vast numbers of Hindu men and carried off Hindu women. This story, the educated-and a lot of even the illiterate Indians-know very well. History books tell it in remarkable detail. But many Indians do not seem to recognize that the alien Muslim marauders destroyed the historical evolution of the earth's most mentally advanced civilization, the most richly imaginative culture, and the most vigorously creative society. "

The Musalman invaders sacked the Buddhist Universities of Nalanda, Vikramshila, Jagaddala, Odantapuri to name only a few. They raised to the ground Buddhist monasteries with which the country was studded. The monks fled away in thousands to Nepal, Tibet and other places outside India. A very large number were killed outright by the Muslim commanders. How the Buddhist priesthood perished by the sword of the Muslim invaders has been recorded by the Muslim historians themselves. Summarizing the evidence relating to the slaughter of the Buddhist Monks perpetrated by the Musalman General in the course of his invasion of Bihar in 1197 AD, Mr. Vincent Smith says, "....Great quantities of plunder were obtained, and the slaughter of the 'shaven headed Brahmans', that is to say the Buddhist monks, was so thoroughly completed, that when the victor sought for someone capable of explaining the contents of the books in the libraries of the monasteries, not a living man could be found who was able to read them. 'It was discovered,' we are told, 'that the whole of that fortress and city was a college, and in the Hindi tongue they call a college Bihar.' "Such was the slaughter of the Buddhist priesthood perpetrated by the Islamic invaders. The axe was struck at the very root. For by killing the Buddhist priesthood, Islam killed Buddhism. This was the greatest disaster that befell the religion of the Buddha in India...."

"There can be no doubt that the fall of Buddhism in India was due to the invasions of the Musalmans." Islam came out as the enemy of the 'But'. The word 'But' as everybody knows, is the Arabic word and means an idol. Thus the origin of the word indicates that in the Moslem mind idol worship had come to be identified with the Religion of the Buddha. To the Muslims, they were one and the same thing. The mission to break the idols thus became the mission to destroy Buddhism. Islam destroyed Buddhism not only in India but whatever it went. Before Islam came into being Buddhism was the religion of Bactria, Parthia, Afghanistan, Gandhar, and Chinese Turkestan, as it was of the whole of Asia..."

Long before the Arabs came here with their new religion of Islam, Buddhist monks lived in Central Asia, the conduit through which Buddhism traveled from India to the East.

The giant Buddha statues at Bamian in Afghanistan lay on the same road.

They have been destroyed, but a wonderful sleeping Buddha, 16m long, still lies peacefully in Tajikistan.

And near Kampyr-Tepe, we were invited to the site of a Buddhist lamasery, where the mendicant monks lived underground in a labyrinth, to protect them from the terrible heat and cold of the plain.

(source: Uzbekistan's best kept secret - BBC news.com).

Buddhism, Jainism and Sikhism originated as offshoots of Hinduism. Their founders were neither crucified nor exiled. The ancient history of India attests to the symbiotic existence of multiple religions in that subcontinent. Religious tolerance has been the norm in India for thousands of years.

(source: Proselytization In India: An Indian Christian's Perspective - By C Alex Alexander - sulekha.com).

Many foreign groups of people persecuted for their religion came to seek refuge in India. The Parsis have thrived. The heterodox Syrian Christians have lived in peace until the Portuguese arrived to enlist them in their effort to christianize India. The Jews have expressed their gratitude when they left for Israel because India was the only country where their memories were not of persecution but of friendly co-existence.

(source: Negationism in India: Concealilng the Record of Islam - By Koenraad Elst Voice of India p. 72).

The infidels in the new territories were mainly Buddhists and Hindus. The Buddhists with their pacifist philosophy offered no resistance and were the first to go. The destruction of the monasteries, the killing of the monks and the rape of nuns is well-known even though there is still no book documenting this episode in all its horror. In particular the destruction of the Buddhist universities of Nalanda, Vikramshila, Odantapura, and Jagddala as the universities destroyed by Mohammed Bakhtiar Khilji around 1200 A.D. These were particularly heinous crimes. The burning of the Library of Nalanda ranks with the destruction of the Library of Alexandria as the two most notorious acts of vandalism in the course of Islamic expansion.

Guru Tegh Bahadur was subjected to many cruelties, he was kept in an iron cage and starved for many days. The Guru was made to watch as Bhai Mati Das the devoted Sikh was tied between two pillars and his body split in two by being sawn alive. Bhai Dyala was boiled alive in a cauldron of boiling water and Bhat Sati Das was wrapped in cotton wool and set on fire. The Guru bore these cruelties without flinching or showing any anger or distress. Finally on November 11, 1675 Guru Tegh Bahadur was publicly beheaded with the sword of the executioner as he prayed. The Gurus body was left in the dust as no one dared to pick up the body for fear of the emperors reprisal.

(source: http://www.sikhs.org/guru9.htm)

The plight of Hindus has been enshrined in the Granth Sahib:

"Having lifted Islam to the head, You have engulfed Hindustan in dread...Such cruelties have they inflicted, and yet Your mercy remains unmoved...Should the strong attack the strong, the heart does not burn. But when the strong crush the helpless, surely the One who was to protect them has to be called to account...O' Lord, these dogs have destroyed this diamond-like Hindustan, (so great is their terror that) no one asks after those who have been killed and yet You do not pay heed...." (Mahla 1.36).

B. R. Ambedkar who became a Buddhist wrote: "Such was the slaughter of the Buddhist priesthood perpetrated by the Islamic invaders. The axe was struck at the very root. For by killing the Buddhist priesthood, Islam killed Buddhism. This was the greatest disaster that befell the religion of the Buddha in India. " Today it is impossible to find this quotation of the Indian history textbooks.

(source: The decline and fall of Buddhism - Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar: Writings and Speeches, Volume III Government of Maharashtra. 1987. p. 229-38).

Here is just one example from the 19th century, written by Mirza Jan, the author of a historical work known as Hadiquah-I-Shuhada that appeared in 1856:

“…wherever they found magnificent temples of the Hindus….the Muslim rulers in India built mosques, monasteries, and inns, appointed mu’assins, teachers and store-stewards, spread Islam vigorously, and vanquished the Kafirs. Likewise they cleared up Faizabad and Avadh (Ayodhya), too from the filth of reprobation (infidelity), because it was a great center of worship and capital of Rama’s father. Where they stood a great temple of (Ramajanmasthan), there they built a big mosque…what a lofty mosque was built there by king Babar!”

Some of the old sources used by Mirza Jan have yet to be unearthed, but one which he quotes from a Persian work known as Sahifah-I-Chihal Nasa’ib Bahadurshahi written in 1707 by a grand-daughter of the Moghur emperor Aurangazeb is particularly interesting. The Moghul princess declares:

“…keeping the triumph of Islam in view, devout Muslim rulers should keep all idolators in subjection to Islam, brook no laxity in realization of Jizyah (religious tax on Hindus), grant no exceptions of Hindu Rajahs from dancing attendance on Id days and waiting on foot outside mosques till end of prayer…and keep in constant use for Friday and congregational prayer the mosque built up after demolishing the temples of the idolatrous Hindus situated at Mathura, Banaras and Avadh…”


IGNORING HISTORY IS NOT GOING TO SOLVE ANY PROBLEMS.

-------------------------------- --------------------------

Yes I read that Islam in south east counties reached in much peacefull way. But it was not the Arabic Brand of Islam. The Kashmeer where 24,000 Brahmans were converted to Islam by sword took their original advait vedant and Kashmiree Shavism along with them.

It affected Local Islam and Sufi tradition got mixed up. Indonatians and south eastern countries were lucky to get a somewhat mellowed down Indian brand of Islam . But We have paid high price for it.

"....Malik Suha Bhatt, with the active support of Sultan Sikandar, indulged in forcible conversion of Brahmins and wholesale destruction of their temples. A strong reaction during the reign of Sultan Zain-ul-abidin against this policy resulted in the proclamation of complete freedom of conscience and tolerance to all beliefs.

But the mode of conversion adopted by Suha Bhatt and Sikandar naturally brought about its own revenge, and reacted on their concept of Islam. The converts, and through them their leaders, were unable to resist the Hindu philosophy and trend of thought. This resulted in the emergence of a remarkable School or Order of Sufis in Kashmir - the Rishis - who wielded enormous influence on the religious and philosophical beliefs of the people, and moulded their mind and set up the ideal of religious tolerance and abiding faith in the grace of God. "

http://www.koausa.org/vitasta/3c.html...


Sufi tradition is never fully accepted in Islam and sufis were regularly in confrontation of Mulsim rulers of Delhi .

The Sufis incorporated aspects of Hinduism, Buddhism, Judaism and Christianity freely into their teaching. They took concepts such as Moksha from Hinduism and Nirvana from Buddhism. The Sufi doctrines of Fana and Baqa (annihilation and subsistence) correspond to Nirvana.