idesigner1 wrote:Christians were always better at dealing with this virus. Christians opposed and fought Islam primarily on moral grounds.
idesigner1 wrote: Hindus took a very narrow view of fighting Muslims purely on territorial ground. They never developed strategy to defeat Islam on ideological ground.
Well Hindus of some areas in pre-Islamic India might not have attached importance to marital faithfulness, but then Al-Beruni himself said that the acts of Mahmood of Ghaznavi caused the Hindus of those period to have an inveterate hatred of all things Muslim.
Mahmood's acts include murder,pillage and wanton destruction of heritage sites such as temples.Without judging someone on moral issues such as mass murder,rape,robbery or pillaging and destruction of wonderful sites of heritage,people cannot hate someone or some group randomly.
Marco Polo said that criminal justice system in India was quite tough and those that crossed the line were punished severely though sexual indulgence was strangely not considered a crime.May be other crimes were judged on a high moral pedestal even before Islam came to India and thus were severely penalised.
So might be some Hindus did not judge muslims on moral scales of marital fidelity but they did indeed judge them on some other scales.Without judging muslims on their own moral scales,it is might not have been possible for the Vijayanagar soldiers to feel like torching muslim hamlets when they overran the lands of Indo-Persian Bahmani Empire.
They too might not have taken kindly to acts of murder,rape,pillage and destruction.Of course they did this all when they were pushed to the extreme and were on the verge of loosing political power all over the sub-continent.Perhaps they became that desperate.