What would pre-partitioned India have looked like in 2020?

Unspecified

2,318

Brother

1,105

#1 [Permalink] Posted on 19th July 2020 12:46

would there have been more kashmirs or would muslims have flourished.

What would have been political make up of United india?

Which parties would have dominated regional and national level politics? Muslim League, Congress, BJP etc.

The population of Muslims would have been 550 million out of 1.7 billion if you combine present day population of India, pakistan and Bangladesh.

Based on above population figures. Would muslims have been better off in united india if they were promised 1/3 representation in parliament and government jobs?

report post quote code quick quote reply

+1 -0Like x 1

Rajab

Unspecified

1,166

Brother

1,174

#2 [Permalink] Posted on 19th July 2020 13:46

That all depends on what the state of Muslims would have been with respect to deen. If the Muslims would have managed to get their act together and actually started treating the Sunnah of Prophet (saw)

the true path of success in this world and the hereafter, then perhaps things would have been looking up. Hindus would have been converting at record rates and the dominance of Hindus in the region would be slowly diminishing. The number of population would have been nothing more than a number for record keeping.

If however, the Muslims were to be living pretty much the same way that they are right now with dunya being their primary purpose, a united India would probably have been a constant war-zone. With Muslims believing they are entitled to world dominance solely on the basis of being Allah's chosen ones, and the Hindus being extremely bitter and hateful towards the Muslims for ruling over them for hundreds of years. Of course with the Hindus still being a majority, the power scales would be tilted heavily in their favor especially since the world would be enjoying the humiliation and persecution of Muslims.

report post quote code quick quote reply

+3 -0Like x 3

fod1083

London

27,519

Brother

9,588

#3 [Permalink] Posted on 19th July 2020 15:34

It could've been United Kingdom of India or United States of Islam or even Darul Islam and it could've been the super power of the world.

I would settle for The Islamic Emirates of Hind

But man plans and Allah plans and Allah is the best of planners.

report post quote code quick quote reply

+2 -0Like x 1Creative x 1

Actions are judged by intentions, so each man will have what he intended.
ابو محمد

11,774

Brother

319

#4 [Permalink] Posted on 19th July 2020 17:01

Rajab wrote:

View original post

Short Answer: It would have been a war zone with multiple separatist and accession movements with daily bomb blasts and casualties

Long Answer:

Upto a few years ago I answered this question differently but now I am accepting defeat and admitting that Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi (RA) had foresight.

India has never been a "country" except under the Muslims and then under the British and both were Non-Hindus. Thus the history of India tells us that Brahmin rule would not work.

If India was undivided then it would have disintegrated quicker, the reasons being:

Undivided India was caste and class based society so "Hindu Belt" of India was much more developed and it would have only accelerated. Punjab and Bengal were always revolting and due to growing gap the rebellion would have grown bigger.
Muslims would have had a few more seats but still unable to demand any Islamic concessions and sooner or later in order for "United India" to work you would have to go with "Unified Civil Code" which would meant that Muslims would have rebelled in large numbers and created a much bigger problem.
North India (present Pakistan) could not have lived under Hindu rule, its not in their blood
The 1979 Soviet invasion of Afghanistan would have had a devastating impact on the psyche of Indian Muslims with thousands of miles of open border. Jihad would have spread far and wide and "Hindu" an open target. It would have reminded Indian Muslims of their glory days and their ancestral rule over India and that would start a long and bloody separation revolution ending up in implosion of India.

The Urdu speaking Muslims (and controllers of Deoband) * would continue to coerce Muslims to be loyal to the "state of India" while the masses of Muslims would have drifted away exactly like what's happening now but it would have been quicker and more fierce.

* The Urdu speaking Ashraaf of India are still advocating loyalty to "Mother India" and would keep on doing it no matter what. My grandfather died in "Mother India" but refused to migrate to Pakistan even when his sons deserted him. Some Deobandi Ulama today are more loyal to "Mother India" then Hindus who believe in Akhund Bharat

report post quote code quick quote reply

+2 -0Like x 1Informative x 1

There is no Plan B!

http://www.central-mosque.com/

Unspecified

1,166

Brother

1,174

#5 [Permalink] Posted on 19th July 2020 18:33

Whichever way you look at the issue one thing becomes very clear. If India were not partitioned in 1947 it would still have gotten partitioned whether 100 years later or a decade later. To anyone with even the slightest of common sense, it is very obvious that unless and until the people of the subcontinent had a unifying ideology to live under (i.e. Islam) there was never a chance of unity between the people here.

report post quote code quick quote reply

+-1 -0Like x 1Agree x 1

fod1083

Unspecified

2,673

Sister

1,887

#6 [Permalink] Posted on 19th July 2020 19:10

Quote:

Upto a few years ago I answered this question differently but now I am accepting defeat and admitting that Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi (RA) had foresight.

But it only helped a subset of population and the majority of Muslims were left helpless in India.

report post quote code quick quote reply

+1 -0Like x 1Agree x 1Optimistic x 1

الإسلامُ یَعْلُو وَلَا یُعْلیٰ

Unspecified

2,673

Sister

1,887

#7 [Permalink] Posted on 19th July 2020 19:17

I personally think Muslims of the subcontinent would have been stronger if India was not partitioned but qaddar Allahu wa ma sha fa'al.

report post quote code quick quote reply

+1 -0Like x 1Agree x 1Optimistic x 1

الإسلامُ یَعْلُو وَلَا یُعْلیٰ

Eraf

1,328

Brother

413

#8 [Permalink] Posted on 20th July 2020 01:16

Rajab wrote:

View original post

Quote:

Based on above population figures. Would muslims have been better off in united india if they were promised 1/3 representation in parliament and government jobs?

In a purely materialistic sense, yes.

report post quote code quick quote reply

+2 -0Like x 2

Iqra (Read).

Unspecified

2,318

Brother

1,105

#9 [Permalink] Posted on 24th July 2020 09:42

abuzayd2k wrote:

View original post

Nothing wrong with material possessions and being money-oriented in a country where majority live in poverty. Spend that wealth in the path of Allah

report post quote code quick quote reply

+2 -0Like x 2

Rajab

11,774

Brother

319

#10 [Permalink] Posted on 24th July 2020 10:11

bint e aisha wrote:

View original post

I accept your point but it needs context.

Don't forget that the Ulama forced that subset to stay in India and pledge allegiance to India and continuously downplayed the idea that Hindus and Muslims are two different nations based on religion and Ulama keep on doing it to this day.

The loyalty in Indian Ulama to the "state of India" has always remained high.

It wasn't completely the fault of my grandfather that he stayed in India, although ultimately it was his decision.

report post quote code quick quote reply

+1 -0Informative x 1

There is no Plan B!

http://www.central-mosque.com/

Unspecified

113

Brother

259

#11 [Permalink] Posted on 24th July 2020 23:49

Why did more Hindus not convert, under centuries of Muslim rule?

report post quote code quick quote reply

+2 -0Like x 2

Intrepid

Eraf

1,328

Brother

413

#12 [Permalink] Posted on 25th July 2020 03:51

Intrepid wrote:

View original post

Most of the 200 million Muslims in India today are descendents of converts, as are the majority of Pakistanis and Bangladeshis. At least one third of the total population of the Indian subcontinent is Muslim, of which only a very small percentage are descendents of Muslim immigrants, the others are all descendents of converts.

report post quote code quick quote reply

+5 -0Like x 2Informative x 3

Iqra (Read).

11,774

Brother

319

#13 [Permalink] Posted on 25th July 2020 11:41

Intrepid wrote:

View original post

You have raised a very important point. It is because the Muslim rulers of India never really concerned on Dawah or Islam apart from some token gestures, in fact did you know that NONE of the Mughal emperors even performed Hajj?

If they had even given it lip-service then millions of (low-caste) Hindus would have converted who were under subjugation of Brahmins.

Shah Wali-ullah (RA) [1703-1762] has predicted that a day will come when Hindus will enter Islam in large numbers

report post quote code quick quote reply

+3 -0Like x 1Informative x 2

There is no Plan B!

http://www.central-mosque.com/

What would pre-partitioned India have looked like in 2020?

Font Size

Font Weight