Muhammad bin Qasim a Failed Terrorist

Muhammad bin Qasim a Failed Terrorist

In this post I will try to answer the question "Was Muhammad bin Qasim a Failed Terrorist?" Muhammad bin Qasim was a petty 8th century Arab warlord mercenary and  is considered the Father of failed Islamic Terrorist state Pakistan.

Before we get into tthis question, we shall first try to understand who was Muhammad bin Qasim and why we need to discuss about him. I will do so using the  ancient Hindu Purva-Paksha and Uttar-Paksha format, in which we will first examine in details the opponents position, and then provide a rebuttal/ critique/ acceptance.

Who is the Opponent?

Terrorist state Pakistan, neighbor of secular democratic India.

Who is Muhammad bin Qasim? 

Muhammad bin Qasim was a petty Arab warlord and mercenary who was able to briefly conquer parts of Multan and Sindh and then died an inglorious death at a young age. As per Arab historians, Muhammad bin Qasim is a nobody. But Pakistanis consider him to be the first Pakistani citizen and their National Hero.

Muhammad bin Qasim

Purva-Paksha of Muhammad bin Qasim or what Pakistanis believe

Pakistanis believe that history begins from 712 AD, when Mohammad bin Qasim arrived in the subcontinent and conquered the port of Debal. 

Mohammad bin Qasim is sometimes called the first Pakistani;. Port Qasim, Pakistan's second major port is named in his honor. PNS Qasim is the name of a Pakistani Naval ship. Pakistan Army Aviation's home base is called Qasim Base. Qasim is a fairly common first name for Pakistani male children. The day of Yom-e-Babul Islam is observed each year in Pakistan in memory of Muhammad bin Qasim.

Apparently before arrival of Mohammad bin Qasim there were cruel and despotic Hindu kings like Raja Dahir and the oppressed and uncivilized kafir Hindu populace anxiously waiting for a ‘liberator’ to free them from the clutches of such cruel kings. And when the liberator came, he was welcomed with open arms and the grateful people converted to Islam en mass.

Mohammad bin Qasim allegedly encountered little resistance as he made his way into India. When he reached the city of Nerun, on the banks of the Indus River, he was welcomed into the city by the Buddhist monks that controlled it. Most cities along the Indus thus voluntarily came under Muslim control, with no fighting. In some cases, oppressed Buddhist minorities reached out to the Muslim armies for protection against Hindu governors.

Ahmad Salim  observes that in Pakistani education, many Pakistan Studies textbooks declare that Muhammad-bin-Qasim, was Pakistan’s first citizen—a full twelve centuries before its independence in 1947. Indeed, one textbook simply declares that “although Pakistan was created in August 1947, . . . the present-day Pakistan has existed, as a more or less single entity, for centuries.”

Pakistanis believe that Mohammad Bin Qasim came to India to help oppressed widows and orphan girls.  Hajjaj bin Yusuf al Thaqifi, a tyrannical governor of Iraq for the Ummayads, apparently sent his nephew Mohammed bin Qasim on a mission to Sindh to rescue some Muslim damsels in distress from the evil clutches of Raja Dahir.

Muhammad bin Qasim Pakistan Terrorism

Pakistanis (Muslims) believe that the war between Muhamad Bin Qasim and Raja Dahar was a war of faith versus infidelity. They further insist that Muhammad Bin Qasim’s men included Hindus of scheduled castes fighting for him. Pakistanis believe that the taking over of the reigns of Hind and Sindh by the Arabs changed the condition of the oppressed and victimised classes of society, which is claimed to be the focus of Islamic governance.

Pakistani Muslim fundamnetalists believe that Mohammad Bin Qasim treated most kindly his new subjects when he became their governor.

In short Pakistanis believe that Mohammad bin Qasim was the flag-bearer of Islam in the subcontinent.

Uttara Paksha of Muhammad bin Qasim


The indoctrination a Pakistani has endured through the distortion of Pakistan’s history to justify its existence on the basis of Islam has left Pakistani's judgment severely impaired. A group of writers in Pakistan elevated Muhammad Bin Qasim as the conqueror of Sindh and the founder of Pakistan. Although he remained in oblivion during the medieval period, he was transformed as a hero in response to communalism which emerged in 1924. In his life, Muhammad Bin Qasim suffered heavily. He was dismissed from his post and imprisoned in Wasit where he either committed suicide or died a natural death.

What nobody realises is that Muhammad bin Qasim was a general of the Ummayad Dynasty, the same dynasty which was a sworn enemy and killers of the offspring of the Mohammad (founder of Islam). It is the dynasty that Yazid, the murderer of Imam Hussain, also belongs to.

Hajjaj is the same man to whose credit is the murder of numerous companions of the Mohammad (founder of Islam), like Abdullah bin Al-Zubayr  and Jabir bin Abdullah, because they fought for the right of the Mohammad's descendants to the caliphate. Hazrat Asma, daughter of Hazrat Abu Bakr, reported, “I heard Allah’s Apostle (PBUH) say: ‘Allah will fill a corner of the corners of the fire with the hypocrite of Thaqif (Hajjaj) for he will throw stones at the Kaaba. May Allah curse him’” (Al-Imama wa al-Siyasa, volume two, page 45). The hadith points towards the war against Abdullah bin Zubayr (RA) in which Hajjaj bombarded the Kaaba, damaging it severely. The question that begs attention here is: can a tyrant like Hajjaj start a war against Raja Dahir just to rescue some fair maidens? The earliest source mentioning Muhammad bin Qasim’s adventure in Sindh is Baladhuri’s ‘Futuh al-Buldan’. No maidens are mentioned therein and they found their way into historical accounts centuries later.

The actual reasons for the Umayyad interest in Sindh had nothing to do with spreading Islam but were the same as have been for any ruler/dynasty in any part of the world at any given time: power. The actual motive was to gain a foothold in the Balochistan and Sindh regions, not only to protect their maritime interests but also to punish the armies of Sindh for their participation, alongside the Persians, in battles at Nahawand, Salasal and Qâdisiyyah against the Ummayads. More importantly, the attack was carried out to capture the fleeing rebel chieftains, many of whom were Imam Hussain’s loyalists. These rebels had also fought alongside Raja Dahir against earlier Arab attempts to gain entry into Sindh. So those who think of Dahir as an Islam-hating psychopath should know that his army actually included Arab Muslims who opposed the Ummayad’s right to the Caliphate.

Muhammad bin Qasim Pakistan Arab Mercenary Predator

Muhammad bin Qasim succeeded in occupying some cities of Sindh. His successors led some raids towards the Punjab, Rajasthan, and Saurashtra. But they were soon defeated, and driven back. The Arab historians admit that a place of refuge to which the Muslims might flee was not to be found. By the middle of the 8th century they controlled only the highly garrisoned cities of Multan and Mansurah. Their plight in Multan is described by AI Kazwin in Asr-ul-Bilãd in the following words: "The infidels have a large temple there, and a great idol The houses of the servants and devotees are around the temple, and there are no idol worshippers in Multan besides those who dwell in those precincts. The ruler of Multan does not abolish this idol because he takes the large offerings which are brought to it. When the Indians make an attack upon the town, the Muslims bring out the idol, and when the infidels see it about to be broken or burnt, they retire". So much for Islamic monotheism of the Arabs and their military might. They, the world-conquerors, failed to accomplish anything in India except a short-lived raid.

Where resistance was strong, long-drawn-out and rigorous, Muhammad bin Qasim's response was rather ruthless. By credible accounts, he inflicted 6,000 deaths at Rawar, between 6,000 and 26,000 at Brahmanabad, 4,000 at Iskalandah and 6,000 at Multan. And that he built many mosques upon the sites of razed Hindu temples.

Muhammad bin Qasim died a Lowly Inglorious Death

Chachnama, a Sindhi book published by the Sindhi Adabi Board in 2008, speaks of Muhammad bin Qasim's demise on page 242 to 243. Below is a summary by AKHTAR BALOUCH.

After Raja Dahar was killed, two of his daughters were made captive, whom Muhammad Bin Qasim sent to the capital Damascus. After a few days, the Caliph of the Muslims called the two young women to his court. The name of the elder daughter of Raja Dahar was Suryadevi, while the younger one’s name was Pirmaldevi. Caliph Waleed Bin Abdul Malik fell for Suryadevi’s extraordinary beauty. He ordered for her younger sister to be taken away. The Caliph then began to take liberties with Suryadevi, pulling her to himself.

It is written that Suryadevi sprang up and said: "May the king live long: I, a humble slave, am not fit for your Majesty's bedroom, because Muhammad Bin Qasim kept both of us sisters with him for three days, and then sent us to the caliphate. Perhaps your custom is such, but this kind of disgrace should not be permitted by kings."

Hearing this, the Caliph’s blood boiled as heat from anger and desire both compounded within him. Blinded in the thirst of Suryadevi’s nearness and jealousy of Bin Qasim who had robbed him of the purity he would otherwise have had, the Caliph [sic] immediately sent for pen, ink and paper, and with his own hands wrote an order, directing that, “Muhammad (Bin) Qasim should, wherever he may be, put himself in raw leather and come back to the chief seat of the caliphate.”

Muhammad bin Qasim Homosexual Gay Pakistan

Muhammad Bin Qasim received the Caliph’s orders in the city of Udhapur. He directed his own men to wrap him in raw leather and lock him in a trunk before taking him to Damascus. En route to the capital, Muhammad Bin Qasim died an inglorious lowly death.

When the trunk carrying Muhammad Bin Qasim’s corpse wrapped in raw leather reached the Caliph’s court, the Caliph called upon Dahar’s daughters, asking them to bear witness to the spectacle of obedience of his men for the Caliph. One of Dahar’s daughter’s then spoke in return and said: “The fact is that Muhammad Qasim was like a brother or a son to us; he never touched us, your slaves, and our chastity was safe with him. But in as much as he brought ruin on the king of Hind and Sind, desolated the kingdom of our fathers and grandfathers, and degraded us from princely rank to slavery, we have, with the intention of revenge and of bringing ruin and degradation to him in return, misrepresented the matter and spoken a false thing to your majesty against him.

Muhammad bin Qasim was an Insignificant Nobody

The first instance where Muhammad bin Qasim and his expedition to Sind is mentioned is in the book ‘Kitab Futuh al-Buldan’ (Book of the Conquests of the Lands) written by Persian historian Ahmad Ibn Yahya al-Baladhuri. The book details conquests of the Arabs from the 7th century, and the terms made with the residents of the conquered territories. It covers the conquests of lands from Arabia west to Egypt, North Africa, and Spain and east to Iraq, Iran, and Sind. The Sind expedition was not given much importance by the writer and only 13 pages were devoted to it. Baladhuri mentioned that upon his return to Iraq, Muhammad bin Qasim did not receive a hero’s welcome. His mentor Hujaj bin Yusuf had fallen from favour and on the orders of Caliph Walid, Muhammad bin Qasim was imprisoned where he succumbed to torture.

Muhammad bin Qasim Father of Terrorism Pakistan


Muhammad bin Qasim a Failed Terrorist

According to researcher and historian Dr Mubarak Ali, the war between Muhamad Bin Qasim and Raja Dahar was never a war of faith versus infidelity. He further says that it is not correct that Muhammad Bin Qasim’s men included Hindus of scheduled castes fighting for him. It was after Muhammad Bin Qasim had conquered Sindh and had marched further ahead that locals started joining the Arab forces due to poverty and joblessness. According to Dr Mubarak Ali, the Arabs started ruling under the umbrella of an ancient elite class, thus their behaviour towards the lower and humbler communities never changed.

As such, the taking over of the reigns of Hind and Sindh by the Arabs never changed a thing for the already oppressed and victimized classes of society, which is claimed to be the focus of Islamic governance.

The comedy of the contradiction here is that, on the one hand, Pakistanis consider Imam Hussain a symbol of resistance against oppression while in the same breath they idolise his killers.

This distortion was done at the behest Pakistani establishment immediately after partition to divorce Pakisttani Muslims from their Hindu past, and thus the entire history of the subcontinent had to be distorted. Patriotism thus gave way to a misguided sense of Islamic fundmentalism, making Pakistanis a confused, paranoid and intolerant people.
 
How did an Insignificant Arab Warlord Muhammad bin Qasim become Pakistan's founder?

Here is what Abdul Majd Abod says: "After partition, Pakistan’s history textbooks focussed more on Indian history that predates arrival of Arabs to these shores.

The discoveries of Mohenjo Daro and Harappa were highlighted by the government to attract tourists and students of history from across the world. S.M. Ikram, a nationalist historian from Pakistan wrote three books on Pakistan’s history which focussed on our glorious Mughal and Arab ancestors and two-nation theory. The three books were later translated as a single-volume while his stay at Columbia University. He traced the origins of Pakistani nation to Mohammad bin Qasim. It was only after the loss of East Pakistan in 1971 that our priorities changed.

The Pakistan educational conference was held in the year 1975, chaired by I.H. Qureshi, a Pakistani historian. It was decided during the conference that new history of Pakistan needed to be written. The need for new narratives and origin was also highlighted. In 1978, a second conference on this theme took place, chaired by Dictator Zia-ul-Haq. It was decided in the conference that the version of history favoured by I.H.Qureshi and S.M. Ikram would be taught in Pakistan’s textbooks. It was around the same time that Naseem Hijazi’s ‘Mohammad bin Qasim’ republished by Adabi boards and its preface was written by Zia himself.

It has been recorded in history that the first Muslims (as traders) to land in India came decades before Qasim’s foray into Sind. The ‘military invasion’ theory trumped the ‘trader’ theory because of our national narrative being shaped more by the military than the trading classes. "

Muhammad bin Qasim Pakistan is a Terrorist State

Another factor to be noted is the theory of Arab Origin. Here is what Salman Rashid says: "Every single Muslim in the subcontinent believes s/he is of Arab descent. If not direct Arab descent, then the illustrious ancestor had come from either Iran or Bukhara. Interestingly, the ancestor is always a great general or a saint. Arab origin is the favourite fiction of all subcontinental Muslims. Most claim their ancestor arrived in Sindh with the army under Mohammad bin Qasim ... Most of us (Pakistanis) are the progeny of converts. .. our ancestors converted to a religion that in theory claimed to profess human equality regardless of colour or caste. I use the words ‘in theory’ because even as the Arabs converted our ancestors to Islam, they discriminated against them for being “Hindis” as we learn this from Ibn Batuta’s own prejudices. And he is not alone. Consequently, even after conversion, my ancestors, poor agriculturists, were looked down upon by the Arabs and even those who had converted earlier the same way as they were by the Brahmans when they professed their Vedic belief. Within a generation or two, those early converts began the great lie of Arab ancestry to be equal to other converts and the Arabs. This became universal with time."

Final Words on Petty Arab Warlord Muhammad bin Qasim

Pakistan must correct its understanding of the nature and role of an invader. Invasions always took place for greed and lust or for wealth or occupation of someone else’s land and resources without any ‘moral’ justification. It is customary for Pakistanis to be proud of their invaders such as Muhammad Bin Qasim, Mehmood of Ghazna and Muhammad Ghori and to denounce other invaders who looted our country from time to time. In fact, all these invaders were mass murderers and should be treated as criminals in history. Pakistan recognised Muhammad Bin Qasim as a conqueror and hero because Sindh was converted to Islam. Charles Napier invaded Sindh in 1843 modernised it but because Sindh did not convert to Christianity therefore, Charles Napier’s status remained to being an invader and did not replace Muhammad Bin Qasim’s as a hero. Pakistan history text books mislead our students by not telling the truth and by hiding the real facts.

Till then Pakistan will continue to be a failed Islamic Terrorist state.

Muhammad bin Qasim Pakistan Terrorist

Source

https://aacounterterror.wordpress.com/2010/03/22/the-myth-of-history/
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/opinion/12-Jan-2014/of-textbooks-extremism-and-mohammed-bin-qasim
http://www.dawn.com/news/1098562
http://www.voiceofdharma.org/books/siii/ch8.htm
http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/most-dangerous-place-pakistan%E2%80%99s-past-pakistan%E2%80%99s-future
http://defence.pk/threads/our-hero-is-raja-dahir-not-muhammad-bin-qasim-haji-adeel-anp.55513/page-4
http://www.dawn.com/news/1203153
http://nation.com.pk/columns/12-Oct-2015/the-origins-of-our-origin
http://tribune.com.pk/story/317619/arab-origins/

You may also like

Mughal Barbarism and Islamic Savagery in India
Homosexual Icon and Gay King Mahmud of Ghazni
Bakhtiyar Khilji's conquest of Bengal and Bihar

That's it. Thank you for reading Muhammad bin Qasim a Failed Terrorist. Please show your appreciation by sharing and/or leaving a comment.

Comments

  1. Sir u kinda nailed this matter. Agree about the status of bin qasim's stature. Sadly not just pakistani but numerous indian muslim hail him as their hero.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Wow awesome. I quite dont blame Pakistan.They have been raped by so many people.First quasem.Then mahmud. Then ghori,timur,etc.So many rapes and I bet their blood will be less than 5 %pure. What can people expect more from people with more than 95 % impure blood?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Homosexual Icon and Gay King Mahmud of Ghazni

Destruction of Nalanda University by Bakhtiyar Khilji

5 Shocking Facts about Mahmud of Ghazni

Bakhtiyar Khilji's conquest of Bengal and Bihar

Was Islamic Emperor Babur Gay? Or was Babur impotent?

Mughal Barbarism and Islamic Savagery in India

5 Amazing Facts about Tamil Langugage