First Muslims in Indian Subcontinenet were ismailis

[Admin]

http://www.dawn.com/news/1136288


‘First Muslims to arrive in the subcontinent were Ismailis
’
By Peerzada Salman

Published Oct 05, 2014 07:07am



KARACHI: Ismailis were the first Muslims, and the best missionaries, to arrive in the subcontinent, said eminent historian Dr Mubarak Ali while speaking on ‘Impact of history writing in India and Pakistan’ at the Sindh Institute of Urology and Transplantation on Saturday evening.

Shedding light on facets of history writing, Dr Ali said there were three aspects of history that every historiographer kept in mind: events, evidence and interpretation. Events were to do with what happened in the past. Sometimes events were concocted which was why it’s the historian’s responsibility to present them with evidence.

Interpretation was equally important because there were different groups of historians — Marxist, feminist, positivist, etc — analysing things in their distinct ways. In that context the example of Mehmood of Ghazna could be taken who for one group of historians was a holy warrior and for others a looter and plunderer. While the events were the same, it’s their interpretation that varied.

Dr Ali said interpreting history changed drastically after World War I as now there were several ways of looking at it — history of emotions, history of sensibilities, cultural history. “Nothing is beyond history,” he remarked. In 1980, historian E. P. Thompson wrote an article, ‘History from below’, in which he included the role of the common people, the marginalised ones, in history and not of the rulers because by being part of history the common folk would be respected.

He argued that in the subcontinent history became politicised in the colonial period. The East India Company was fascinated by Indian culture. By that time Europe had become well versed in the art of editing and knowledge of philology. So the company formed the Asiatic Society of Bengal. Its founder, William Jones, tried to establish a relationship between Sanskrit and European languages suggesting it was the ‘meeting of cousins’ taking place in India. They published histories based on religion (history of Hindus, Muslims) whereas for themselves they would use the phrase ‘rule of British India’.

After the 1857 war of independence Indian writers were not allowed to write anything. It was imperialism and colonialism that created nationalism in India. In 1920, after the collapse of the Khilafat and noncooperation movements, Muslim nationalists created their own heroes suggesting things such as the Mughal period was part of our history but the Mughals were not our heroes. Hindu historians also came up with their own heroes — Rana Pratab, Guru Gobind Singh, etc.

Dr Ali said in Pakistan, after 1947, history was written in different stages. First rulers started to devise ways how to identify Pakistan as different from India. Instead of looking for its roots in the Indus Valley Civilisation, they tried to identify Pakistan with Mesopotamia. Even Prof Ahmed Ali wrote a piece saying Mesopatamian culture was deep-rooted in us.

In the second stage a lot of other distortions were made. Dr Ishtiaq Hussein Qureshi wrote that Akbar was responsible for the fall of the Mughal Empire. And that the Muslims who arrived in India did not have their ethnic identities. After the fall of Dhaka, Z. A. Bhutto formed a cultural department which tried to prove that Bengal had nothing to do with the Indian subcontinent. Then Dr Dani came up with the idea that we had our links with Central Asia and not with India.

With regard to textbooks, Dr Ali said in India historians such as Romila Thapar wrote good textbooks, but when the BJP came to power it tried to change them. It wanted to prove that Aryans were Indians who migrated to other parts of the world, but education ministers of many states refused to comply with that.

In Pakistan, history was not considered an important subject; therefore, in the 1960s it was replaced with the discipline of Social Studies, which began history with Moenjodaro, then jumped to Sir Syed Ahmed Khan and then to the two-nation theory — it was discontinued, interrupted history. Such an attitude would lead us to have no historical consciousness.

In response to a question put to him by Syed Hasan Khan, Dr Ali said that to have a counter narrative he took out a quarterly magazine, Tareekh, which owing to lack of funds and original writings he might have to stop publishing.

In reply to another question, he said the first Muslims that arrived in India were Ismailis; they were the best missionaries. Mehmood Ghaznavi destroyed the Ismaili kingdom. As for Mohmmad bin Qasim, as G. M. Syed had written about him, he did not capture Sindh to serve Islam but was an imperialist representing the Ummayad dynasty.

Earlier, SIUT director Dr Adib Rizvi said history was equally important for doctors because if they didn’t know about the history of their patients, they wouldn’t be able to have the right diagnosis.

Rana Muzzaffar conducted the programme.

Published in Dawn, October 5th, 2014

[agakhani]

Ismailis were the first Muslims, and the best missionaries, to arrive in the subcontinent, said eminent historian Dr Mubarak Ali while speaking on ‘Impact of history writing in India and Pakistan’ at the Sindh Institute of Urology and Transplantation on Saturday evening.

It does not says when the Ismailis were converted in India or when they start to live in India!, it is just a black and white imagination.

Brother! do not waste your time to find unreliable source to prove you right. I know you are wrong and you will not accept the truth even if I put reliable sources here! that Khoja Ismailis were not there before pir Satgur Noor!. period
Also I have solid proof i.e When the first Muslims came in India? please note that I used the word Muslims not Ismailis!

[ismaili103]

The history of muslims in subcontinent is very long. The first muslim to enter subcontinent is an arabic ruler mohd bin qasim who entered in indian subcontinent from the coast of sindh he entered in subcontinent with his soldiers in 7th century AD . Islam entered in subcontinent from sindh thats why sindh known as Bab Ul Islam which means gateway of islam. After qasim many muslim dynasty enters in subcontinent mostly from sindh except Mughals who entered from mongolia they are decendent of mongols from which mughals derived. The other muslim dynasties in subcontinent after Qasim were lodhi's, ghaznavids , ghauris, suris , mughals etc ...they were not ismailis at all.

Those ismailies who converted into ismailies from hindus by pir satgur noor were known as Satpanthis later known as Momuna. They converted in somwhere near 11 century. And i think they were also not the first ismailies of subcontinent because before them many of the central asian ismalies already live in hunza and gilgit baltistan. Hunza is the 13000 sq km area region of pakistan which have 95 % of the ismaili population and many 800 years old fort of ismaili kingdom i.e baltit and altit fort.
In my opinion ismailis of north pakistan bordering with central asians are the first ismailies.

I have a quest for u all i dont know the answer of that

The question is Mughals were the direct decend from chengis and halaku khan according to historians who destroyed ismailies biggest library in fort of almaut. But Hazir Imam helps indian govt to restore mughal buildings thats weird but Mowla kn ows the best ?

[Admin]

The Sumra Dynasty with its allegiance to the Fatimids was ismaili though it came later.

I understand that the exploit of the very young Mohamed bin Qasim have made the dreams of many ladies but Ismailis came to the Indian sub-continent very early. They did not come to conquer territories like Mohamed bin Qasim but Ismailis came to conquer hearts.

[ismaili103]

The Sumra Dynasty with its allegiance to the Fatimids was ismaili though it came later.

I understand that the exploit of the very young Mohamed bin Qasim have made the dreams of many ladies but Ismailis came to the Indian sub-continent very early. They did not come to conquer territories like Mohamed bin Qasim but Ismailis came to conquer hearts.

Soomra dynasty was sent by abbasids in sindh from iraq and they are sunni muslims.

What are the exact regions of indian subcontinent where ismaili came. BTW history says that ismailis of subcontinent are converted from hindus even the ismailis of north ( G.B and C.A ) were also converted from sunnis and shia by the efforts of Pir Nasir Khusrow.

[Admin]

Your assessment of history has to be revised in the face of the available document today. Before drumming the praises of Abbasids, check out the Ismaili connections of the Sumrah of that time.

[ismaili103]

Your assessment of history has to be revised in the face of the available document today. Before drumming the praises of Abbasids, check out the Ismaili connections of the Sumrah of that time.

To be honest i dont know much about it, I only give two cents from my side which was i studied in the subjct of social studied, pak studies and HRE -REC. its very good if u provide source and links or book related to ismailis - soomra link. Its my pleasure to learn more about ismaili history.

P.S
BTW most of us know that who were abasids and how they treat ismailis in history Lsso its imposiible , atleast for me to praise them ....

[Admin]

You can start from

http://ismaili.net/mirrors/sumras/sumras.html

http://www.ismaili.net/html/modules.php ... pic&p=6293

In fact you can just google Ismailis and Soomras and you will find a lot of material.

[ismaili103]

You can start from

http://ismaili.net/mirrors/sumras/sumras.html

http://www.ismaili.net/html/modules.php ... pic&p=6293

In fact you can just google Ismailis and Soomras and you will find a lot of material.

Great
Thanks.

[agakhani]

And i think they were also not the first ismailies of subcontinent because before them many of the central asian ismalies already live in hunza and gilgit baltistan.

The Central Asian Ismailis were not first Ismailis in Indo-Pak subcontinental but as I wrote above Momnas were the first converted Ismailis, at that time they were known as "Satpanthi" The Momin (Momana) name has been given by Pir Tajdin many years latter. The central Ismailis mostly converted by Dai Nasir Khushru who was born and preached in central Asia many years after Pir Satgur Noor's arrival in India.

Kha(n)dd Gujaraat jaanno aann,
maa(n)he Patan nagaree ut-tam jaann….5

teeaa(n) raaj kare Jesa(n)gh ho raae,
teeaa(n) pun paveetr dharamaj thaae….6

The above ginanic verses are from ginan name "PUTALA" composed by pir Hasan Kabirdin which shows the name of the city (Patan) and king (Jaysingh)

This is not it! but I have many proof to backing my comments look below for some more sources*

As per the 'history of Gujarat', Tawarikh e Pir and History of Ismaili pirs *Sidhraj Jaysinh" was the ruler when Pir Satgur Noor came in Anhilwad Patan, it was after year somewhere 1070 and converted the farmars surrounding Patan and Sidhpur areas that means Momans were converted around 1000 years ago latter on they become little lazy and rusty in their religious duties so that Pir Tajdin came and he rejuvenated them and gave "Momna" name.

*For interesting readers who wants to know more about Momans should read following books in which they can find some articles related to Momin Jamats and also find that Momna were the first "converted" Ismailis in Indo-Pak subcontinents!!

1, Nooran Mubin (Urdu & Gujarati)
2, Momna Komno Itihas: Gujarati (very good book )
3, Gulzar- E-Shams: Urdu
4, Tawarikh-E-Pir 1-2:Gujarati and Urdu ( very informative books about Satgur Noor and his visit to Anhilwad Patan, Sidhraj Jaysinh and miracles )
5, Mirat-E- Sikandari : Persian but I think English, translation available
6, Satpanth Dharam: Gujarati & Hindi
7, Kalam-E-Imam Mubin Farmans of Sultan Mohammad Shah : Gujarati
8, Imam Ali Shah na Farmans: Gujarati
9, Pir Padharya Apne Dwar 1-2: Gujarati
10, History of Ahmedabad: Amdavad No Itihas: English & Gujarati
11, Some Ginans of Imamshahi Sects: Gujarati
12, Ismaili ginans /garbis/Granths : Gujarati
13, Mushayakhvani : Gujarati
14, Aulia -E- Islam : Urdu Out of print
15, The Pirs: by Vladimir Ivanov (I bought from library but not read because it is not in English but I think it may be in Russian language!)
16, Aulia -E-Multan: Urdu
17, Mirat-E-Aashikin: Gujarati
19, Saint of Sind: English
20, Sufi jan to tene kahiye: Gujarati
21, Sufi saints and state power : the pirs of Sind, English
22, Tarikh -e- Farista : Persian translation available in English
23, Sidhpurna survir sitarao: Gujarati & English
24, A Short History of Ismailis by Farhad Dafatary: English & Gujarati
25, A Short History of Ismailis by Abu Ali English
26, Tarikh-E-Ahmadi, originally in Persian but English translation available
27, http://simerg.com/special-series-i-wish ... %E2%80%99/

Many believes Sumara from Sind were Ismailis, (they might be!) if this is true then they were first Ismailis in Indo-Pak but many believes they were not, they were Sunnies because the Sumaras were sent by Abbasi Caliph he was the enemy of Shia sect and Imam Ismail so basically he would not had sent Sumaras in Sind if they were following Imam Ismail or Shia sect!! which at that time he was opposing! think about this, this reason is main reason not to believe that Sumaras were Ismaili.
Another reason if they were Ismailis then we should have found some historical evidences in Sind but unfortunately we didn't, so we need more research to reach that decision that Sumaras were Ismailis! the link provided by Admin rely only thinking and imagination of the author without solid proof or evidences that Sumaras were Ismailis.

[ismaili103]

Thanks agakhani bhai for correcting my mistake. Yes i was wrong with the dates, Pir nasir came in 11 century.