When a person suffers from a viral disease, the incident can be viewed in two perspectives:

  1. First, the virus caused the disease. And the virus is to blame.
  2. Second, our body was NOT strong enough to defend the virus. We ourselves are to blame.

In the context of Islamic invasions, most articles, posts focus on the first point and keep blaming Islam. And that’s correct as Islam in the middle ages was barbaric, tribal and extremely aggressive.

But it is also a fact that Indian society also could not fend off the threat just as it had repealed the Greek invasion or even in the “Battle Of Rajasthan” it had stopped the Muslims from getting Inside Indian mainland (after capturing Sindh) around 730AD.

Let me put the social reasons what were responsible in weakening the Hindu society.

First is “NEPOTISM”. How?

  1. All professions became “strictly” hereditary: During the ancient ages, the profession, trade etc. were based on merit. For e.g. the mobility across castes was very high. And people could choose their profession. Due to this, Nepotism had not crept in and Indian business remained competitive. But mainly after the Gupta period, the caste system became rigid, mobility across professions diminished and the professions were strictly inherited from parents to child – to some extent this is okay, but with zero mobility across professions, new skills/ideas could not come. And hence, we see after Gupta period Indian society did not produce new scientists, mathematicians, engineers, logicians and doctors as it used to produce earlier. Innovation in Indian society became miniscule.
  2. All Govt posts became hereditary: Prithiviraj Chauhan was a great king. But, if we look at his administration, it was extremely nepotistic. Major Govt posts became hereditary. For e.g. the tax collectors (equivalent to today’s Income Tax Officers), Kotwals (today’s Police) became hereditary. During the Mauryan period, all officials were selected through entrance examinations just like today (by UPSC or SPSC). Due to this, the Governance became very weak and common public suffered. After Prithiviraj Chauhan, the Delhi sultanate broke this nepotism and made all positions merit based. This must have improved the Governance and the common people would have supported the Muslim rulers as the services offered by the Govt would have improved. If the Police Commissioner of your city becomes dynastic i.e. daughter of the police commissioner becomes the commissioner – then what will happen to the law and order? And when the Govt posts became hereditary in the Delhi Sultanate, the Mughals destroyed it and started ruling.
  3. Inter-caste marriages became a thing of past. Inter-caste marriages were prevalent in ancient ages. To make matters worse, within castes, sub-castes and sub-sub-castes developed. All these made Hindu society utterly divided.

Second, status of Women:

  1. Around the time India started facing Islamic invasions, the status of women had greatly degenerated.
  2. During the Gupta period for e.g., there were Personal Law codes in places which gave rights to women. The women could inherit the property of her husband. Widows could remarry. Sati system was there, but not very prevalent. Women wore less clothes and veiling of women was absent.
  3. The strength of a society is directly proportional to the status enjoyed by women.
  4. If I compare the rights of a woman of a post Gupta era to an woman in Gupta era, the status of women in Gupta era (or earlier) was much higher.

Third, no unifying Hindu authority:

  1. Islam had an institution called “CALIPH” or “KHALIFA”. Caliph was supposed to be the spiritual and political head of Islam. This was very similar to the institution of POPE of Roman Catholics.
  2. The Islam marched under the banner of KHALIFA, and Christians defended and attacked the Muslims under the banner of POPE. Hindus did have no such institution then.
  3. Christians had regiments of warrior monks(unmarried fierce monk soldiers), for e.g. Knight Hospitalliers. But Hindus had none. The Naga sadhus were created with such intention, but they were not that effective as the European warrior monks. That’s why we saw that Europe was more successful than India in defeating the Islamic invasions.

Fourth, Religious institutions became corrupt:

  1. This applies to both Europe and India. And during this period both India and Europe were most vulnerable. The Vatican had become corrupt. Same is the case with India.
  2. Lord Ram immensely respected Viswamitra. Why? Did he have a lot of money, did he command a big army? No. He was respected because Viswamitra lived a very austere life and had commanded high moral values.
  3. During the ancient ages, the temples were places where people met, discussed, transacted governance etc. The priests were deeply respected. But over the period of time, (probably because the priesthood became hereditary) they became corrupt. Even now, if you go to many Indian temples, you will find naked corruption being done by priests. For e.g. quintals of valuable golden ornaments have simply vanished from the Padmanav Temple in Kerala. Same is the case in Puri Temple, the “Garbha Griha” keys went missing.
  4. The moral standard of Rishis/Sadhus degenerated. Has any one seen a Mahant today weighing less than one quintal?

Due to degeneration of the values among the religious leaders, people lost faith in them and was exploited by Islam and even lately the communists. For e.g. in Kerala and other states, when communists snatched away the land of many monasteries/temples, there was wide speared public support. The Govt. Of Odisha is planning to sell off a lot of land of Lord Jagannath and is finding widespread support as the land is being illegally used by the sevaits (servants) of Lord Jagannath for their personal benefits.

The religions institutions were extremely unpopular, When Gandhis and Communists confisciated their lands and distributed them among the people, they became extremely popular.

I see, some of these weaknesses are already taken care of. But some are still there which Hindus need to get rid of.

DISCLAIMER: The author is solely responsible for the views expressed in this article. The author carries the responsibility for citing and/or licensing of images utilized within the text.