The Sultanate of Delhi, 711–1526 A.D. c8.s7.1.2

c8.s7.1.2

Quite a considerable number of them supplied valuable information to the invader and joined him against their king and country. Mr. S. N. Dhar protests against what he calls making the Buddhists ‘the knaves of the story’¹² but the Buddhist defection is based on recorded evidence, and facts must always have more weight than logic. Some of the Hindus, too, must share with the Buddhists the ignominy of treachery to their country, and the example was shamelessly set by a priest from the sacred temple of Debal. It is generally forgotten that, in spite of social tyranny within their own folds, the Hindus, long accustomed to religious tolerance, had developed a cosmopolitan attitude towards other faiths and peoples. Little did they reflect how Islam, which looks upon other religions as false and considers it to be its primary duty to put down idolatry, would treat them. Ignorant cosmopolitanism, combined with lack of patriotism, had produced a frame of mind in the generality of the Hindus that made little difference between their own countrymen and foreigners and induced the disgruntled among them to go over to the side of the enemy of their country. Defection and treachery were, without doubt, important causes of the fall of Sindh. Fourthly, Sindh was then, as now, an economically poor and a deficit province. Its meagre resources could not support a large standing army or finance a long war with a superior enemy.