Source on Shah Waliullah Dehlawi

“According to Shah Wali-Allah the mark of the perfect implementation of the Shari'a was the performance of jihad. He compared the duties of Muslims in relation to the law to those of a favourite slave who administered bitter medicine to other slaves in a household. If this was done forcefully it was quite legitimate but if someone mixed it with kindness it was even better. However, there were people, said the Shah who indulged in their lower natures by following their ancestral religion, ignoring the advice and commands of the Prophet Muhammad. If one chose to explain Islam to such people like this it was to do then a disservice. Force, said the Shah, was the much better course-Islam should be forced down their throats like bitter medicine to a child. This, however, was only possible if the leaders of the non-Muslim communities who failed to accept Islam were killed; the strength of the community was reduced, their property confiscated and a situation was created which led to their followers and descendants willingly accepting Islam. The Shah pleaded that the universal domination of Islam was not possible without jihad and by holding on to the tails of cows. Not only would this be humiliating but it would make other religions more powerful.”

“Shah Wali-Allah was pessimistic about the real depth of faith of those converted by the sword. Such converts were in reality hypocrites and on the Day of Judgment they would be thrown to the very deepest part of Hell, together with the infidels. Islamicization by the sword, added the Shah, did not remove doubts from the minds of newly converted Muslims and it was always possible they might revert to infidelity. The Shah believed that Imams (here meaning rulers) should convince the people through rational argument. They should preach that other religions were worthless since their founders were not perfect, and that their practice was opposed to divine law, interpolations having made them unbelievable. The superiority of Islam should be explained in positive terms and it should be brought home to converts that Islamic laws were perfectly clear and easy to follow. What appeared confusing (literally, night) in reality was clear (literally, day).”

“Another means of ensuring conversions was to prevent other religious communities from worshipping their own gods. Moreover, unfavourable discriminating laws should be imposed on non-Muslims in matters of rules of retaliation, compensation for manslaughter and marriage, and in political matters.”

“In short, Shāh Walīullāh does not deviate from the traditional Muslim position that the primary function of the state is to keep order. Thus, ideas which turn the subjects ‘against their king, the servant against the master, and the wife against her husband’ are against the ideal city (madīnah). He does not believe that aggressive jihad had come to an end—an assertion which was made in the nineteenth century by modernist Muslims—since he argues that the Imām ‘must make his religion predominate over all other religions, and that he not leave anyone unless religion has gained ascendancy over him’...”

“The letters of both his father’s and his own—even if they are not genuinely his—are very significant in understanding how jihad was conceived of in pre-modern India. However, since the consensus among the Muslims of South Asia has been that they are genuine, they remain as exemplars or paradigm-setters helping us understand how jihad was perceived in this part of the world. Hence, the letters must be given attention.”