One interesting thin is that Arabs lost control of political Islam in about a hundred years with the displacement of the Ummayad Caliphs of Damascus by the Abassids in Baghdad. The Abbassids were Arabised-Persians who took control of politicial Islam and relegated the Arabs to the backwaters they emerged from. This point is lost in the glowing accounts of historians who see a monolithic Islam through the centuries. The Arab reaction was the creation of Shiasim as an improvement but even this was adpted by later Persians. It was only during Muhammad Wahab that a retrun to Arabic roots was contemplated.
The Persians were able to take back the force of history as they converted wholesale (elite and commoner) to Islam. Thus they had demographic advantage. When Islam came to India, after the early Arab invasion were confined to a small region, it came through the TAP (Turco-Afghan-Persian) converts. The early converts were either defeated upper castes or extremely poor folks to carry on thier lives. This is what created the Ashraf and Ajlaf divide. Its this divide which prevents the growth of Islam in India for they can never takeover the religious dogma and doctrine of Islam being non-Arabs. The religious center will always be outside India and that will hinder its growth.
The Persians were able to take back the force of history as they converted wholesale (elite and commoner) to Islam. Thus they had demographic advantage. When Islam came to India, after the early Arab invasion were confined to a small region, it came through the TAP (Turco-Afghan-Persian) converts. The early converts were either defeated upper castes or extremely poor folks to carry on thier lives. This is what created the Ashraf and Ajlaf divide. Its this divide which prevents the growth of Islam in India for they can never takeover the religious dogma and doctrine of Islam being non-Arabs. The religious center will always be outside India and that will hinder its growth.