Nalanda University flourished for more than seven centuries

To be blunt: Islamic invaders to the Indian subcontinent were by and large iconoclastic, at best intolerant and at worst genocidal (by forced conversions, marriages, outright murder, etc) of the native Dharmic (read: Hindu, Buddhist, and Jain) population, and burned down, looted, and deconstructed Hindu and Buddhist places of worship to construct their own mosques on top of said ruins.

The India-Pakistan debacle today is an extension of a nearly millennium-long Hindu-Muslim feud.

The burning of Nalanda University (whether or not it is a 'university' is an orthogonal matter) is another facet in this feud. The decline of Buddhism in the late classical era in the Indian subcontinent—already on a somewhat downhill slope, due to Hinduism co-opting much Buddhist thought, and in general being more popular and accessible than the ascetic demands of monastic Buddhism—was drastically accelerated by the Islamic incursions into the Indian subcontinent.

The Ayodhya mosque-temple riots are another facet of this clash. Western commentators glibly say 'Hindus are anti-Muslim'. The issue in India is so much more nuanced than that; there is bad blood on both sides going back a thousand years. Islam cannot escape from these charges: the religion is fundamentally intolerant of non-Abrahamic ones, especially ones with liberal iconography (like Hinduism and Buddhism).

There is a reason why (most of) the oldest and largest Hindu temples are in South India, which mostly escaped from the period of Muslim rule relatively unscathed. There are (possibly apocryphal) stories about how the idols at several temples (such as the one in Srirangam, Trichy) were relocated to mountain redoubts to prevent them being stolen and melted down by 'the invaders'.

The destruction of Buddhist iconography by Islam (or its followers) continues to this day: the Bamyan Buddhas in Afghanistan were blown up by the Taliban in 2001.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Constantinople

Indeed, we can trace the following sequence of events:

1054: Great Schism divides the Byzantine Empire and Western Europe

1048-73: Holy Roman Emperor Henry III attempts to dominate the election of popes

1050-80: Bishop, later (1073) Pope Gregory VII initiates the Gregorian Reforms, reigniting interest in the legal codes of Justinian, which gave legitimacy to the Church's autonomy contra the Emperor

1088: Irnerius begins teaching Roman law at Bologna, supposedly teaching the Four Doctors of Bologna (disputed by some historians), who would complete the medieval exegesis of Roman law in Europe

The principal innovation of the European university, which occurred sometime in the early 12th century, was the granting of degrees by the doctoral committee, rather than the advisor. As with most achievements in history, the development of the university was a gradual process, not a single event. The incorporation of students and professors into the universitates scholarum and colegia doctorum was initially necessary as collective bargaining against the mercurial and often conflicting state and church authority in medieval Europe, but eventually proved to maintain a higher standard of quality than had been previously possible.

We can therefore trace several "firsts":

- the collective school for multiple subjects, somewhere between Plato's Akademia (-387) and Theodosius's Pandidakterion (425)

- the residential school where students came to live and study, Nalanda (427)

- the certification of studies completed as a license to teach, ijazah, Al-Qarawiyyin (857) or earlier

- the collectivization of students and professors, Bologna (1084-1155, uncertain)

Fun fact: Indian laws are not the same for all religions even today. Muslims have their own version of personal laws closely derived from Sharia. This happens in a 'secular' country

Battle of ideologies, groups, regions and culture is as old as history and does not seem like it will ever completely die down. We need a more hybrid understanding where we evolve with time and apply modern lens to historical ideas carefully. Without ideological pride in Christianity, white superiority I doubt most of the European countries would've had been the colonizing superpowers they became controlling most of the world.