Re: How Islam Spread [split: UN Condemns the Dutch Film]
you asked me for Hindu kings who demonstrated tolerance and I showed you.
Akbhar wasn’t a muslim king, was he? the one example you give for tolerance happens to be a guy who rejected islam and tried to create a ‘tolerant’ faith for himself! 
Re: How Islam Spread [split: UN Condemns the Dutch Film]
The exploit of the destruction of buddhism in hindustan alone belongs to Islam and the Ummah! From the destruction of the pagan institution of Nalanda, to the modern day victory of the pious Taliban over the buddhist idols in Afghanistan, Islam and muslims have been performing marvelous exploits over the Buddhists. Infact, if one reads the Buddhist text Kalachakra, one realizes the extent to which these marvelous exploits destroyed the buddhists! Infact, these wonderful exploits drove the buddhists to declare a holy war on the Ummah!
This exploit alone belongs the the Ummah and we should not be apologetic about it!
Re: How Islam Spread [split: UN Condemns the Dutch Film]
^^^^^^^, to the modern day victory of the pious Taliban over the buddhist idols in Afghanistan,
I loved reading the post above full of great sarcastic humour imagine if one truly believed blowing up beautiful artistic , and vernerated statues that buddists created couple thousand years ago is a modern day victory of the pious Taliban ------- i never laughed so hard............................... great joke. hahahahaha
Once again , thank you for your great sense of humour anything else would be sheer disbelief..........
Re: How Islam Spread [split: UN Condemns the Dutch Film]
Even if you limit yourself to the Subcontinent, there’s no dearth of examples…
The 14th century reign of Sultan Zain-ul-Abidin is considered one of the golden eras of Kashmiri history. He treated the Hindus well, going so far as to build a number of temples for them. Even Pandit historians who literally have nothing good to say Muslim rule praise his tolerance and justness.
Around the same time, the Mamluk queen Razia Sultan was working to abolish jiziya in Delhi.
The Adil Shahi sultans of Bijaipur were well known for their tolerance towards their Hindu subjects as well…they allowed Hindus to practice their religion freely, made liberal grants to Hindu religious institutions.
The Nawabs of Oudh promoted Hindus to top posts in the administration and military, endowed and built temples, and funded Hindu religious celebrations.
Even the much maligned Tippu Sultan is known to appointed Hindus to some of the top posts in his kingdom (including PM and commander in chief of the armies), and issued firmans endowing scores of temples…to this day there are temples in South India that still have the jewels presented to them by Tippu Sultan…
Re: How Islam Spread [split: UN Condemns the Dutch Film]
^ that's great Jenab. But there is another view point about all these examples too:
there is no dearth of smart muslim people or kings. ofcourse they threw some bones here and there were certainly some genuinely good ones too (and no I am not saying that grudgingly). But the point being made here is not whether there are ANY decent muslim kings - rather it is about how islam spread. BTW I do apologize to those whose sentiments it may hurt but it is a nasty past.
Razia Sultan had to 'work' to remove jazia. Jazia was one of the milder forms of discrimination designed to make non-muslims miserable.
But I certainly agree about the Tipu grants and some of the nawabs treating their 'ministers' well. They were either the smart or nice ones.
Re: How Islam Spread [split: UN Condemns the Dutch Film]
Overall, Islam was not spread by the sword because if that was the case, then Spain would still retain majority of muslim population and it does not. Infact, Spain is a majority Christian nation. One might say Christianity was spread by the sword.
The presence of Hindu faith and its huge following in Indian subcontinent is a witness to the fact that even there Islam never spread by the sword or else India would've been a majority of muslims. Yes, there may have been certain rulers/kings who misbehaved and committed atrocities, but an overwhelming number of rulers were kind to their people.
Islam is growing fast even today, but how? There are no invisible swords. After 9/11 (a tragedy) Islam got a boost in USA alone because more people were drawn to study and learn about it. And found out for themselves that Islam is not what it is made to look like in the mass media of the west (specifically).
To state the facts is one thing, but to taint the image of Islam with incorrect information is really not necessary. You may disagree on aspects of Islam if they don't appeal to you, that's an individual notion and a decision that everyone's entitled to.
Re: How Islam Spread [split: UN Condemns the Dutch Film]
i find this sword theory pretty vague.
if muslims had swords, so does their enemies.
and if we are saying this sword phenomenon was directed towards poor people then what kinda faith those poor people were holding that they got scared of swords.
Sword can never change the faith, but money sure does.
so now can we talk about missionaries now.
Re: How Islam Spread [split: UN Condemns the Dutch Film]
Even if you limit yourself to the Subcontinent, there's no dearth of examples...
Around the same time, the Mamluk queen Razia Sultan was working to abolish jiziya in Delhi.
The Nawabs of Oudh promoted Hindus to top posts in the administration and military, endowed and built temples, and funded Hindu religious celebrations.
Even the much maligned Tippu Sultan is known to appointed Hindus to some of the top posts in his kingdom (including PM and commander in chief of the armies), and issued firmans endowing scores of temples...to this day there are temples in South India that still have the jewels presented to them by Tippu Sultan...
jizya is a practice of the Quran and sunnah to abolish that is a step towards oppression of islam
and under an islamic state appointing nonmuslims to military , financial and advisor posts is strictly forbidden to say nothing of celebrating hindu festivals]
if they are considered dhimmi they shud be granted religious rights and rights to trade etc and live in peace and muslims shud not usurp their rights or oppress them but to employ them in govt is not advisable
most of these nawabs and sultans were the ideological succesors of the ummayyads despite the fact that some of them called themselves "shia" ] who started this practice of converting the islamic state to a kingship one of which was employing nonmusims to high posts...
Re: How Islam Spread [split: UN Condemns the Dutch Film]
The presence and survival of Hinduism in India today simply shows its strength and resilience. The muslim kings who destroyed our temples foolishly thought that would end the religion .... obviously they had no clue.
That doesn't take one iota of blame or sin away from those who destroyed our temples, killed and forced people into conversion. That is why you now how have over 1/2 billion muslims in the sub-continent instead of the 5 or 10% muslim population in other countries
Re: How Islam Spread [split: UN Condemns the Dutch Film]
That is why you now how have over 1/2 billion muslims in the sub-continent instead of the 5 or 10% muslim population in other countries
Oh please. First of all, there aren't over 500 million Muslims in the Subcontinent.
Pakistan (98% of 169,000,000) = 165,620,000
India (13.5% of 1,130,000,000) = 152,550,000
Bangladesh (88% of 151,000,000) = 132,880,000
Sri Lanka (7% of 21,000,000) = 1,470,000
Nepal (4.2% of 29,000,000) = 1,218,000
Bhutan (0.5% of 2,500,000) = 12,500
For a grand total of 453,750,500, or just 30.2% of the total population. Considering the fact the lengthy history of Muslim rule in the region (between 1,200 years in Balochistan and Sind and 700 years in North India), I don't think that's a particularly shocking number, or one that indicates mass forced conversions. The Muslim presence in places like Malaysia and Indonesia was far shorter, and yet a far greater percentage of the population converted in these areas...
Re: How Islam Spread [split: UN Condemns the Dutch Film]
^ that is a real stretch Jenab = 453M instead of 1/2B - big difference. Lets not quibble; why not take Afghanistan also in?
BTW you don't need this sort of labored arguments to prove muslim atrocity for converting people in India. There are books.
Also what percentage factor will you add for people who were killed for refusing to convert?
Re: How Islam Spread [split: UN Condemns the Dutch Film]
*The conquest of spain was done by the moors around 700 A.D. by a huge force that made its way north. *During the eight year invasion by the muslims spain became under islamic control
The person who lead the invasion Tarig or the one eyed as a berber and an ummayad
Tariq ibn Ziyad was considered one of the best military commanders. ( military means troops of soldiers trained to kill)
Therefore since Tariq was a military commander and invaded spain and began a campaign of domination it sounds more like warfare and invasion then peaceful spreading of islam. Therefore, islam did not spread only peacefully but with warfare. His armies landed in Girbraltar and this is the speech he gave to his warrior soldiers:
Oh my warriors, whither would you flee? Behind you is the sea, before you, the enemy. You have left now only the hope of your courage and your constancy. Remember that in this country you are more unfortunate than the orphan seated at the table of the avaricious master. Your enemy is before you, protected by an innumerable army; he has men in abundance, but vou, as your only aid, have your own swords, and, as your only chance for life, such chance as you can snatch from the hands of your enemy. If the absolute want to which you are reduced is prolonged ever so little, if you delay to seize immediate success, your good fortune will vanish, and your enemies, whom your very presence has filled with fear, will take courage. Put far from you the disgrace from which you flee in dreams, and attack this monarch who has left his strongly fortified city to meet you. Here is a splendid opportunity to defeat him, if you will consent to expose yourselves freelv to death. Do not believe that I desire to incite you to face dangers which I shall refuse to share with you. In the attack I myself will be in the fore, where the chance of life is always least.
Remember that if you suffer a few moments in patience, you will afterward enjoy supreme delight. Do not imagine that your fate can be separated from mine, and rest assured that if you fall, I shall perish with you, or avenge you. You have heard that in this country there are a large number of ravishingly beautiful Greek maidens, their graceful forms are draped in sumptuous gowns on which gleam pearls, coral, and purest gold, and they live in the palaces of royal kings. The Commander of True Believers, Alwalid, son of Abdalmelik, has chosen you for this attack from among all his Arab warriors; and he promises that you shall become his comrades and shall hold the rank of kings in this country. Such is his confidence in your intrepidity. The one fruit which he desires to obtain from your bravery is that the word of God shall be exalted in this country, and that the true religion shall be established here. The spoils will belong to yourselves.
Remember that I place myself in the front of this glorious charge which I exhort you to make. At the moment when the two armies meet hand to hand, you will see me, never doubt it, seeking out this Roderick, tyrant of his people, challenging him to combat, if God is willing. If I perish after this, I will have had at least the satisfaction of delivering you, and you will easily find among you an experienced hero, to whom you can confidently give the task of directing you. But should I fall before I reach to Roderick, redouble your ardor, force yourselves to the attack and achieve the conquest of this country, in depriving him of life. With him dead, his soldiers will no longer defy you. excerpted from Leaders and Battles
So to those who choose to believe Islam spread peacefully into spain study religious wars and the spread of religion to know the real truth and you will conclude:
Islam did not spread peacefully but with military invasion.
Re: How Islam Spread [split: UN Condemns the Dutch Film]
^ this simplistic approach to interpretation of historical events is shocking indeed .... by the same logic we cud argue that hinduism in India and christianity in europe and later americas was spread by brute force ....and if u recall tariq b ziyad did not stay long in spain nor was he personally responsible for the muslim spanish culture for which spain was wellknown in the middle ages
No religion with such a mass following as islam or christianity can be spread simply by sword , it might be introduced by armies but it only flourishes by the help of saints and scholars
imperial powers can at times use religion as a tool of domination and kings of all faiths have done that thru out history islam being no exception] but the religion itself is nothing but a dictatorship of God and of no man. Instead if u are familiar with islamic history u will find that its the class religious muslims who have traditionally challenged the authority of tyrannical muslim kings.
the problem is that on one side we have people like u that are hellbent on proving that islam is a faith of barbarians which was spread by sword
on the other hand are apologists who are willing to overlook many atrocities committed by muslims to portray islam as a "religion of peace " and try to defend the conduct of all muslim rulers.
but the facts are hindus as polytheists [according to us] really do not even qualify as dhimmis and granting them that status was controverisal to begin with ......most of the wars were started by hindus and that had started in the time of the third caliph uthman , and i must add a good number of Hindus particularly from sind converted to islam and proved to be very good and loyal muslims even at that early age
Re: How Islam Spread [split: UN Condemns the Dutch Film]
^ this simplistic approach to interpretation of historical events is shocking indeed .... by the same logic we cud argue that hinduism in India and christianity in europe and later americas was spread by brute force ....
No religion with such a mass following as islam or christianity can be spread simply by sword , it might be introduced by armies but it only flourishes by the help of saints and scholars
the problem is that on one side we have people like u that are hellbent on proving that islam is a faith of barbarians which was spread by sword on the other hand are apologists who are willing to overlook many atrocities committed by muslims to portray islam as a "religion of peace " and try to defend the conduct of all muslim rulers.
Simplistic approach? I could have written an indepth dissertaton or a lengthy essay but facts are true. Tariq was a berber general and islam spread violently and bloodily in his military campaign for islamic dominaton of the lands. ANd there is his speech to his soliders. Many books available at the book stores or libraryies to learn more . I have written nothing which hasn't been documented historically about Tariq. I'll concede it may have spread peacefully afterwards but the truth is, Islam initiated its spread through violence, destruction, pillaging, plundering and butchery firstly and foremostly .
But so did christianity. Just for anyone who likes to think Islam came to spain nicey , nicey hasn't studied history.
Re: How Islam Spread [split: UN Condemns the Dutch Film]
^ that is a real stretch Jenab = 453M instead of 1/2B - big difference. Lets not quibble; why not take Afghanistan also in?
BTW you don't need this sort of labored arguments to prove muslim atrocity for converting people in India. There are books.
Also what percentage factor will you add for people who were killed for refusing to convert?
these are your own conjectures ....furthermore u still need to bring proof that forcible conversion is allowed in islam .....the example of Godless , infidel imitating, wine bibbers who became kings amongst muslims is not a valid argument.....I dont see christians formulating religious laws based on Cortez's or Charlemalgne's practice of statecraft , dont u think it will be a bit harsh to judge christianity based on actions of fellows like these?
Re: How Islam Spread [split: UN Condemns the Dutch Film]
Simplistic approach? I could have written an indepth dissertaton or a lengthy essay but facts are true. Tariq was a berber general and islam spread violently and bloodily in his military campaign for islamic dominaton of the lands. ANd there is his speech to his soliders. Many books available at the book stores or libraryies to learn more . I have written nothing which hasn't been documented historically about Tariq. I'll concede it may have spread peacefully afterwards but the truth is, Islam initiated its spread through violence, destruction, pillaging, plundering and butchery firstly and foremostly .
But so did christianity. Just for anyone who likes to think Islam came to spain nicey , nicey hasn't studied history.
so ? do u see me defending tariq here ? what he did or did not do is immaterial from the standpoint of religion as we dont take religious laws from tariq or his caliph al-walid
but to fight those who threaten the muslim state was a duty , the manner it was conducted varied greatly esp. since later dynasties were interested more in booty than any real concern with spreading the faith. And at any rate broadly speaking even the nonpractising muslims were no more brutal than any of their european adversaries and generally fought according to the rules of warfare of their times.
this could be attested by the fact that a lot of times christin kings sought alliances with them to fight against fellow christians a more recent example is the crimean war]
Re: How Islam Spread [split: UN Condemns the Dutch Film]
i wasn't talking about defending a muslim country.^^^^
I was supporting the statement that islamic expansion into Spain specifically in my above posts was military in campaign. It's expansion was was intially introduced through terror, violence and forced conversions via threats to life . THis did not only happen to spain when Islam expanded as much historical books written about various battles and such in islamic hisotory. remember Badre? Uhud?
Tours? victory to whom in 732. Thus battle and war campaigns were intrically and intrinisically important to the expansionism of it or the stop of it.
Re: How Islam Spread [split: UN Condemns the Dutch Film]
^ no one denys that all muslim empire building and for that matter all empires whether christian or even supposedly harmless hindus like chandragupta maurya] was military in origin , we dont see nothing wrong with overthrowing a unjust tyrannical govt like sassanian and byzantines] and replacing it with a just and egalitarian govt like the govts of the first , second and fourth caliphs]
We think this kind of "regime change" is neccesary to spread freedom eliminate oppression in the world ....only condition is that its valid if the muslims who do this are abiding with most of the laws of islam and not purely seeking plunder and after all peaceful means have been exhausted and these conditions were met in the time of the prophet and early caliphate]
more specifically for spain frankly i dont care what tariq did there ....its a part of arab nationalism not a part of islam
and like i said people dont draw conclusions on christianity based on what christian kings did or did not do so why apply this principle to islam ? the sunnah is to call all rulers of islamic world after hasan b ali died 40 AH] as kings not caliphs and we dont derive any religious rules from their actions or conduct
Re: How Islam Spread [split: UN Condemns the Dutch Film]
i that islamic expansion into Spain specifically in my above posts was military in campaign. It's expansion was was intially introduced through terror, violence and forced conversions via threats to life . THis did not only happen to spain when Islam expanded as much historical books written about various battles and such in islamic hisotory. remember Badre? Uhud?
it.
actually the oppositte is true the later and corrupt muslim kings discouraged conversions even via peaceful means and did their most to appease nonmuslim subjects for 2 reasons 1- more taxation 2- nonmuslim subjects served as counter force to puritanical muslims within their own state
so akbar and aurangzaib used rajput armies and soldiers to crush his muslim opponents
syrian arab kings employed chrisitians in high post for their administrative and financial skills in flagrant violation of examples of earlier caliphs]
Re: How Islam Spread [split: UN Condemns the Dutch Film]
^ this simplistic approach to interpretation of historical events is shocking indeed .... by the same logic **we cud argue that hinduism in India **and christianity in europe and later americas was spread by brute force ....
Hinduism in India was spread by force? that is plain silly.