/* */

PDA

View Full Version : Do you think the great success of Islam is because it was spread by the sword?



FatimaAsSideqah
04-08-2006, 11:06 PM
as-salaam alaykum

Post to here of your opinion about this..

wa-salaam alaykum
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
BlissfullyJaded
04-08-2006, 11:14 PM
:sl:

It wasn't spread by the sword.. Those who embraced it, did so because they saw Islam as the true religion. And it spread so fast over so many lands due to the fact that the earlier generations practised what they were bringing to the people. They didn't try to make dawah when they themselves weren't practising. Therefore they commanded respect.

There were non Muslims around too...and they lived under the protection and safety of the Muslims, thereby prooving Islam was not spread by the sword. If it was, why were these non Muslims being protected? :)
Reply

cleo
04-08-2006, 11:22 PM
My reason: When I was introduced to Islam, I read the Quran, and it gave me hope. For there is none here in the USA, with or without religion. I was conforted by Allah's word and been since a muslim. Never to leave, because it is the only true religion, (way of life), that is truth....
Reply

Maimunah
04-08-2006, 11:24 PM
salaam
Islam was spread by means of proof and evidence to those who listened to the message and responded to it, and it spread by means of force and the sword to those who were stubborn and arrogant, until they were overwhelmed and became no longer stubborn, and submitted to that reality.

And Allaah knows best.

for more infor check this out: http://63.175.194.25/index.php?QR=43087&ln=eng
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Mu'awiyah
04-09-2006, 03:00 PM
Assalamu 'Alaykum Wa Rahmatullahi Wa Barakatuh

Akhi Mashaallah

Abu Bakr and Umar bin Al-Khattab spread the word of Allah to all corners of the world. The word of Islam was spread through battles and conquest, but homes, women, loot, lifestock, cities and crops were untouched by our Muslim armies under the command of prominent Sahaba's like Khalid bin al-Waleed who conquered Palestina and Syria, Sa'd bin Abi Waqqas who won the battle of Qadissey and with that Persia and of course Amr ibn Al 'As who conquered Egypt.

The reason why Islam captured Persia, Syria, Palestina and Egypt without much difficulty was because the Roman and Persians were fighting each other for centuries and no one was the winner and the only loser were the people. The people did not fight the new Muslim authorities and neither did the Muslims force anyone to convert. All they had to do was pay the non-Muslim tax!

This is one of the core factors why Islam spread from Eastern-China to Spain within 50 years time!
Reply

hidaayah
04-10-2006, 02:05 AM
:sl:
no..i don't think so..it spread because of the character and imaan of the muslims of that time..and if it were swords that spread islam then one may ask..which sword went into indonesia??
wassalam
Reply

Skillganon
04-10-2006, 02:07 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by A sister
:sl:
no..i don't think so..it spread because of the character and imaan of the muslims of that time..and if it were swords that spread islam then one may ask..which sword went into indonesia??
wassalam
I think the hilt of the sword went into malaysia, or maybe the blunt edge!
Reply

north_malaysian
04-10-2006, 04:34 AM
ISlam was spread by trade in Malaysia (14th century), Christianity was spread by swords, guns, cannons by Portuguese in 1511
Reply

anatolian
11-26-2016, 06:30 AM
I am not sure totally but it mustn't be haram even if it is taken by force. Kaba was a pagan worship place before the Prophet a.s. took it. They converted it to a Muslim Masjid then.
Reply

Scimitar
11-26-2016, 04:07 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by anatolian
I am not sure totally but it mustn't be haram even if it is taken by force. Kaba was a pagan worship place before the Prophet a.s. took it. They converted it to a Muslim Masjid then.
And before that, Abraham pbuh built it with his son, Ishmael pbuh.

We just took back what was rightfully ours. And it wasn't forcefully, the Qureish let the Muslims take it, as they admitted they could not rule Makkah like before, the Muslims had won and were now the majority in the land, hence no force necessary, just acceptance that this was God's will.

Scimi
Reply

anatolian
11-26-2016, 05:07 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Scimitar
And before that, Abraham pbuh built it with his son, Ishmael pbuh.

We just took back what was rightfully ours. And it wasn't forcefully, the Qureish let the Muslims take it, as they admitted they could not rule Makkah like before, the Muslims had won and were now the majority in the land, hence no force necessary, just acceptance that this was God's will.

Scimi
Maybe. But still threr were pagans in Makkah

Muslim Turks converted many churchs to masjids during Seljuk and Ottoman periods in the lands they conquered. Actually these were the symbols of the conquest. Hagia Sophia is being the most famous.
Reply

Scimitar
11-26-2016, 05:46 PM
Bro, you can in no way compare the Prophet pbuh taking Makkah peacefully to the Ottoman invasion of Constantinople.

The former being righteous, the latter being a shame to Muslims and Islam.

Scimi
Reply

anatolian
11-26-2016, 06:05 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Scimitar
Bro, you can in no way compare the Prophet pbuh taking Makkah peacefully to the Ottoman invasion of Constantinople.

The former being righteous, the latter being a shame to Muslims and Islam.

Scimi
Only difference between is Makkan pagans were so weak and Muslims were so powerfull and they had to open the gates to Muslims. If they resisted it would be a conquest by sword just like others. Prophet a.s. himself predicted that Konstantiniyah would be conquered. He even praised the future conquerer comander and army. You must have enough evidence to call it a "shame".
Reply

Scimitar
11-26-2016, 06:40 PM
Do you honestly believe that Islam spread through the use of the "sword" ???

Like ... really?

Despite historians debunking that myth, you really believe this?

I'm honestly astounded.

Go look up treaties and agreements between Muslims and non Muslims and see how Islam really spread across the orient.

You'll find that trade facilitated the invitation to Islam way waaaay more than any sword ever did.

Scimi
Reply

anatolian
11-26-2016, 08:12 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Scimitar
Do you honestly believe that Islam spread through the use of the "sword" ???

Like ... really?

Despite historians debunking that myth, you really believe this?

I'm honestly astounded.

Go look up treaties and agreements between Muslims and non Muslims and see how Islam really spread across the orient.

You'll find that trade facilitated the invitation to Islam way waaaay more than any sword ever did.

Scimi
My friend Islam did not spread through sword doesnt mean Muslims did not fight to conquer all those lands. It means they did not force people to convert to Islam by sword. Non-Muslims just paid the jizyah and had the rights as Muslims. Muslims definetly conquered non-muslim lands for the Islamic dominion. I think you need to study the Islamic history a bit. Look at the map


attachmentphp?attachmentid5789&ampstc1 -
Reply

Scimitar
11-26-2016, 08:31 PM
Sheesh, I'll leave you to it. :)

Scimi
Reply

anatolian
11-26-2016, 08:45 PM
My friend, Allah gave Islam to dominate the world. We are supposed to be majority not minority. And Turks just followed the ways of the Prophet a.s. and Rashidun Khilafa.
Reply

Scimitar
11-27-2016, 01:49 PM
Load of rubbish mate, Ottomoan empire was a complete farce by the time the Brits drew up the Balfour declaration... I thank Allah that the ottoman kingship (I refuse to call it a khaliphate) was destroyed.

id rather face an harsh truth than entertain sweet lies.

Scimi
Reply

anatolian
11-27-2016, 03:09 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Scimitar
Load of rubbish mate, Ottomoan empire was a complete farce by the time the Brits drew up the Balfour declaration... I thank Allah that the ottoman kingship (I refuse to call it a khaliphate) was destroyed.

id rather face an harsh truth than entertain sweet lies.

Scimi
Bro, it seems not only your nationality but your mind also has been colonised by the Brits. You would be expected to be proud of the Islamic history rather than an un-Islamic history. Now study the history of Muslim nations of the last 100 years...All Muslim nations who betrayed Ottoman Empire in WW1 paid the price eventually. Plestianians paid the price more than any other.

I don't claim that they were angels, they did mistakes and commited crimes sometimmes but considering the 623 years of history at the end of the day they carried the flag of Islam.
Reply

Scimitar
11-27-2016, 05:57 PM
The Ottomans... if you like,

Tbh, it's not a subject I'm so interested in, because I often find Muslims see the Ottomans through a very warped lens. The first generations were noble, sure - but when the Khilafa became a Kingship, it all went downhill from there... but did the embarrassing khlaifates start with the Ottomans?

Short answer? No.

The embarrassing Khaliphates happened during the dynastic wars between competing Khaliphates... and that was a sign for the people of the time that they were about to be overtaken by an enemy they could not fight - Majuj. Hence the Mongols came... and in case you didn't know this, the Turks, are a genetic offshoot from the Turanian races, of which the Mong (Mongol) were also a genetic offshoot. The Turanians, in history are what we religious folk refer to Magog, or Majuj... the other half of Gog (Yajuj).

Bro, you sure you wanna go down this road with me?

I'm not gonna play to your bias, as that is predictable silly, what I will do though, is throw you curve balls which you may not be prepared for.

Allahu Alam.

Balls in your court. Your move.

Scimi
Reply

cooterhein
11-27-2016, 07:08 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by anatolian
My friend Islam did not spread through sword doesnt mean Muslims did not fight to conquer all those lands. It means they did not force people to convert to Islam by sword.
They did not force people of the book to convert by the sword....but they did force any other non-Muslim in exactly that way, if the Muslims were in a position to use force. So that means any pagan, any Zorastrian, any Yazidi, any Hindu or Buddhist....they were all fair game, especially if they were polytheists.

Non-Muslims just paid the jizyah and had the rights as Muslims.
Not all non-Muslims, that category is far too broad. The jizyah and the dhimmi status (which is worth fighting against all by itself) was specifically, and very exclusively, reserved for people of the book. For everyone else, it was a convert or die scenario- again, so long as the Muslims were in a powerful position and were able to use force in this way.

There were exactly zero polytheists who had the option of living under dhimmi status. And there were quite a lot of polytheists on the Arabian peninsula at one point in time. We all know what happened to those people, right? Keep in mind, none of them had the option of being dhimmis and paying the jizyah.
Reply

anatolian
11-27-2016, 07:30 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Scimitar

The embarrassing Khaliphates happened during the dynastic wars between competing Khaliphates... and that was a sign for the people of the time that they were about to be overtaken by an enemy they could not fight - Majuj. Hence the Mongols came... and in case you didn't know this, the Turks, are a genetic offshoot from the Turanian races, of which the Mong (Mongol) were also a genetic offshoot. The Turanians, in history are what we religious folk refer to Magog, or Majuj... the other half of Gog (Yajuj).
I know Turks are from the same offshoot with Mongols but this Yejuj-Mejuj analogy applied to many nations, Chineese people being the first candidates. If you ask me it has nothing to do with a specific nation on the Earth. Allah knows best and sure I can deal with you on this subject and I can even show you that Turks were chosen by Allah let alone being Yejuj or Majuj..There are signs for this in both Quran and Hadith..I will create another thread for that
Reply

MuslimInshallah
11-27-2016, 08:34 PM
Assalaamu alaikum,

I moved the discussion of the spread of Islam here. Please keep it respectful.

JazakAllah khairan.
Reply

anatolian
11-27-2016, 09:03 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by cooterhein
They did not force people of the book to convert by the sword....but they did force any other non-Muslim in exactly that way, if the Muslims were in a position to use force. So that means any pagan, any Zorastrian, any Yazidi, any Hindu or Buddhist....they were all fair game, especially if they were polytheists.

Not all non-Muslims, that category is far too broad. The jizyah and the dhimmi status (which is worth fighting against all by itself) was specifically, and very exclusively, reserved for people of the book. For everyone else, it was a convert or die scenario- again, so long as the Muslims were in a powerful position and were able to use force in this way.

There were exactly zero polytheists who had the option of living under dhimmi status. And there were quite a lot of polytheists on the Arabian peninsula at one point in time. We all know what happened to those people, right? Keep in mind, none of them had the option of being dhimmis and paying the jizyah.
Yes this happened sometimes but it is totally un-Islamic. Pagans are also under the dhimmitude.
Reply

Serinity
11-27-2016, 09:21 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by cooterhein
They did not force people of the book to convert by the sword....but they did force any other non-Muslim in exactly that way, if the Muslims were in a position to use force. So that means any pagan, any Zorastrian, any Yazidi, any Hindu or Buddhist....they were all fair game, especially if they were polytheists.

Not all non-Muslims, that category is far too broad. The jizyah and the dhimmi status (which is worth fighting against all by itself) was specifically, and very exclusively, reserved for people of the book. For everyone else, it was a convert or die scenario- again, so long as the Muslims were in a powerful position and were able to use force in this way.

There were exactly zero polytheists who had the option of living under dhimmi status. And there were quite a lot of polytheists on the Arabian peninsula at one point in time. We all know what happened to those people, right? Keep in mind, none of them had the option of being dhimmis and paying the jizyah.
you are grossly mistaken. The dhimmi status is for anyone willing to pay for it. afaik.

A) Convert to Islam.
B) Pay Jizyaah
C) Fight.

These are the options given to every Non Islamic State. And Allah :swt: knows best.

I am grateful for the things Ottoman Empire did, although they did do some wrongs, but they succeeded in spreading the Deen. Afaik.
Reply

cooterhein
11-27-2016, 09:29 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by anatolian
Yes this happened sometimes but it is totally un-Islamic. Pagans are also under the dhimmitude.
According to the sources I've been made aware of (which is likely to either originate from or link up with Al-Wahidi's Asbab al-Nuzul), this is absolutely Islamic and proscribed as the precise strategy of how Islam was supposed to spread. Do you take issue with this specific source? It's my understanding that this is one of the most important Sunni commentaries out there, but I want to make sure it's an acceptable source for you.

Which pagans were under the dhimmitude, and when? Are you talking about something that happened during early Islamic history within the Gulf region, or are you talking about something in a different region that happened centuries later?
Reply

Born_Believer
11-27-2016, 09:42 PM
The fact that the majority of India remained Hindu, even after centuries of muslim rule over most of that land, goes a long way to disproving this idea that Islam spread by the sword, or better put: "Islam only spread because you would get killed if you didn't convert".

A modern day proof is the rise of Islam in the western world, without any Muslim armies rampaging through the streets of those countries.
Reply

Born_Believer
11-27-2016, 09:44 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Serinity
you are grossly mistaken. The dhimmi status is for anyone willing to pay for it. afaik.

A) Convert to Islam.
B) Pay Jizyaah
C) Fight.

These are the options given to every Non Islamic State. And Allah :swt: knows best.

I am grateful for the things Ottoman Empire did, although they did do some wrongs, but they succeeded in spreading the Deen. Afaik.
These types of answers sound quite ignorant. At times, even during the Muslim conquest of Sham under the sahabah, non-Muslims were pardoned the jizyah if they were unable to pay of the jizyah commanded of th emwas very little. In fact, once Khalid bin Walid RA conquered Bosra (I think that's how it is spelled), he let the largely Christian population choose their own governor, who inevitably was christian and the former governor, Romulus, who had converted to Islam, left bosra.

The idea that somehow non-Mulims would be killed if they were poor and unwilling to convert is nonsense.

What is even worse is that many Muslims are spreading this nonsense.
Reply

Serinity
11-28-2016, 12:40 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Born_Believer
These types of answers sound quite ignorant. At times, even during the Muslim conquest of Sham under the sahabah, non-Muslims were pardoned the jizyah if they were unable to pay of the jizyah commanded of th emwas very little. In fact, once Khalid bin Walid RA conquered Bosra (I think that's how it is spelled), he let the largely Christian population choose their own governor, who inevitably was christian and the former governor, Romulus, who had converted to Islam, left bosra.

The idea that somehow non-Mulims would be killed if they were poor and unwilling to convert is nonsense.

What is even worse is that many Muslims are spreading this nonsense.
Sadly, I read a fatwa on ISlamqa.com that seems to push this "convert or die" thing. Not all fatwas there are consistent, either.

I basically read that peaceful ways are not the only way, that those who did not want to convert, had to be forced by sword.

https://islamqa.info/en/5441 - one example.

https://islamqa.info/en/43087 - second example.

I want your comments on these. :)
Allahu alam.
Reply

M.I.A.
11-28-2016, 01:54 PM
..well, imo.. islam today is not spread by the sword literally..

so i dont think it was spead by the sword historically either.

although the literal sword is ever looming in some places.. most places have adopted the metaphorical sword of law.

and war is a constant.

when the dust settles in places such as iraq and syria.. and if we are lucky enough to still be around..

you can answer your own question.
Reply

Scimitar
11-28-2016, 04:10 PM
If Islam was successful in Turkey, it would never have allowed itself to become secular.

A powerful leader chosen by the people would not allow Turkey to become secular.

But Turkey didn't have "powerful leaders" lol... they had muppet Kings, who passed the title of Khaliph down from father to son... that's a kingship. Hence the weakened generation of Kings were manipulated to eventually relent their position in the orient and become a monarchy which was eventually overthrown... and Islam in Turkey today? Absolute joke.

I was in Istanbul in the early 2000's and prayed Jummah in the Blue Mosque - ya know? The Most Famous Masjid in Turkey? The one all ya'll Turks make a big song and dance about? Yeah - THAT ONE.

So I'm praying Jummah, 2 rakah fardh behind the imam - soon as he is finished - he just gets up and walks off - so do all the other Muslims... not one stayed behind to finish the rest of the salaat (Sunnah rakats) except me. I was half way thru my rakat when a Turkish securty guard comes and takes me away, breaking my salah... I was angry that he broke my salah and I asked him why...

...his reply was just...

"Now it is time for tourists" - that's what he told me.

And what I saw next, defied explanation.

These non Muslim tourists were entering the masjid with THEIR SHOES ON... NO RESPECT.

Tell me again, why Turkey is so special?

Not to mention, spotting a bearded man in Turkey is like finding a needle in a haystack - sheesh. You nationalists are absolute fools.

Scimi
Reply

Scimitar
11-28-2016, 04:35 PM
Islam spread to Turkey with the Sword - and so, today it is not successful as a Muslim nation - but it's hella successful as a "secular" one.

Define your bias again? :D

Scimi
Reply

Serinity
11-28-2016, 04:49 PM
The sword was used against the disbelievers who prevented others to become Muslims. AFAIK. sounds logical.

logically If person A wanted to become Muslim, but Nation B threatened to kill person A, then the Muslims should defend person A by the sword. Right ?

Forced conversions is prohibited in Islam. Sometimes to maintain peace and order, one has to use Force, to keep the oppressors, criminals, and outlaws, at bay.

Look at the police. Why do they have guns? Why is there a military?

Allahu alam.
Reply

Scimitar
11-28-2016, 05:06 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Serinity

Forced conversions is prohibited in Islam. Sometimes to maintain peace and order, one has to use Force, to keep the oppressors, criminals, and outlaws, at bay.
salam Serenity,

Are you claiming that the Ottomans didn't forcefully convert Christians to Islam?

Do you know about the Janisseries?

What you NEED to do here, is ironically take the same medicine I'm telling Anatolian, and Islamirama to take - to learn HISTORY properly.

Just learning about the Janisseries will show you how the Ottomans were barbaric in many ways, totally ignorant of Islam in those very ways - or if not ignorant - then clearly they were being pragmatic in their need for "empire"... they stopped at nothing. Forcing non Muslim children to become slaves and accept Islam is now Islamic? Since when?

Go learn about the Janisseries.

I'm laughing sadly... simply because those who claim Turkey is this that and the other lol, are totally IGNORANT OF THEIR OWN HISTORY.

Scimi
Reply

Serinity
11-28-2016, 05:11 PM
Have not read about the Janisseries.

I don't know much about the Ottomans, either.
Reply

Scimitar
11-28-2016, 05:14 PM
The READ in sha Allah, you'll be surprised at how Muslims can sing their praises so ignorantly.

What you will discover will make you sick to the stomach.

Ottomans tearing Christian boys between the age of 6 and 14 away from their parents and enslaving them in the royal courts, educating them in Islam forcefully and making them forcefully deny their own inherited faith, then keeping them as slaves until retirement and settling their slavery with a monetary payment... sound familiar?

It should.

Guess what? THIS IS NOT ISLAM.

Remember - in Islam, there is no compulsion in religion. Yet the Ottomans must have turned a blind eye to that verse - a very blind eye. Dajjalic in fact.

Scimi
Reply

Serinity
11-28-2016, 05:26 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Scimitar
The READ in sha Allah, you'll be surprised at how Muslims can sing their praises so ignorantly.

What you will discover will make you sick to the stomach.

Ottomans tearing Christian boys between the age of 6 and 14 away from their parents and enslaving them in the royal courts, educating them in Islam forcefully and making them forcefully deny their own inherited faith, then keeping them as slaves until retirement and settling their slavery with a monetary payment... sound familiar?

It should.

Guess what? THIS IS NOT ISLAM.

Remember - in Islam, there is no compulsion in religion. Yet the Ottomans must have turned a blind eye to that verse - a very blind eye. Dajjalic in fact.

Scimi
Yeah, I remember that. They let a hypocrite in there by forcing, who became the right hand of the Sultan.

Ahhh.......... Forceful conversions leads to hypocrisy, which inevitably, because of their Kingships of the sons becoming king, or whatever........ leads to secularism. not a very good strategy to having a stable Khalifah.

Why does it lead to secularism? Because the people forced, will want to take revenge, by working from inside out, making the dominion of the ottoman empire into a secular state.

by forcing people, the hypocrites, who got forced, will eventually take the power from the Sultan, when they die. And then transforming it into a Secular state.

Which prob let to their downfall. A hypothesis.

Right?

Allahu alam.
Reply

Serinity
11-28-2016, 05:35 PM
I like your unbiased approach, @Scimitar .

After all, we should see both sides of a story, and then form our own view of it. Since when did Allah command us to just listen to one person, and take their words for truth?

Allahu alam.
Reply

anatolian
11-28-2016, 05:37 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by cooterhein
According to the sources I've been made aware of (which is likely to either originate from or link up with Al-Wahidi's Asbab al-Nuzul), this is absolutely Islamic and proscribed as the precise strategy of how Islam was supposed to spread. Do you take issue with this specific source? It's my understanding that this is one of the most important Sunni commentaries out there, but I want to make sure it's an acceptable source for you.
Actually I didn't know anything about him before you mentioned his name. It seems he lived in the 11th c. I just don't think his works should be taken as primary source since Islam had already been spreaded widely until his time. At least it doesn't apply to the first 4 centuries of Islam.

format_quote Originally Posted by cooterhein
Which pagans were under the dhimmitude, and when? Are you talking about something that happened during early Islamic history within the Gulf region, or are you talking about something in a different region that happened centuries later?
Dhimmi means the non-muslim who pays jizyah under an Islamic state. In fact when the "jizyah ayah" (9:29) revealed all pagans of Arabia had already converted to Islam. This ayah revealed after the conquest of Makkah. So there were only Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians over there to collect jizyah from and the Prophet a.s. collected jizyah from these people including Zoroastrians. It was only more than a hundred years when Muslims reached to India they encountered with Budists and Hindus and they commited the crimes you mentioned because of a misinterpretation of the Ayah. But later Scholars decided that it applies to all non-Muslims.
Reply

Serinity
11-28-2016, 05:42 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Scimitar

Jazak Allahu Khairan bro Serenity

That is the nature of truth, there is never just one side to a story.

In a court of law, there is never only witnesses from one side.

We are a fair and thinking people.

But some here would have you think we as a people lack any brain power to deduce a method of investigation and are quick to claim "go learn history" when they themselves are so ignorant of the "historical process of investigation".

Such fools we have on this board, such ignorance.

Scimi
Yeah, I just remembered. When someone comes with something, one better investigate it. Otherwise we'd be thoughtless sheeples.

Otherwise, one may cause more harm than good, if one does not use the brain Allah gave us.

It is like trusting a layman or a person saying "man A stole from man B, cut his hands off!"... Should we trust this person, face value, and immediately cut the hands off the person??

Lol, that'd cause chaos.. There is a procedure.

Allahu alam.
Reply

Scimitar
11-28-2016, 05:45 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by anatolian
Dhimmi means the non-muslim who pays jizyah under an Islamic state.
More accurately it describes a Non Muslim citizen of Muslim lands... I'm a Muslim Dhimmi in the Christian land of United Kingdom - I also pay my taxes.

Scimi
Reply

azc
11-28-2016, 06:31 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by FatimaAsSideqah
as-salaam alaykumPost to here of your opinion about this..wa-salaam alaykum
No, it was due to their strong imam otherwise they couldn't win the battle against enemies with sword. How can anyone imagine that only 3000 Muslims went to fight against 200000 well trained enemies equipped with best weapons of the age (battle of mota)
Reply

Scimitar
11-28-2016, 06:46 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by azc
No, it was due to their strong imam otherwise they couldn't win the battle against enemies with sword. How can anyone imagine that only 3000 Muslims went to fight against 200000 well trained enemies equipped with best weapons of the age (battle of mota)
explain Alexander using that same logic lol

Scimi
Reply

azc
11-28-2016, 06:59 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Scimitar
explain Alexander using that same logic lolScimi
I think you should study the chapter of battle and books of seerah. Then I hope you will not compare them to big army of Alexander
Reply

Muhammad
11-28-2016, 08:21 PM
:wasalamex

I am closing this thread due to the manner in which the discussion was taking place. Some of you may have great points of knowledge to share but unfortunately these are lost when you insult and attack each other. Below is the reminder from sister charisma once again:


format_quote Originally Posted by *charisma*
Assalamu Alaikum IB members,

We receive many complaints in regards to the language some members choose to use. Please remember that this environment is not to push each other’s buttons, but a place where we can have intelligent discussions. You are all knowledgable individuals mashallah but insulting other members can easily create a negative environment for all. Be aware that there are witnesses beyond those who you are interacting with.

Brothers and sisters, do not give the angels the chance to write anything against you. What you say and how you say it are great parts of your character. No one can botch your character but you!

O you who believe! Let not a group scoff at another group, it may be that the latter are better than the former; nor let (some) women scoff at other women, it may be that the latter are better than the former, nor defame one another, nor insult one another by nicknames. How bad is it, to insult one’s brother after having Faith [i.e. to call your Muslim brother (a faithful believer) as: “O sinner”, or “O wicked”, etc.]. And whosoever does not repent, then such are indeed Zalimun (wrong-doers, etc.). (49:11)

Starting from TODAY, anyone who uses inappropriate language including insults will get infracted and furthermore, their entire post will be deleted regardless of whether it is relevant to the topic. Continuous abuse of this rule will result in a ban. There are NO exceptions. It doesn’t matter who you are or how long you have been a part of this forum. If you cannot speak intelligently by using appropriate words, then you are better remaining silent. We will no longer tolerate anyone who cannot control their tongue. When voicing your opinions to members, mods, or admins, be respectful, that’s all we ask.

Jazakum Allahu khair.
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 14
    Last Post: 09-26-2014, 12:05 AM
  2. Replies: 241
    Last Post: 11-22-2007, 06:54 AM
  3. Replies: 59
    Last Post: 02-06-2007, 08:03 PM
  4. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10-31-2006, 08:50 AM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-23-2006, 02:25 AM
HeartHijab.com | Hijab Sale | Pound Shop | UK Wholesale Certified Face Masks, Hand Sanitiser & PPE | British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!