problems with islamic history...

[sevgi]

i dont know if there are any history buffs out there or if anyone is studying it as i am but i just need some help understanding some things in the history of islam.

i think everyone knows about the 'treaty of Hudaybieh'. the way ive read about it and learnt about in islamic sources is that after the Qurayshi's of Mecca violated the treaty and the treaty was henceforth broken, Prophet Muhammed(saw) and his companions realised they could take over Mecca, so they did. When they did so, ive always been taught that the Meccans were scared of our prophet taking revenge...but all he does is forgive them and tell them that they could live freely in security amongs the muslims. Many of them convert to islam when they see this lovely behaviour.

BUT... the way i learn it in history at uni is that after our prophet (saw) takes over Mecca, he forces the meccans to convert....

this is quite a compelling situation for me as i need to write down the facts in history. i cant just "put in the truth" coz they dnt believe it the way that i do. when asked, i am in need of stating that meccans were forced into islam...CAN ANYONE CLEAR THIS UP FOR ME???:? :? :?

[lolwatever]

^ no that's not true, the evidence is stated in the quran... that the people of makkah where given till the end of the contract to remain on their religion.. after which they had a choice between accepting Islam or leaving makkah without harm. i.e. they wheren't forced into nething.

its in teh very beginnin of surat tawbah...

tc salams

[Dawud_uk]

assalaamu alaykum,

this exactly shows the reason why it is dangerous for muslims to go to establishments teaching like this, because if they do so they begin to respect their teachers to the extent they are even taking their deen from them!

assalaamu alaykum,
Abu Abdullah

[Nuseyba bintkab]

sister you should read islamic history book it tells about evey step about islamic history

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

[Dawud_uk]

sister you should read islamic history book it tells about evey step about islamic history

given the huge number of non muslims 'experts' on islam could i suggest maybe one of us could write a quirky book on christianity full of strange theories backed up with little or no evidence and then maybe we could get paid loads for appearing tv as an 'expert' on christianity?

of-course such a thing would be grossly unfair but why is it that the non-muslims are given the task of explaining islam then?

Abu Abdullah

[Akil]

The answer isn’t to shelter yourself inside Islamic schools, with Islamic books, listening to Islamic teachers say Islamic things about Islamic life. Islam was ruled the world when they read Plato, Socrates and Aristotle, alongside the Holy Quran, Muslim and Bakuri.

Never accept anything anyone says without evidence at any time for any reason, ever. Not a Kafir history teacher, not a Muslim Scholar.

Your teacher says something and you look it up and then agree or disagree; you look it up in Muslim sources, in Kafir sources, in every source you can’t get your hand on.

Then you’ll find out that Nabi Mohammad (peace and blessings be upon him) was a caravaner well known his honesty and his integrity and the city of Medina invited him to come lead them in an effort to stop blood feuds that had been going on for sometime. I believe his only stipulation was that they accept Islam which they did so willingly and of their own free will. Someone please correct me if I am wrong.

[Dawud_uk]

The answer isn’t to shelter yourself inside Islamic schools, with Islamic books, listening to Islamic teachers say Islamic things about Islamic life. Islam was ruled the world when they read Plato, Socrates and Aristotle, alongside the Holy Quran, Muslim and Bakuri.

Never accept anything anyone says without evidence at any time for any reason, ever. Not a Kafir history teacher, not a Muslim Scholar.

Your teacher says something and you look it up and then agree or disagree; you look it up in Muslim sources, in Kafir sources, in every source you can’t get your hand on.

Then you’ll find out that Nabi Mohammad (peace and blessings be upon him) was a caravaner well known his honesty and his integrity and the city of Medina invited him to come lead them in an effort to stop blood feuds that had been going on for sometime. I believe his only stipulation was that they accept Islam which they did so willingly and of their own free will. Someone please correct me if I am wrong.

other than the bit about greek philosophy then yes,

Abu Abdullah

[Malaikah]

Your teacher says something and you look it up and then agree or disagree; you look it up in Muslim sources, in Kafir sources, in every source you can’t get your hand on.

Do non-Muslims even have sources on Islamic history other than what the Muslims themselves gathered?^o)

[Dawud_uk]

Do non-Muslims even have sources on Islamic history other than what the Muslims themselves gathered?^o)

they're sources are from islam, but they read the islamic sources, put the worst possible spin on it and then reproduce it showing islam in a negative light.

they will also use rafadiyyah sources we wouldnt touch as we know their lying ways.

[Sabbir_1]

BUT... the way i learn it in history at uni is that after our prophet (saw) takes over Mecca, he forces the meccans to convert....

No that aint true, prophet muhammed s.a.w didn't not force them to convert.. islam was the true religion.. true always prevails.. they saw the beautiful character of muslims and of the prophet and they knew islam was the true religion.. some of them converted wright away but for others it took couple of months.. because they still had doubt in there minds.. ..

Most of these lecturers at uni who teach islamic studies.. get paid loads of money and give false info about islam.. they dont know nothing really they aint scholars.. they get there degree or phd and start teaching..

Best thing to do is find out for yourself about islamic history cuz these kaafis dont want you to know the truth.. about islamic history.. find out from other sources as well not just your lecturer..

I don't know why u confused about this. Muslims should know that the prophets character was not to force people to islam.. he was kind..saying he forced them.. which aint true creates doubt in person mind that he wasnt kind and that he forced people to islam... Study his seerah.. read the books written by the great scholars ibn kathir and others.. on the life of the prophets. l

[lolwatever]

Do non-Muslims even have sources on Islamic history other than what the Muslims themselves gathered?^o)

:sl:
Actually that's what bewilders me, it's not like the pagans or ne1 else left behind any form of verifiable evidence... so how on earth do non Muslim historians come up with wacky versions of events that aren't backed up by any chain of narration watsoever :uuh:
:w:

[Akil]

Do non-Muslims even have sources on Islamic history other than what the Muslims themselves gathered?

Islam at its height had much influence on the western world and vice versa. There was a time in the past where Muslims and the rest of the world had much more contact. There are still sources from that time.

[Akil]

so how on earth do non Muslim historians come up with wacky versions of events that aren't backed up by any chain of narration whatsoever

Intentional, hateful, lies, propaganda and distortion. In a very real way this is the natural path of man kind.

[azim]

Asalaamu alaykum sis.

My suggestion is to look up a book called the History of Islam - it in three volumes, published by DARUSALAM. It may help.

My suggestion is to find the hadith where the Prophet (pbuh) granted the Makkans forgiveness, their property and wealth. Then I would try and find a scholar of the Quran to tell you which verses were revealed around that time. The aim of this is to be able to say in your work that the Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) offered Islam (not forced it) and the people accepted, and using the Quran and Hadith as evidence that it was not forced upon them.

One good point to use is also that during the Apostasy Wars of Abu Bakr's reign - the people of Makkah did not leave the deen - meaning they took it seriously and accepted it of their own free will.

I know it can be difficult sometimes to have a teacher or lecturer talk about Islam in such a way, but it is our responsbility to not be emotionally effected - rather, approach it from an academic and critical point of you.

Also, ask your teacher for the evidence that Islam was forced upon them and study the view she/he provides closely.

[azim]

assalaamu alaykum,

this exactly shows the reason why it is dangerous for muslims to go to establishments teaching like this, because if they do so they begin to respect their teachers to the extent they are even taking their deen from them!

assalaamu alaykum,
Abu Abdullah

Asalaamu alaykum.

Someone once said "it is the sign of an intelligent mind to entertain a view without accepting it".

As Muslims, we shouldn't be afraid of exposing ourselves to those who have different beliefs to us, Islam is haq and truth always overcomes falsehood - a promise from the Quran. If we keep truth hidden, how will falsehood ever come to destruction?

[lolwatever]

^ i think he's saying we shouldn't expose ourselves to other views if we don't understand what Allah and his messenger say in the first place.

It's a bit like those Muslims who convert to other religions and they have no idea what Islam is about in first place... same with learning about other views and confusing yourself when you don't understand the basics of what Islam has to say about them before seeing what others say about "Islams teachings"

tc ws

[sevgi]

Do non-Muslims even have sources on Islamic history other than what the Muslims themselves gathered?^o)

sis, of course...most muslim texts are compiled by non muslims of the time. i know u aint studyn history...:)

[sevgi]

Asalaamu alaykum sis.

My suggestion is to look up a book called the History of Islam - it in three volumes, published by DARUSALAM. It may help.

My suggestion is to find the hadith where the Prophet (pbuh) granted the Makkans forgiveness, their property and wealth. Then I would try and find a scholar of the Quran to tell you which verses were revealed around that time. The aim of this is to be able to say in your work that the Prophet Muhammed (pbuh) offered Islam (not forced it) and the people accepted, and using the Quran and Hadith as evidence that it was not forced upon them.

One good point to use is also that during the Apostasy Wars of Abu Bakr's reign - the people of Makkah did not leave the deen - meaning they took it seriously and accepted it of their own free will.

I know it can be difficult sometimes to have a teacher or lecturer talk about Islam in such a way, but it is our responsbility to not be emotionally effected - rather, approach it from an academic and critical point of you.

Also, ask your teacher for the evidence that Islam was forced upon them and study the view she/he provides closely.

can i know who authored this three peice history of islam?

[sevgi]

:sl:
Actually that's what bewilders me, it's not like the pagans or ne1 else left behind any form of verifiable evidence... so how on earth do non Muslim historians come up with wacky versions of events that aren't backed up by any chain of narration watsoever :uuh:
:w:

well,,,they used to think we were the pagans.

and think about it...are u telling me that in medieval wars, two sides are fighting and people arent gna write about the doings, interactions and habits of the other side. there are tonnes of books like that.

take the Gesta Francorum...its a commemorative peiece written by a frank(most probably a knight)...in it is a whole lot of junk about muslims and how they were pagands and kept crying out "allachibar!!!" (allahuakbar) and how they would use stars and gods and astrology to determine fate etc...

[Malaikah]

sis, of course...most muslim texts are compiled by non muslims of the time. i know u aint studyn history...:)

:sl:

But the only sources they gave are the hadith and quran! they just interprete things their own way, their sources are all Muslim sources!

[sevgi]

:sl:

But the only sources they gave are the hadith and quran! they just interprete things their own way, their sources are all Muslim sources!

what sources are u reffering to coz i think we are misunderstanding eachother. im talking about historic events complitions, historic islamic leader sources, islamic war tactic sources, islamic economy and trade sources, islamic lifestyle sources...etc...

most are written from the view point of the enemy because what was different bewildered them. they sometimes had to settle into muslim land and wrote down their experiences. they lived out trade in spain (then islamic) and wrote out their experiences.

while these primary texts are still available, current historians are gathering all they can from these primary texts (using both muslim and non muslim viewpoints) and writing books on the topics of their choice. that is their job.

what im worried about is that sometimes, i NEED to read and analyse non muslim orientated history books about muslims, (where the author has largely looked at non muslim view points)and i must state what they say. i can tell that it is non muslm orientated coz i know the truth, but others dnt know that and go on believing everything they read...

peace.

[Malaikah]

^Why do you gave to use them sis? will you get in trouble if write the Muslim viewpoint and back your up your claims? :)

[sevgi]

^Why do you gave to use them sis? will you get in trouble if write the Muslim viewpoint and back your up your claims? :)

well...im studying hsty at an accelarated level in uni. i would like to do my honours in history(inshallah pray for me...)

so sometimes, our core texts, the one we are analysing as a whole, are this way and i must read them. they are core texts,,,and when making references in our essays, it is important to quote ur core text.

eg)say my core text is about the trading and economic life of muslims in early spain.

i get an essay question something like:
-'what was the impact of the early muslims on the world of economy in the west?"

well...in my 'core text' it would most probably say that muslims came up with tax...but obtained it unfairly coz after conquering land,offerd three options to non muslims.
1)become muslim
if not
2)pay shocking amounts of tax
if not
3)fight with us till ur death coz we are the super power.

this is all true.even muslim scholars say this.these three options are accepted by both sides. what is important is the way more core text makes it sound.i must state it in my essay but i have to try n find a way to make it sound nice...coz the muslims did not execute this in a bad way.the non msulim texts jst make it sound bad.

peace.

[Malaikah]

:sl:

Hmm ok. Well I recommend you make it sound good then. :)

[sevgi]

sis malaikah i have question for u...

where are u from? like where do u live?

[netprince]

Very interesting subject you have chosen, we need more muslim historians to highlight the real history of the islamic world, rather than the distorted versions we were taught when i was in school!!!

Its only many years later when i started looking into things for myself that i realised that people like avicenna and averroes were infact ibn sina and ibn rushd who were actually muslims!!!

May Allah(SWT) grant you success in your studies and succesful career as a historian. Ameen

[sevgi]

Very interesting subject you have chosen, we need more muslim historians to highlight the real history of the islamic world, rather than the distorted versions we were taught when i was in school!!!

Its only many years later when i started looking into things for myself that i realised that people like avicenna and averroes were infact ibn sina and ibn rushd who were actually muslims!!!

May Allah(SWT) grant you success in your studies and succesful career as a historian. Ameen

thank u and amen.

may Allah grant us sucess is all our fields lishallah...

[lolwatever]

what sources are u reffering to coz i think we are misunderstanding eachother. im talking about historic events complitions, historic islamic leader sources, islamic war tactic sources, islamic economy and trade sources, islamic lifestyle sources...etc...

most are written from the view point of the enemy because what was different bewildered them. they sometimes had to settle into muslim land and wrote down their experiences. they lived out trade in spain (then islamic) and wrote out their experiences.

Most? i'm pretty sure that's not the case... a quick look in a few encyclopedias written by Muslims during that time will show that there was alot of documentation done by them.

I can go on to claim that it was by far more accurate and abundant than whatever non Muslims had to say. Muslims where known for their love of documenting things, no matter how irrelvent or even unbeneficial it was in nature, along with the degree of authenticiyt of the narration of the event.

I doubt (infact, i know) non Muslims don't have any means to verify the authenticity of their sources or even teh diary enteries attributed to people 'living in those societies'. They can barely figure whether shakespeares macbeth belongs to shakespeare or not.

while these primary texts are still available, current historians are gathering all they can from these primary texts (using both muslim and non muslim viewpoints) and writing books on the topics of their choice. that is their job.

How do they verify the non Muslim sources, when a Muslim source is direclty opposed to a Muslim source, what's their judicial balance for deciding which version of hte story to take?

e.g. the case you brought up (incident of fath makkah).

what im worried about is that sometimes, i NEED to read and analyse non muslim orientated history books about muslims, (where the author has largely looked at non muslim view points)and i must state what they say. i can tell that it is non muslm orientated coz i know the truth, but others dnt know that and go on believing everything they read...

peace.

That's why you need to press your case from the poitn of 'ability to verify' your claims.

The neat thing is, for those who claim that Muslims try cover up the negatives in history, there's tonnes of documentaiton made by scholars and Muslims that reveal alot of injustice that went on, al-Bidayah wan-Nihayah is a good example...

even during time of prophet, why couldn't Muslims have easily covered up the instances of where the companions made mistakes (e.g. Khalid ibn walid killing those ppl in makkah out of anger, as well as whent he prophet found some of the companions hitting that guy at battle of badr to get stuff outta him, and many many many others...)

Ibn Battuta is another neat source which is very impartial in what he mentions... even H.A.R. Gibbs affirms that (he's a non Muslim professor at Oxford )

:w: :D

[Malaikah]

sis malaikah i have question for u...

where are u from? like where do u live?

:sl:

Why?:?

[sevgi]

Most? i'm pretty sure that's not the case... a quick look in a few encyclopedias written by Muslims during that time will show that there was alot of documentation done by them.

I can go on to claim that it was by far more accurate and abundant than whatever non Muslims had to say. Muslims where known for their love of documenting things, no matter how irrelvent or even unbeneficial it was in nature, along with the degree of authenticiyt of the narration of the event.

I doubt (infact, i know) non Muslims don't have any means to verify the authenticity of their sources or even teh diary enteries attributed to people 'living in those societies'. They can barely figure whether shakespeares macbeth belongs to shakespeare or not.







How do they verify the non Muslim sources, when a Muslim source is direclty opposed to a Muslim source, what's their judicial balance for deciding which version of hte story to take?

e.g. the case you brought up (incident of fath makkah).



That's why you need to press your case from the poitn of 'ability to verify' your claims.

The neat thing is, for those who claim that Muslims try cover up the negatives in history, there's tonnes of documentaiton made by scholars and Muslims that reveal alot of injustice that went on, al-Bidayah wan-Nihayah is a good example...

even during time of prophet, why couldn't Muslims have easily covered up the instances of where the companions made mistakes (e.g. Khalid ibn walid killing those ppl in makkah out of anger, as well as whent he prophet found some of the companions hitting that guy at battle of badr to get stuff outta him, and many many many others...)

Ibn Battuta is another neat source which is very impartial in what he mentions... even H.A.R. Gibbs affirms that (he's a non Muslim professor at Oxford )

:w: :D

no offence but im really tired of this thread so ive given up. im studying the late medieval period along with the crusades...ur giving me stuff from the early mideival period and even some ancient stuff...

u guys can go along with the world as it is and i will do my best in my field of history. im not trying to create argument. im setting out the facts about my course, if poeple cant understand that then they really shudnt try to respond or ever ever ever study history at a uni level.

i cant change the way history texts have been written, recorded or verified. all i can do is study and analyse them and do my best to make all the INACCURATE bullcrap written about muslims in the past sound as good as can be and give as much true facts from wholesome muslim texts as possible...ok.

i thank everyone for ur help.

peace.

[lolwatever]

no offence but im really tired of this thread so ive given up. u guys can go along with the world as it is and i will do my best in my field of history. im not trying to create argument. im setting out the facts about my course, if poeple cant understand that then they really shudnt try to respond or ever ever ever study history at a uni level.

i cant change the way history texts have been written, recorded or verified. all i can do is study and analyse them and do my best to make all the INACCURATE bullcrap written about muslims in the past sound as good as can be and give as much true facts from wholesome muslim texts as possible...ok.

i thank everyone for ur help.

peace.

salams sis..
lol i think u totally misunderstood my point.

i was just pointing out that it's not what you thought... whether you're forced to work within their rules or not is diff story sis.


all the best with it sis!

tc salams :D

[sevgi]

salams sis..
lol i think u totally misunderstood my point.

i was just pointing out that it's not what you thought... whether you're forced to work within their rules or not is diff story sis.

personally i think it's a waste of time doin islamic history at a uni that can't get its sources right.

all the best with it sis!

tc salams :D

what can i say...thank u for demeaning my uni, my course, my life ambition and dream and my passion. i never realised how worthless my struggles at one of the best unis in australia for the next four years were. i have wasted my life.

[lolwatever]

what can i say...thank u for demeaning my uni, my course, my life ambition and dream and my passion. i never realised how worthless my struggles at one of the best unis in australia for the next four years were. i have wasted my life.

hey sis i didn't mean it that way... to me its like studying medicine from a carpenter or something like that...

i'm sure tonnes of ppl think the course i want to do is a waste of time too... its their personal opinion, who cares :mmokay:

all the best! didn't mean it in a -ve way sis! honestly.... i'll retract it since it seemed offensiv.

salamz

[sevgi]

hey sis i didn't mean it that way... to me its like studying medicine from a carpenter or something like that...

i'm sure tonnes of ppl think the course i want to do is a waste of time too... its their personal opinion, who cares :mmokay:

all the best! didn't mean it in a -ve way sis! honestly.... i'll retract it since it seemed offensiv.

salamz

wateva bro...

:w:

[lolwatever]

wateva bro...

:w:

sis wallahi i'm sorry! i really really didn't mean it to come across that way... i took the statement off!

pls4giv me :(

all the best :w:

[sevgi]

sis wallahi i'm sorry! i really really didn't mean it to come across that way... i took the statement off!

pls4giv me :(

all the best :w:

i understand..its ok.

its just the fact that my uni isnt the one "getting their sources wrong" they cant help it. there is only one primary text from the first crusade what are they gna use? they wana talk about salah al din, there gna use texts from his companions perspectives and the opposite sides perspective. theyre not gna pull out "kingdom of heaven" and tell us to study that. everything hasd to be in proportion.studying history is one of the most sacred things. it helps me understand the events today for gods sake.

anyways. wallahi i forgive u brother. dnt mind me...i enjoy ur posts usually. i think u jst caught me at a wrong time,,,my mum is naggn me.

peace bro...take care.
:)

[Erundur]

i dont know if there are any history buffs out there or if anyone is studying it as i am but i just need some help understanding some things in the history of islam.

i think everyone knows about the 'treaty of Hudaybieh'. the way ive read about it and learnt about in islamic sources is that after the Qurayshi's of Mecca violated the treaty and the treaty was henceforth broken, Prophet Muhammed(saw) and his companions realised they could take over Mecca, so they did. When they did so, ive always been taught that the Meccans were scared of our prophet taking revenge...but all he does is forgive them and tell them that they could live freely in security amongs the muslims. Many of them convert to islam when they see this lovely behaviour.

BUT... the way i learn it in history at uni is that after our prophet (saw) takes over Mecca, he forces the meccans to convert....

this is quite a compelling situation for me as i need to write down the facts in history. i cant just "put in the truth" coz they dnt believe it the way that i do. when asked, i am in need of stating that meccans were forced into islam...CAN ANYONE CLEAR THIS UP FOR ME???:? :? :?

:salamext:

Here is some info on the treaty of Hudetbeih, I got from the footnote froms the Evils of Terrorism by Shaykh Muhammad Al-Aqeel.

http://www.islamicboard.com/sects-di...terrorism.html

:sl:

[AHMED_GUREY]

what can i say...thank u for demeaning my uni, my course, my life ambition and dream and my passion. i never realised how worthless my struggles at one of the best unis in australia for the next four years were. i have wasted my life.

hey sis i didn't mean it that way... to me its like studying medicine from a carpenter or something like that...

i'm sure tonnes of ppl think the course i want to do is a waste of time too... its their personal opinion, who cares :mmokay:

all the best! didn't mean it in a -ve way sis! honestly.... i'll retract it since it seemed offensiv.

salamz

wateva bro...

:w:

sis wallahi i'm sorry! i really really didn't mean it to come across that way... i took the statement off!

pls4giv me :(

all the best :w:

These posts remind me of a classic Indian movie i once saw :D

thanks for the laugh:D

[جوري]

I just saw this post.. & It is utterly engrossing.. Akil's first comment especially so.. how does he propose we learn Islamic history really? from Jihad watch? How absured is this fellow?.. if Islamic history is originally documented by Muslims, who does he propose we learn it from, as to have a 'non-biased' objective opinion?-- the source of documentation or some secondary source that contradicts what was originally recorded by historians of the time? Who in his opinion has the correct impression of what actually happened then?
Some folks' intense dislike of Islam exude out so profusely like sweat through the pores.. I am just here as the clinical strength deodorant........sheesh!

[NoName55]

****

[Nσσя'υℓ Jαииαн]

:sl:

Sis, ok your learning the way they tell you. But how will things change if someone doesnt step up to the plate and say "Hey, this is all wrong!" If someone has the guts and knowledge to do so, go ahead. But I would never sit quiet and let the lies pass by me. Sure I'd learn it the way they are if I want to get ahead in the university...but even just verbally fixing their mistakes makes a whole lot of a difference...even if its just in their minds...

The point here is that if you want to learn Islamic history itself...whats better than going to the source itself? And it seems to me your field is history in general. So i think its proper you learn it the way they tell you, but also remember to fix their mistakes if you can. Why should we let lies about our Deen pass like nothing? :)

:D !:w:

[Woodrow]

I am going to move this thread where it belongs shortly. But, before I do I would just like to point out a few realities.

1. Muhammad(PBUH) was Arab. Who did he conquer for? the Arab world? Less then 15% of the world's Muslims are Arab. Seems like that was not much of a conquest.

2. my ancestors the Taters of the Golden horde, were pagans when they attacked the Muslim world. they had already invaded much of Eastern Europe. They reverted to Islam after their blody conquest. The same can be seen with the Berbers of the Sahara, they had conqured North Africa and then reverted once they came in contact with Islam.

3. Muhammads conquest of Makkah was peaceful, not an enemy was killed. It was later because of treachery that any killing took place.

[sevgi]

precisely woodrow.

i know all this, tho, the initial point of this thread was the fact that many 'western' sources on the early medieval period are innacurate and send off a messge totally opposite to what our prophet and khalifs intended and acted.

i was upset due to the fact that i am obliged to use these sources throughout my course and degree.

however, seeing as this thread is about a year old, i am a year advanced in my degree and have learnt my way around the 'facts'...i am pretty much qualified to critique such 'facts' and prove them wrong...

:w:

[Woodrow]

precisely woodrow.

i know all this, tho, the initial point of this thread was the fact that many 'western' sources on the early medieval period are innacurate and send off a messge totally opposite to what our prophet and khalifs intended and acted.

i was upset due to the fact that i am obliged to use these sources throughout my course and degree.

however, seeing as this thread is about a year old, i am a year advanced in my degree and have learnt my way around the 'facts'...i am pretty much qualified to critique such 'facts' and prove them wrong...

:w:

:w:

I am glad to see that you have seen that "History" books will differ depending on whose perspective you are looking at it from. History doesn't change, but the facts get "remembered" differently.

With that said it is best to close this thread before additional confusion is added.