problems with islamic history...

[sevgi]

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]

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 )

 

[Malaikah]

sis malaikah i have question for u...

where are u from? like where do u live?

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 )

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

 

[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

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...

 

[lolwatever]

wateva bro...

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

 

[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

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-divisions/30344-ebook-evils-terrorism.html

 

[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...

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

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

thanks for the laugh

 

[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]

****