Nura: Something more to keep you amused. Part II

Submitted by Plato (India), May 20, 2008 at 10:23

Nura, you wrote:

>>Islamic History!! Where do you get your information from? You know you skipped the whole part where Muslims fled Mecca to Ethiopia to flee persecution.<<

I am not about to recount the whole of Islamic history not because there is no time and space but because I know only bits and pieces, the interesting bits probably. About Muslims fleeing to Abbysinia, you failed to mention that the main enemy of the Quraish, the prophet, was still ensconced safely in Mecca under the protection of his patrons. So were innumerable companions. That tells you anything??

>>They were followed by the pagans who tried to have them turned over to them for slaughter.<<

The pagans must be dumb beyond belief. When they had them in their power they did nothing but when they go away to a distant land they follow them to convince the Christian ruler who had given them asylum there to have them killed. Tell it to the birds, Nura.

>>You are saying that you KNOW Islamic history.<<

I know SOME Islamic history, not all. The little I know is enough to tell me what islam is all about.

>>Who is better to write it than Muslims themselves!!! I guess I am to learn Islamic history from a Hindu!!<<

What a lovely way to write history, Nura. You want that the only people who have a right to write Islamic history are Muslims because presumably only then will it be authentic. By that logic the only people who should write Hindu history are the Hindus. Or is it still a case of only Muslims being capable of writing undistorted history? Now if you read history written by Hindus you will probably gag when you read what Muslims did in India to the Hindus.

I will not do that but I will quote for you from Muslim history in India written by Muslims themselves and you will still, if you take yourself out of your Islamic mindset, gag. Are you ready, Nura?

The History of India as told by its own Historians, By H. M Elliot and John Dowson Vol II

Tajul Maasir by Hasan Nizami (on Kutubuddin Aibak) Page 217 ‘..He purged with sword the land of Hind from the filth of infidelity and vice, and freed the whole of that country from God-plurality, and the impurity of idol-worship, and by his royal vigor and intrepidity, left not a temple standing.' Page 219 on the capture of Delhi:'…The city and its vicinity was freed from idols and idol-worship and in the sanctuaries of the images of the gods, mosques were raised by the worshippers of one god.'

Vol III:

Tazjiytul Amsar wa Tajriyatul Asar of Abdullah Wassaf, page 43: ‘..The Mohammedan forces began to "kill and slaughter on the right and the left unmercifully, thoroughout the impure land, for the sake of Islam…..They took captive a great number of handsome and elegant maidens, amounting to 20,000 and children of both sexes…."

Zafar Nama of Sahrafuddin Yazdi. Page 497: ‘…Taimur considered the point, and deeming the advice of his officers to be wise, he gave orders for all\the Hindu prisoners to be put to death…..In pursuance of this order 100,000 infidel Hindus were put to the sword.'

Page 504:'…High towers were built with the heads of the Hindus and their bodies became food of ravenous beasts and birds.'

Page 539 (about Sultan Firoz Shah Khilji) ‘….When the Shah arrived at the land of Kabar, a contest ensued, the "Musulmans made their swords rusty with the blood of the Hindus." "…Whatever live Hindu fell into the king's hands was pounded into bits under the feet of elephants. The Musulmans who were Hindis had their lives spared,…"

Page 542: ‘….While the soldiers sought every opportunity of plundering, the Shah was engaged in burning the temples and destroying the idols….'

In Vol I of the same series you get a glimpse of how the Hindus conducted war.

Early Arab Geographes: Salsilatut tawarikh of the Merchant Sulaiman with additions by Abu Zaidul Hasan, of Siraf, page 7'…The Indians sometimes go to war for conquest, but the occasions are rare. ….'

>> I have taken Islamic History Plato, you are not pulling blankets over my eyes. YOU do not know the history of Islam.<<

I have not taken Islamic history. But I suggest you read some history of India written by Muslims to get the picture of what Islam did in the country. You may have noticed Muslims scream about the crusaders, who were only doing what Muslims had done to the Christians in Palestine, Syria, Iraq etc. Have you heard the Hindus whining about what happened to them for a thousand years under Muslims? They managed to get rid of foreign rule without much bloodshed and are now carrying on with the business of living instead of complaining about what happened long ago.

I only have a few books, the Koran, Shahi Bukhari, the histories of the prophet written by Ibn kathir, Ibn Ishaq, Tabari, Heikel and the Tabaqat by Ibn Saad, the eight volume A history of India as written by its own historians (mostly Muslim), Alberuni's A history of India vol 1 and 2 and a few other books by other Muslims, Christians, Hindus and atheists and best of all I have the internet. As an expert in Islamic history I would like your guidance on what books will give me the true picture of Islam. Till then I will have to depend on these few books and the internet to pull the blanket over your eyes.

>>Note: Abu Suffyan became Muslim later of his own fee will.<<

My little book of sira has this little story about Abu Sufyan's conversion, Ibn Ishaq page 547: ‘…He (Abu Sufyan) stayed the night with me and I took him in to see the apostle early in the morning and when he saw him he said, ‘Isn't it time that you should recognize that there is no god , but Allah?' He answered, ‘You are dearer to me than my father and mother…….By God I thought that had there been another god with god he would have continued to help me.' He said ‘Woe to you, Abu Sufyan, isn't time you recognize I am god's apostle?' He answered, ‘As to that I still have some doubt.'

‘I said to him, ‘Submit and testify that there is no god but Allah and that Muhammad is the apostle of God before you lose your head,' so he did so.

And you claim that Abu Sufyan converted of his own free will. Nura you are a scholar of Islamic history, if you have Islamic history written by any biographer earlier than this and more reliable please let me have the reference.

>> His daughter,Ramlah became Muslim before him.<<

Ibn Ishaq (page 543)narrates one little incident from Ramlah's life as a Muslim. When her father Abu Sufyan went to her to intercede with her husband, Muhammad, and was about to sit on a carpet she pulled it away saying he should not rest on the piece of cloth used by the holy prophet and defile it, calling him an unclean polytheist. The crestfallen father sadly told his daughter ‘By God, since you left me you have gone to the bad.'

This is the wall created by Islam between a daughter and her father.

>> Islam has the reputation of endoctrinating it's oppenents: The Tuks, Mongols, who actually conqured the Islamic empire and then coverted to Islam by the influence of the people!!! Who converts to a conquered idealogy unless it is the truth!!!<<

Most people convert voluntarily if they think it is beneficial to them. The violent warlike Mongols and Turk found the perfect ideology to hide their killer instincts under the guise of fighting for God.

>>Oh, the caravan attack. During the Medina period Muslims would have been fine if the pagan Arabs were not sanctioning the city. During this period and the Meccan period before it Muslims were being heavily sanctioned. There were in forced starvation. There were times when they were so hungry that they used to tie rocks around their stomachs to help the pain. The Meccans would not allow them to buy food and prevented others for selling to them. This was the state of affairs in early Islam.<<

Have you heard of sob stories, Nura? Muslim historians were good at inventing them. This story you have recounted is just a very good example of one. The prophet merrily went about abusing the gods and sacred symbols of the Meccans for 13 years (Read Ibn Ishaq for more). Any attacks came only towards the end of the 13 year Meccan period after the death of Abu Talib. You know your Islamic history. How could many Muslims remain safely in Mecca even after the migration?

And what do Muslims do to people who draw cartoons and write stories about the prophet. Invite them to dinner??

>>This is one of the reasons why ALLAH allowed the taking of caravans.<<

You had once quoted a verse that said Allah does not love aggressors Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities.Lo! Allah loves not, aggressors. Al-Baqarah 2:19 .

Allah seems to have abrogated this verse by allowing the prophet to take revenge for his (almost) voluntary exile from Mecca.

>>Another reason is that this is a very known tactic in war. You take the supplies of your enemy. I need to say no further.<<

It is not a tactic of war, Nura, it is war. When someone attacks your trade route, your lifeline, it is a declaration of war. There is no need to send a letter signed by one tribal chief to the other informing him that he is going to attack. Why do Arabs scream loudly when the Israelis choke off supplies to the Palestinians. The Israelis are only following a tactic of war approved by Allah.

>>It's very easy to skim read the Quran, Google search it, take passages out of context. It's an elementary game that is played quite often. I don't have time for it, so you can save it for your next debate.<<

Muslims seem to think that unbelievers cannot, do not, or will not understand the Koran, probably taking their cue from the infallible Koran itself (18:57, 17:97). Count me out, but skim through the many posts on this site by unbelievers and you will see they have demonstrated deeper knowledge than many Muslims posting here. Dhimmi, Ianus, jaladi to name just a few.

All Muslims, unable to counter their arguments, do is throw the context rock at them. Take the two verses I have mentioned above,17:97 and 18:57, as examples and show me that they are not clearly saying that Allah has chosen to misguide unbelievers. If you have any context to say mean the opposite of what it is so clearly saying give me the reference. Go to this site to read what Ibn kathir has to say on them: http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=17&tid=29112 , http://www.tafsir.com/default.asp?sid=18&tid=30517

Regards

Plato

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".