ideological enslavement is worst than armed colonialism!
1. Arabs were NOT at each other's throats about whose god was superior. You just said it because you THINK so. Just shows your perspective and way of thinking. Do you have anything upon which to base your assertion? Make sure to bring something concrete because it will be shredded.
The most remarkable feature of the political life of Arabia before Islam was the total absence of political organization in any form. With the exception of Yemen in the south-west, no part of the Arabian peninsula had any government at any time, and the Arabs never acknowledged any authority other than the authority of the chiefs of their tribes. The authority of the tribal chiefs, however, rested, in most cases, on their character and personality, and was moral rather than political.
The modern student of history finds it incredible that the Arabs lived, generation after generation, century after century, without a government of any kind. Since there was no government, there was no law and no order. The only law of the land was lawlessness. In the event a crime was committed, the injured party took law in its own hands, and tried to administer "justice" to the offender. This system led very frequently to acts of horrendous cruelty.
If the Arab ever exercised any modicum of restraint, it was not because of any susceptibility he had to questions of right or wrong but because of the fear of provoking reprisals and vendetta. Vendetta consumed whole generations of Arabs. Since there were no such things as police, courts or judges, the only protection a man could find from his enemies, was in his own tribe. The tribe had an obligation to protect its members even if they had committed crimes. Tribalism or ‘asabiyya (the clan spirit) took precedence over ethics. A tribe that failed to protect its members from their enemies, exposed itself to ridicule, obloquy and contempt. Ethics, of course, did not enter the picture anywhere.
Since Arabia did not have a government, and since the Arabs were anarchists by instinct, they were locked up in ceaseless warfare. War was a permanent institution of the Arabian society. The desert could support only a limited number of people, and the state of inter-tribal war maintained a rigid control over the growth of population. But the Arabs themselves did not see war in this light. To them, war was a pastime or rather a dangerous sport, or a species of tribal drama, waged by professionals, according to old and gallant codes, while the "audience" cheered. Eternal peace held no appeal for them, and war provided an escape from drudgery and from the monotony of life in the desert. They, therefore, courted the excitement of the clash of arms. War gave them an opportunity to display their skills at archery, fencing and horsemanship, and also, in war, they could distinguish themselves by their heroism and at the same time win glory and honor for their tribes. In many cases, the Arabs fought for the sake of fighting, whether or not there was a cause belli.
2. What is Arab history to you? Jahiliyah and then fast forward to 19th & 20th centuries with no stops in between? Are you serious about what you said? How could you make such a set of unfounded and bigoted assertions? Arabs did nothing for civilization? Why was Arabic the ligua-franca for international learning from early Abbasid period onwards, if it were not for Arab influence? Did Arabs do nothing for cultural, economic, commercial development in the three continents? Did Arabs not preserve, translate, and spread classical philosophy and mathematics?
And what was everyone speaking before that? Your assertions are based on teenager ideologies of Islam and Ummah fanaticism! Let me question you the alternative side. Why was Persian exodus into India was created upon the advent of Islam? Or the Assyrians of Levant traditionally known for their knowledge and innovation for 4000 years choose to flee rather than surrender to the Arab religion?
You make it seem as though Arabs were barbarians who remain so to this day. May I enquire from whence springs such hatred? You can masquerade as a Pakistani nationalist, but I can not imagine what could motivate a Pakistani to go to such extremes just to denigrate a race, a culture, a people on the whole. I could understand indifference, or disdain, but I can not comprehend pathological hatred. What makes you so unbalanced in your exposition of unwarranted hatred? Surely no Paksitani would be so in thrall of Israel to go to such extremes. Are you really who you pretend to be? My doubts are certainly dispelled.
May be instead of ranting you can come up with factual debate because that would be helpful. Losers usually resort to accusations, ranting, name calling and all the negative traits one can expect on PDF.
3. What came later than Quran that influenced it? Or am I reading you incorrectly? I specifically mean your assertion when you say: "I do not understand how principles which were to develop much later - thanks to borrowing from Roman and Persian cultures could lead someone from darkness to light." I hope you realize that the reference of leading from darkness to light comes from Surat-al-Baqarah.
A masters from Madrassah is not going to help you in your research. A deeper look into Roman, Persian and Semitic mythologies will reveal how much Islam has copied from these civilizations - especially Romans and Persians none of which are Abrahimic. Once again your frustated out-burst over nothing rather than a factual debate.
4. Your enumeration of various fields of science for absence of 'Arab achievement' is duly noted. I would like to ask you what is 'Pakistani' contribution to the said fields of study. I ask this because you masquerade as a Pakistani nationalist. Surely your denigration of Arabs must have some Nationalistic angle. Let me ask how your Pakistani nationalist identity is helped or bolstered by such a display of bigotry towards Arabs.
Like any imperial religion, Islamic history is very much doctored but beside that translation does not equal innovation. And Much of the Islamic golden age was the work of Persians, Egyptians, Central Asians and Assyrian converts. Had there been an indigenous Arab scientific & cultural spring then we should have seen the results of it as a subsequent civilization. Rather, Arabs remain one of the most backward and undeveloped people on earth with a culture more austere than Ethiopia and Somalia. The mongol sacking of Baghdad proved how stupid the Khalifah and his ruling elite as well as the subject were.
A debate with civility, fact, figures and references will be appreciated. Emotional outburst and defensive rampage will earn you some ridiculous nick name.
