The major reason Islam was so successful was due to chivalry and mercy towards civilians - Most merciful conquerors in history

[Itachi]

Read Wikipedia article on battle of Badr.

You want me to read an article that's been edited to fit a narrative??

You need to do actual research before quoting me or I'll report you.

 

[21st Century Vampire]

Caliph Umar was the most aggressive of all the Sahabas of Prophet Muhammad. After the Battle of Badr, Prophet Muhammad, Ali and Abu Bakr decided that the prisoners of war shall be freed after paying ransom or by giving education to 10 muslims per person.

However Umar objected and instead decided to behead each and every prisoner of war.

You do realize that Islamic laws didn't come in a jiffy right? He had his opinion and own character but he had a prescriptive law and morality to follow and that's what he followed in Jerusalem as well as in your example he eventually followed what was ordered (assuming the incident is true) There are various examples of Umar changing his opinion on administrative matters when he was caliph coz sometimes (rarely) it wasn't compatible with what the Prophet taught take his stance on Price mechanism for example so whether his character was aggressive or not really doesn't matter, he abided by what was taught and ordered to him and btw not sure why you're highlighting this when your previous point about Umar was already proven to be historically untrue

 

[Apprentice]

I am a proud Muslim but for the first time I find most responses by my fellow Muslim brothers to be nauseating. All it takes is one look at the medieval Muslim court chronicles and all this apologist narrative of "benevolent Muslim conquerors" falls flat on its face. Medieval Muslim historians took pride in narrating instances of forced conversions and temple destruction.

As for the sex slavery bit, this is true. Islamic jurisprudence books boastfully talk of it as a means of "dishonouring" the enemy women (in this case "infidel" women). But sex slavery was a weapon used by all sides (Muslim and non-Muslim) against their enemies. The Mughal Empire and Ahmad Shah Abdali's army captured thousands of Hindu and Sikh women and turned them into concubines. Likewise, many Rajput kings and the Sikh Empire also enslaved Muslim women.

The Sikh Empire in particular enslaved many Muslim girls and women in Punjab and Kashmir. Sikh soldiers literally used our Muslim girls as sex slaves/concubines. This happened again to our women during Partition, in Jammu and East Punjab and its princely states. Tens of thousands of our girls were taken as concubines by Sikhs, and many of them refused to return from their captors. I have heard stories of this from my grandmother, who migrated from Amritsar during Partition as a girl.

I find it unbelievable that we are saying ridiculous things such as "Muslim soldiers used to take in dead non-Muslim soldier's widow to provide for them and their children." The exact same justification can be given by those non-Muslims who took our women and children. Please have some respect for your own women.

Islam never outlawed it. But Islam does instruct us to abide by our treaties as long as other sides don't break them. Literally the only reason Muslims have for not enslaving today is because Muslim countries have treaties today which say that prisoners of war won't be enslaved.

I think Muslims should quit being apologist and just be proud of whatever we believe.

 

[Falcon29]

You do realize that Islamic laws didn't come in a jiffy right? He had his opinion and own character but he had a prescriptive law and morality to follow and that's what he followed in Jerusalem as well as in your example he eventually followed what was ordered (assuming the incident is true) There are various examples of Umar changing his opinion on administrative matters when he was caliph coz sometimes (rarely) it wasn't compatible with what the Prophet taught take his stance on Price mechanism for example so whether his character was aggressive or not really doesn't matter, he abided by what was taught and ordered to him and btw not sure why you're highlighting this when your previous point about Umar was already proven to be historically untrue

I've been reading your responses here, brother, and you are doing a great explaining these matters. Learned a lot from your posts.

 

[Saddam Hussein]

Even TODAY, 1000s of White Western Europeans PARTICULARLY White Western European women convert to Islam each year............... :

'I Am A White Western Woman—I Converted From Christianity To Islam'

I met a man from Brahmin family of Hindus. He was also interested in searching for answers outside of his cultural upbringing. In 2014 I discovered he had already converted to Islam. A year later—in 2015—I finally felt ready to take my declaration of faith and to marry him.

www.google.co.uk

Converting to Islam: British women on prayer, peace and prejudice

Around 5,000 British people convert to Islam every year – and most of them are women. Six of them talk to Veronique Mistiaen about prejudice, peace and praying in car parks

www.theguardian.com

These bitches ruin Islam and the Islamic community, western converts are of no use. They come due to community/identity reasons and they find it in Islam, often they go very extreme for a year or two and then leave Islam again.

 

[fitpOsitive]

These bitches ruin Islam and the Islamic community, western converts are of no use. They come due to community/identity reasons and they find it in Islam, often they go very extreme for a year or two and then leave Islam again.

Any kind of evidence you present for your claim? It's not that I don't trust you, just for the sake clarity.

 

[Buddhistforlife]

I am a proud Muslim but for the first time I find most responses by my fellow Muslim brothers to be nauseating. All it takes is one look at the medieval Muslim court chronicles and all this apologist narrative of "benevolent Muslim conquerors" falls flat on its face. Medieval Muslim historians took pride in narrating instances of forced conversions and temple destruction.

As for the sex slavery bit, this is true. Islamic jurisprudence books boastfully talk of it as a means of "dishonouring" the enemy women (in this case "infidel" women). But sex slavery was a weapon used by all sides (Muslim and non-Muslim) against their enemies. The Mughal Empire and Ahmad Shah Abdali's army captured thousands of Hindu and Sikh women and turned them into concubines. Likewise, many Rajput kings and the Sikh Empire also enslaved Muslim women.

The Sikh Empire in particular enslaved many Muslim girls and women in Punjab and Kashmir. Sikh soldiers literally used our Muslim girls as sex slaves/concubines. This happened again to our women during Partition, in Jammu and East Punjab and its princely states. Tens of thousands of our girls were taken as concubines by Sikhs, and many of them refused to return from their captors. I have heard stories of this from my grandmother, who migrated from Amritsar during Partition as a girl.

I find it unbelievable that we are saying ridiculous things such as "Muslim soldiers used to take in dead non-Muslim soldier's widow to provide for them and their children." The exact same justification can be given by those non-Muslims who took our women and children. Please have some respect for your own women.

Islam never outlawed it. But Islam does instruct us to abide by our treaties as long as other sides don't break them. Literally the only reason Muslims have for not enslaving today is because Muslim countries have treaties today which say that prisoners of war won't be enslaved.

I think Muslims should quit being apologist and just be proud of whatever we believe.

You are a potential terrorist and should be banned. You are glorifying forced conversion and temple destruction.

@LeGenD @krash

Mods read his message. He literally favoured forced conversion, sex slavery and temple destruction.

 

[21st Century Vampire]

I've been reading your responses here, brother, and you are doing a great explaining these matters. Learned a lot from your posts.

Thanks bro, my pleasure

 

[Apprentice]

You are a potential terrorist and should be banned. You are glorifying forced conversion and temple destruction.

@LeGenD @krash

Mods read his message. He literally favoured forced conversion, sex slavery and temple destruction.

I didn't. I said these things can't happen now because of treaties. But we can't deny history. The very history you are so insistent on Muslims admitting. So why complain if we confess? Why play both sides?

 

[Itachi]

I am a proud Muslim but for the first time I find most responses by my fellow Muslim brothers to be nauseating. All it takes is one look at the medieval Muslim court chronicles and all this apologist narrative of "benevolent Muslim conquerors" falls flat on its face. Medieval Muslim historians took pride in narrating instances of forced conversions and temple destruction.

As for the sex slavery bit, this is true. Islamic jurisprudence books boastfully talk of it as a means of "dishonouring" the enemy women (in this case "infidel" women). But sex slavery was a weapon used by all sides (Muslim and non-Muslim) against their enemies. The Mughal Empire and Ahmad Shah Abdali's army captured thousands of Hindu and Sikh women and turned them into concubines. Likewise, many Rajput kings and the Sikh Empire also enslaved Muslim women.

The Sikh Empire in particular enslaved many Muslim girls and women in Punjab and Kashmir. Sikh soldiers literally used our Muslim girls as sex slaves/concubines. This happened again to our women during Partition, in Jammu and East Punjab and its princely states. Tens of thousands of our girls were taken as concubines by Sikhs, and many of them refused to return from their captors. I have heard stories of this from my grandmother, who migrated from Amritsar during Partition as a girl.

I find it unbelievable that we are saying ridiculous things such as "Muslim soldiers used to take in dead non-Muslim soldier's widow to provide for them and their children." The exact same justification can be given by those non-Muslims who took our women and children. Please have some respect for your own women.

Islam never outlawed it. But Islam does instruct us to abide by our treaties as long as other sides don't break them. Literally the only reason Muslims have for not enslaving today is because Muslim countries have treaties today which say that prisoners of war won't be enslaved.

I think Muslims should quit being apologist and just be proud of whatever we believe.

Need a source on that....I have never read of Muslims being proud of enslaving and killing others. We are a proud people but not for the wrong reasons.

 

[zain41]

I am a proud Muslim but for the first time I find most responses by my fellow Muslim brothers to be nauseating. All it takes is one look at the medieval Muslim court chronicles and all this apologist narrative of "benevolent Muslim conquerors" falls flat on its face. Medieval Muslim historians took pride in narrating instances of forced conversions and temple destruction.

As for the sex slavery bit, this is true. Islamic jurisprudence books boastfully talk of it as a means of "dishonouring" the enemy women (in this case "infidel" women). But sex slavery was a weapon used by all sides (Muslim and non-Muslim) against their enemies. The Mughal Empire and Ahmad Shah Abdali's army captured thousands of Hindu and Sikh women and turned them into concubines. Likewise, many Rajput kings and the Sikh Empire also enslaved Muslim women.

The Sikh Empire in particular enslaved many Muslim girls and women in Punjab and Kashmir. Sikh soldiers literally used our Muslim girls as sex slaves/concubines. This happened again to our women during Partition, in Jammu and East Punjab and its princely states. Tens of thousands of our girls were taken as concubines by Sikhs, and many of them refused to return from their captors. I have heard stories of this from my grandmother, who migrated from Amritsar during Partition as a girl.

I find it unbelievable that we are saying ridiculous things such as "Muslim soldiers used to take in dead non-Muslim soldier's widow to provide for them and their children." The exact same justification can be given by those non-Muslims who took our women and children. Please have some respect for your own women.

Islam never outlawed it. But Islam does instruct us to abide by our treaties as long as other sides don't break them. Literally the only reason Muslims have for not enslaving today is because Muslim countries have treaties today which say that prisoners of war won't be enslaved.

I think Muslims should quit being apologist and just be proud of whatever we believe.

We are simply comparing muslim rule to rule of others and defending against islam getting a bad rap..
There is no light ever shed on the atrocities commited by other religions/empires which in most cases are much worse than what muslims did.
Its always islam islam islam bad violent etc when whoever is saying that should take a look at their own history..

Regarding(imo) sex slavery yes your right it happens...it happens in every war like you yourself pointed what the sikhs did..it is the reality of war..im not saying it is a good thing to do but there will always be soldiers who do this whether muslim/christian/hindu/jew atleast islam gives these women rights and like i said earlier great rulers have been born through some of these women

 

[Apprentice]

We are simply comparing muslim rule to rule of others and defending against islam getting a bad rap..
There is no light ever shed on the atrocities commited by other religions/empires which in most cases are much worse than what muslims did.
Its always islam islam islam bad violent etc when whoever is saying that should take a look at their own history..

Regarding(imo) sex slavery yes your right it happens...it happens in every war like you yourself pointed what the sikhs did..it is the reality of war..im not saying it is a good thing to do but there will always be soldiers who do this whether muslim/christian/hindu/jew atleast islam gives these women rights and like i said earlier great rulers have been born through some of these women

Sikh kings also had influential sons from their Muslim concubines.

Need a source on that....I have never read of Muslims being proud of enslaving and killing others. We are a proud people but not for the wrong reasons.

This is an excerpt from Tarikh Firoz Shahi. A Muslim qazi is describing his orders pertaining to temple destruction

More of the same from the same book. He narrates that a Brahmin convicted of openly practising idolatry in public was given a choice between conversion to Islam or death. He refused to convert. So he was burnt to death by the authorities. Some interesting comments on the following page too about jizya on Brahmins.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

I am a proud Muslim but for the first time I find most responses by my fellow Muslim brothers to be nauseating. All it takes is one look at the medieval Muslim court chronicles and all this apologist narrative of "benevolent Muslim conquerors" falls flat on its face. Medieval Muslim historians took pride in narrating instances of forced conversions and temple destruction.

As for the sex slavery bit, this is true. Islamic jurisprudence books boastfully talk of it as a means of "dishonouring" the enemy women (in this case "infidel" women). But sex slavery was a weapon used by all sides (Muslim and non-Muslim) against their enemies. The Mughal Empire and Ahmad Shah Abdali's army captured thousands of Hindu and Sikh women and turned them into concubines. Likewise, many Rajput kings and the Sikh Empire also enslaved Muslim women.

The Sikh Empire in particular enslaved many Muslim girls and women in Punjab and Kashmir. Sikh soldiers literally used our Muslim girls as sex slaves/concubines. This happened again to our women during Partition, in Jammu and East Punjab and its princely states. Tens of thousands of our girls were taken as concubines by Sikhs, and many of them refused to return from their captors. I have heard stories of this from my grandmother, who migrated from Amritsar during Partition as a girl.

I find it unbelievable that we are saying ridiculous things such as "Muslim soldiers used to take in dead non-Muslim soldier's widow to provide for them and their children." The exact same justification can be given by those non-Muslims who took our women and children. Please have some respect for your own women.

Islam never outlawed it. But Islam does instruct us to abide by our treaties as long as other sides don't break them. Literally the only reason Muslims have for not enslaving today is because Muslim countries have treaties today which say that prisoners of war won't be enslaved.

I think Muslims should quit being apologist and just be proud of whatever we believe.

I would like to see the source for your statement of Muslims relishing sex slaves, you even said it was in a fiqh book.

Share it here.

@masterchief_mirza @21st Century Vampire @Itachi @CatSultan @Iltutmish

Make sure he gives the sources for what he is saying.

 

[Itachi]

Sikh kings also had influential sons from their Muslim concubines.


This is an excerpt from Tarikh Firoz Shahi. A Muslim qazi is describing his orders pertaining to temple destruction

View attachment 689220

More of the same from the same book. He narrates that a Brahmin convicted of openly practising idolatry in public was given a choice between conversion to Islam or death. He refused to convert. So he was burnt to death by the authorities. Some interesting comments on the following page too about jizya on Brahmins.

View attachment 689221

You have yet to provide sources to your main claims, the sex slaves etc etc.

All you do is point towards the works of a political thinker, of which there exist millions in the history of Islam. His works have no meanings to actual Muslims who can quote multiple hadiths and the Quran itself.

Your biased opinion of Islamic history, probably formed after reading Indian, non-Muslim and highly revised sources isn't helping your case either.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

You have yet to provide sources to your main claims, the sex slaves etc etc.

All you do is point towards the works of a political thinker, of which there exist millions in the history of Islam. His works have no meanings to actual Muslims who can quote multiple hadiths and the Quran itself.

Your biased opinion of Islamic history, probably formed after reading Indian, non-Muslim and highly revised sources isn't helping your case either.

Which thinker is he quoting?