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

[Apprentice]

As for the first two, they are poems intended to insult the enemy's honor and it probably wasn't as bad as they described it. The last one as @Itachi says is dubious and most likely inaccurate.

The second wasn't a poem. It was an account of what happened after the siege of Jerusalem. The first one was a poem and was referring to events which had already happened. Even as a poem. the attitude in it was quite telling in itself about how Muslims saw slavery - as a weapon to humiliate non-Muslim women.

You can say the third source is contested. But there are equally valid views on its reliability. So according to one legitimate perspective, its a factual incident.

I too know how to use Wiki sources

Your only support for your point of views are 2 unknown Qazis and a couple of screenshots. I on the other hand have brought forth actual well known Islamic scholars.

The topic of this thread is "The major reason Islam was so successful was due to chivalry and mercy towards civilians..."

And that point of view is very much supported by Goras also.....I know the Indian sources tend to disagree because of the millennia of rule and humiliation that they faced at the hands of Islamic/Muslim conquerors.

If your ancestors converted under the sword (your unverified claim), doesn't mean all did.

Can you bring primary sources to show this was a general trend? Not secondary sources. All sorts of unverifiable claims abound in secondary sources, like the false claims that the Pak Army killed 3 million people in 1971 or raped 200,000 women.

 

[Itachi]

Can you bring primary sources to show this was a general trend? Not secondary sources. All sorts of unverifiable claims abound in secondary sources, like the false claims that the Pak Army killed 3 million people in 1971 or raped 200,000 women.

I would rather you stick to the topic. You have derailed this thread quite a bit.

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

I would rather you stick to the topic. You have derailed this thread quite a bit.

He is using severely mistranslated propaganda sources with embellished poems as some sort of proof that Muslims committed war crimes.

The question is simple, when Non-Muslim men were killed off in war, what was to be done with women and children? Were they to be made to fend for themselves, most likely enslaved by nefarious forces or forced into prostitution by necessity?

Islam made it clear, they were to be married with honor to Muslims, who would also raise their children and provide for them.

There is no imaginary mass sexual violence, they were given homes and became an equal part of the Muslim society.

War captives were not hereditary slaves as we see in Western or Hindu culture.

 

[Apprentice]

He is using severely mistranslated propaganda sources with embellished poems as some sort of proof that Muslims committed war crimes.

The question is simple, when Non-Muslim men were killed off in war, what was to be done with women and children? Were they to be made to fend for themselves, most likely enslaved by nefarious forces or forced into prostitution by necessity?

Islam made it clear, they were to be married with honor to Muslims, who would also raise their children and provide for them.

There is no imaginary mass sexual violence, they were given homes and became an equal part of the Muslim society.

War captives were not hereditary slaves as we see in Western or Hindu culture.

Sikhs give the exact same argument for taking our women. Have you read Sikh literature which boasts about taking Muslim women from Jalandhar (after capturing it) and turning these Muslim women into wives for Sikh soldiers? Would you like it if we are killed in war and non-Muslims take our women as their wives or concubines?

And I never said Muslims committed war crimes. Sex slavery was not considered a war crime until modern era where we have international treaties such as Geneva Conventions which outlaw it for signatories. Muslims are obliged to abide by these treaties as long as others don't break the treaty.

 

[Itachi]

Sikhs give the exact same argument for taking our women. Have you read Sikh literature which boasts about taking Muslim women from Jalandhar (after capturing it) and turning these Muslim women into wives for Sikh soldiers? Would you like it if we are killed in war and non-Muslims take our women as their wives or concubines?

And I never said Muslims committed war crimes. Sex slavery was not considered a war crime until modern era where we have international treaties such as Geneva Conventions which outlaw it for signatories. Muslims are obliged to abide by these treaties as long as others don't break the treaty.

Sikhs did that right around the time of Geneva Conventions....so much for your Geneva Conventions...

And the rape and plundering of Muslim lands is still taking place today.....Muslim women from Syria are still being exported to the rest of the world...I know a kid like you won't understand it but this is reality.

You talk about things which are normal in Islam and have been normal since ancient times. Muslims still hold the moral high ground because we don't exploit the defenseless women and children.

We don't start wars and conflicts for resources, including women and children, the non-Muslims did and will. Better you start military training rather than coming to PDF to educate us about your identity crises and worries.

Rules and treaties don't mean anything if no one is following them btw.

 

[Homo Sapiens]

muslims ruked india for a 1000 years according to that logic all of india should have been muslim by now

Not only that, Muslims ruled Spain for 800 years, yet remained minority. Christians there were able to reclaim Spain bit by bit and then in 1492 conquered all of Spain and then killed and expelled all the Muslims and Jews from Spain.

Ottoman Muslims rules Balkans peninsula(Greece, Serbia, Bulgaria and others) for 500 years. Yet Greece, Serbia, Bulgaria and other countries in Balkan remain Christians.

If Muslims rulers forcefully converted people to Islam, then how come Muslims ultimately lost these countries to other faith?

 

[Pan-Islamic-Pakistan]

Why are you saying OUR WOMEN?

You are obviously not one of us. Another Indian hider in a fake ID, but you seem familiar somehow.

@Areesh @PakFactor

Sikhs did that right around the time of Geneva Conventions....so much for your Geneva Conventions...

And the rape and plundering of Muslim lands is still taking place today.....Muslim women from Syria are still being exported to the rest of the world...I know a kid like you won't understand it but this is reality.

You talk about things which are normal in Islam and have been normal since ancient times. Muslims still hold the moral high ground because we don't exploit the defenseless women and children.

We don't start wars and conflicts for resources, including women and children, the non-Muslims did and will. Better you start military training rather than coming to PDF to educate us about your identity crises and worries.

Rules and treaties don't mean anything if no one is following them btw.

We did not parade women naked from Chandigarh to Amritsar, and burn them in a mass fire as Sikhs did to us.

1 million Muslims were massacred by these barbaric killers, only for being Muslim, and they were defenseless.

14 million were forced to leave their 7 Muslim majority regions which British and Sikh/Hindu collusion gave to Indians.

 

[OldenWisdom...قول بزرگ]

Sikhs did that right around the time of Geneva Conventions....so much for your Geneva Conventions...

And the rape and plundering of Muslim lands is still taking place today.....Muslim women from Syria are still being exported to the rest of the world...I know a kid like you won't understand it but this is reality.

You talk about things which are normal in Islam and have been normal since ancient times. Muslims still hold the moral high ground because we don't exploit the defenseless women and children.

We don't start wars and conflicts for resources, including women and children, the non-Muslims did and will. Better you start military training rather than coming to PDF to educate us about your identity crises and worries.

Rules and treaties don't mean anything if no one is following them btw.

On a side note, useless trivia... Sikhs appropriation of "Serdar Ji"
@Hakikat ve Hikmet

Serdar being Turkish for chief, something also used in Persian... and Ji or ci a Turkish suffix creating a noun ...
Qahwaji as in Arab states or Kahveci in Turkish denoting a coffee maker...
Or, one Khashoggi a certain reporter or Znbarakji... so on and so forth
Basically anywhere Turks ruled, they left this marker.

So, the question is, How sikhs happen to get this certain distinction, acclaimed or attributed?

 

[Apprentice]

Not only that, Muslims ruled Spain for 800 years, yet remained minority. Christians there were able to reclaim Spain bit by bit and then in 1492 conquered all of Spain and then killed and expelled all the Muslims and Jews from Spain.

Ottoman Muslims rules Balkans peninsula(Greece, Serbia, Bulgaria and others) for 500 years. Yet Greece, Serbia, Bulgaria and other countries in Balkan remain Christians.

If Muslims rulers forcefully converted people to Islam, then how come Muslims ultimately lost these countries to other faith?

No one is saying Muslim rulers were all intolerant. But it can't be said that they were merciful either, as if that was a universal rule. It was quite a mixed bag. Many of the Muslim lands which exist today such as Persia, Kashmir etc had some element of coercion involved in the conversions of natives to Islam.

Why are you saying OUR WOMEN?

You are obviously not one of us. Another Indian hider in a fake ID, but you seem familiar somehow.

@Areesh @PakFactor


We did not parade women naked from Chandigarh to Amritsar, and burn them in a mass fire as Sikhs did to us.

1 million Muslims were massacred by these barbaric killers, only for being Muslim, and they were defenseless.

14 million were forced to leave their 7 Muslim majority regions which British and Sikh/Hindu collusion gave to Indians.

Have some shame. If I was an Indian I would not have written this detailed write up countering Indian-Awami League propaganda on 1971

Debunking the claim of 200,000 rapes in 1971

Okay se we all know that rape happened (on both sides) in the 1971 war and we all know that the 2 lakh number has no accounting basis (its been made popular through unquestioned repetition in the media and scholarship). But is there hope for figuring out the true extent of rape in that war...

defence.pk

And the statistics you are giving are wrong. Approximately 5.5 million Muslims were ethnically cleansed from East Punjab. Around 4-5 million Hindus and Sikhs left West Punjab.

The Sikhs took at least 50,000 Muslim women in East Punjab. But its also a fact that 33,000 Hindu and Sikh women were taken by Pakistanis in West Punjab.

This is a fact. There was an Inter-Dominion Treaty between India and Pakistan in 1947, for the exchange of these girls. India returned Muslim girls in exchange for the return of Hindu girls kept by Muslims in Pakistan. Its all in our government/Constituent Assembly records.

 

[Buddhistforlife]

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

About sex slavery. Why can't these women be returned back to their family? By forcedfully keeping a woman as concubine you ain't doing any favour to them.

 

[zain41]

About sex slavery. Why can't these women be returned back to their family? By forcedfully keeping a woman as concubine you ain't doing any favour to them.

it’s in assumption that most/all the men are dead

 

[Buddhistforlife]

it’s in assumption that most/all the men are dead

Will you like if non muslims do the same with muslim women?

 

[zain41]

Will you like if non muslims do the same with muslim women?

sadly it happens in any war..
Like I’ve said it’s the reality of war

Would I like it ..no
But reality doesn’t care about my feelings

it must be a very noble army who wouldn’t engage in such things and I respect them..

the only way to prevent this from happening is being strong when it comes to wars that’s the practical approach of not letting it get to that point another way is to enlist women in war and die On the battle field like how men do

why do you think jauhar was practiced even when it was Hindu v hindu.. don’t make this a muslim only thing.

and sorry just to add this is already happening at a massive scale in Kashmir and to rohingya women

 

[Itachi]

About sex slavery. Why can't these women be returned back to their family? By forcedfully keeping a woman as concubine you ain't doing any favour to them.

What family?? The one that died fighting Muslims??

You sound like a kid coming up with all these excuses. Once the men and the men of their kin die....doesn't matter if the women go back to their land or stay in the one they tried to conquer....because any helpless women in ancient times became a slave.....just like how you don't walk alone in certain parts of the world today, whether male or female...

 

[CatSultan]

Sikhs give the exact same argument for taking our women. Have you read Sikh literature which boasts about taking Muslim women from Jalandhar (after capturing it) and turning these Muslim women into wives for Sikh soldiers? Would you like it if we are killed in war and non-Muslims take our women as their wives or concubines?

And I never said Muslims committed war crimes. Sex slavery was not considered a war crime until modern era where we have international treaties such as Geneva Conventions which outlaw it for signatories. Muslims are obliged to abide by these treaties as long as others don't break the treaty.

The difference is the Islam is the truth and sikhism is false.