So what am I to make of the Muslim invasion, yes, INVASION, of Mesopotamia in the 600's CE. This was done under Abu Bakr and Umar. This is well accepted history. PLEASE, do not give me a glossed over version that relies heavily on Islamic propaganda and little on actual historical fact.
I am NOT attacking Islam. I'M A MUSLIM. But I cannot reconcile these blatant attacks, raids, and hostile takeovers with what I believe to be the rules concerning warfare set forth in Islam/the Qur'an.
History is not my strong point and I am begging to be enlightened. When someone claims "Islam was spread by the sword," how can I disagree if history seems to say otherwise?
EDIT: I knew going to Islam Q & A would only make things worse. See below. It makes me absolutely SICK that they say we should be proud of Islam being spread by the sword, that that is the only way to convert people who are too "Arrogant and stubborn." What about there being no compulsion in religion? What the $%@# am I supposed to make of all this?
Was Islam spread by the sword?
Was Islam spread by the sword?. Praise be to Allaah.
We have already stated in question no. 34830 that jihad is of two types: taking the initiative in fighting and jihad in self-defence.
Undoubtedly taking the initiative in fighting has a great effect in spreading Islam and bringing people into the religion of Allaah in crowds. Hence the hearts of the enemies of Islam are filled with fear of jihad.
In the English-language Muslim World Magazine it says: There should be some kind of fear in the western world, one of the causes of which is that since the time it first appeared in Makkah, Islam has never decreased in numbers, rather it has always continued to increase and spread. Moreover Islam is not only a religion, rather one of its pillars is jihad.
Robert Bean says: The Muslims conquered the entire world before and they could do it again.
The Orientalists wanted to slander Islam by claiming that it was spread by the sword.
The orientalist Thomas Arnold wrote his book The Preaching of Islam with the aim of killing off the spirit of jihad among the Muslims and proving that Islam was not spread by the sword, rather that it spread by means of peaceful preaching, free from any use of force.
The Muslims fell into the trap that was set up for them. When they heard the orientalists’ accusations that Islam was spread by the sword, they said: You are mistaken, listen to a refutation from one of your own people, this Thomas says such and such.
The defeatists among the Muslims come out to defend Islam, and they want to disavow Islam of this so-called lie, so they deny that Islam was spread by the sword, and they say that jihad is not prescribed in Islam, except in the case of self-defence. There is no such thing in Islam as taking the initiative in fighting in their view. This goes against what the Muslim scholars have stated, let alone the fact that it goes against the Qur’aan and Sunnah.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah said in Majmoo’ al-Fataawa, 28/263.
The purpose is that all religion should be for Allaah alone, and that the word of Allaah should be supreme. The word of Allaah is a comprehensive phrase that refers to His words that are contained in His Book. Hence Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“Indeed We have sent Our Messengers with clear proofs, and revealed with them the Scripture and the Balance (justice) that mankind may keep up justice”
[al-Hadeed 57:25]
The purpose behind sending the Messengers and revealing the Books was so that mankind might keep up justice with regard to the rights of Allaah and the rights of His creation. Then Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“And We brought forth iron wherein is mighty power (in matters of war), as well as many benefits for mankind, that Allaah may test who it is that will help Him (His religion) and His Messengers in the unseen”
[al-Hadeed 27:25]
So whoever deviates from the Book is to be brought back with iron, i.e. by force. Hence the soundness of the religion is based on the Qur’aan and the Sword. It was narrated that Jaabir ibn ‘Abd-Allaah (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) commanded us to strike with this, meaning the sword, whoever turns away from this, meaning the Qur’aan.
Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allaah have mercy on him) said in al-Faroosiyyah (p.18):
Allaah sent him – meaning the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) – with the guiding Book and the conquering sword, ahead of the Hour, so that Allaah alone would be worshipped with no partner or associate, and his provision was placed beneath the shade of his sword and spear. Allaah has established the religion of Islam with proof and evidence, and with the sword and spear, both together and inseparable.
This is some of the evidence from the Qur’aan and Sunnah. The evidence clearly indicates that the sword is one of the most important means that led to the spread of Islam.
1 – Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“For had it not been that Allaah checks one set of people by means of another, monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques, wherein the Name of Allaah is mentioned much would surely, have been pulled down. Verily, Allaah will help those who help His (Cause). Truly, Allaah is All-Strong, All-Mighty”
[al-Hajj 22:40]
“And if Allaah did not check one set of people by means of another, the earth would indeed be full of mischief. But Allaah is full of bounty to the ‘Aalameen (mankind, jinn and all that exists)”
[al-Baqarah 2:251]
2 – Allaah has commanded us to prepare the means of fighting against the kuffaar and frightening them. He says (interpretation of the meaning):
“And make ready against them all you can of power, including steeds of war (tanks, planes, missiles, artillery) to threaten the enemy of Allaah and your enemy, and others besides whom, you may not know but whom Allaah does know”
[al-Anfaal 8:60]
If Islam was only spread by peaceful means, what would the kuffaar have to be afraid of? Of mere words spoken on the tongue? In al-Saheehayn it is narrated that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “I have been supported with fear as far as a month’s journey.” Would the kuffaar be afraid of being told, “become Muslim, but if you do not then you are free to believe and do whatever you want”? or were they afraid of jihad and the imposition of the jizyah and being humiliated? That may make them enter Islam so that they may be spared this humiliation.
3 – When the Messenger called people to Islam, his call was accompanied by the sword, and he commanded his leaders to do likewise, so that when the people saw the serious of the Muslims in calling people to their religion, that dispelled any confusion.
Al-Bukhaari (3009) and Muslim (2406) narrated that Sahl ibn Sa’d (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said on the day of Khaybar: “Tomorrow I will give the banner to a man at whose hands victory will come, one who loves Allaah and His Messenger, and Allaah and His Messenger love him.” The people spent that night wondering which of them would be given the banner and all of them were hoping for it. Then he (the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)) said, “Where is ‘Ali?” It was said, “His eye is hurting.” So he spat in his eyes and made du’aa’ for him, and he was healed, as if there had not been anything wrong with him. Then he gave him the flag and he [‘Ali] said: “Shall I fight them so that they will be like us?” He said: “Go ahead, until you reach their encampment, then call them to Islam and tell them what they are obliged to do, for by Allaah if Allaah were to guide a man at your hands that would be better for you than having red camels [the best kind].”
So this call to Islam was accompanied by the force of arms.
Muslim (3261) narrated that Buraydah said: When the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) appointed a commander to lead an army or a raiding party, he would advise him to fear Allaah with regard to himself and the Muslims with him, then he said: “Fight in the name of Allaah and for the sake of Allaah. Fight those who disbelieve in Allaah, fight but do not steal from the war booty (before it is shared out), betray, or mutilate. Do not kill children. If you meet your enemy of the mushrikeen, call them to three things, and whichever one of them they respond to, accept that from them and leave them alone. Then call them to Islam and if they respond, accept that from them and leave them alone. If they refuse but they pay the jizyah, then they have responded to you, so accept that from them and leave them alone. If they refuse then seek the help of Allaah and fight them…”
So the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) told his commanders to call the kuffaar to Islam whilst wielding their swords over their heads. If they refused to become Muslim then they should pay the jizyah with humility. If they refused then there was nothing left for them but the sword – “If they refuse then seek the help of Allaah and fight them”
4 – The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “I have been sent ahead of the Hour with the sword so that Allaah will be worshipped alone, and my provision has been placed in the shade of my spear, and humiliation has been decreed for those who go against my command, and whoever imitates a people is one of them.” Narrated by Ahmad, 4869; Saheeh al-Jaami’, 2831.
The fact that the sword and power were means of spreading Islam is not a sources of shame for Islam, rather it is one of its strengths and virtues, because that makes people adhere to that which will benefit them in this world and in the Hereafter. Many people are foolish and lacking in wisdom and knowledge, and if they are left to their own devices they will remain blinded to the truth, indulging in their whims and desires. So Allaah has prescribed jihad in order to bring them back to the truth and to that which will benefit them. Undoubtedly wisdom dictates that the fool should be prevented from doing that which will harm him, and should be forced to do that which will benefit him.
Al-Bukhaari (4557) narrated that Abu Hurayrah (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: “ ‘You (true believers in Islamic Monotheism, and real followers of Prophet Muhammad and his Sunnah) are the best of peoples ever raised up for mankind’ [Aal- Imraan 3:110 – interpretation of the meaning].” He said: “You are the best (i.e., the most beneficial) of people for mankind, you bring them in the chains that are around their necks until they enter Islam.” Can people be brought in chains except in the case of jihad??
This is something for which Islam deserves to be praised, not condemned. The defeatists should fear Allaah lest they distort this religion and cause it to become weak on the basis of the claim that it is a religion of peace. Yes, it is the religion of peace but in the sense of saving all of mankind from worshipping anything other than Allaah and submitting all of mankind to the rule of Allaah. This is the religion of Allaah, not the ideas of any person or the product of human thought, so that those who promote it should feel ashamed to state its ultimate goal, which is that all religion (worship) should be for Allaah alone. When the ideas that people follow are all produced by human beings and the systems and laws that control their lives are all made up by human beings, then in this case each idea and each system has the right to live safely within its own borders so long as it does not transgress the borders of others, so the various ideas and laws can co-exist and not try to destroy one another. But when there is a divine system and law, and alongside it there are human systems and laws, then the matter is fundamentally different, and the divine law has the right to remove the barriers and free people from enslavement to human beings…
Fiqh al-Da’wah by Sayyid Qutb, 217-222.
It says in Fataawa al-Lajnah al-Daa’imah (12/14):
Islam spread by means of proof and evidence to those who listened to the message and responded to it, and it spread by means of force and the sword to those who were stubborn and arrogant, until they were overwhelmed and became no longer stubborn, and submitted to that reality.
And Allaah knows best.
Second Edit: I found this blog post that meshes well with my understanding of what happened. What do you think?
http://bizarreideas.wordpress.com/2010/08/31/umars-invasion-of-persia-for-god-or-greed/
Second Edit: I found this blog post that meshes well with my understanding of what happened. What do you think?
http://bizarreideas.wordpress.com/2010/08/31/umars-invasion-of-persia-for-god-or-greed/
16 comments:
I don't know much about history but have been able to notice these things too. It makes me see how the companions were as human as anyone has ever been! Not super-Muslims in any way! Errors have been made from the very beginning.
I'm not an expert in this either, but there are some things I can say
1) I don't visit Islam Q&A, because I don't agree at all with their views. The explanation that they gave on this question, further proves why it's good to stay away from there. If Muslims really were so violent, why were there jews and christians in the Islamic empire who weren't forced to convert? I think maybe this site has trouble seeing things in context. Also, I study Islamic sciences, and in class, Qutb was defined as an islamist. So I don't listen to any fatwa's of him either.
Some sayings of the Prophet that are against violence:
"Power consists not in being able to strike another,
but in being able to control oneself when anger arises"
"From morning until night and from night until morning
keep your heart free from malice towards anyone."
Inscribed on the prophet's sword:
Forgive him who wrongs you; join him who cuts you off;
do good to him who does evil to you;
and speak the truth even if it be against yourself.
2) I think that conquests always have more than one motive, and I think it's very well possible that they also had economic and non-religious benefits in mind.
i may as well carry a sword with me next time i want to give dawah. no seriously, this is not true. The scholar doesnt present any Qur'an verses or hadith from Prophet Muhammad sws to support his thought. If Islam was spread by the sword then where was the sword that made 20,000 americans convert after september 11. Where was the sword that made early converts of the time of Prophet Muhammad sws accept Islam without questioning. Nope no sword. Take a look at this surah.
"When Allah's succour and the triumph cometh
And thou seest mankind entering the religion of Allah in troops,
Then hymn the praises of thy Lord, and seek forgiveness of Him. Lo! He is ever ready to show mercy."
Anyway,there is no sound person with half a heart that can accept the answer the scholar has given..
Asalaamu Alaikum,
Ok so first of all, islam q&a is well...i just don't even bother with them anymore lol.
And yes, the Muslims did go to war with many countries (or at least other areas that are now different countries). But from everything that I find and have read they have been of rebellious tribes who would constantly stir up trouble. The Muslims fought the Romans (and won). Or, the "Muslims" who would not give zakaat. They were obligated to fight them because zakaat is a law from Allah subhana wa ta'ala, not something that you can just choose not to pay. And even then it was only after things were explained to them clearly and they would still deny it. Anyway, if they were fighting the kaffirs, they were given three options. Surrender and pay the jizya, which was the small tax they would pay every year, and in return they would have the Muslims help defend them if they were ever attacked. The second option was become muslim and have the full muslim rights, which really the difference was just not having to pay the jizya, or thirdly to fight and die. A very good book to read is called "the sealed nectar". It explains the wars that they went through. So really, Islam could not have been spread by the sword because no one could be forced to be muslim. But governments were taken over. There is personal Jihad, but when there is actual "jihad", the ulema have to make a CALL to jihad. And the muslim men have to attend, unless they are exempt for various reasons. There is no call for jihad right now. I thinkkk when they war in Chechnya was going on there was a call to fight. But i could totally be wrong on that.
Also just want to add that Spain is a good example. Spain was taken over by force of course, but not the people. The people were pleasantly surprised that the soldiers did not rape, burn, and raid like their own soldiers did. What did they have to do to keep the peace? Pay the jizya. I am pretty sure this is also considered one of the golden ages of Judaism there because they were allowed to practice without being harassed and murdered.
and you never had any second thoughts regarding the christians crusades??
Well it seems that page says good stuff about Ibn Taymiyya, that means its a wahabi site. Wahabis are behind most terrorattacks in this world.
If you look at history, you will see that people were allowed to keep their faith. Because Allah does not like the hypocrites..to force people to believe is just stupid, it would mean that people played to be muslims instead of beeing real believers.
"There is no compulsion in religion; verily, the guidance has become clear from the error. So whosoever rejects the idol and believes in God, he has laid hold onto the most firm rope which will not break; God is All-hearing, All-knowing." (2:256)
How can you force people to be muslims if the Quran states otherwise?
If you read the history of the Ommayyidds, they hated that people become muslims, that would mean less taxes from nonmuslim groups..they even made laws that made muslims live in army cities (like Kufa).
The Prophet of Islam (peace be upon him and his progeny) has also been mentioned as a reminder, not as a person who forces Islam upon others: "Therefore, you remind (them), for you are only a reminder; you are not a watcher over them." (88:21-22)
You are only a reminder, not a watcher of them. So if we force people to become muslims, we haev to guard them and watch them and make them follow our rules and our religion..
I as shia dont like Umar and the other Caliphs but we have to differ between them increasing the empire they built and spreading islam.
They conquered lands, but that doesnt mean that the people who lived there, would convert to islam by force.
As stated the Ommayyids who came after, hated that people became muslims, it meant less non muslims to tax.
One of the most famous historians wrote this:
Ira M. Lapidus in his A History of Islamic Societies writes:
"The question of why people convert to Islam has always generated intense feeling. Earlier generations of European scholars believed that conversions to Islam were made at the point of the sword and that conquered peoples were given the choice of conversion or death. It is now apparent that conversion by force, while not unknown in Muslim countries, was in fact rare. Muslim conquerors ordinarily wished to dominate rather than convert, and most conversions to Islam were voluntary."
Look at countries like India. Why were the hindus ruled by muslims and the muslims didnt force the hindus to convert? Why was spain ruled by muslims over so many non muslims? why do we until this day, have christians and jews in the mid east? And that this is changing is due to those wahabis.
Allah has given us Aql, to understand logic. To say that we have to force religion on people who do not want to be believers will make htem just hate us and hate Allah and hate oure religion.
Its the religion of the hearts not the religion of the tongue..
Someone here spoke about the Zakat wars, please read history of Ibn Nuwair, who was killed by Khaled bin Waleed. He was a good muslim, he didnt refuse to pay zakat, but he was accused of that. I advice to read the shia version of that history..
I find it odd how people slander the companions of the Prophet Sallallahu Alayhi wasalaam. Do they think Prophet Muhammed Sallallahu Alayhi wasalaam was so deficient in his knowledge and wisdom that he would befriend horrible people? Or people who would later on become horrible? It doesn't make any sense. That goes for his wives who are called the mother's of the believers, and by others called whores. astaghfirallah.
I also suggest reading the book called the wahabi myth.
I try to get my people NOT to fear Muslims so I definitely will not be recommending Islam Q&A. Their answer was rather disgusting.
Alabaster i cant help you if you dont trust your own hadith books, or your own history books.
None is allowed to call any wive of the Prophet a whore, those women accused of that, were, in the Quran, freed of any such act.
Fact is though, that those dear sahabas you speak of, killed, raped and stole power from those who were chosen by Allah.
1. Ibn Nuwaira was killed by Khaled bin Waleed, after he had prayed like a muslim and given greetings like a muslim and after he was handcuffed. Same day his wive was raped by khaled bin Waleed, a "sahabi". This lead to Umar himself wanting _Khaled bin Waleed killed for his crime, but Abu Bakr needed him.
2. According to Aishar, Fatimah, the beloved daughter of the Prophet, hated Abu Bakr so much, that she died without speaking to him ever again, she even refused to say salam to him when he came close to her. If this was from shia books, i would agree with you, but all i am saying is from sunni books.
3. The Prophet, saw said, only a hypocrite hates Ali and only a believer loves him. Aisha hated Ali with all her power. She hated him so much she started the first civil war, she hated him so much that she prayed thanks to when he died. Now either you beleive in the Prophet or you believe in your logic, that always defends and always has to think good of men and women who broke all that was good and honest in islam.
I can proove all i say from your own hadith and history books, so please dont accuse me or shias of anything, accuse your own books for stating these things instead?
BAHLOOL, it seems to me that you are just regurjatating the same nonesense I hear over and over. Aisha did this, Abu Bakr did that, Omar said this. Ughhh enough with the FITNA! These are the Prophet Muhammad sws companions, get over it.
Quiet frankly, Allah swt didn't send Islam so that I can accuse so and so and hate this person or that, so stick to the basic principles of Islam and for the sake of Allah stop creating fitna.
@ Sarah, while I respect your opinion, I respect Bahlool's as well and am glad he felt comfortable enough to share them on my blog. He made a very good case for himself and was acting first, to present his case, and second, in self defense so I don't find him at fault.
Also coming from a Christian background, I can't help but think Judas was a companion of Jesus, but yet he betrayed him in the worst way possible. Have you never had a friend who's attitudes or actions changed and made them unrecognizable to you? Being a companion of the prophet does not make one perfect.
@ Nikki..please sister do not get attatched to brother bahlools words ..he is clearly shia..i only had to read one line were he blamed aisha and abu baker for things to know that he was..look please do not refer to other bloggers for islamic knowledge..go to authentic books on the prophets life or the history of islam..or quranic tafseer to answer your questions..asking these things on a blog will get you a lot more then what you asked for..and a lot of fitnah added to that ..do your reserch well..
@ Bahlool..first of all do you even know what "wahabi" means?? .. Don't give the sister misleading information from your own sect which by the way in islam even uttering anything negative about aisha or abu bakr or the sahaba you are involved in an act of KURF so please be careful.
Fee amanillah
**Bella_Vita**
@Bella_Vita - Thank you for your comment on both this and another post (about hijab). I am glad to know I have readers out there who can relate. Also, I'm glad to have a fellow Italian-Muslim!
As for Bahlool being Shia, my husband is Shia, as well, so I am more than familiar with the sentiments he stated above and am comfortable with him posting them on my blog. I consider myself Muslim only, but do consider both Shia's and Sunni's "vaild" Muslims (although it is certainly not my call but Allah's alone) and the views of both will always be welcome on my blog.
Also, Bahlool clearly stated that his information was from Sunni books, so accusing him of giving misleading information of his own sect is almost impossible, because he didn't use sources from his sect.
I am not trying to create fitna, on the contrary, I think Shia's and Sunni's need much more increased dialogue to clear up the misinformation about one another. I may not identify as Shi'a myself, but I am well aware, and heartbroken by, the persecution of the Shi'a people throughout much of the world today. I will not allow the view that Shi'as are inferior and deviant (thus, making their persecution acceptable) to be promoted through my blog.
I realize bloggers are not scholars, but just as bloggers all have different opinions, so do scholars. To tell me not to "get attached to brother bahlools words" is to imply that I am unable to hear different viewpoints and think for myself. Islam encourages asking questions and thinking critically and I believe we are unable to do that if we only want to listen to ourselves and like minded people. ALL views can be discussed in the comments section of my blog. I often don't agree with some commentors, but they are entitled their opinion, and I want any reader who happens by to be able to go through the same process I did, reading the comments and making a conclusion, I do not want to do it for them.
Please, sister, take all that I said with the utmost respect. I do not mean to attack you in standing up for another. I appreciate your views just as much as anyone elses and encourage you to continue posting on my blog as you see fit. :)
Nikki
Islam is perfect.
It is us, humans, who practice it incorrectly, making others feel that Islam is a 'hypocritical' religion, so-to-speak. "Well, the Quran says this, but you're doing that, so why should I follow this religion?" "Muslims had slaves, but they preach of peace. What am I supposed to think about that?"
I've heard, and asked, questions such as these many times. (I reverted to Islam one year ago, by the way!)
IMHO, a person should not choose to follow a religion based on others (of course, I'm not saying that's what you're doing). Choose the religion because it's in your heart and you believe it. If you keep thinking about what this person did, or that person did, you will always wonder if the religion you chose is really the 'right thing', you know?
Muslims in the past made mistakes that did not follow the ways of Islam, and Muslims today make mistakes that do not follow the ways of Islam, and we always will, IMHO.
I'm not questioning why certain Muslims participated suicide missions, had slaves, or fought others for unjust reasons.
THOSE ACTIONS ARE NOT ISLAM.
That's all that matters to me.
Assalam Wailaykum!!!
Oh, and you have a great blog, and I pray that the struggles you are going through with your family ease, Insh'Allah. I come from a Military family, but Alhamdullilah, they are very open-minded and had no problems whatsoever with my conversion. I had never accepted "todays" Christianity though, although my parents have always been Christian.
Good Luck!
Post a Comment