: Was Islam spread by sword and imposed?:

[sachin4islam]

Assalau Alaikom....

To me if asked this question by non-muslim my answer is NO but if muslim its yes. Why, 'coz i want them to like Islam. So it depends on what your personality really is...and how you make your dawah to non-muslim.

Assalam Alaikum:

This is what is called ''Takkiya" and is well practiced by a Muslim sect in India. This sect promotes fabrication of false stories to make Dawah to Non-Muslims.
Isn't it amazing that they need falsehood to propagate Divine Decree.

Regards.

 

[tariq353]

:salam2:

I think the topic here is clear "WAS ISLAM SPREAD N IMPOSED BY SWORD"

we shouldnt get confused with "Was Muslim ruled land was spread by sword"


Muslims did fight....but thats half truth.. and half truth is even dangerous than lie.

Let me expalin with an example-
Suppose i say that "US army general said Vietnamis should be killed"

Here i m doing both things firstly telling the truth and secondly doing satanic work by hiding the context.

Cz if we go into context we ll come to knw that these order pertains to the period of Vietnam war........and of no significance today.... so in context this is very logical as any army general will say the same.... so the same thing which was looking absurd becomes meaningful in right context.


Critics of Islam does the same thing the will present the facts, list, history of muslims attacking others but they will not present the back ground...nor do they present the history of non muslims attacking muslims or non muslims attacking other non muslims.

How did that stupendous miracle happen ? That has been one of the baffling questions for historians* To-day the educated world has rejected the vulgar theory that the rise of Islam was a triumph of fanaticism over sober and tolerant peoples. The phenomenal success of Islam was primarily due to its revolutionary significance and its ability to lead the masses out of the hopeless situation created by the decay of antique civilisations not only of Greece and Rome but of Persia and China and of India*
(page7)

HISTORICAL ROLE OF ISLAM by M N ROY (1938)

[in the east
muslims conquered persia (present iran & Afghanistan) and later India (sindh) and much later ghauris and gahzanvis from Afghanistan attacked India. Then later came the mughals. ]


Once again dont mix expansion of muslim land by muslims with spreading of Islam...... its Irony that people consider that if any muslim in any part of world is fighting/fought.he is fighting/fought for islam. Ghauries Ghaznavi Mongols Mughals.....they fight for expansion of their land.......which was the Theory of that time.... Yes sm emperors tried to do a little bit for islam on moral basis but that was wn they were already established without any force...some evn did things against islam like Akbar who started a new religion "Deen-e-Ilaahi".

Those who were actually responsible for spreading islam were great people like Moinuddin Chisti, Nizamuddin, Kaki bakhtiyaar etc (May Allah forgv their sins n enter them in to Jannah)... Whereever they used to go whole town villages used to revert.......

one of the reason which helped in spreading Islam in Indian subcontinent was the Equality propounded by islam.......as this area was ruled by aryans who came from Europe invaded n declared orginal natives as SHUDRAS(low cast/untouchables) who were without any rights n sole purpose of their life was to serve higher class....... So the idea of eqality(which they nvr dreamed of) was mesmerizing for them n attracts reverts in thousands .

The message of hope and salvation came from the Caravan traders of Arabia who had stood outside the corrupting atmosphere of the decomposed Roman world, and prospered by their advantageous position. The "Revolt of Islam" saved humanity.

THE HISTORICAL ROLE OF ISLAM by M N Roy

Wa salam

 

[arzafar]

no man lying is never permitted! lols

and most of these battles that i listed were attacks. The prophet (saw) during his lifetime had sent letters to various kings and rulers, inviting them to accept islam. But they refused so there is only two options left after that
1) kaafir should pay jizya and accept Islamic government
2) prepare to fight

There are two types of jihad attacking and defending. Most muslims and even scholars nowadays fear talking about these concepts; particularly the western scholars. Although, i can completely understand their weak position, residing in a kaafirs land, but they should not misguide people.

attacking jihad i.e. muslims attack first is fard e kifaya. if enough muslims do it, it is enough. For centuries now muslims have abandoned this duty.
defending jihad i.e. defending when kaafir attack is fard. everybody present has to fight or contribute financially etc.

detailed fatwa and explanation on jihad from top scholars can be found at http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/20214

Most muslims are surprised when they come to know of these rulings and even i was surprised when i first read them. The reason is that very few scholars say it how it is and most almost never clarify the rulings and types of jihad. They are hesitant to say the truth! Sheikh munajjid seems to be the only brave one who talks about jihad in no uncertain terms, providing detailed evidence as always. this probably why he is criticized a lot particularly in the west. He seems to be getting old now so i dont know what will happen in the future. Who will tell the truth!

if someone asks whether islam spread by sword?
answer is yes it was spread by sword as well as other means. Both are permitted in islam!

The truth is that islam was spread by several different means some of them were peaceful but others were very bloody. Many early muslims laid down their lives and sacrificed everything to expand the borders of islaamic lands today most of us are muslims because of that! But Nowadays muslims are very weak so they are under the cosh. But at the very minimum we should speak the truth.

having said that islam was not imposed on anyone. in fact the purpose of jihad is not to convert people or kill kaafirs.

The purpose of jihad in Islam is not to kill non-Muslims, rather the purpose is to establish the religion of Allaah on earth, to establish the rule of His sharee’ah, and to bring people forth from the worship of other people to the worship of the Lord of all people, from the injustice of other religions to the justice of Islam. Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

“And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism, i.e. worshipping others besides Allaah), and the religion (worship) will all be for Allaah Alone”

[al-Anfaal 8:39]

Shaykh ‘Abd al-Rahmaan al-Sa’di said in his commentary on this verse:

Here Allaah states the purpose behind fighting for His sake, which is not to shed the blood of the kaafirs and take their wealth; rather the purpose is so that all religion (worship) will be for Allaah alone, and the religion of Allaah will prevail over all other religions, and everything that goes against that, whether it is shirk or anything else – which is what is meant by fitnah – will be repelled. If this purpose is achieved, there will be no killing or fighting.

Tafseer Ibn Sa’di, p., 98

http://www.islamqa.com/en/ref/21961

 

[Aapa]

Assalaam walaikum,

First, this is not discussing jihad. This is limited to the spread of Islam. Even if one uses swords this does not make the individual who opts for Islam and becomes a Muslim a true believer. No-one can be forced to believe. Thus, if a person out of fear becomes Muslim to please the victor..the faith will not propagate through the centuries.

For a faith to grow in different cultures those who revert must love the faith. As the old saying goes you can take a horse to water but you can't make him drink it. The faith spread because the new reverts internalized and accepted the faith.

Brother, what scholar in his right mind is going to discuss jihad. And please stop the east/west divide. That is so irritating and makes no sense. Faith is not defined by where you live. Islam is the faith for Believers..not people of the east. That is short of insipid. Pray tell where is the dividing line of faith..is there a latitude and longitude that makes eastern Muslims superior to Western Muslims..please let me know...I will visit it.

 

[sachin4islam]

Assalaam walaikum,

First, this is not discussing jihad. This is limited to the spread of Islam. Even if one uses swords this does not make the individual who opts for Islam and becomes a Muslim a true believer. No-one can be forced to believe. Thus, if a person out of fear becomes Muslim to please the victor..the faith will not propagate through the centuries.

For a faith to grow in different cultures those who revert must love the faith. As the old saying goes you can take a horse to water but you can't make him drink it. The faith spread because the new reverts internalized and accepted the faith.

Assalam Alaikum:

I fully agree. Faith is very sensitive issue and no one is going to take an imposed faith to the heart,unless the soul witnesses,nay it's the truth.

Regards.

 

[stiks]

Asalaamualaykum,

The hindus in India, The Copts in Egypt, other Christian in muslim countries belie this arguement. These religions would not have survived to this day if people had been made to conver at sword point. Compare this this to Spain when the christians took over, no muslims from that era survived their brutal inquisition.

 

[stiks]

Islam expanded and conquered lands and ruled over them, this did not require the people of that land to convert, they were free to follow their religion. they did pay jizya just as muslims paid zakah.

 

[strive-may-i]

A pious muslim trader, is influence enough... true faith too

:salam2:
Importantly, the viewpoint of analysis I feel should change. Islam is submission to will of god, Prophet time and his prophethood was as per Almightys plan. There where many Ambiya and Murseleen sent by Allah to spread divine message and to bring law order peace and hamony time and again. as the message diluted another new one was sent to renew. The last of them being our Prophet So the spread of the renewed faith is natural, its natural , its law of Almighty. Why did faith, message dilute? Thanks to Iblees, And, because every human , Jinn is to be tested for being worthy for hereafter.

Now when talking to another person, its really important to realize this, the other person is a soul, every soul has come to earth with a predisposition, the soul will either submit or it wont. Faith cannot be imposed, history is proof. Individuals are proof, married couples of inter-faith are proof.

Now the history grind

During Prophets time itself. Were there not, the non-believers? Did Umar[R] the caliph, be just to christians, jews at jerusalem. Did King Saladin not restore to the ones who had lost hope? Didnt some of the so called South Indian muslim rules patronage believers of other faith? Were not best of Persian Mughal considered one of the best ruler world has seen?

Next,
Prophet, chose some of his Sahabah, and sent them to various parts of world.Being hand chosen from the best of man, and then from his most ablest caliphs, wherever they went and settled, these men of Pure faith, highest ethical standards, filled with divine wisdom and unshakeable belief, have made an impact and humbled many a souls. And gradually small islamic communities, have come up and survived test of time (yes there are proofs, travellers report which indicate this.. but many reports are lost/destroyed too may be! ).
An Indian king from south india accepted Islam after seeing Prohpet miracle of split moon. There are many mosques its reported in south africa, Indonesia, in India etc which trace back to before the 1000 AD. Indonesia, the largest, is a case of Muslim majority region which had 'no-state patronage'.

And,
we are not to underestimate the Pious muslim traders who went far and wide. A pious honest trader is a very powerful influence. There were lots of native stories about Muslim traders and their honesty. Some of them did did settle in their trading countries.
Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, Christianity... they all had state-patronage. Did they not? The spanish armada and spread of spanish language is quite intriguing.... it was under christian missionary zeal. The spread of english in US at cost of natives, the spread of English in Australia at loss of natives, the spread of english (yes!) in south afirca at loss of natives.... Same cannot be said about Islam, a subtle distinction.

Now,
lets come to our so called "modern" times, the ones who turned to Islam, tell us just this - "we bow to our lord, his message is clear, our purpose of life was never before soo clear..... we were blind before, but enlightened now"

Islams spread in middle ages, In wests history books is in bits and pieces, with most details missing. And the fabricated history has filled the gap ....

In current times Individuals who turned from godless anarchism , are fabricated with " Terrorism" (again agreed, some are to be blamed, but does not reflect the vast majority.)
​

Propaganda continues..... Iblees (lahnathullaahi alaihi) conspires....

 

[Seeking Allah's Mercy]

Asalamaoalaikom wa rahmatullahi wa barakaatuh,

I hav'nt heard uncle Naik's reply, so I don't know if I'm just sharing with you what you already know. Incase it is I apologise. This man is Naik's teacher (As per him):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7u258kakwI

I like this reply, it's short and conveys the message.

 

[abdul-aziz]

:salam2:

When the messenger was alive, pbuh, you know he sent letters to the romans and persians. Nice letters (peaceful not kaafir so and so; more like oh leader of so and so people) with the call to worship Allah.

One story of the Romans, is they took the messenger(person delivering the message usually a few people because of safety) and tortured them severely to death. In those days no one can announce anything in the community unless with the rulers permission.

Having said that, the rulers rejected the call to Islam, and the fact there was a messenger, PBUH. They also hid it from the people.

These barriers had to be removed in order for the message to be received.

so back to the question was Islam spread by the sword? NO! as the people heard the message of Islam after taking down the barriers and it was up to them if they wanted to accept. That is why you still have Christians and Jews that peacefully resided among the Muslims till today.

You really would realize this if you study in the west and how like Newton, Copernicus, and other scientists where threatened and almost killed trying to present facts and what they termed as "Deviant Ideas".

 

[sachin4islam]

Asalaamualaykum,

The hindus in India, The Copts in Egypt, other Christian in muslim countries belie this arguement. These religions would not have survived to this day if people had been made to conver at sword point. Compare this this to Spain when the christians took over, no muslims from that era survived their brutal inquisition.

Walikum Assalam.

Very recently I discovered an article about the topic being discussed from an authentic Islamic website and more importantly it is the same website to which TTI judiciary clings for answering for various issues on Deen of Allah (SWT),have a look at it


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.

Islam Q&A


Regards.

 

[sachin4islam]

Asalamaoalaikom wa rahmatullahi wa barakaatuh,

I hav'nt heard uncle Naik's reply, so I don't know if I'm just sharing with you what you already know. Incase it is I apologise. This man is Naik's teacher (As per him):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7u258kakwI

I like this reply, it's short and conveys the message.

Walikum Assalam: Sister in faith.

Thanks for the video. I haven't yet come across this reply.

The reply by Dr Naik............

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=blQ8ZW8s8W8

Regards.

 

[Ershad]

Assalamu alaikkum warahamatullahi wabarakatuhu,

Dear brothers and sisters,

My 2 cents from a historical point of view, especially that of India (Since i am an indian). You might know India has lot of communities. Therefore, I was born in a community called Mappila, the Muslim community of Kerala, primarily in the northern region called Malabar. I did some research on my background to know who my ancestors were. It wasn't too tough.

Contrary to popular belief, Islam came to South Asia prior to Muslim invasions of Indian subcontinent. Islamic influence first came to be felt in the early 7th century with the advent of Arab traders. Trade relations between Arabia and the subcontinent are very ancient. Arab traders used to visit the Malabar region, which was a link between them and ports of South East Asia, to trade even before Islam had been established in Arabia.

According to Historians Elliot and Dowson in their book " The History of India as told by its own Historians", the first ship bearing Muslim travelers was seen on the Indian coast as early as 630 CE. H.G. Rawlinson, in his book: Ancient and Medieval History of India claims the first Arab Muslims settled on the Indian coast in the last part of the 7th century CE. Shaykh Zainuddin Makhdum’s “Tuhfat al-Mujahidin” also is a reliable work.

So I guess the invasion of india by Muslim rulers didn't have much influence on the spread of Islam. Today this particular community (from this origin) have migrated to lot other countries like pakistan, malasiya and the middle east.

You can find more about this here - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mappila and also check out the references in the article, if interested.

I hope it was useful.

Jazakallahu Khair!

 

[kashif_nazeer]

:salam2:

I would like to share with you a couple of lectures, very informative and talks about the issue of Freedom of Conscience.

Part 1
[yt]_xFKqlQFgAY&list=PL3893DDA771572001&index=1&feature=plpp[/yt]

Part 2
[yt]i9ALPRVDs5o&feature=related[/yt]

 

[sachin4islam]

Assalamu Alaikum: Dear Ershad.

Thanks. Yet the truth is that the spread of Islam through Arab traders and that too only along southern east coast of India was negligible. It wasn't a massive reversion. The wave of reversion forceful or otherwise in Northern India was with invasion of Arabs and subsequently by Turks and other central Asian dynasties. Even today you will find the form of Islam practiced in major part of India similar to that practiced by Turks or central Asians.

My own view have now changed and it says Islam was imposed in India rather than preached.

Regards.

 

[sachin4islam]

Assalamu Alaikum:

Why doesn't the knowledgeable (moderators+administrators) throw some light on this issue?.

Regards.

 

[islamirama]

Islam was spread by both means. Not a finger was lifted in Indonesia and look at that nation, 99% are Muslims, most population Muslim nation in the world. Other parts of the world were either spread by preaching or by the sword. India was done both ways, parts of India had Muslims traders and preachers and other parts were taken over by force because of the actions of the Hindus. There's a history count of one incident where the Muslim women were going for hajj and the hindus kidnapped them for their own pleasure and thus they were conquered and the Muslim women freed.

But the sword of the Islam is not the same as the sword of the Christians. Muslim ruler told the rulers of other empires such as Byzantine, Roman and Persian empires (who were all kicking Christian butt) to either accept Islam or face the sword. By the sword their were conquered, then they were given the choice to either accept Islam or live as dhimmi (non-Muslim residents) and pay jizya (non-Muslim tax but exempted from participating in the battle). Compare that to the Christian's sword that not only conquered but killed everyone in the way and those that were left were forced to convert to Christianity or faced torture, such as cross being burned into their chests or women having their breasts chopped off or other gruesome stuff. All this barbarism is well document during crusades of Spain when the non-white Spaniards (Muslim, Christians and Jews) were massacred by the thousands.

So the sword of Islam was nothing like the sword of Christianity, who always claim that Islam was spread by the sword but fail to see their own bloody history and whose sword was was more soaked in blood of the innocents.

My own view have now changed and it says Islam was imposed in India rather than preached.

Regards.

IF Islam was imposed on India then majority of India would be Muslims and not hindus. Muslims conquered and ruled India but the fact that majority are hindus shows that they were not imposed upon to convert.

 

[kashif_nazeer]

:salam2:

I very much agree with brother arzafar,that Islam is not be imposed on anyone.It is to be preached,however,I am unsure if this is correct(Please correct me if I am wrong),when Islam is dominant,then force might be used,like a mop up operation.Like when Islam was dominant in Arab world.Still,there are quite a number of non muslim arabs.This shows Islam is not to be imposed.
Also in India,significant number of non muslims,bear witness that Islam was not imposed.Since,the invading,muslim armies were strong and could have forced them all to convert.It didn't.History has been maligned by biased nationalist historians,who preferred nationalism over truth.
I was reading an article in the newspaper some years back on this issue,the writer said that how Islam spread in India is a big mystery.Some say it was by force,some say it was peaceful.If former,then majority should have been muslim.This is a very unclear issue.However,Muhammad Bin Qasim(r.a) who lead first muslim army in India,I believe(correct me if I am wrong),even he didn't force people to convert.
We can only conclude that Islam,might have been spread in many ways,by sword maybe,by preaching,by self interest of people,by immigrants who settled and inter marriages etc.
Only Allah knows.The best thing is we can trut Him and thank Him for His beautiful deen.

Islam however cannot be imposed on anyone as surah Baqarah verse 256 clarifies,"Let there be no compulsion in (acceptance of )religion."

May Allah help us and guide us all.Ameen.
PS:I have asked some people about this question relating to spread of Islam in India and am awating answers.

 

[sachin4islam]

Assalamu Alaikum: Dear Kashif.

I appreciate your response.Convincing.

What I think: Use of force to spread Islam can be easily justified. When monarchies prevailed round the globe,the state religion used to be the one practiced by royal family. In such cases it wasn't easy at all to preach Islam at any land. There were no sources for communications other than physical efforts to spread word of Allah. The only choice remains first invite a monarchy to deen of Allah through preaching by sending envoys. Undoubtedly in almost all cases no monarchy was going to allow spread of word of Allah. Hence the last option which remained was to use power to conquer a land and establish an Islamic state there.

Regards.

 

[kashif_nazeer]

Assalamu Alaikum: Dear Kashif.

I appreciate your response.Convincing.

What I think: Use of force to spread Islam can be easily justified. When monarchies prevailed round the globe,the state religion used to be the one practiced by royal family. In such cases it wasn't easy at all to preach Islam at any land. There were no sources for communications other than physical efforts to spread word of Allah. The only choice remains first invite a monarchy to deen of Allah through preaching by sending envoys. Undoubtedly in almost all cases no monarchy was going to allow spread of word of Allah. Hence the last option which remained was to use power to conquer a land and establish an Islamic state there.

Regards.

I think brother your post has raised an important point.The distinction between Jihad fisabilillah which includes Qital(fighting) and Dawah,which is inviting people to the way of Allah through peaceful preaching and peaceful and wise arguments and the circumstances they are used,how they are to be used,both are fee sabilillah.I think it would be better if some knowledgeable brother or sister clarified on this issue or a scholar.
How did prophet implement it,there is a need to study seerah and take lessons from them inshaAllah.
Then again,Islam is something which heart absorbs and cannot be forced upon people according to Qur'an(2:256).There comes the need to understand which is the circumstances under which fighting is to be used.