• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Islam will dominate!

DeitySlayer

President of Chindia
Response: Perhaps. But I'm not interested. For you can't prove its validity to begin with.

It exists. It was first published during Jahangir's reign. He did not contest the validity of the memoir, nor did he inflict any punishment on those who published it. It provides numerous insights into his private life and his musings on philosophy and art, amongst other matters, both of which are consistent with what is known of him from other contemporary sources. Thus we either conclude that Jahangir wrote it, or he was a complete retard who failed to notice a widely circulating memoir that contained what you are portraying as slurs against his character.
 

Fatihah

Well-Known Member
It exists. It was first published during Jahangir's reign. He did not contest the validity of the memoir, nor did he inflict any punishment on those who published it. It provides numerous insights into his private life and his musings on philosophy and art, amongst other matters, both of which are consistent with what is known of him from other contemporary sources. Thus we either conclude that Jahangir wrote it, or he was a complete retard who failed to notice a widely circulating memoir that contained what you are portraying as slurs against his character.

Response: There's the statement. Where's the proof?
 

Wannabe Yogi

Well-Known Member
This is what the Great Will Durant had to say about the Islamic conquest of India.

"...the Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex order and freedom can at any moment be overthrown by barbarians invading from without and multiplying from within." Almost all the Muslims of South Asia are descendants of weaker elements of the population who had succumbed to forcible Islamic conversion." )

"The Mohammedan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history". The Islamic historians and scholars have recorded with great glee and pride of the slaughters of Hindus, forced conversions, abduction of Hindu women and children to slave markets and the destruction of temples carried out by the warriors of Islam during 800 AD to 1700 AD. Millions of Hindus were converted to Islam by sword during this period. "

"The growth of Buddhism and monasticism in the first year of our common era sapped the manhood of India, and conspired with political division to leave India open to easy conquest. When the Arabs came, pledged to spread a simple and stoic monotheism, they looked with scorn upon the lazy, venal, miracle-mongering Buddhist monks, they smashed the monasteries, killed thousands of monks, and made monasticism unpopular with the cautious. The survivors were re-absorbed into the Hinduism that had begotten them; and eased the return of the prodigal by proclaiming Buddha a god."

"At Elephanta the Portuguese certified their piety by smashing statuary and bas-reliefs in unrestrained barbarity; and almost everywhere in the north the Moslems brought to the ground those triumphs of Indian architecture, of the fifth and sixth centuries, which tradition ranks as far superior to the later works that arouse our wonder and admiration today. The Moslems decapitated statues, and tore them limb from limb; they appropriated for their mosques, and in great measure imitated, the graceful pillars of the Jain temples; time and fanaticism joined in the destruction, for the Hindus abandoned and neglected temples that had been profaned by the touch of alien hands.” "Even in its ruins the Temple of Shiva at Elephanta, with its massive fluted columns, its “mushroom” capitals, its unsurpassed reliefs, and its powerful statuary, suggests to us an age of national vigor and artistic skill of which hardly the memory lives today."


Story of Civilization: Our Oriental Heritage - By Will Durant MJF Books. 1935. p. 459 and 505 and 524 – 600
 

301ouncer

Well-Known Member
So all this back and forth none-sense is saying that some shiks picked up arms and waged a war against the Islamic superpower were met with a sword of Islam?

Ofcourse and rightly so.

At least we did not burn hindu babies and then labled them muslims. And setup websites to demonize the hindu population against their own dead?

I care about here and now and jpegs, bitmaps and Gifs..
 
Last edited:

DeitySlayer

President of Chindia
So all this back and forth none-sense is saying that some shiks picked up arms and waged a war against the Islamic superpower were met with a sword of Islam?

Ofcourse and rightly so.

The Muslims conquered India first. So when the Sikhs come along wanting independence, suddenly it's not allowed to have land switching hands any more? Also note that the Mughals came to Punjab; the Sikhs never went to Delhi to start a war with the Mughals.

At least we did not burn hindu babies and then labled them muslims.

Yep, but the Mughals did brick up two children; seven and nine; the sons of the Guru, for refusing to convert to Islam after capture. I'm not contesting the propaganda nature of that image you keep touting, but Islam has not been an innocent little angel throughout history either, and both you and Fatihah (Fatihah mostly) need to realize this.
 

Fatihah

Well-Known Member
With all due respect, but he gave enough interesting leads, so may be it is time for you to refute them. It is not enough to say that he is wrong, you have to actually prove why he is wrong you know.

Response: And with all due respect, if you have been paying attention to the thread, I did not state that his leads were wrong, but that he has no proof that they are right. And what I did say was wrong concernig his take on India being conquered by force was refuted.
 

DeitySlayer

President of Chindia
Response: There's the statement. Where's the proof?

That is proof.

He did not contest the book.

He did not make any move against the publishers.

You say the book is falsity published to slur him.

But he made no movement against the book, nor did he ever express any displeasure.

That is proof.
 

Fatihah

Well-Known Member
This is what the Great Will Durant had to say about the Islamic conquest of India.

"...the Islamic conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex order and freedom can at any moment be overthrown by barbarians invading from without and multiplying from within." Almost all the Muslims of South Asia are descendants of weaker elements of the population who had succumbed to forcible Islamic conversion." )

"The Mohammedan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history". The Islamic historians and scholars have recorded with great glee and pride of the slaughters of Hindus, forced conversions, abduction of Hindu women and children to slave markets and the destruction of temples carried out by the warriors of Islam during 800 AD to 1700 AD. Millions of Hindus were converted to Islam by sword during this period. "

"The growth of Buddhism and monasticism in the first year of our common era sapped the manhood of India, and conspired with political division to leave India open to easy conquest. When the Arabs came, pledged to spread a simple and stoic monotheism, they looked with scorn upon the lazy, venal, miracle-mongering Buddhist monks, they smashed the monasteries, killed thousands of monks, and made monasticism unpopular with the cautious. The survivors were re-absorbed into the Hinduism that had begotten them; and eased the return of the prodigal by proclaiming Buddha a god."

"At Elephanta the Portuguese certified their piety by smashing statuary and bas-reliefs in unrestrained barbarity; and almost everywhere in the north the Moslems brought to the ground those triumphs of Indian architecture, of the fifth and sixth centuries, which tradition ranks as far superior to the later works that arouse our wonder and admiration today. The Moslems decapitated statues, and tore them limb from limb; they appropriated for their mosques, and in great measure imitated, the graceful pillars of the Jain temples; time and fanaticism joined in the destruction, for the Hindus abandoned and neglected temples that had been profaned by the touch of alien hands.” "Even in its ruins the Temple of Shiva at Elephanta, with its massive fluted columns, its “mushroom” capitals, its unsurpassed reliefs, and its powerful statuary, suggests to us an age of national vigor and artistic skill of which hardly the memory lives today."


Story of Civilization: Our Oriental Heritage - By Will Durant MJF Books. 1935. p. 459 and 505 and 524 – 600

Response: The irony of such a post is the simple fact that the history of hindu and indian culture on record is just as heinous, if not more gruesome, than that recorded of islamic conquest of India. So such a writing irrational from the start.
 

301ouncer

Well-Known Member
Yep, but the Mughals did brick up two children; seven and nine; the sons of the Guru, for refusing to convert to Islam after capture. I'm not contesting the propaganda nature of that image you keep touting, but Islam has not been an innocent little angel throughout history either, and both you and Fatihah (Fatihah mostly) need to realize this.

Pics, Jpegs, Gifs? As I really do not believe anything that comes from that neck of the woods any more. After the burning of baby tender bodies alive and changing them to hindu babies was the last straw that broke the camel back.
 

xkatz

Well-Known Member
So all this back and forth none-sense is saying that some shiks picked up arms and waged a war against the Islamic superpower were met with a sword of Islam?

The reason the Sikhs and Mughals had conflict (at least in the later years of the Mughal Dynasty) is because the Emperors feared that the Sikhs were gaining too much power in the Punjab. Therefore, in order to stop the Punjab from being seceded to the rule of Sikhs, the Mughal Empire went to war with them; this included executing Sikh gurus, such as Guru Tegh Bahadur:

[Guru Tegh Bahadur] was arrested, along with some of his followers, Bhai Dayala, Bhai Mati Das and Bhai Sati Das by Nur Muhammad Khan of the Rupnagar police post at the village Malikhpur Rangharan, in Ghanaula Parganah, and sent to Sirhind the following day. The Faujdar (Governor) of Sirhind, Dilawar Khan, ordered him to be detained in Bassi Pathana and reported the news to Delhi. His arrest was made in July 1675 and he was kept in custody for over three months. He was then cast in an iron cage and taken to Delhi in November 1675.
The Guru was put in chains and ordered to be tortured until he would accept Islam. When he could not be persuaded to abandon his faith to save himself from persecution, he was asked to perform some miracles to prove his divinity. On his refusal, Guru Tegh Bahadur was beheaded in public at Chandni Chowk on 11 November 1675
They were killed because the Mughals saw them as threats because Sikhism threatened the idea of Islam's monopoly over the subcontinent.
 

DeitySlayer

President of Chindia
Pics, Jpegs, Gifs? As I really do not believe anything that comes from that neck of the woods any more.

Do you have any pictures of Muhammad receiving the words of the Qur'an from Allah? Photographs weren't invented at the time remember. But I can promise you that you will be unable to find a single scholar who disputes the fact that the Guru's two younger sons were killed on Aurangzeb's orders.
 

Wannabe Yogi

Well-Known Member
"My principal object in coming to Hindustan… has been to accomplish two things. The first was to war with the infidels, the enemies of the Mohammadan religion; and by this religious warfare to acquire some claim to reward in the life to come. The other was… that the army of Islam might gain something by plundering the wealth and valuables of the infidels: plunder in war is as lawful as their mothers’ milk to Musalmans who war for their faith.”-Tamerlane (1336 - 1405) Turkmen Mongol conqueror
 

Fatihah

Well-Known Member
The Muslims conquered India first. So when the Sikhs come along wanting independence, suddenly it's not allowed to have land switching hands any more? Also note that the Mughals came to Punjab; the Sikhs never went to Delhi to start a war with the Mughals.



Yep, but the Mughals did brick up two children; seven and nine; the sons of the Guru, for refusing to convert to Islam after capture. I'm not contesting the propaganda nature of that image you keep touting, but Islam has not been an innocent little angel throughout history either, and both you and Fatihah (Fatihah mostly) need to realize this.

Response: Coming from a person who can't prove a single thing he states, there's nothing to realize.
 

301ouncer

Well-Known Member
With all due respect, but he gave enough interesting leads, so may be it is time for you to refute them. It is not enough to say that he is wrong, you have to actually prove why he is wrong you know.

With all due no respect. Did you open your mouth to defend the tender bodies of these burned out alive muslim babies?

No. You would rather come to the aid of your comrads.

So please stay and be quite till the end of this thread.
 

DeitySlayer

President of Chindia
With all due no respect. Did you open your mouth to defend the tender bodies of these burned out alive muslim babies?

No. So be quite till the end of this thread.

With all due respect, I wasn't here when the claim was made and if you track back through the thread, you will see I supported you on this, although I did not go so far as to say it was a conspiracy from the entirety of Hinduism against the entirety of Islam.

So with respect, refute my points, and show me evidence to the contrary, or do not insult others.
 

301ouncer

Well-Known Member
"My principal object in coming to Hindustan… has been to accomplish two things. The first was to war with the infidels, the enemies of the Mohammadan religion; and by this religious warfare to acquire some claim to reward in the life to come. The other was… that the army of Islam might gain something by plundering the wealth and valuables of the infidels: plunder in war is as lawful as their mothers’ milk to Musalmans who war for their faith.”-Tamerlane (1336 - 1405) Turkmen Mongol conqueror

LOL they qouting from Mongols. The mongols even after imbracing islam never left their barbaric ways. They did this same thing to their own arab muslim brothern in Syria too.
 

301ouncer

Well-Known Member
With all due respect, I wasn't here when the claim was made and if you track back through the thread, you will see I supported you on this, although I did not go so far as to say it was a conspiracy from the entirety of Hinduism against the entirety of Islam.

So with respect, refute my points, and show me evidence to the contrary, or do not insult others.

With all due respect. You are the last person to support anything for muslims. Not that we care anyway. You would happily be calling muslims animals all day long if I did not expose those pics and links related to them.

Secondly. I am addressing your comrad badran not you. You need to backtrack too to read all the insults of your comrads.
 
Last edited:

Badran

Veteran Member
Premium Member
With all due no respect. Did you open your mouth to defend the tender bodies of these burned out alive muslim babies?

No. You would rather come to the aid of your comrads.

So please stay and be quite till the end of this thread.

What?

"Comrades". When my "comrades" are denying reality, and throwing pointless and proof-less accusations around, and can't take the same treatment when applied to them, i have no interest to "aid" them in their delusions.

Your behavior is basically an embarrassment, and it causes so much harm. You force people to bring up crimes perpetrated by Muslims, you make generalized and random claims that has nothing to do with reality, and can't accept any kind of criticism, so don't expect any help from me. And i will argue against you as long as you act this way.
 
Top