What is wrong with smashing the idols?

[FearGod]

Qur'an makes little sense taken on its own. I am pretty sure you know this.

That s another topic in which I disagree with you.

 

[FearGod]

You don't consider Quraniyoon to be Muslims?

Sucks, @firedragon

I don't care, I am not God to tell who is a Muslim and who isn't.

 

[Rival]

Many Hindus converted to Islam during that era, if they chose to build a mosque in the site
of the temple then why you see it as a problem, in Saudi Arabia the polytheists converted to
Islam and of course all ancient temples has no reason to exist, I can't see a problem with
converting the stones from one building to another one.

It was destroyed by an invading Islamic army.

 

[FearGod]

It was destroyed by an invading Islamic army.

The Islamic army invaded India, agree
but what evidence we have that the army destroyed the temple, what if the
Hindus themselves converted to Islam and built the mosque.

I guess the mosque if built then it was used by the local people (Indians) and not for the Arabs.

 

[Rival]

The Islamic army invaded India, agree
but what evidence we have that the army destroyed the temple, what if the
Hindus themselves converted to Islam and built the mosque.

I guess the mosque if built then it was used by the local people (Indians) and not for the Arabs.

Dude, are you serious? Do you think that if the British invaded KSA tomorrow, the Saudis would tear down all the Mosques and build Churches?

 

[Rival]

The Islamic army invaded India, agree
but what evidence we have that the army destroyed the temple, what if the
Hindus themselves converted to Islam and built the mosque.

I guess the mosque if built then it was used by the local people (Indians) and not for the Arabs.

The armies destroyed the temple.

This isn't hard stuff, Fear.

 

[FearGod]

Dude, are you serious? Do you think that if the British invaded KSA tomorrow, the Saudis would tear down all the Mosques and build Churches?

Muslims in India are approaching 200 millions, Christians in Saudi Arabia is zero.

 

[Rival]

The temple has been mentioned in the Puranas including the Kashi Khanda (section) of Skanda Purana. The original Vishwanath temple was destroyed by the army of Qutb-ud-din Aibak in 1194 CE,

 

[FearGod]

The armies destroyed the temple.

This isn't hard stuff, Fear.

We are talking about evidences, how could we know if it was smashed by the Muslim army,
what if it was peacefully made as a mosque for the Indian Muslims after accepting Islam.

 

[SomeRandom]

The Islamic army invaded India, agree
but what evidence we have that the army destroyed the temple, what if the
Hindus themselves converted to Islam and built the mosque.

I guess the mosque if built then it was used by the local people (Indians) and not for the Arabs.

Do not insult persecuted people like that by pretending it didn't happen. That's just disrespectful.
An army invaded and conquered. This happened to be a Muslim Army, which did happen during history. Local places of worship were demolished as a result. It doesn't matter how many people converted, it's wrong to do so in the first place. And for the record, even if they did convert I don't see ex Hindus (unless they became very fundamental) demolishing an old temple. They would simply worship in the temple without Idols. That's just how Hinduism rolls and how it always has. Hindus, even ex Hindus, don't usually see a difference between a Mosque or a Temple. It's a place of God and that's that.

 

[Rival]

You know what? I give up. You are so unreasonable, so revisionist and brainwashed that it is a pointless effort arguing with you. Anything I say is dismissed. Any evidence anyone presents is discarded and revised.

Have fun in your fantasy world.
@FearGod

 

[FearGod]

The temple has been mentioned in the Puranas including the Kashi Khanda (section) of Skanda Purana. The original Vishwanath temple was destroyed by the army of Qutb-ud-din Aibak in 1194 CE,

These are words, do you regard the words as a material evidence?

 

[FearGod]

BUT THERE WERE NOT MILLIONS OF MUSLIMS IN INDIA BEFORE THE ISLAMIC INVASION SO WHY WOULD THEY BUILD MOSQUES?

/reallyannoyedatyou

And there were no Muslims in Saudi Arabia prior to the message of prophet Muhammad.

 

[FearGod]

Do not insult persecuted people like that by pretending it didn't happen. That's just disrespectful.
An army invaded and conquered. This happened to be a Muslim Army, which did happen during history. Local places of worship were demolished as a result. It doesn't matter how many people converted, it's wrong to do so in the first place. And for the record, even if they did convert I don't see ex Hindus (unless they became very fundamental) demolishing an old temple. They would simply worship in the temple without Idols. That's just how Hinduism rolls and how it always has. Hindus, even ex Hindus, don't usually see a difference between a Mosque or a Temple. It's a place of God and that's that.

The existence of many worshiping places for Christians in the Arab world and the Idols in
many parts of the world which were in the hand of the Muslims proves you wrong.

 

[sayak83]

The Islamic army invaded India, agree
but what evidence we have that the army destroyed the temple, what if the
Hindus themselves converted to Islam and built the mosque.

I guess the mosque if built then it was used by the local people (Indians) and not for the Arabs.

Apparently, linking is not enough. So i will copy paste including reference. Is that sufficient? Should I continue?

Persecution of Hindus - Wikipedia

Persecution by Muslim Rulers[edit]
Muslim conquest of the Indian subcontinent began during the early 8th century AD. According to a 1900 translation of Persian text Chachnamah by Mirza Kalichbeg Fredunbeg, the Umayyad governor of Damascus, Hajjaj responded to a plea by men and women attacked and imprisoned by a tribe off the coast of Debal (Karachi), who had gone there to purchase some Indian female slaves and rich goods.[3] Hajjaj mobilised an expedition of 6,000 cavalry under Muhammad bin-Qasim in 712 CE. Records from the campaign recorded in the Chach Nama record temple demolitions, and mass executions of resisting Sindhi forces and the enslavement of their dependants. The raids attacked the kingdoms ruled by Hindu and Buddhist kings, wealth plundered, tribute (kharaj) settled and hostages taken.[4] Numerous Hindu Jats were captured as prisoners of war by the Muslim army and moved to Iraq and elsewhere as slaves.[5]




Mahmud of Ghazni
Mahmud of Ghazni, Sultan of the Ghaznavid empire, invaded the Indian subcontinent during the early 11th century. His campaigns across the Gangetic plains are often cited for their iconoclast plundering and destruction of temples. Mahmud's court historian Al-Utbi viewed Mahmud's expeditions as a jihad to propagate Islam and extirpate idolatry.[6][7][8] Mahmud may not have personally hated Hindus, but he was after the loot and welcomed the honours and accolades in the Islamic world obtained by desecrating Hindu temples and idols.[9] Of his campaign on Mathura, it is written:

Orders were given that all the temples should be burnt with naphthala and fire and levelled with the ground. The city was given up to plunder for twenty days. Among the spoil are said to have been five great idols of pure gold with eyes of rubies and adornments of other precious stones, together with a vast number of smaller silver images, which, when broken up, formed a load for more than a hundred camels.[10]

The loot from Mathura is estimated at 3 million rupees and over 5,000 slaves.[10]

According to military historian Victoria Schofield, Sabuktagin, the Turkish ruler of Ghazni and father of Mahmud, "set as his goal the expulsion of the Hindus from the Kabul valley and Gandhara (Khandar), as the vale of Peshawar was still called. His son and successor, the Sultan Mahmud of Ghazni, continued his work, carrying the holy war against the Hindus into India."[11] Till the year 980 CE, this area of Gandhara was under Hindus until Sabuktagin from Ghazni invaded it and displaced its last Hindu Shahi king Jaya Pala.[12] Shahi was an important kingdom in Northwest India at that time. According to some sources (like Ibn Batuta[13]) the name of the Hindu Kush mountains of the region means "Hindu killer"[14][15] because raiders would capture Hindus slaves – all Indians were termed Hindu in Islamic literature – from the plains and take them away to West Asia, with large numbers of boys and girls dying from icy cold weather in these mountains.[16][17][18]

Mahmud of Ghazni sacked the second Somnath Temple in 1026, looted it, and the famous Shiva lingam of the temple was destroyed .[19] Following the defeat of the Rajput Confederacy, after deciding to retaliate for their combined resistance, Mahmud had then set out on regular expeditions against them, leaving the conquered kingdoms in the hands of Hindu vassals annexing only the Punjab region.[20] By 1665, the temple, one of many, was once again ordered destroyed by Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb.[21]

Mahmud utterly ruined the prosperity of the country, and performed there wonderful exploits, by which the Hindus became like atoms of dust scattered in all directions, and like a tale of old in the mouth of the people.[22]

Alberuni, a historian who accompanied Mahmud of Ghazni, described the conquests in North Western India by stating that Mahmud impoverished the region and that the civilisation of the scattered Hindus declined and retreated from the North West.[23]

This is the reason, too, why Hindu sciences have retired far away from those parts of the country conquered by us, and have fled to places which our hand cannot yet reach, to Kashmir, Benares, and other places.[22]

References in the next post

 

[sayak83]

References

1. The feudal relations did not undergo any fundamental change apart from the abolition of the Jazia penal tax levied on the Hindus by the Muslim rulers and general freedom from religious persecution of petty Muslim chieftains and representative of the Muslim monarchy based at Delhi. Hindu History - National revival under the Marathas
2. Jump up^ "British national party - The biggest holocaust in World History...whitewashed from history".
3. Jump up^ Mirza Kalichbeg Fredunbeg: The Chachnamah, An Ancient History of Sind, Giving the Hindu period down to the Arab Conquest. [1]
4. Jump up^ Wink, Andre, "Al-Hind, the Making of the Indo-Islamic World", Brill Academic Publishers, 1 August 2002, ISBN 0-391-04173-8 pg. 51, 204-205
5. Jump up^ André Wink (2002). Al-Hind, the Making of the Indo-Islamic World: Early Medieval India and the Expansion of Islam 7Th-11th Centuries. BRILL. p. 161. ISBN 978-0391041738.
6. Jump up^ Chopra, P. N.; Puri, B. N.; Das, M. N.; Pradhan, A. C. (2003). A Comprehensive History of India, Vol. 2 — Medieval India. New Delhi: Sterling Publishers. p. 13. ISBN 8120725085.
7. Jump up^ Bostom, Andrew G., ed. (2010). The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims. Prometheus Books. p. 82. ISBN 9781615920174.
8. Jump up^ Saunders, Kenneth James. A Pageant of India. H. Milford, Oxford University Press pg. 162.
9. Jump up^ Avari 2013, p. 40
10. ^ Jump up to:a b Growse, F. S. (2000). Mathura-Brindaban — The Mystical Land Of Lord Krishna. New Delhi: Diamond Pocket Books. p. 51. ISBN 8171824439.
11. Jump up^ Schofield, Victoria (2010). Afghan Frontier: At the Crossroads of Conflict. Tauris Parke Paperbacks. p. 25. Retrieved 28 January 2014.
12. Jump up^ Kapoor, Subodh (2002). Ancient Hindu society. Genesis. p. 365. Retrieved 28 January 2014.
13. Jump up^ Encyclopædia Britannica. 14 (15 ed.). July 1987. pp. 238–240.
14. Jump up^ Ibn Battuta; Samuel Lee (Translator) (2009). The Travels of Ibn Battuta. Cosimo. pp. 97–98. ISBN 978-1-60520-621-9., Quote: "they call it the Hindu Kush, i.e. Hindoo-slayer, because most of the slaves brought thither from India die on account of the intenseness of the cold."
15. Jump up^ The World Book Encyclopedia. 19. 1990. p. 237.
16. Jump up^ Christoph Witzenrath (2016). Eurasian Slavery, Ransom and Abolition in World History, 1200-1860. Routledge. p. 45. ISBN 978-1-317-14002-3., Quote: "Ibn Battuta, the renowned Moroccan fourteenth century world traveller remarked in a spine-chilling passage that Hindu Kush means slayer of the Indians, because the slave boys and girls who are brought from India die there in large numbers as a result of the extreme cold and the quantity of snow."
17. Jump up^ Douglas, W.O., (July 1958). "West of Khyber Pass". National Geographic Magazine. 114,1: 13–23.
18. Jump up^ Encyclopedia Americana. 14. 1993. p. 206.
19. Jump up^ Kakar, Sudhir. The Colors of Violence: Cultural Identities, Religion, and Conflict. University of Chicago Press P 50. ISBN 0-226-42284-4.
20. Jump up^ P. M. (Peter Malcolm) Holt, Bernard Lewis, The Cambridge History of Islam, Cambridge University Press, 21 April 1977, ISBN 0-521-29137-2 pg 3–4.
21. Jump up^ Satish Chandra, Medieval India: From Sultanat to the Mughals, (Har-Anand, 2009), 278.
22. ^ Jump up to:a b Sachau, Edward (1910). Alberuni's India, Vol. 1. Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner & Co. p. 22.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

Muslims in India are approaching 200 millions, Christians in Saudi Arabia is zero.

...largely because (as I've heard) of the oppressive environment for immigrants, "guest workers," and missionaries (and the fact that conversion is frowned upon by the dominant religion), and actual immigration policies that would make it difficult for a Christian to become a citizen. There are quite a few Hindus, under the category of guest workers...

 

[sayak83]

Muslims in India are approaching 200 millions, Christians in Saudi Arabia is zero.

Maybe because the penalty of converting is DEATH

Apostasy in Islam - Wikipedia

Saudi Arabia[edit]
Main articles: Freedom of religion in Saudi Arabia, Human rights in Saudi Arabia, Blasphemy law in Saudi Arabia, and Capital punishment in Saudi Arabia
See also: Wahhabism, Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice (Saudi Arabia), and Religion in Saudi Arabia
Saudi Arabia has no penal code, and defaults its law entirely to Sharia and its implementation to religious courts. The case law in Saudi Arabia, and consensus of its jurists is that Islamic law imposes the death penalty on apostates.[216]

Apostasy law is actively enforced in Saudi Arabia. For example, Saudi authorities charged Hamza Kashgari, a Saudi writer, in 2012 with apostasy based on comments he made on Twitter. He fled to Malaysia, where he was arrested and then extradited on request by Saudi Arabia to face charges.[217] Kashgari repented, upon which the courts ordered that he be placed in protective custody. Similarly, two Saudi Sunni Muslim citizens were arrested and charged with apostasy for adopting the Ahmadiyya sect of Islam.[218] As of May 2014, the two accused of apostasy had served two years in prison awaiting trial.[219]

Saudi Arabia school textbooks include chapters with justification for the social exclusion and killing of apostates.[220]

According to the "Online Saudi-arabian Curriculum مناهج السعودية الألكترونية",[221] taught at schools, we read under the title "Judgements on Apostates أحكام المرتدين" the following (in Arabic):[222] "An Apostate will be suppressed three days in prison in order that he may repent ..... otherwise, he should be killed, because he has changed his true religion, therefore, there is no use from his living, regardless of being a man or a woman, as Mohammed said: "Whoever changes his religion, kill him", narrated by Al-Bukhari and Muslim."

 

[Kirran]

The Islamic army invaded India, agree
but what evidence we have that the army destroyed the temple, what if the
Hindus themselves converted to Islam and built the mosque.

I guess the mosque if built then it was used by the local people (Indians) and not for the Arabs.

I've been to the temple under discussion a few times. Basically, after the conquerors destroyed the temple the Hindus were so driven to keep it, as it's one of the holiest temples, that they built it again next door. This was definitely a temple in use, and they definitely didn't want it destroyed.

It was destroyed under the orders of Aurangzeb, who was the sixth Mughal ruler, and the one to rather abandon the pluralist policies which some of his predecessors had championed.

 

[The Kilted Heathen]

I don't care, I am not God to tell who is a Muslim and who isn't.

Apparently you are:

Taliban doesn't represent Islam,