Search results

But you guys were the ones making temples for trump and kissing his behind.. we are jumping in joy from that perspective

L lmao how naive are you

the pact of umar like the other poster pointed out is disputed in terms of whether what clauses umar himself added and what other people added after him After consulting with the poor, Omar established the first welfare state, Bayt al-mal.[82][83][84] The Bayt al-mal aided the Muslim and NON-...

Again I will need Again I will need to know the context of when it was said.. In the Constitution of Medina, Jews were given equality to Muslims in exchange for political loyalty.[2][14] However, after each major battle with the Medinans, there were accusations of Jewish tribal treachery for...

the irony is Indians giving reasons as to why Islam couldn’t be spread forcefully in India (population too high, didnt wana disturb peace etc) when the whole narrative has been otherwise

This is great as it will encourage children belonging to poor families to enroll in schools for a free meal.. win win situation... feed the hungry while educating them

the banu qurayza were expelled because they broke their treaty with the muslims please do some research man before posting stuff..if a tribe supports your enemy while pretending to be allies with you what would you have done???also i will need the context of the hadith since there were many...

bro they are lucky they encountered muslims(under who they enjoyed high ranking government and even military positions) and not christians..imagine the conquistadors..there would have been 5 or 6 hindus left today:cheesy:

ok and i would assume that peace times would far exceed war times..when war is over it is only then a ruler starts his reign(start of peace time) and youre saying except kashmir there wasn't forced conversion during this period of peace time.. ok thank you!! you know dalits are still...

so muslims did not engage in a policy of forced conversion of hindus??

Slavery is not encouraged but discouraged in islam.. You get great reward if you free a slave you couldn’t just make anyone a slave and the process to get a slave was basically through war or trading for one in war let’s say the muslims won, they couldn’t just free every slave because that...

Yep only in Islam you have rules that even during war you can’t cut trees, destroy crops, kill civilians.. after muslims conquered jerusalem hazrat umer prayed outside the church of the holy sepulchre because he thought if he prayed inside people would try and convert it into a mosque..

youll find incidents like these through out everyone’s history and this is a 1400 year history..it’s like you almost think as if no Indian ruler ever killed innocent people.. let’s not be intellectually dishonest or naive here Stepaniants also (like Arnold) declares that some historians have...

id agree yes in some places it was under some rulers.. However a lot of people portray it as being only spread by the sword like how you explained just now(In comparison Christianity trumps any religion when it comes to being spread by the sword) There were no muslim armies sent to west africa...

Ill be waiting 🤣

even if you consider that number an exaggeration and half it.. still looks bad on you lol

Resilience?when you let a small minority rule over you for a 1000 years and then Europeans ..being constantly ruled by a minority/outsiders shows that the character of the people is anything but resilient..if Indians were resilient they would have fought these comparatively small number of...

No one is making that claim not even the article posted

Or even the crusaders who would massacre the local population.. in recent history it’s been Islam vs Christianity in terms of global dominance.. and Islam has been comparatively much less violent than the latter

That’s what happens in every war though