1857- Jihad Against Christianity Commence

[Umair Nawaz]

He has written several books - all novels,based on life and society during the Raj. Other accounts corroborate his line of views. I thought this gora was an okay guy.

Just check a little background of this author. He is british and they even today use this tactic to pay money to several authors to spread wrong info both in print media (books, News papers) and electronic media. Its not new my friend even in this 21st century we all know what BBC and CNN does and what their news papers and authors even today write abt islam, muslim countries and our heroes and even Prophet SAW.

Thats their age old tactic which finds its roots in Humphrey and Lawrence of Arabia. Read a book Dastaan Emaan Farooshon ki By Al Tamash and u will know what they have been doing since times of Crusades. Just google this name and author and u will find book download it in PDF format and read it. It comprises of 5 books starting from the Day Salahud Din Ayubi was born till the day he died. Its the only comprehensive book available abt Salahud din and what was happening in his times.

Its in Urdu if u can still read language then this is by far the best thing available on how these westerners infiltrated our youth and our societies and even religion. Let not forget Lawrence of Arabia was the imam of the biggest mosque of muslim world of its time in Kabul.

Dastan Iman Faroshon Ki (Tales of Traitors) by Altamash (Salahuddin Ayubi Jehad against Christian Crusades)

 

[PlanetWarrior]

The war of independence by the then united British colony of India was indeed a jihad in its literal sense. It was a war against injustice. Whether fought by a Hindu or a Muslim or both, that war was indeed a jihad

 

[Jaggu]

@flamer84 The spread of Christianity was almost negligible in North India except the tribes although missionaries had big presence. In South India a large amount of population converted to Christianity.

The reason why Christianity did not gain much in North Western India is because the among the Hindus, the Arya Samaj was very active, among the Sikhs the Singh Sabha movement and among the Muslims the Ahmadis. These three movements not only competed with each other but also successfully countered the Christian missionaries

 

[INDIC]

The reason why Christianity did not gain much in North Western India is because the among the Hindus, the Arya Samaj was very active, among the Sikhs the Singh Sabha movement and among the Muslims the Ahmadis. These three movements not only competed with each other but successfully countered the Christian missionaries

The percentage of Christians in all North Indian states is extremely low, Christians in North India mainly comes from the different tribes of MP, Chhattisgadh, Jharkhand or Odisha, even in North-East India mainly tribals converted to Christianity. Only in South India, missionaries managed to convert lots of non-tribals population although Christianity was already a major religion in Kerala before the arrival of Vasco da Gama.

 

[halupridol]

troll level=professional

 

[freshmint]

i wanted to know do rest of Muslims share the same view as the above person,as a christian myself i have noticed when ever some on post contents regarding Islam it will be taken off immediately from pdf while person like above can say and spread hatred and his post will gather 1000s of comments.

Forget internet where anybody can post anything under a false identity, you have to watch Pakistani TV and newspapers where they openly spew vitriol against non-Muslims and ignorant people believe that it is only the Arabs and Iranians who spew venom against non-Muslims and Jews on TV.

Media of all major countries is very closely monitored by all intelligence agencies and they know how to exterminate Pakistanis who are a danger to human race as Pakistanis have exterminated and made the non-Muslims helpless which reflects their attitude towards all non-Muslim countries and peoples.

 

[freshmint]

In Western countries there are lots of lies about the British rule in India. You will find lot many British claiming how they saved Hindus from the Mughal rule without knowing the fact that defacto Mughal rule never existed since 1758 after Delhi fell to Marathas.

at least 90% Indian land in 2014 is held by non-Muslims and it was the same in 1947. the few Muslims who left for Pakistan left their land to their Muslim relatives and no land was every confiscated from Muslims and yet at least 90% land is in the hands of non-Muslims as it always has been for more than 1000 years since Islam came to subcontinent.

even substantial land of present day Pakistan and Bangladesh was in non-Muslim hands in 1945 when the Muslims there killed and confiscated their lands. so the theory that Muslims ruled India was never true. If the Muslims were rulers of India as they lie, then they would have owned most land of India which was never true. The Muslims were just so united due to Islamic injunction and the non-Muslims of India were so divided and so tolerant of Muslims whom they saw as just another type of believers and not as outsiders that the Muslim race-buildings survived in India unlike Spain from where Muslims were driven out. Besides you have to take into account the most important factor, the supremely tolerant polytheism of non-Muslim Indians which the Sufis took full advantage of and roamed freely in non-Muslim India and converted as they liked. The Muslims as always never allowed any Muslim to leave Islam. therefore there was no question of any non-Muslim saint venturing into Islamic lands and risking his life.

 

[scorpionx]

All sourced from material commissioned by WCC. Late Palestinian writer,Eduard Saeed, had opened our eyes to this.

I have gone through some revisionist arguments which try to sketch Aurangzeb as a secular and tolerant ruler. But those arguments are feeble and not convincing enough,at least not enough convincing to "open our eyes."

 

[INDIC]

@freshmint British erased the entire history of Marathas or try to belittle their might of Marathas powers to the minimum to give a fake impression that they conquered India from the Muslim Mughals although Mughal lost their entire empire even Delhi 100 years before the 1857 Rebellion. In reality the conquered most of India from Hindu-Sikhs except some Muslim ruled Kingdoms. Sadly the fabricated British version of history is still popular among British people and many South Asians.

 

[Jf Thunder]

Rani Lakshmibai, Tatya Tope and Mangal Pande were all Jihadis

Admire them both,

 

[KingMamba]

Much obliged for the usefull new info gents.

@Jaanbaz is wrong when he says some wanted to do jihad against Brits because they were spreading Christianity, either he is mistaken or outright lying on purpose. There was only one sect of Muslims who wanted to jihad against British and it was because British were occupiers not because they were trying to convert people. Christianity was already in South Asia long before the British came along and most rulers of South Asia Muslim and Hindu alike allowed Christians to spread their beliefs. The Portuguese Jesuits were even a part of the courts of Mughal emperors.

Question,as i am unimformed on this issue.Were the British agressive missionaires in India ?

The Portuguese were more aggressive than the British but with limited results, most converts were from lower strata of Hindu castes and in the case of Pakistan at least from amongst Mazhabi sikhs who were discriminated against by jatt sikhs. Muslims in South Asia were always stronger in supporting one another so converts from amongst Muslims while did occur were much fewer in number.

 

[Jaanbaz]

@Jaanbaz is wrong when he says some wanted to do jihad against Brits because they were spreading Christianity, either he is mistaken or outright lying on purpose. There was only one sect of Muslims who wanted to jihad against British and it was because British were occupiers not because they were trying to convert people. Christianity was already in South Asia long before the British came along and most rulers of South Asia Muslim and Hindu alike allowed Christians to spread their beliefs. The Portuguese Jesuits were even a part of the courts of Mughal emperors.

I'm not lying. There were different reasons. Jihad was a response to Muslims losing their territories to the Brits. You do know Tipu Sultan worked with the French to fight the British. There was no Muslim state to declare Jihad, so you had different Scholars declaring Jihad against the British. The whole concept of Jihad was hijacked by selfish scholars to advance their own agendas.

 

[KingMamba]

I'm not lying. There were different reasons. Jihad was a response to Muslims losing their territories to the Brits. You do know Tipu Sultan worked with the French to fight the British. There was no Muslim state to declare Jihad, so you had different Scholars declaring Jihad against the British. The whole concept of Jihad was hijacked by selfish scholars to advance their own agendas.

Spread of Christianity was not one of them, if Muslims had such big deal with the Christians than Punjabi Christians would not have opted for Pakistan in 1947.

Yeah so what? The Nizam was working with the Brits as was the Marathas who were also allied with the Brits so he would obviously try to get his own support.

The only scholars who were planning on declaring jihad if the British did not leave were the deobandis and quite frankly as horrible as they are today they would have been justified to do so back then. However although they were thinking about it they did not because of certain people within the larger Muslim community who were saying jihad against British was unIslamic helped fragment Muslim unity on this issue.

 

[Jaanbaz]

Spread of Christianity was not one of them, if Muslims had such big deal with the Christians than Punjabi Christians would not have opted for Pakistan in 1947.

Yeah so what? The Nizam was working with the Brits as was the Marathas who were also allied with the Brits so he would obviously try to get his own support.

The only scholars who were planning on declaring jihad if the British did not leave were the deobandis and quite frankly as horrible as they are today they would have been justified to do so back then. However although they were thinking about it they did not because of certain people within the larger Muslim community who were saying jihad against British was unIslamic helped fragment Muslim unity on this issue.

Okay lets just assume one Deobandi Sect had declared Jihad against British would other Sects had followed the way? And what is Jihad? Why is freedom resistance declared as Jihad? Isn't Jihad to end religious persecution by the unbelievers. Prophet Mohammad(saw) never started wars but was always defending. He had to march on Mecca after the treaty was broken with the Quraish. I don't Jihad is to be used by any tribe to conquer lands. Jihad can be fought against oppressive government that restricts and persecutes Muslims.

There should have been a united movement with Muslims and Non-Muslims alike to seek freedom from the British. By declaring Jihad, Muslims had all ready divided India into Muslim and Non Muslim camp. The Brits quickly realised that and used the classic divide and conquer strategy.

 

[INDIC]

I'm not lying. There were different reasons. Jihad was a response to Muslims losing their territories to the Brits. You do know Tipu Sultan worked with the French to fight the British. There was no Muslim state to declare Jihad, so you had different Scholars declaring Jihad against the British. The whole concept of Jihad was hijacked by selfish scholars to advance their own agendas.

British were less into spreading Christianity almost negligible in North India still today only the Adivasis are Christians in North India, in India we only remember Portuguese who resorted to extreme religious persecution to spread Christianity.