Are We Really A Marshal Community?

[Auzer]

lol how did this topic turn from sikhs talking about sikhs still being martial to a muslim topic.

Say thanks to [MOD CUT] aka Panther ji....He spam EVERY THREAD with anti-Islamic slurs and ruins the whole thread...

This is not the only one...he did the same with Sikh and Pakistan thread...etc..

**SS Mod Note: Do not name call please, any further name calling will be removed from everyone's post regardless who it is.

[panther]

Panther,

Please don't reply to hate with hate. All further posts calling you what you find to be offensive will be deleted, but at the same time please try to remain at least slightly intelligent and carry yourself in a bit of a classy manner. A lot of people view these boards. Look at some of the posts in the few threads and see how they were able to make similar points you were making, but without insulting anyone.

If you wanted to have a constructive debate, then do your own research and pose a question in the form of a question or a claim without adding needless ad-hominem attacks. You will find it will make your argument stronger and if the other individual can't properly answer them, then the 3rd person reading will automatically see who the right person is.

I hope you understand Panther

[panther]

Maaf karna mods and i will try to calm my hot nature

[panther]

Insulting the founder of a religion is not right.

But Jonny Veer if jhoota sauda wala or Satya Sai Baba or enemies of Waraich pind wale do something that is well documented then by pointing it out the truth it doesn't mean its an insult. Just because people reported how Waraich Gurdwara was smashed down its not insult against the founder of Swami religion. If we post from NarkSwami or Jhoota Sauda holy book and NarkSwami or Jhoota Sauda katha's its not an insult

The Truth can never be considered an insult Veer

[Sherdil]

Auzer ji, Islam was spread by the sword from its very inception. Muhammad led a conquest of Mecca didn't he? When he took it over, he destroyed all of the idols in the Kaaba and turned it into a mosque. This is a repeating theme. Look how many temples, churches and mandirs where destroyed and mosques built upon them. Or atleast converted into mosques.

You yourself have stated in a previous post (I hope you don't go back and edit it now) that had it not been for Muslim empires fighting each other, Islam would have taken over Europe.

Islam was introduced into Asia by invading Arab armies. Then brought into the subcontinent by Persian, Turkish, and Mughal armies.

We Sikhs know the story of how Kashmiri Pundits came to Guru Tegh Bahadur, to ask for his help in saving them from forced mass conversions by the Mughal emperor.

What of the jaziya enacted on non-Muslims? Surely, this caused the poorest people to adopt Islam because they couldn't afford to pay the tax.

What of the hadiths that instruct how to rape captured non-Muslim women, so that you don't get them pregnant and thus decrease their value in the slave market?

What of the offspring of Hindu mothers who were raped by Muslims (I guess they didn't follow the Hadith). These offspring were raised to be Muslim fighters and then sent to the front-lines to die for Islam.

There is a lot more twisted stuff bro. You know the mountains in Afghanistan called Hindu Kush right? You know what

Hindu Kush means? It means "Kills The Hindu" in Persian.

Auzer bro, you forgot to reply to this :-)

[Auzer]

Auzer ji, Islam was spread by the sword from its very inception. Muhammad led a conquest of Mecca didn't he? When he took it over, he destroyed all of the idols in the Kaaba and turned it into a mosque. This is a repeating theme. Look how many temples, churches and mandirs where destroyed and mosques built upon them. Or atleast converted into mosques.

Well if you are really eager to get my response...then here it is ...

There were several events preceeding the conquest of Makkah. It all started when Quraish tribe killed one of Muhammad's (PBUH) follower by torturing him...and tried to assasinate the Prophet himself..which compelled Prophet and early Muslims to migrate to Medina...

Then there came several wars , internal conflicts etc... BTW , I know you haven't taken any classes in Islamic History...so let me educate you...

Makkah was attacked AFTER Quraish tribe broke peace treaty with Muslims (treaty of Hudaibia) ... Why don't you mention all this? Muhammad (SAW) just defended himself and his weak community... A thing that any honorable man would do.

BTW , after the conquest of Makkah , Muhammad (SAW) "freed" Quraish and didn't force them to convert....you didn't mention that part? All these things are well-recorded..

And Prophet's destroying idols is nothing bad...THAT was Prophet's message..to worship ONE GOD and not stones , fire , sun and what not...It was just symbolic as it harmed nobody...but only harmed their beliefs which were wrong and against the God.

But prophet (SAW) never "forced" anyone to accept Islam....He freed Makkah....how many casualities were there during Makkah conquest? NONE! Why? Because Muhammad (SAW) announced 'public Maafi " for EVERYONE...even for those who killed Prophet's companions and attacked him on previous occasions..So conquest of Makkah only shows the humility of Islam , if anything.

Kindly post just SINGLE other incident where such public maafi was given to bitterest of enemies in a tribal culture like that of 7th century Arabia?

Islam was introduced into Asia by invading Arab armies. Then brought into the subcontinent by Persian, Turkish, and Mughal armies.

Islam was "introduced" in South-Asia by invading Armies...In East Asia..Muslim traders introduced it..In China , Prophet's ambassador introduced Islam...So you see...you are just generalizing too much. Kindly keep it to "South-Asia/Subcontinent" ..Don't go towards 'Islam in Asia' ...You don't know about it..believe me , you don't. It is a hugeeee subject...

But Islam was spreaded mainly by Sufi Saints...not invaders. I hope you do understand the meaning of "Introducing Islam in a region for the first time" and "spreading Islam to masses" ....

What of the jaziya enacted on non-Muslims? Surely, this caused the poorest people to adopt Islam because they couldn't afford to pay the tax.

Muslim citizens of the state payed "Zakkah" while non-Muslims payed "Jizya" .... So? In mediveal culture...this was a very humane example of taxation...ALL citizens paid same amounts...but just different name and different timing....

Read mediveal taxation on 'Jews' in Europe and Gypsies in Roman Empire...

Jizya wasn't "unfair" by the standard of the time..it is just that now we have developed way more advance taxation systems.....

What of the hadiths that instruct how to rape captured non-Muslim women, so that you don't get them pregnant and thus decrease their value in the slave market?

lol What Hadith is that? What is its chain of narration? It is authentic? Semi-authentic? Is it a Hadith or just a quote in Hadith book? You don't know the 'science of hadith' ...Hadiths are a very complex matter...

BTW , kindly post the hadith you are talking about..with reference..I've never heard of this hadith before..

What of the offspring of Hindu mothers who were raped by Muslims (I guess they didn't follow the Hadith). These offspring were raised to be Muslim fighters and then sent to the front-lines to die for Islam.

This never happened on "systematic scale" in Mughal Empire....

"Mumluks" of Egypt were slave-soldiers but they were COMPLETELY different than what you are mentioning...Kindly any source of this claim?

There is a lot more twisted stuff bro. You know the mountains in Afghanistan called Hindu Kush right? You know what

Hindu Kush means? It means "Kills The Hindu" in Persian.

Hindu-Kash can have different meanings...but leave it..this is not the topic..

Generally , it is accepted that these mountains were named as such because invading armies will come through khyber pass and invade hindus...but this notion , though popular , has no evidence to back it up....It is one of those things that have just become popular...like folk tales etc... I'm not denying the possibility...but it is a 50/50 ...It can be due to this reason...but it can have other meanings too ..

But leave it ...This is not important...

[Mehtab Singh]

If we started believing Auzer, I guess we will have to quit believing the bachans of Bhai Gurdas ji, Kavi Santokh Singh ji, Sant Baba Gurbachan Singh Ji Khalsa Bhindranwale, Sant Baba Jarnail Singh Ji Khalsa Bhindranwale.

Auzer, you may have read 200 books, researched all your life, good for you. But since you're not ready to accept what we've been saying based on the recorded history from just 300 years ago by Sikhs who were (and we look upon them as) enlightened blessed personalities, we are under no obligation to accept a 1400 year old account from yourself which God knows has been distorted how many times.

[Auzer]

If we started believing Auzer, I guess we will have to quit believing the bachans of Bhai Gurdas ji, Kavi Santokh Singh ji, Sant Baba Gurbachan Singh Ji Khalsa Bhindranwale, Sant Baba Jarnail Singh Ji Khalsa Bhindranwale.

What do you mean here? Kindly , elaborate. What I'm saying is just pure facts. Recorded facts with manuscript support.....

I'm not talking "Oh Aurangzeb was good..or Islamic Rulers of India didn't do any aggression on Sikhs etc" ...but what about this comment? What you want to say...Say it clearly.

Auzer, you may have read 200 books, researched all your life, good for you. But since you're not ready to accept what we've been saying based on the recorded history from just 300 years ago by Sikhs who were (and we look upon them as) enlightened blessed personalities, we are under no obligation to accept a 1400 year old account from yourself which God knows has been distorted how many times.

Again.... Where is that "not ready to accept" part in my posts? I accept whats truth... Kindly elaborate what I'm not "accepting" ?

[Mehtab Singh]

I thought you were a well read scholar? The most well-read dude on this forum in your own words? Looks like you don't even know who Bhai Gurdas ji, Kavi Santokh Singh ji, Sant Baba Gurbachan Singh Ji Khalsa Bhindranwale, Sant Baba Jarnail Singh Ji Khalsa Bhindranwale were, and you're on a Sikh forum trying to act all wise? Do we look like we care about what you call pure facts?

"Are we a Martial community" is the title of this thread. We have been a martial community since Sahib Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji Maharaj blessed us with Amrit in 1699. We are the ones responsible for India not becoming an Islamic country. All the way from Morocco to Malaysia, its just Israel and India that are NOT under the flag of Islam. So are we a martial community? BLOODY HELL YES WE ARE!

Our Gurus and Shaheeds chose to die rather than accept Islam, are we a martial community? WE ARE HELLA MARTIAL!

You keep repeating that you adore Sikh bravery, so why doubt our martial community status? Or did I totally misread you? If you do not consider us cowards (which you claimed more than once), then this discussion is over.

[Mehtab Singh]

Are we martial?

http://www.info-sikh.com/JJPage1.html

Are we martial?

http://www.bbc.co.uk...-india-16027179

The game commemorates the 1897 battle of Saragarhi, during which 21 Sikhs died defending a British army post from 10,000 Afghan tribesmen. The battle took place in what is now Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa province in Pakistan.

The battle is little-known, but is considered by some military historians as one of history's great last-stands.

The Sikhs rejected calls to surrender and repulsed numerous attacks, killing scores of attackers. The post was finally overrun and all the Sikhs died before a relief column could arrive. They all won gallantry medals.

Are we martial?

40 Singhs against 1 million Mughals at the battle of Chamkaur!

Are we martial? Listen to all 7 videos on here about Operation Bluestar. Hope you can understand Punjabi fluently.

http://www.youtube.com/user/sikhtemple/videos?query=heart