Was Muhammad persecuted in Mecca, as Muslims claim?


There are loads of sites and Books by Muslims that states that Muhammad was persecuted by the Meccans for preaching Islam, and this led Prophet to leave Mecca and Move to Yathrib (Medina). This gives Muslims a chance to create a myth; that Prophet fought his fight in self-defense. However the Historye of Muhammad, written by Muslims themselves is a stark denial to this fact. If at all, Muhammad was persecuted, we need to know the reason as to why he was persecuted. The reason for his persecution is important to be able to pass any judgment on him. Today we see all Governments of different countries persecute Terrorist Organizations and Drug Dealers, but those Governments are not to be blamed for persecuting or prosecuting these Organisation. In the same way, we need to see why Muhammad and other Muslims were persecuted, if really he was?

The very first thing I notice in Islamic history is that Quraysh was very Tolerant. As one of the Muslim biographer says, “Abu Talib made no objection to Islam of his two sons ]a’far and ‘Ali, but for himself he said he was not prepared to forsake the religion of his forefathers; ‘Abbas was evasive and Hamzah uncomprehending, though both assured him of their unfailing affection for him personally.” [1]

This shows the head of Quraysh was a tolerant man, he had no objection when his two sons embraced Islam.

When Muhammad started mocking and insulting the religion of Quraysh, Quraysh went to Abu Talib, and requested him to ask Muhammad to stop insulting  them. Quraysh said, “0 Abu Talib, thine is a high and honourable position amongst us, and we have asked thee to hold in check thy brother’s son, but thou hast not done so. By God, we will not suffer our fathers to be insulted, our ways scoffed at, and our gods reviled.” [2]

The above quote however does not prove that Muhammad was persecuted, Muhammad used to insult and abuse gods and the religions of the Qurayshies.  Quraysh begged Abu Talib to stop his Nephew . Another source says, “ the Quraysh went to Abu Talib, a highly respected elder who was the Prophet’s uncle and tribal protector, and demanded that he put an end to Muhammad’s behavior, whom they accused of cursing their gods, denouncing their forefathers and insulting their religion. “ [3] 

Quraysh had a reason to be negative toward Muhammad. The Prophet cursed their gods, denounced their forefathers, and insulted their religions. But they did not fight directly; rather they requested Abu Talib to stop Muhammad. But Abu Talib failed to stop Muhammad. Even so, this did not make Quraysh attack Muhammad. They still waited and hoped for peace. Quraysh, sent another person, Utbah to offer Muhammad anything he wanted so that he can leave them in peace.
Utbah went to the Prophet and said, “Son of my brother,thou art as thou knowest a noble of the tribe and thy lineage assureth thee of a place of honor. And now thou hast brought to thy people a matter of grave concern, whereby thou hast rifted their community, declared their way of life to be foolish, spoken shamefully of their gods and their religion, and called their forefathers infidels. So hear what I propose, and see if any of it be acceptable to thee. If it be wealth thou seekest, we will put together a fortune for thee from our various properties that thou mayst be the richest man amongst us. If it be honour thou seekest, we will make thee our overlord and take no decision without thy consent; and if thou wouldst have kingship, we will make thee our king; and if thyself thou canst not rid thee of this sprite that appeareth unto thee, we will find thee a physician and spend our wealth until thy cure be complete.”  Before Utbah went to prophet, read what made Utbah go to Muhammad. In a meeting with other Chiefs of Quraysh, Utbah said, “‘Utbah ibn Rabi’ah. “Why should I not go to Muhammad,” he said, “and make certain offers to him, some of which he might accept? And what he accepteth, that will we give him, on condition that he leave us in peace.” [4] 

We can see what was the grave concern with the Prophet’s tribe. Muhammad broke the peace of his Tribe, and he was also a big danger for the basic livelihood of his tribe, which was through pilgrimage to the Kaaba. On one occasion Quraysh decided that outside the town all the roads by which Mecca was approached ( by Pilgrims) must be manned, and that visitors must be warned in advance to be on their guard against Muhammad. This was done because Quraysh had a high reputation of hospitality, not only as regards food and drink but also because they made every man feel welcomed, both him and his gods. But this year there was the threat that pilgrims will hear their gods insulted by Muhammad and his followers, and they would be urged to forsake the religion of their forefathers and to adopt a new religion which appeared to have numerous disadvantages. [5]

Prophet even failed to prove his religion, which is evident from Many Meccans verse while at the same time he abused their religions, forefather and gods. Then  Quraysh wrote a decree institutinging a boycott of the Hashim and al-Muttalib sub-clans: marriage, and all forms of buying and selling, between the rest of Quraysh and the two sub-clans was completely suspended, such that not even basic provisions could be secured. [6] 

This boycott continued for three years. During this period Muhammad earned few followers in Medina, who used to visit Muhammad during each Pilgrimage season. Finally, all his followers met with the Prophet in secrecy at ‘Aqaba, in nearby Mina under cover of night, to make the following pledge: (1) Not to associate any partners with the one true God, Allah; (2) To obey the Prophet in all righteous matters; (3) To refrain from stealing; (4) And adultery; (5)And infanticide; (6)And slander.  In the following year a larger delegation (over seventy, including two women) again met with him during the pilgrimage season and invited him to migrate to Medina. On that night they proclaimed the second pledge of ‘Aqaba, with a new added clause (7) To protect the Messenger in the same manner as they would protect their own women and children. After this Muslims started Migrating to Medina. [7] 

I don’t find any persecution from Quraysh, and he was only boycotted, but for a reason. Now, Gandhi asked Indians to Boycott the British when they ruled India. This does not make Gandhi a cruel man and in the wrong. By the same token, Quraysh boycotted Muhammad since he was a threat to their peace, abused and insulted their forefathers and religions, without proving his own religion to be correct. He also was a threat to their livelihood, which they earned from servicing Pilgrims.  This Muslims claim of persecution in Mecca is no more than a mirage.

___________________________________________________________

Reference:

[1]  Muhammad- His life based on earliest source, by Martin Lings. Pg no- 50

[2] Historical development of the Qur’an, by Cannon Sell, Pg no-5

[3] The History of Qur’anic Text, By Muhammad Mustafa Al- A’zami, Pg no- 28

[4]  Muhammad- His life based on earliest source, by Martin Lings. Pg no- 60-61

[5] Ibid, Pg no- 53

[6] The History of Qur’anic Text, By Muhammad Mustafa Al- A’zami, Pg no- 29

[7] Ibn Hisham, Sira, vol. 1-2, p. 433 to 442

10 thoughts on “Was Muhammad persecuted in Mecca, as Muslims claim?

  1. prostitution in islamic world

    Prostitution is best service to allah as per islamic doctrine. Prostitution in USA + UK = that in Iraq alone. Proof:

    http://www.thenational.ae/news/world/middle-east/prostitution-flourishing-in-iraq-say-activists

    Iran = prostitute behind the Veil.

    Mullah loves prostitute

    http://www.weeklyblitz.net/858/interview-with-an-iranian-prostitute-mullahs

    Kuwait – another nation of prostitution

    http://news.kuwaittimes.net/2012/06/21/underground-flesh-market-booming-in-staid-kuwait/

    Prostitution of Qatar

    http://www.qatarliving.com/node/1918699

    Dubai hotel full of prostitutes

    http://www.tripadvisor.com/ShowUserReviews-g295424-d571104-r109985950-York_International_Hotel-Dubai_Emirate_of_Dubai.html

    A bonus scene for all victims of Al Taqiyya

    http://londonmuslims.blogspot.in/2012/06/saudi-arabian-halal-sex-with-indonesian.html

    All prostitutes originate from islamic world.

    • Hi nuke, thanks for the video link as it shows the true colors of hypocrites among Muslims whom the Quran condemns and a separate chapter for such hyenas!

      Prostitution is not the monopoly of Islam but hypos exist in every religion and in India there are streets reserved for them as prostitution is legalized in many Western countries too.

      Of the 100 countries listed in the link below, non of them is an Islamic Nation legitimizing prostitution and can never be!!
      http://prostitution.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000772

      Prostitution in Egypt is illegal
      Prostitution has been illegal in Morocco since the 1970s
      Prostitution in Afghanistan is illegal, with punishments ranging from 5 to 15 years imprisonment.
      Prostitution in Iran is illegal, and incurs various punishments ranging from fines and jail terms to execution for repeat offenders.
      Pros in Indonesia is legally considered a “crime against decency/morality”
      Prostitution in Kuwait is illegal
      Prostitution in Pakistan is illegal. and etc for all other Islamic Countries.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_by_country

      Meanwhile, prostitution exists in most of the non-Islamic countries!

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prostitution_by_country

      In conclusion, Non Muslims love whores more than the Muslims. Kindly note that prostitution, alcohol and gambling are an abomination in Islam!!

      regards
      plum

  2. “There are loads of sites and Books by Muslims that states that Muhammad was persecuted by the Meccans for preaching Islam, and this led Prophet to leave Mecca and Move to Yathrib (Medina). This gives Muslims a chance to create a myth”
    “The very first thing I notice in Islamic history is that Quraysh was very Tolerant.”

    But this is NOT where Muslims went to first! At first they sought peace in Abyssinia.

    – –

    No – you ONLY arrived at this conclusion by disregarding other claims that were against this view and picked and chose your reference. Fallacious logic.

    – –

    “This shows the head of Quraysh was a tolerant man, he had no objection when his two sons embraced Islam.”

    Many Muslim sources claim he too became a Muslim. Prophet Muhammad himself was his nephew and hence belonged to the ruling class. There are many references that Abu Talib was loving and caring towards his nephew. No has hidden this. So were some of his other uncles – like Abbas and Hamza. Abu Sufyan joined when there were no other options left.

    Just because Abu Talib was kind to his nephew doesn’t equal that whole Quraysh was.

    – –

    “I don’t find any persecution from Quraysh, and he was only boycotted, but for a reason.”

    There are many, many reference alluding to persecution of early Muslims. . . . if you don’t present them. Well what do you think – happens!

    • Respected aminthemystic,

      You said in your above comment, “But this is NOT where Muslims went to first! At first they sought peace in Abyssinia.”

      The article is talking about Muhammad’s tribe in general, even you too know that his tribe allowed some 360 Gods to assembled in Kabba together for worship. This alone proves that they were pluralistic in nature and were not against any religion in particular. The example I gave, which you quoted is the second evidence that they didn’t opposed Islam until it was a threat to them in some or other way. I would also like you to know that, people of Quraish tolerated and handled peacefully some 360 different GODS, why were they not able to accept a single god which Muhammad propagated?

      Next you said, “No – you ONLY arrived at this conclusion by disregarding other claims that were against this view and picked and chose your reference. Fallacious logic.”

      Fine you provide me some other historical account of it. All most all historical would agree that Quraish people were tolerant to diversity of religion and god, I don’t need to prove it. Above example it enough to prove it. It may look a fallacious logic to you, because you want always to Islam in good light. If someone criticizes Islam, then he is using fallacious logic. Anyways, I don’t have problem with that.

      You said, “Just because Abu Talib was kind to his nephew doesn’t equal that whole Quraysh was.”

      He is just an example, because he was head of those people. People generally follow what their head do. I have other references too, which I will provide if you ask.

      Lastly you said, “There are many, many reference alluding to persecution of early Muslims. . . . if you don’t present them. Well what do you think – happens!”

      So you suggest that early Muslims were persecuted. Again I have to repeat, why they not persecuted those followers of some 360 different idol worshipers, who came to Kabba to pray their respective GODS? What made these people exclusively prosecute Muhammad and his followers? As I have suggested, that the better word would be boycotted instead of persecution. Muhammad claimed himself that he and his followers were prosecuted, but this is a big fat lie. Muhammad was boycotted, because he abused the religion of his tribe, he abused their GODS, and forefathers.

      Even you too know what happens when some Kafir abuse Islam,Muhammad,Allah etc. They kill thousand, burn their houses, murder their people, protest and kill Americans and Israelis wherever they find them. Now when Muslims can do all these when their religion is abused, why can’t Quraish boycott a false Prophet, abusing their fore father religion and preaching a demonic religion.

      Regards

      • “The article is talking about Muhammad’s tribe in general, even you too know that his tribe allowed some 360 Gods to assembled in Kabba together for worship. This alone proves that they were pluralistic in nature and were not against any religion in particular.”

        No it doesn’t. All their gods belonged to ONE RELIGION. . . theirs.

        They were against Jews and Christians. .. HENCE why they had peace treaties and whatnot. I can give longer references if required. But the whole base of the above argument is wrong.

        – – –

        ” The example I gave, which you quoted is the second evidence that they didn’t opposed Islam until it was a threat to them in some or other way. I would also like you to know that, people of Quraish tolerated and handled peacefully some 360 different GODS, why were they not able to accept a single god which Muhammad propagated? ”

        All Gods that belonged to ONE RELIGION as above.

        – – –

        “Fine you provide me some other historical account of it. All most all historical would agree that Quraish people were tolerant to diversity of religion and god, I don’t need to prove it.”

        Actually YOU DO . . . as this is YOUR CLAIM.

        See Burden of Proof is UPON YOU.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burden_of_proof

        Attempting to shift the Burden of Proof is fallacious logic!

        If “almost all” historical data is saying Quraysh were peaceful . . . then where is this information?

        Surely to form YOU view – you have read a lot . . .else you are lying outright when making this claim. . . in other words – you read Sina who makes the same claims. He has no basis for this either. But you are NOT him . . . so either prove your claim – or their merit is lessened – as they have a strong possibility of being hogwash, fiction.

        – – –

        “He is just an example, because he was head of those people. People generally follow what their head do. I have other references too, which I will provide if you ask. ”

        I am asking . . .

        – – –

        “Again I have to repeat, why they not persecuted those followers of some 360 different idol worshipers”

        See above – and Doh!

        – – –

        “As I have suggested, that the better word would be boycotted instead of persecution. Muhammad claimed himself that he and his followers were prosecuted, but this is a big fat lie. Muhammad was boycotted, because he abused the religion of his tribe, he abused their GODS, and forefathers. ”

        You have NO evidence for this – other than claims.

        And Sina’s book – perhaps . . . its operation is ongoing. . . .

        I even had to drill him about this. Next section of my blog will deal with it.

        Sorry for Link Deletion

        – – –

        “Even you too know what happens when some Kafir abuse Islam,Muhammad,Allah etc. They kill thousand”

        Another baseless claim? Examples!?

        • Thanks for replying back aminthemystic,

          In your above comment you said, “No it doesn’t. All their gods belonged to ONE RELIGION. . . theirs. They were against Jews and Christians. .. HENCE why they had peace treaties and whatnot. I can give longer references if required. But the whole base of the above argument is wrong.”

          So please can you elaborate what was the one religion, which all the people from different tribes of Arabia followed and had some 360 different gods. I thought different tribes had their own God, with one supreme God. Even If for sake of argument I agree that they did not fight among each other because they belong to Paganism, still how you defend that, even before Muhammad there people who followed Monotheism, and no one ever boycotted or persecuted them, take for example Hanifs. I guess I don’t need to give reference to prove it. Hanifs were people who followed the religion of Ibraham, as per Islamic History, and no one from entire Quraish objected on their belief. Would you even not consider it as an evidence?

          You said they were against Jews and Christians, well then I would like to see a good evidence for that. If you want me to believe that the Pagans boycotted Jews and Christians as they boycotted and disliked Muhammad’s new religion, then it is hard for me to digest and need a strong evidence to believe it.

          Next you said, “Fine you provide me some other historical account of it. All most all historical would agree that Quraish people were tolerant to diversity of religion and god, I don’t need to prove it.”

          Actually YOU DO . . . as this is YOUR CLAIM.”

          Fine if I do need to give evidence, I’ll no issue. Lets start with concept of your religion, or say why you think Muhammad was persecuted(In your words) by his own people? Was it because of his religion, which preached Monotheism, instead of idolatary? Or was it something much more than that for which he and his followers were boycotted by his people?

          If monotheism was only problem, then I find no reason to believe QUraish were intolerant. In fact many people even much before and at the time of Muhammad himself, used to preach Monotheism, and some among them were successful too. Ali Dasti in his book, “23 Years” writes:-

          Another pre-Islamic poet, Amr b. Fadl, flatly rejected the famous idols of the Arabs:
          I have forsaken Lat and Ozza altogether.
          Any man who is stalwart and constant will do likewise.
          No longer shall I visit Ozza and her two daughters
          or the two idols of the Banu Ghanm.
          Nor shall I visit Hubal when, as often happens,
          fortune is adverse; for my patience is slight.
          The call to reject idolatry and worship the one great God was thus not without precedent.
          What was new was urgent insistence. Mohammad’s miracle was that he unflinchingly
          faced all insults, harassments, and repulses, and never shrank from any step until he had
          imposed Islam on Arabia and brought the different Arab tribes under one flag.
          [Page 19]

          Read Ibn Ishaq pag 411- 412, which says:-

          The man of Aws, Abu ‘Amir, was sometimes called “the Monk” because he had long been an ascetic and had been known to wear a garment of hair. He claimed to be of the religion of Abraham, and had acquired a certain religious authority amongst the people of Yathrib, He came to the Prophet soon after his arrival, ostensibly to ask him about the new religion. He was answered in the words of the Revelation which had more than once defined it as the religion ofAbraham.2 “But I am of it,” said Abu ‘Amir, and persisting in the face ofdenial he accused the Prophet of having falsified the Abrahamic faith. “I have not,” said the Prophet, “but I have brought it white and pure.” “May God let the liar die a lonely outcast exile!” said Abu ‘Amir, “So be it!” said the Prophet. “May God do that unto him who is lyingl'”

          These evidences prove that people at the time of Muhammad used to follow Monotheism and preach too, as I gave example of Hanifs, but none were opposed by Quriash. This too proves they were tolerant.

          Now coming to some more evidence which suggests that initially the leaders of Quraish begged Muhammad to stop abusing their religion and their forefather. But he didn’t, which made Quraish angry. Read Historical Developement of Quran page 5. They very same people also suggested Muhammad to worship both the religion side by side, but he denied as per same source. On one occasion Muhammad got angry by continuous requests of Quraish and said “I come to you with slaughter” [See Keolle’s, Muhammad and Muhammadinsm, page 87]

          I have given sufficient evidence to prove what I said, and Logical explanations too.

          Next you said on Boycotted topic, “You have NO evidence for this – other than claims.”

          I have ample evidence from very Islamic sources to prove that, I guess you din’t cared to read the article on which you are commenting, it itself gives the references. See Ibn Hisham, Sira, vol. 1-2, p. 433 to 442, The History of Qur’anic Text, By Muhammad Mustafa Al- A’zami, Pg no- 29

          Lastly you added, “Even you too know what happens when some Kafir abuse Islam,Muhammad,Allah etc. They kill thousand”

          Another baseless claim? Examples!?”

          So you are funny too. Thanks for making me laugh, do I really need to give example. Fine take some:-

          See here, here, here, here, here and here too.

          This much evidence I had in my posts. Try googling it, you will lakhs of more such example.

          Regards

          • “So please can you elaborate what was the one religion, which all the people from different tribes of Arabia followed and had some 360 different gods.”

            It shouldn’t be ME educating you – they were loosely Henotheist.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henotheism

            – – –

            “I thought different tribes had their own God, with one supreme God.”

            Not all tribes – but they believed in multiple gods that conformed to their way of being.

            – – –

            “Even If for sake of argument I agree that they did not fight among each other because they belong to Paganism, still how you defend that, even before Muhammad there people who followed Monotheism, and no one ever boycotted or persecuted them, take for example Hanifs. I guess I don’t need to give reference to prove it. Hanifs were people who followed the religion of Ibraham, as per Islamic History, and no one from entire Quraish objected on their belief. Would you even not consider it as an evidence?”

            huh? Hanif WERE objected upon. Even the tribes fought each other. That is what they were . . . warring small tribes in comparison to major Civilisations of the time.

            – – –

            “You said they were against Jews and Christians, well then I would like to see a good evidence for that. If you want me to believe that the Pagans boycotted Jews and Christians as they boycotted and disliked Muhammad’s new religion, then it is hard for me to digest and need a strong evidence to believe it.”

            Sure – but look at the claims you make . . . Besides anti Islam sites – have you EVER bothered to learn about Islam?

            Tarikh Of Tabari – Ibn Hisham – Ibn khaldun . . . there are many history books – start reading. Then there are many books by Western historians. You seem NOT to have even read Muir.

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Migration_to_Abyssinia

            This is one place to start – The First Hijrah to Abyssinia – the Quraish had a peace treaty AFTER war with this kingdom.

            History of Yathrib is another important junction. As is History of Quraysh

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quraysh_tribe#Early_history

            – – –

            “Fine if I do need to give evidence, I’ll no issue.”

            What does THIS mean . . . ?

            And yes – you do need to give evidence for your claims.

            – – –

            “If monotheism was only problem, then I find no reason to believe QUraish were intolerant. In fact many people even much before and at the time of Muhammad himself, used to preach Monotheism, and some among them were successful too. Ali Dasti in his book, “23 Years” writes:-”

            You give this example – however Dashti answered this!

            “he call to reject idolatry and worship the one great God was thus not without precedent. What was new was urgent insistence. Mohammad’s miracle was that he unflinchingly faced all insults, harassments, and repulses, and never shrank from any step until he had imposed Islam on Arabia and brought the different Arab tribes under one flag.”

            This was the next bit . . . which shows you taking the above out of context – and if you HAD read this objectively . . . you might have got there.

            – – –

            “These evidences prove that people at the time of Muhammad used to follow Monotheism and preach too, as I gave example of Hanifs, but none were opposed by Quriash. This too proves they were tolerant. ”

            No it doesn’t . . . 1st look at the example you gave:

            “He claimed to be of the religion of Abraham, and had acquired a certain religious authority amongst the people of Yathrib, ”

            Read this again!

            Existence of Monotheism DOES NOT equal to there being tolerance or acceptance.

            What were the Arabs? Multiple Tribes. They could NOT eradicate everyone or fight everyone. Existence of something – does NOT automatically mean – there was NO conflict.

            As even Dashti pointed out. None rose to the prominence to challenge their status. And none as powerful rose – from among them – especially from the ruling class. Of course they knew monotheism. From Jews and Christians!

            – – –

            “I have given sufficient evidence to prove what I said, and Logical explanations too.”

            No you haven’t.

            As – this:

            “Now coming to some more evidence which suggests that initially the leaders of Quraish begged Muhammad to stop abusing their religion and their forefather. But he didn’t, which made Quraish angry. Read Historical Developement of Quran page 5. They very same people also suggested Muhammad to worship both the religion side by side, but he denied as per same source. On one occasion Muhammad got angry by continuous requests of Quraish and said “I come to you with slaughter” [See Keolle’s, Muhammad and Muhammadinsm, page 87]”

            It shows NOTHING but some copy and pasting. This is NOT evidence. But pretence of it. Just because the leaders went to Prophet Muhammad – so what?

            That does NOT mean no persecution.

            You are DISHONEST when presenting this book as its tone is against what you claim, for example:

            “for whom there was no powerful protector from amongst the leading members of the great Meccan families. They were cruelly tortured and imprisoned.”

            Page Seven of the book!

            – – –

            What logical explanations . . . where?

            – – –

            ““As I have suggested, that the better word would be boycotted instead of persecution. Muhammad claimed himself that he and his followers were prosecuted, but this is a big fat lie. Muhammad was boycotted, because he abused the religion of his tribe, he abused their GODS, and forefathers. ””

            Read this . . . .

            ” Muhammad claimed himself that he and his followers were prosecuted, but this is a big fat lie. ”

            You were asked about this . . . .

            You chose to reply with:

            “I have ample evidence from very Islamic sources to prove that, I guess you din’t cared to read the article on which you are commenting, it itself gives the references. See Ibn Hisham, Sira, vol. 1-2, p. 433 to 442, The History of Qur’anic Text, By Muhammad Mustafa Al- A’zami, Pg no- 29”

            Once again, unsurprisingly, you did NOT answer.

            – – –

            “So you are funny too. Thanks for making me laugh, do I really need to give example. Fine take some:-

            See here, here, here, here, here and here too.”

            Again you failed to answer. . . as you claimed:

            “Lastly you added, “Even you too know what happens when some Kafir abuse Islam,Muhammad,Allah etc. They kill thousand””

            And you give evidence of one or two cases . . . ! Where is this “thousand”

            – – –

            “This much evidence I had in my posts. Try googling it, you will lakhs of more such example.”

            No there isn’t.

            If it WAS that easy . . . you would have given it. And you could NOT manage. You have NOT read even a single book like Tarikh Tabari.

            Your baseless claims are simply based on what OTHER hate-mongers and/or anti Islam’s say. . . without research of your own.

          • Dear aminthemystic,

            Thanks for your quick reply. You said, “Not all tribes – but they believed in multiple gods that conformed to their way of being.”

            So by above statement, I can say that at least some tribes believed in their own GOD with one supreme one. Now I can understand little why Sina neglected you, its little hard to debate with you, not because of your knowledge, but because of your ignorance and childish nature, the reason why I am saying this will be explained later.

            You said, “Hanif WERE objected upon. Even the tribes fought each other. That is what they were . . . warring small tribes in comparison to major Civilisations of the time.”

            Ridiculous, bring any authentic source, or historical record which says that Quraish and other Arabian tribes objected Hanifs for their FAITH. I am stressing on something and that is faith. How many Hanifs were killed, boycotted or persecuted in hands of Quraish just for their faith? You need to bring evidence for this. Now you say, the small tribes were fighting among each other. Now I want to ask you, was that fight because of religious view? Are you having split personality?? At one place you say they all followed same religion, and by above statement, do you want me to believe that they were fighting because of their religion? At the first place you need to clear your concept. Even if they used to fight, that was not because of religion, as they all followed same religion, isn’t it??

            Next you said, “Sure – but look at the claims you make . . . Besides anti Islam sites – have you EVER bothered to learn about Islam? Tarikh Of Tabari – Ibn Hisham – Ibn khaldun . . . there are many history books – start reading. Then there are many books by Western historians. You seem NOT to have even read Muir.”

            Well are you kidding me? Why you even need to comment, if you are so sure that I have no knowledge and have never read Tarikh of Tabari, Ibn Hisham etc. Anyways I admit, I have not read Tabari, but I guess I din’t gave reference from that.. What should matter you is my reference, forget from which ever source I bring, forget whether I have copied or stolen it, forget this-that. You should either accept or deny with a reason and evidence my references. Anyways, thanks for your suggestions, but I don’t need that. Please bring an evidence for what I asked or move on. What I asked you was:-

            “You said they were against Jews and Christians, well then I would like to see a good evidence for that. If you want me to believe that the Pagans boycotted Jews and Christians as they boycotted and disliked Muhammad’s new religion, then it is hard for me to digest and need a strong evidence to believe it.”

            Now please don’t suggest me books of history, give me reference. Next you started talking about Migration to Abyssinia, and I still Imagine, from where this topic came? I think the article is about the alleged persecution of Muhammad, which led him to leave Mecca and move to Medina, why bringing topics in topics. Is this how you want to win against Sina. This is the reason I guess why he choose to neglect you.

            You gave me a link from Wikipedia about the Early History of Quraish, but forgot to read what it say at the top, let me paste it here for you,it says:-

            This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.

            I guess you must have understood, why I pasted it here.

            Next you said, “he call to reject idolatry and worship the one great God was thus not without precedent. What was new was urgent insistence. Mohammad’s miracle was that he unflinchingly faced all insults, harassments, and repulses, and never shrank from any step until he had imposed Islam on Arabia and brought the different Arab tribes under one flag.”

            This was the next bit . . . which shows you taking the above out of context – and if you HAD read this objectively . . . you might have got there.”

            Yes I read it objectively, but you missed something. So you agree that Muhammad imposed islam on Arabia as Ali Dasti suggests??

            Next you added, “He claimed to be of the religion of Abraham, and had acquired a certain religious authority amongst the people of Yathrib, ”

            Read this again!

            Existence of Monotheism DOES NOT equal to there being tolerance or acceptance.

            What were the Arabs? Multiple Tribes. They could NOT eradicate everyone or fight everyone. Existence of something – does NOT automatically mean – there was NO conflict.

            As even Dashti pointed out. None rose to the prominence to challenge their status. And none as powerful rose – from among them – especially from the ruling class. Of course they knew monotheism. From Jews and Christians!”

            I guess this is what Muhammad too claimed, even he claimed to follow the true religion of Abraham, Moses, Jesus etc. I stressed on existence of Monotheism because, this is what Muhammad brought as per Muslims. Is the concept of divinity in something different than monotheism? If not, then why didn’t the people opposed others as Muhammad? I think you must answer this. Why Hanifs were not persecuted as Muhammad was(as per Muslims).

            The simple reason why Muhammad was boycotted by his tribe and others because he abused their religion, forefathers, way of living, he was also a big threat to their source of income, this is why he was boycotted.

            Next you said, “It shows NOTHING but some copy and pasting. This is NOT evidence. But pretence of it. Just because the leaders went to Prophet Muhammad – so what? That does NOT mean no persecution.”

            Yes it does not show no persecution, but it does show that Muhammad was first begged by leaders of his tribe to drop his devastating idea. Finally when Muhammad denied to drop his idea, he and his tribe was boycotted. If you read that book with care, then you must have noticed, what Muhammad said when offered peace from Quraish, see page 5, “well give, me a word whereby Arabs may be governed and Persians subjugated” Three lines after the author writes, ” the meccans realized the danger” of Muhammad so they boycotted him, why it is so hard to understand?

            Next you said, ““for whom there was no powerful protector from amongst the leading members of the great Meccan families. They were cruelly tortured and imprisoned.” Page Seven of the book!”

            For this I will go with what Ali Sina said, they were not tortured and imprisoned because of their religion. But because the leaders owned them. How can you let your slave go with a madman, whom you have bought.

            Next you said, “Once again, unsurprisingly, you did NOT answer.”

            Who said I did not answered, I gave exact reference from Islamic sources which suggested that Muhammad was boycotted instead of persecution. Read the following from the same reference I gave above:-

            Quraish wrote a
            decree instating a boycott of the Hashim and al-Muttalib sub-clans: marriage,
            and all forms of buying and selling, between the rest of Quraish and the
            two sub-clans was completely suspended, such that not even basic provisions
            could be secured. This ruthless and devastating embargo carried on for three
            years, during which the Prophet and his clans suffered immeasurably, carving
            out a precarious existence with nothing to eat but the tough leaves of the
            sparse desert vegetation

            Next you added, “And you give evidence of one or two cases . . . ! Where is this “thousand””

            So do you want me literally to add thousands of references like this, I gave 5 recent examples of DEC 2012 and JAN 2013, just imagine, when I can have this much references in 2 months, think about a year, and then decade.

            Last comments of yours, “If it WAS that easy . . . you would have given it. And you could NOT manage. You have NOT read even a single book like Tarikh Tabari.

            Your baseless claims are simply based on what OTHER hate-mongers and/or anti Islam’s say. . . without research of your own.”

            I have already said, how does it matters to you whether I have copied or done my own research?? Does it change anything? You are here to answers to claims I guess, if you can’t then please look for another blog/site.

            Regards

          • “Now I can understand little why Sina neglected you, its little hard to debate with you, not because of your knowledge, but because of your ignorance and childish nature, the reason why I am saying this will be explained later.”

            Huh? Sina has challenged me to a debate! TWICE! And neglected? Are you in control of yourself? Why would care about Sina’s attention?

            We’ve exchanged quite a few emails and messages on his blog. . . so what are you talking about?

            “because of your ignorance and childish nature”

            You could NOT hold your temper! And became personal. As you know full well you are UNABLE to answer.

            “the reason why I am saying this will be explained later.”

            You didn’t.

            – – –

            “Ridiculous, bring any authentic source, or historical record which says that Quraish and other Arabian tribes objected Hanifs for their FAITH. ”

            Sure:

            You are losing it . . . what is ridiculous?

            You are getting angrier . . . and starting to insult – see above.

            Your attitude is changing.

            However:

            http://www.al-islam.org/restatement/3.htm

            This lists a good few sources. I have ALREADY mentioned to you – Tarikh of Tabari, Ibn Hisham. . . etc.

            What more do you want?

            – – –

            ” I am stressing on something and that is faith. How many Hanifs were killed, boycotted or persecuted in hands of Quraish just for their faith? You need to bring evidence for this. ”

            Hanfis were NOT a distinct group like Christians and Jews, but tribe members. History does NOT record exact number of their deaths. Rather general fighting between tribes – which included religion.

            Here is a good start for you:

            http://www.answering-islam.org/Books/Muir/Life1/section5.htm

            – – –

            “Now you say, the small tribes were fighting among each other. Now I want to ask you, was that fight because of religious view? Are you having split personality?? At one place you say they all followed same religion, and by above statement, do you want me to believe that they were fighting because of their religion?

            Again NOTE your increasing rudeness.

            Tribes that dominated Mecca among WHOM prophet Muhammad came WERE of one religious view. But they too were small tribes coming together to form some sort of community.

            Jews were groups of about 20 tribes. Christians were weak – but powerful in neighbouring Abysinnia.

            You need to read some books! i have named them. . . Even read likes of Muir and other Western books!

            – – –

            ” At the first place you need to clear your concept. Even if they used to fight, that was not because of religion, as they all followed same religion, isn’t it??””

            You are DELIBERATELY trying to cause confusion to argue . . . when there is NONE there.

            The smallish tribes around Mecca followed one religion. Likes of Jews didn’t. Doh! Stop creating petty arguments.

            – – –

            “Well are you kidding me? Why you even need to comment, if you are so sure that I have no knowledge and have never read Tarikh of Tabari, Ibn Hisham etc.”

            Doh! Because you are NOT awar of basics . . . you don’t know what you are talking about.

            I have pointed out – that you have ONLY read material AGAINST islam. And NOT the primary sources.

            YOU EVEN CONFIRM it.

            Then you tell me to forget – YOUR references and sources!

            That is absurd.

            – – –

            “Anyways I admit, I have not read Tabari, but I guess I din’t gave reference from that.. What should matter you is my reference, forget from which ever source I bring, forget whether I have copied or stolen it, forget this-that. You should either accept or deny with a reason and evidence my references. Anyways, thanks for your suggestions, but I don’t need that. Please bring an evidence for what I asked or move on. ”

            Then read it . . and OTHER books – to get your basics straight.

            THen you say to forget your references – BUT THAT IS ABSURD. .. it is ALL about evidence and references are way to proving your claims.

            – – –

            “Now please don’t suggest me books of history, give me reference.”

            Huh? Those BOOKS are a references . . . What else do you think references are?

            – – –

            “Now please don’t suggest me books of history, give me reference. Next you started talking about Migration to Abyssinia, and I still Imagine, from where this topic came? I think the article is about the alleged persecution of Muhammad, which led him to leave Mecca and move to Medina, why bringing topics in topics. Is this how you want to win against Sina. This is the reason I guess why he choose to neglect you.”

            Again – YOU have NO ANSWER .. . . . hence this poor, poor, poor pretence.

            I pointed OUT your dishonest from your own sources . . .

            What do you do? You ignore it . . . and pretend this.

            As for Sina – read the 1st part of this comment!

            Your own previous source pointed out – when Poor and Weak Muslims were persecuted they left for Abysinnia.

            THAT IS EVIDENCE!

            What do you do – ignore it!

            As you have NO answer.

            – – –

            “You gave me a link from Wikipedia about the Early History of Quraish, but forgot to read what it say at the top, let me paste it here for you,it says”

            Which was ONE source – and copying that is a cop out. As the chunk says “additional”

            NOT that it lack citations.

            – – –

            “Yes I read it objectively, but you missed something. So you agree that Muhammad imposed islam on Arabia as Ali Dasti suggests??”

            Doh. . . OBVIOUSLY not . . . I highlighted your absurdity and dishonesty.

            You ignored that! And NOTE – you did NOT answer.

            – – –

            “I guess this is what Muhammad too claimed, even he claimed to follow the true religion of Abraham, Moses, Jesus etc. I stressed on existence of Monotheism because, this is what Muhammad brought as per Muslims. Is the concept of divinity in something different than monotheism? If not, then why didn’t the people opposed others as Muhammad? I think you must answer this. Why Hanifs were not persecuted as Muhammad was(as per Muslims).”

            You ignored this:

            “Existence of Monotheism DOES NOT equal to there being tolerance or acceptance.”

            And could NOT answer and:

            You have IGNORED this:

            “As even Dashti pointed out. None rose to the prominence to challenge their status. And none as powerful rose – from among them – especially from the ruling class. Of course they knew monotheism. From Jews and Christians!””

            Which goes to answer you.

            Hanfis were single people – who blended in . . . and that was it. None rose to challenge the wider society! Something, which is ALREADY answered.

            ” I stressed on existence of Monotheism because, this is what Muhammad brought as per Muslims.”

            NO – Prophet Muhammad brought Islam – one single religion THAT is monotheistic.

            – – –

            “The simple reason why Muhammad was boycotted by his tribe and others because he abused their religion, forefathers, way of living, he was also a big threat to their source of income, this is why he was boycotted. ”

            Doh! Muslims were persecuted – NOT at first to Medina – BUT to Abysinnia. THen they found permanent home at Medina.

            Of course – Muslims rose to challange Idol worship!

            Doh – NO ONE is denying this – something NOT under discussion.

            And Muslims were the ones that became powerful enough – to be a threat.

            – – –

            “Next you said, “It shows NOTHING but some copy and pasting. This is NOT evidence. But pretence of it. Just because the leaders went to Prophet Muhammad – so what? That does NOT mean no persecution.”

            Yes it does not show no persecution,”

            Try reading what I wrote and your immediate response – you misread and made a mistake!

            – – –

            “Yes it does not show no persecution, but it does show that Muhammad was first begged by leaders of his tribe to drop his devastating idea. Finally when Muhammad denied to drop his idea, he and his tribe was boycotted.”

            THAT book clearly says they were persecuted!

            I even pasted the quote!

            Look at your level of dishonesty!

            – – –

            “If you read that book with care, then you must have noticed, what Muhammad said when offered peace from Quraish, see page 5, “well give, me a word whereby Arabs may be governed and Persians subjugated” Three lines after the author writes, ” the meccans realized the danger” of Muhammad so they boycotted him, why it is so hard to understand?”

            WHICH WAS NOT an offer of peace . .. .

            I have POINTED this out. . . .

            You ignored and repeated your position.

            – – –

            “For this I will go with what Ali Sina said, they were not tortured and imprisoned because of their religion. But because the leaders owned them. How can you let your slave go with a madman, whom you have bought.”

            As I pointed out – you have ONLY read such people.

            And you have NOT read a book that is PRIMARY source.

            Hence you are stuck.

            Sina himself gives no sources in his book! Other than copying Muir. What you paste is ramblings of Sina – NOTHING More.

            – – –

            “Who said I did not answered, I gave exact reference from Islamic sources which suggested that Muhammad was boycotted instead of persecution. Read the following from the same reference I gave above:-”

            I said. And you did NOT. . . what you paste NOW – Is NOW after being challenged and NOT before.

            SO I was 100% correct!!!!!

            You confirm it with your answer.

            – – –

            “Quraish wrote a
            decree instating a boycott of the Hashim and al-Muttalib sub-clans: marriage,
            and all forms of buying and selling, between the rest of Quraish and the
            two sub-clans was completely suspended, such that not even basic provisions
            could be secured. This ruthless and devastating embargo carried on for three
            years, during which the Prophet and his clans suffered immeasurably, carving
            out a precarious existence with nothing to eat but the tough leaves of the
            sparse desert vegetation”

            HUH!

            THIS IS PERSECUTION! If you READ the source . . . MANY PEOPLE DIED!

            – – –

            “So do you want me literally to add thousands of references like this, I gave 5 recent examples of DEC 2012 and JAN 2013, just imagine, when I can have this much references in 2 months, think about a year, and then decade.”

            Your words IMPLY – in one instance Muslims kill thousands . . .. WRONG!

            – – –

            “I have already said, how does it matters to you whether I have copied or done my own research?? Does it change anything? You are here to answers to claims I guess, if you can’t then please look for another blog/site. ”

            Yes – IT ABSOLUTELY changes things . . .

            Read this:

            http://exposingsina.wordpress.com/

            I have highlighted why – HOW you do research is essential.

            – – –

            “You are here to answers to claims I guess, if you can’t then please look for another blog/site.”

            Dishonest – as I have SUCCESSFULLY refuted you.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s