Assalaamu alaikum [peace be to you],
This article is part of a series of Articles about what famous non-Muslims said about the prophet Mohammed -peace be upon him-.
The Muslims were also the masters of India for a thousand years, but eventually when the sub-continent received independence in 1947, the Hindus obtained three-quarters of the country and the Muslims the balance of the one-quarter. Why? Because the Muslims did not force Islam down the Hindus' throat! In Spain and in India, the Muslims were no paragons of virtue, yet they obeyed the Qur'anic injunction to the letter -
لَا إِكْرَاهَ فِي الدِّينِ ۖ قَد تَّبَيَّنَ الرُّشْدُ مِنَ الْغَيِّ
Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Errorfrom translation of 2:256
The Muslim conquerors understood from this command that "compulsion" was incompatible with true religion: because
Religion depends on faith and will, and these would be meaningless if induced by force. Force can conquer but cannot
Truth and Error have been so clearly shown up by the Mercy of God that there should be no doubt in the minds of any person of goodwill as to the fundamentals of faith.
God's protection is continuous and His Plan is always to lead us from the depths of darkness into the clearest light.
Except for some eccentrics here and there, the Muslims as a whole adhered to the commandment of God in the lands over which they held sway.
But what can the enemy say about countries where no single Muslim soldier had set foot?
INDONESIA: It is a fact that over a hundred million Indonesians are Muslim, yet no conquering Muslim army ever landed on any of its over two thousand islands.
MALAYSIA: The overwhelming number of its people in this
country are Muslims yet no Muslim soldier had landed there
AFRICA: The majority of the people on the East coast of Africa as far down as Mozambique, as well as the bulk of the
inhabitants on the West coast of the continent are Muslims, but history does not record any invading hoards of Muslims from anywhere.
What sword? Where was the sword? The Muslim trader did the job. His good conduct and moral rectitude achieved the miracle of conversion.
"All what you say seems incontrovertible" says the controversialist, "but we are talking about Islam at its very beginning, the way in which your prophet converted the pagans to his faith! How did he do it if not with the sword?" ONE AGAINST ALL?
We can do no better than to allow Thomas Carlyle himself to defend his Hero Prophet against this false charge; - - -The sword indeed; but where will you get your sword! Every new opinion, at its starting, is precisely in a minority of one. In one man's head alone, there it dwells as yet. One man alone of the whole world believes it; there is one man against all men. that he takes a sword, and try to propagate with that, will do little for him. you must first get your sword! on the whole, a thing will propagate itself as it can. we do not find, of the Christian religion either, that it always disdained the sword, when once it had got one. Charlemagne's conversion of the Saxons was not by preaching."Heroes and Hero-Worship, p. 80
The enemy, the sceptic, the missionary and their passive camp followers will not stop bleating that "Islam was spread at the point of the sword!" but they will not venture to answer our question - - "WHO BRIBED CARLYLE!?" In 1840 when Carlyle defended Muhummed (pbuh) and refuted the allegation about the sword, there was nobody around to bribe. The whole Muslim world was in the gutters. The countries of Islam were all under subjugation by the Christians, except for a few like - Persia, Afghanistan and Turkey who were only nominally independent. There were no riches to flaunt and no petrodollars to bribe with! VERDICT OF NON-MUSLIM ORIENTALS
Almost all the defenders of Muhummed (pbuh) who spoke out against the false theory that he spread his religion at the point of the sword, were Westerners. Let us now hear what some non-Muslim Easterners have to say on the subject:"The more I study the more I discover that the strength of Islam does not lie in the sword."
and"I become more than ever convinced that it was not the sword that won a place for Islam in those days. It was the rigid simplicity, the utter self-effacement of the Prophet, the scrupulous regard for pledges, his intense devotion to his friends and followers and his intrepidity, his fearlessness, his absolute trust in God and in his own mission. These and not the sword carried everything before them and surmounted every obstacle”.Mahatma Gandhi - the father of modern India, in "Young India."They (Muhummed's critics) see fire instead of light, ugliness instead of good. they distort and present every good quality as a great vice. it reflects their own depravity... The critics are blind. They cannot see that the only 'sword' Muhammad wielded was the sword of Mercy, compassion, friendship and forgiveness - the sword that conquers enemies and purifies their hearts. his sword was sharper than the sword of steel."Pandit Gyanandra Dev Sharma Shastri, at a meeting in Gorakhpur (India). 1928He preferred migration to fighting his own people, but when oppression went beyond the pale of tolerance, he took up his sword in self-defence. Those who believe religion can be spread by force are fools who neither know the ways of religion nor the ways of the world. they are proud of this belief because they are a long, long way away from the truth."A Sikh journalist in "Nawan Hindustan," Delhi, 17 November 1947.
It was Rudyard Kipling who said, "East is East and West is West, never the twain shall meet!"
He was wrong! In the defence of Muhummed -peace be upon him-, all, who are not blinded by prejudice will converge.
to be continued in part 7:
from "Muhammad the greatest" by Ahmed Deedat.you can download the PDF ebook from [link]
if I am right, it's from the God. if I am wrong, it's from myself.