4 ms·
... you can say that about any historical event ever and massage it to fit your narrative. The commandment for Muslims to fight wasn't sent down till a year or
by mkaziz 10y ago
... you can say that about any historical event ever and massage it to fit your narrative.
The commandment for Muslims to fight wasn't sent down till a year or two after the emigration, so they were quite literally not allowed to fight or "subdue" or "coerce" anyone. There's a /tonne/ of evidence that the emigration was peaceful (though there were certainly subgroups opposed to it politically and ideologically). It is quite literally one of the least contentious pieces of Islamic history.
- leesalminen 10y agoBecause neither of you cited any material to substantiate your claims, I did some Googling. As someone with little bias on this topic and no prior knowledge of the "Hijrah" from Mecca to Medina, page 1 of Google for multiple queries returned both versions of the story; a peaceful one and a violent one. > It is quite literally one of the least contentious pieces of Islamic history. That doesn't appear to be true.
- mkaziz 10y agoI referred to the act of emigration and the pact of brotherhood, not the subsequent conflicts with the Jews. There was no "conquest" of Medina. Conquest implies an invading army subjugating a native population, which didn't happen because there was no army - only refugees.
- leereeves 10y agoConquer, among other definitions, means "to overcome by force; subdue". It's not limited to invading armies.
- mkaziz 10y agoConquest: https://www.google.com/search?q=conquest&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8#spf=1 https://www.google.com/search?q=conquest&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8#s... con·quest/ˈkänˌkwest/ noun the subjugation and assumption of control of a place or people by use of military force.
- leereeves 10y agoOne of many definitions. Let's run with it. Isn't that what happened in Medina? Certainly Muhammad assumed control, and any groups that didn't submit voluntarily were subjugated by military force, driven out, or simply murdered.
- mkaziz 10y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Medina https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Medina https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Medina#Rights_of_non-Muslims https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Medina#Rights_...
- leereeves 10y agoTake a look at the history of that page and the deletion of, for example, information about the "Expulsion of Banu Qaynuqa". That page shows us why Wikipedia is never a valid source. Whatever anonymous editor wins the edit war decides what the "wikitruth" is.
- leesalminen 10y agoBut did the refugees subjugate the native population? It looks like the truth could go either way.
- mkaziz 10y agoI mean, they were invited to come over and the Prophet(S) was invited to take a role of the head of state. Generally speaking most (not all) of the native Arab population (excluding the Jews) was happy about it. So in that sense, yes they were "subjugated" in that their were subject to him as head of state. It's not unlike a modern election where even if you're not happy about the result of the election, you're still subject to rules made by the new government.
- leereeves 10y agoDo we have any histories not written by Muslims confirming that they were invited or that Muhammad was voluntarily given absolute and hereditary power? As for being like a modern election, well, Trump hasn't exiled any Democrats yet.
- mkaziz 10y agoa) It wasn't hereditary. b) A bunch of ragtag Meccans came to Medina with a destitute Prophet, where there were two well armed and well established Arab tribes and three Jewish tribes. No armed conflict took place, because there is no reasonable way to assert that that would not be recorded, by both Jewish and Muslim sources.
- leereeves 10y agoa) I guess whether it was hereditary depends on whether you're Sunni or Shia. Either way, it certainly was heritable, lasting beyond Muhammad's death, to be inherited by either his cousin or his wife's father. b) Muhammad united the two Arab tribes and conquered Medina, expelling or killing the three Jewish tribes. Is that your understanding?
- leereeves 10y ago> though there were certainly subgroups opposed to it politically and ideologically What happened to those subgroups, in the version of history you learned?
- jmaygarden 10y agoThe two Jewish tribes were expelled. http://www.pbs.org/muhammad/ma_jews.shtml http://www.pbs.org/muhammad/ma_jews.shtml