islamic-jihad-legacy-of-forced-conversion-imperialism-slavery

Propagation of Islam: By Force or Peacefully?No matter how much we suffer and elect to remain at peace with them, they stir up strife andsedition, as David predicted, ‘I am all peace, but when I speak, they are for war’ (Psalms 120:7).If, therefore, we start trouble and claim power from them absurdly and preposterously wecertainly give ourselves up to destruction.HOW SO MANY HINDUS SURVIVED IN INDIA?Naik applies a different ploy to refute the allegation that Islam was propagated through violence. He countersit by arguing that if Islam was spread by the sword, there could not have survived so many non-Muslims inIndia and the Middle East. He writes:Overall, the Muslims ruled Arabia for 1400 years. Yet today, there are 14 million Arabs who areCoptic Christians, i.e. Christians since generations. If the Muslims had used the sword therewould not have been a single Arab who would have remained a Christian.The Muslims ruled India for about a thousand years. If they wanted, they had the power ofconverting each and every non-Muslim of India to Islam. Today more than 80% of the people ofIndia are non-Muslims. All these non-Muslim Indians are bearing witness today that Islam wasnot spread by the sword.Al-Qaradawi counters Naik in claiming that sword was applied to create the atmosphere for spreading theuniversal message of Islam:…the sword may conquer lands and occupy states, it will never be able to open hearts andinculcate faith in people. The spread of Islam only occurred after a while, after the barriersbetween the common people of these countries and Islam were removed. At this point, they wereable to consider Islam within a peaceful atmosphere, away from the disturbance of war and thebattlefields. Thus, non-Muslims were able to witness the excellent morals of the Muslims...Dr Fazlur Rahman, a renowned Islamic scholar, who had to flee Pakistan and take refuge in the United Statesfor his allegedly moderate views on Islam, also agrees with al-Qaradawi. Rahman asserts that ‘Jihad (by thesword) becomes an absolute necessity’ for instituting the religio-social world-order underlined in the Quran.He asks: ‘How can such an ideological world order be brought into existence without such means?’ Quitepuzzlingly, he then blasts what he calls Christian propaganda for popularizing the slogan that ‘Islam wasspread by the sword’ or ‘Islam is a religion of the sword.’ He, however, candidly agrees that the sword camefirst in creating a conducive environment before Islam could be propagated. He writes, ‘…what was spread bythe sword was not the religion of Islam, but the political domain of Islam so that Islam could work to producethe order on the earth that the Quran seeks... But one can never say that Islam was spread by the sword.’ 158On the question of Jihad, Abdel Khalek Hassouna, the Secretary General of the Arab League (1952-71), similarly said in interview (1968) that ‘Islam was not imposed by the sword as its enemies claim. Peoplewere converted to Islam by their own choice because the life it promised them was better than their previouslife. Muslims invaded other countries to ensure that the Call (to Islam) would reach the masseseverywhere.’ 159These renowned Muslim scholars had set out to refute the allegation that Islam was spread by thesword. In the process, they have inadvertently agreed that the sword had indeed played the pivotal role in thepropagation of Islam. If analyzed carefully, their statements clearly affirm that the sword was the primary158. Sharma, p. 125159. Waddy C (1976) The Muslim Mind, Longman Group Ltd., London, p. 18768