Tässä on maailmanhistorian parhaan kenraalin Khalid ibn al Walidin, "Jumalan miekan" englanninkielinen elämänkerta. Khalid johti yli sataa taistelua elämänsä aikana usein monikymmenkertaista ylivoimaa vastaan häviämättä kuitenkaan kertaakaan. Khalid oli myös avainasemassa kahden sen hetkisen suurvallan - Bysantin ja Persian tuhossa.
Loppujen lopuksi kalifin piti erottaa Khalid kenraalin paikalta, sillä hän pelkäsi ihmisten ihannoinnin Khalidia kohtaan saavan sopimattomia mittasuhteita, sillä minne ikinä ja ketä tahansa vastaan Khalid lähetettiin hänen armeijansa selvisi voittajana ja siksi Khalid siirrettiin eläkkeelle, että muslimit näkisivät että menestys tulee Jumalalta eikä vain yhdeltä mieheltä.
Kirjan kirjoitti pakistanilainen kenraali paneutuen aiheeseen luotettavien historiankirjojen pohjalta.
http://www.swordofallah.com/
Loppujen lopuksi kalifin piti erottaa Khalid kenraalin paikalta, sillä hän pelkäsi ihmisten ihannoinnin Khalidia kohtaan saavan sopimattomia mittasuhteita, sillä minne ikinä ja ketä tahansa vastaan Khalid lähetettiin hänen armeijansa selvisi voittajana ja siksi Khalid siirrettiin eläkkeelle, että muslimit näkisivät että menestys tulee Jumalalta eikä vain yhdeltä mieheltä.
Kirjan kirjoitti pakistanilainen kenraali paneutuen aiheeseen luotettavien historiankirjojen pohjalta.
http://www.swordofallah.com/
Vastaukset 7
Vanhimmat
tuosta barbaarista vaarallisena esimerkkinä.
http://keskustelu.suomi24.fi/servlets/search?start=0&advanced=1&all_words=khalid&some_words=&exclude_words=&exact_words=&conference=islam&poster=Jake Waits&sort=relevance&search_interval=fixed_interval&fixed_interval_time=0&sd=01&sm=01&sy=2007&ed=31&em=8&ey=2007&hpp=25
Millä perusteella Khalid on sinusta barbaarinen?
On aina ilo muistuttaa tästä!
"Kun Allah sitten oli antanut heille voiton, Khaled lähetti joukkoja kokoamaan vankeja ja ohjeisti muslimeita tappamaan ainoastaan ne, jotka eivät alistuneet. Kun muslimit olivat vanginneet ja alistaneet persialaiset, heidät tuotiin joelle ja teloitettiin hakkaamalla pää poikki. Muslimit jatkoivat tätä kolme päivää, kunnes he olivat tappaneet 70 000."
(ﻦﺑﻻ ﺔﻳﺎﻬﻨﻟﺍﻭ ﺔﻳﺍﺪﺒﻟﺍ ـ ﺎﺿﺭ ﺪﻴﺷﺭ ﺪﻤﺤﻤﻟ ﻖﻳﺪﺼﻟﺍ ﺮﻜﺑ ﻮﺑﺃ ﺙﺪﺤﻤﻟﺍ ﺞﻣﺎﻧﺮﺑ ﻦﻋ ـﺓﺮﺠﻬﻟﺍ ﻦﻣ 12 ﺔﻨﺳ ﺮﻛﺫ ﻲﻓ ﺮﻴﺜﻛ)
(Abu Bakr – By Muhammad Rashid Rida – “Muhaddith Program”[2] – And Bedaya wa nehaya –Ibn Katheer – In the mention of year 12 of Hijrah “Muhaddith”)
kyse oli sodasta ja tapetut olivat vihollistaistelijoita. he eivät tulleet paikalle tarjoamaan kukkasia vastapuolelle. ja kuten totesit, kaikkia vankeja ei tapettu vaan ainoastaan ne jotka eivät alistuneet.
sota on sotaa.
"sota on sotaa."
Hauska tietää, miten islamin mukaan sotavankeja tulee kohdella: pää poikki.
Abu Chraibissa sentään oli vain ihmispyramidileikkejä.
During the battle with the Persians Khaled said: “O Allah, if you give us victory over them, I swear I won’t leave one of them alive and I will run their river with their blood.”
70.000 sotavangin pää poikki kolmessa päivässä...
Yhdessä ihmisessä on noin 5 litraa verta.
5 x 70.000 = 350.000 litraa verta.
On siinä mahtanut olla joki iraanien verestä sakeana.
"kaikkia vankeja ei tapettu vaan ainoastaan ne jotka eivät alistuneet.
sota on sotaa."
Vai sellaista sotaa...
mitä mieltä olet sitten roomalaisista ja persialaisista? heidän tekonsa sodissa yleisesti ei jäänyt jälkeen tälläisistä teoista. hekin olivat mielestäsi barbaareja? muslimeja vastaan he eivät vaan saaneet mahdollisuutta tehdä näin suuressa mittakaavassa, sillä he olivat aina alakynnessä. roomalaiset yrittivät myös tuhota islamin jo aivan sen alkuaikoina, mutta yllättyivät miten mu'tahissa käydyssä taistelussa 3000 muslimia pystyivät antamaan todella kovan vastuksen 200 000 roomalaissotilaalle.
Bysantin kuningas Herakleios tiesi että Muhammad oli profeetta. Tässä mitä Quraishin johtaja ja islamin pahin vihollinen siihen aikaan, Abu Sufian kertoi heidän välillään käydystä keskustelusta:
Abu Sufyân bin Harb informed me that Heraclius had sent a messenger to him while he had been accompanying a caravan from Quraish. They were merchants doing business in Sham (Syria, Palestine, Lebanon, and Jordan), at the time when Allâh's Apostle had truce with Abu Sufyân and Quraish infidels. So Abu Sufyân and his companions went to Heraclius at Ilya (Jerusalem). Heraclius called them in the court and he had all the senior Roman dignitaries around him. He called for his translator who, translating Heraclius's question said to them, "Who amongst you is closely related to that man who claims to be a Prophet?" Abu Sufyân replied, "I am the nearest relative to him (amongst the group)."
Heraclius said, "Bring him (Abu Sufyân) close to me and make his companions stand behind him." Abu Sufyân added, Heraclius told his translator to tell my companions that he wanted to put some questions to me regarding that man (The Prophet) and that if I told a lie they (my companions) should contradict me." Abu Sufyân added, "By Allâh! Had I not been afraid of my companions labelling me a liar, I would not have spoken the truth about the Prophet. The first question he asked me about him was:
'What is his family status amongst you?' I replied, 'He belongs to a good (noble) family amongst us.' Heraclius further asked, 'Has anybody amongst you ever claimed the same (i.e. to be a Prophet) before him?' I replied, 'No.' He said, 'Was anybody amongst his ancestors a king?' I replied, 'No.' Heraclius asked, 'Do the nobles or the poor follow him?' I replied, 'It is the poor who follow him.' He said, 'Are his followers increasing decreasing (day by day)?' I replied, 'They are increasing.' He then asked, 'Does anybody amongst those who embrace his religion become displeased and renounce the religion afterwards?' I replied, 'No.' Heraclius said, 'Have you ever accused him of telling lies before his claim (to be a Prophet)?' I replied, 'No.' Heraclius said, 'Does he break his promises?' I replied, 'No. We are at truce with him but we do not know what he will do in it.' I could not find opportunity to say anything against him except that. Heraclius asked, 'Have you ever had a war with him?' I replied, 'Yes.' Then he said, 'What was the outcome of the battles?'I replied, 'Sometimes he was victorious and sometimes we.' Heraclius said, 'What does he order you to do?' I said, 'He tells us to worship Allâh and Allâh alone and not to worship anything along with Him, and to renounce all that our ancestors had said. He orders us to pray, to speak the truth, to be chaste and to keep good relations with our kith and kin.' Heraclius asked the translator to convey to me the following, I asked you about his family and your reply was that he belonged to a very noble family. In fact all the Apostles come from noble families amongst their respective peoples. I questioned you whether anybody else amongst you claimed such a thing, your reply was in the negative. If the answer had been in the affirmative, I would have thought that this man was following the previous man's statement. Then I asked you whether anyone of his ancestors was a king. Your reply was in the negative, and if it had been in the affirmative, I would have thought that this man wanted to take back his ancestral kingdom.I further asked whether he was ever accused of telling lies before he said what he said, and your reply was in the negative. So I wondered how a person who does not tell a lie about others could ever tell a lie about Allâh. I, then asked you whether the rich people followed him or the poor. You replied that it was the poor who followed him. And in fact all the Apostle have been followed by this very class of people. Then I asked you whether his followers were increasing or decreasing. You replied that they were increasing, and in fact this is the way of true faith, till it is complete in all respects. I further asked you whether there was anybody, who, after embracing his religion, became displeased and discarded his religion. Your reply was in the negative, and in fact this is (the sign of) true faith, when its delight enters the hearts and mixes with them completely. I asked you whether he had ever betrayed. You replied in the negative and likewise the Apostles never betray. Then I asked you what he ordered you to do. You replied that he ordered you to worship Allâh and Allâh alone and not to worship any thing along with Him and forbade you to worship idols and ordered you to pray, to speak the truth and to be chaste. If what you have said is true, he will very soon occupy this place underneath my feet and I knew it (from the scriptures) that he was going to appear but I did not know that he would be from you, and if I could reach him definitely, I would go immediately to meet him and if I were with him, I would certainly wash his feet.' Heraclius then asked for the letter addressed by Allâh's Apostle which was delivered by Dihya to the Governor of Busra, who forwarded it to Heraclius to read. The contents of the letter were as follows: "In the name of Allâh the Beneficent, the Merciful (This letter is) from Muhammad the slave of Allâh and His Apostle to Heraclius the ruler of Byzantine. Peace be upon him, who follows the right path. Furthermore I invite you to Islâm, and if you become a Muslim you will be safe, and Allâh will double your reward, and if you reject this invitation of Islâm you will be committing a sin by misguiding your Arisiyin (peasants). (And I recite to you Allâh's Statement:) O people of the scripture! Come to a word common to you and us that we worship none but Allâh and that we associate nothing in worship with Him, and that none of us shall take others as Lords beside Allâh. Then, if they turn away, say: Bear witness that we are Muslims (those who have surrendered to Allâh)”. (3.64).
Abu Sufyân then added, "When Heraclius had finished his speech and had read the letter, there was a great hue and cry in the Royal Court. So we were turned out of the court. I told my companions that the question of Ibn-Abi-Kabsha (the Prophet Muhammad) has become so prominent that even the King of Bani Al-Asfar (Byzantine) is afraid of him. Then I started to become sure that he (the Prophet) would be the conqueror in the near future till I embraced Islâm”.