Ertugrul was a Pagan
- Thread starter Vitamin_C
- Start date
Which Byzatians did not beleive he was a Muslim? The book that your X friend shared by Gibbins is saying that ALL ottoman and byzantine historians beleive he was a Muslim. Did you not read that?
Where did you get that 'The tribe of Ertughral never accepted' Islam ? From the same book I suppose but the author never qualifies it. I thought you had read all the works on the subject before making such a claim?
JusticeLover
Minister (2k+ posts)
There are couple of facts which prove that western historian are wrong , let me tell you one
Ertugrul is buried near abdul rehman alp , abdul rehman is a pure islam name who fought wars with him.
Ertugrul came after suljuks , suljuks are proven Muslims. One or 2 books references cannot negate these facts.
Go back and read the page of the book shared in the video. Man what kind of imbeciles we have to deal with!
مشک آں است کہ خود بگوئید نہ آں کہ عطار بگوئی
تمہیں کیسے یہ زعم پیدا ہو گیا ہے کہ پاکستان میں ایک تم ہی عقلمند ہو اور باقی کے ایک کم بائیس کڑور بیوقوف ہیں اگر ترکوں کے پاس ارطغرل کا ہسٹوریکل ریکارڈ موجود نہیں ہے تو گوروں کی ہسٹری بھی فیک ہے کچھ عقل نوں ہتھ پا پتر وٹامن سی باقی ڈرامہ سچا ہے یا جھوٹا اس نے جو مقصد حاصل کرنا تھا کر لیا ہے اب ٹکریں مارنے سے کیا فائدہ سعودی یہ بازی ہار چکے ہیں بتا دو انہیں
Vitamin_C
Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
I think either you are liar or you have limited comprehension of English.
What we learn from the excerpt from the book is this:
1. Osman was a Muslim and,
2. The people that Osman ruled over in his empire were Muslims and of Muslim ancestory
3. Osman was not always a Muslim and his tribe was not always Muslim. Osman only became Muslim after his tribe settled in Sugut where they served the Sultanate of Rum.
4. There is no historical record of Osman's tribe converting to Islam.
5. The tribes of later migrations for example the Kayi tribe of Gunduz Alp (Father of Ertugrul) never came under influence of Islam
"That Osman and his people were good Muslims themselves, and of Muslim ancestory, is not questioned by Ottoman and Byzantine writers, and seems to have been accepted as a matter of fact by European historians who have written upon the history of the Ottoman Empire. But it is very clear that Osman and his tribe, when they settled in Sugut, must have been pagans. There is no direct mention, in any historical records, of the conversion to Islam, of the tribes from Khorassan and other Transoxanian regions which, in the beginning of the thirteenth century, appeared on the confines of Asia Minor."
It later goes on to say:
"But the Turks of later immigration, from whom Osman sprang, had never come to any great extent under the influence of Islam"
Yes Ertugrul's fathers name was Gunduz Alp and not Sulaiman Shah. We know this because we found coins from the times of Osman's rule that say this: "Osman bin Ertugrul bin Gunduz Alp"
The real Sulaiman Shah of the Seljuk Empire was a completely different person who lived many centuries before Gunduz Alp had nothing to do with the Kayi tribe. Another Bongi of fictional Ertugrul drama.
What we learn from the excerpt from the book is this:
1. Osman was a Muslim and,
2. The people that Osman ruled over in his empire were Muslims and of Muslim ancestory
3. Osman was not always a Muslim and his tribe was not always Muslim. Osman only became Muslim after his tribe settled in Sugut where they served the Sultanate of Rum.
4. There is no historical record of Osman's tribe converting to Islam.
5. The tribes of later migrations for example the Kayi tribe of Gunduz Alp (Father of Ertugrul) never came under influence of Islam
"That Osman and his people were good Muslims themselves, and of Muslim ancestory, is not questioned by Ottoman and Byzantine writers, and seems to have been accepted as a matter of fact by European historians who have written upon the history of the Ottoman Empire. But it is very clear that Osman and his tribe, when they settled in Sugut, must have been pagans. There is no direct mention, in any historical records, of the conversion to Islam, of the tribes from Khorassan and other Transoxanian regions which, in the beginning of the thirteenth century, appeared on the confines of Asia Minor."
It later goes on to say:
"But the Turks of later immigration, from whom Osman sprang, had never come to any great extent under the influence of Islam"
Yes Ertugrul's fathers name was Gunduz Alp and not Sulaiman Shah. We know this because we found coins from the times of Osman's rule that say this: "Osman bin Ertugrul bin Gunduz Alp"
The real Sulaiman Shah of the Seljuk Empire was a completely different person who lived many centuries before Gunduz Alp had nothing to do with the Kayi tribe. Another Bongi of fictional Ertugrul drama.
Last edited:
Vitamin_C
Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
If you think I am wrong, show me how with evidence. Otherwise if you want to live in your fantasy world then go ahead.
Even the Turkish critics of the book that I quoted agree with the historicity of the origins of Ottoman empire as written by author of that book.
Even the Turkish critics of the book that I quoted agree with the historicity of the origins of Ottoman empire as written by author of that book.
Vitamin_C
Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
That doesnt conflict with anything that the book says.
1. Yes it is entirely possible that Ertugrul was pagan when he arrived at Sogut but may have converted to Islam before he died at Sogut in 1280 AD. We do not know but it is a possibility and it doesnt conflict with the pagan background of Ertugrul and his tribe
2. The tomb of Ertugural was made by Osman, but this tomb was construct reconstructed many times. I am sure it is still Ertugrul's tomb since Ottoman empire ruled until 20th century so no one could have destroyed Ertugrul's tomb.
3. I have no clue who is Abdul Rehman Alp could you quote a history book that mentions him? And even if that was his name, it is entirely possible that he changed his name after arrival at Sogut when Kayi tribe started serving Sultanate of Rum at Sogut, which does not conflict with the book that I am quoting. That also raises a question, why didnt everyone else have Muslim names in that tribe?
4. Ertugruls tribe didn't come after Seljuks, it came because of the marauding Mongols. Many Turk tribes that came to Anatolia after Seljuks for not Muslims. They didnt leave central Asia because of religion but because of other reasons. Seljuks are a different story, they had been in contact with Muslim for long time before they went to Anatolia, but the Kayi tribe came centuries after Seljuks, if it was because of Islam why did they wait 500 years before joining the Seljuks?
1. Yes it is entirely possible that Ertugrul was pagan when he arrived at Sogut but may have converted to Islam before he died at Sogut in 1280 AD. We do not know but it is a possibility and it doesnt conflict with the pagan background of Ertugrul and his tribe
2. The tomb of Ertugural was made by Osman, but this tomb was construct reconstructed many times. I am sure it is still Ertugrul's tomb since Ottoman empire ruled until 20th century so no one could have destroyed Ertugrul's tomb.
3. I have no clue who is Abdul Rehman Alp could you quote a history book that mentions him? And even if that was his name, it is entirely possible that he changed his name after arrival at Sogut when Kayi tribe started serving Sultanate of Rum at Sogut, which does not conflict with the book that I am quoting. That also raises a question, why didnt everyone else have Muslim names in that tribe?
4. Ertugruls tribe didn't come after Seljuks, it came because of the marauding Mongols. Many Turk tribes that came to Anatolia after Seljuks for not Muslims. They didnt leave central Asia because of religion but because of other reasons. Seljuks are a different story, they had been in contact with Muslim for long time before they went to Anatolia, but the Kayi tribe came centuries after Seljuks, if it was because of Islam why did they wait 500 years before joining the Seljuks?
I don't think you are reading what I write - The author claims Ertughrul was not a Muslim But tells us that All Ottoman and Byzantian historians accept that He was a Muslim:
"Osman and his people were good Muslims themselves, and of Muslim ancestory, is not questioned by Ottoman and Byzantine writers"
Now Gibbons is an American historian from early 20th century. He has tried to build a case but on weak grounds. Also He would not have access to the historical sites such as graves, mousoleums and other archeological remain. Now you could have started this thread yourself (instead of video by the lanaati) saying that there is an alternate view on this, but no, you saw this video and started jumping up and down with excitement to upload it with a claim. This shows that you are not only an atheist but also a lier. Turks and Muslims agree with the historical record and consider Ertughrul to be a Muslim rejecting Gibbons. End of story !
میں تو اس پہ بحث ہی نہیں کر رہا کہ ارطغرل مسلمان تھا میں تو تمہیں بار بار یہ کہہ رہاہوں کہ قطع نظر اسکے کہ وہ مسلمان تھا یا نہیں ہمیں اسکے کارناموں پہ فخر ہے وہ ایک جیتا جاگتا انسان تھا جس نے سلطنت عثمانیہ کی راہ ہموار کی اس سے کیا فرق پڑتا ہے کہ وہ مسلمان نہیں تھا اب اسکا معاملہ اللہ کے ساتھ ہے باقی جہاں تک میں سمجھ سکا ہوں تم سعودیوں کی زبان بول رہے ہو اور انہیں اس ڈرامے سے مسئلہ ہے اور تم بھی نہیں چاہتے کہ آجکی نوجوان مسلمان نسل اپنے شاندار اور قابل فخر ماضی سے آگاہ ہو یہ جتنا بے خبر ہونگے اتنا ہی انکے لئے مرزے کے فالوورز کو قبول کرنا آسان ہوگا میں تم پہ کوئی پرسنل اٹیک نہیں کر رہا صرف اس ساری بحث کے پیچھے چھپے ایجنڈے کو کھول رہا ہوں اگر ڈرامے میں حقیقت نہیں بھی ہے تو پھر بھی یہ ایک زبردست ڈرامہ ہے جس نے سعودیوں کی چیخیں نکال دی ہیں اور انکے ساتھ ساتھ ترکوں کے سب دشمن درد زہ میں مبتلا ہو چکے ہیں
Vitamin_C
Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
Vitamin_C
Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
At first I gave you benefit of doubt because I thought maybe you lack comprehension in English.
But now I can see that you are a liar and dishonest person.
Gibbons was a well traveled scholar who had traveled to the Ottoman empire and had access to all those graves and evidence. He is also one of few Europeans who was first hand eye witness to the Greek and Armenian Genocide in Ottoman empire. (Which means he was present physically in Ottoman Empire when those events happened)
Man what a dishonest bongi person you are.
According to the New York Times, "the career of Dr. Gibbons was one of high adventure. He traveled to remote corners of the world to gain first hand information on the life, religions and political conditions in Asiatic and African territories."
From New York Times, August 8th, 1934.
I am reading books even from the Western and Eastern critics of Gibbon's work but even they agree that his accounts of events before Ottoman empire's are reliable.
Read from page 34, it documents the events before Ottoman Empire, it was written by Turkish writers and even though he is a critic, he agrees with much of what Gibbons has to say about prehistory of Ottomans.
Even Turkish historians agree with Gibbons but you are the only rascal here who openly lies and twists historical information using your personal intuition.
But now I can see that you are a liar and dishonest person.
Gibbons was a well traveled scholar who had traveled to the Ottoman empire and had access to all those graves and evidence. He is also one of few Europeans who was first hand eye witness to the Greek and Armenian Genocide in Ottoman empire. (Which means he was present physically in Ottoman Empire when those events happened)
Man what a dishonest bongi person you are.
According to the New York Times, "the career of Dr. Gibbons was one of high adventure. He traveled to remote corners of the world to gain first hand information on the life, religions and political conditions in Asiatic and African territories."
From New York Times, August 8th, 1934.
I am reading books even from the Western and Eastern critics of Gibbon's work but even they agree that his accounts of events before Ottoman empire's are reliable.
Ottoman History - Misperceptions and Truths
This book was first published in Turkish under the title Bilinmeyen Osmanlı, co-authored by Prof. Dr. Said Öztürk, and 250,000 copies were printed. I answered 290 questions whereas Öztürk answered 13 in total. He collaborated regarding source details and references as well as tirelessly...
books.google.se
Read from page 34, it documents the events before Ottoman Empire, it was written by Turkish writers and even though he is a critic, he agrees with much of what Gibbons has to say about prehistory of Ottomans.
Even Turkish historians agree with Gibbons but you are the only rascal here who openly lies and twists historical information using your personal intuition.
Last edited:
Osman and his people were good Muslims themselves, and of Muslim ancestory,
This is getting silly now. Do you want me to translate ancestory for you if you don't have access to a dictionary ?
Last edited:
JusticeLover
Minister (2k+ posts)
All these are proof that he was muslim more ever his father name was suliman shah.
Islam permits every name which don't have shirk.
You have no proof that he was pagan. All you are saying is probably where was whole world says he is Muslim except few mulaon mulhids.
At first I gave you benefit of doubt because I thought maybe you lack comprehension in English.
But now I can see that you are a liar and dishonest person.
Gibbons was a well traveled scholar who had traveled to the Ottoman empire and had access to all those graves and evidence. He is also one of few Europeans who was first hand eye witness to the Greek and Armenian Genocide in Ottoman empire. (Which means he was present physically in Ottoman Empire when those events happened)
Man what a dishonest bongi person you are.
According to the New York Times, "the career of Dr. Gibbons was one of high adventure. He traveled to remote corners of the world to gain first hand information on the life, religions and political conditions in Asiatic and African territories."
From New York Times, August 8th, 1934.
I am reading books even from the Western and Eastern critics of Gibbon's work but even they agree that his accounts of events before Ottoman empire's are reliable.
Ottoman History - Misperceptions and Truths
This book was first published in Turkish under the title Bilinmeyen Osmanlı, co-authored by Prof. Dr. Said Öztürk, and 250,000 copies were printed. I answered 290 questions whereas Öztürk answered 13 in total. He collaborated regarding source details and references as well as tirelessly...books.google.se
Read from page 34, it documents the events before Ottoman Empire, it was written by Turkish writers and even though he is a critic, he agrees with much of what Gibbons has to say about prehistory of Ottomans.
Even Turkish historians agree with Gibbons but you are the only rascal here who openly lies and twists historical information using your personal intuition.
Now this is getting seriously absurd. I have concluded two things: Ertughrul was a Muslim and you are full of shit. I have no more time for this nonsense as I have a life. Good bye !
Vitamin_C
Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
Vitamin_C
Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
You can conclude what you want but all your clothes are off and your filthy lies exposed in-front of everyone. Don't be a dishonest liar if you do not want be humiliated like this in-front of everyone. Its not about religion or non-religion, every person should act and debate honestly and in a decent manner.
Vitamin_C
Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
"That Osman and his people were good Muslims themselves, and of Muslim ancestory, is not questioned by Ottoman and Byzantine writers, and seems to have been accepted as a matter of fact by European historians who have written upon the history of the Ottoman Empire. But it is very clear that Osman and his tribe, when they settled in Sugut, must have been pagans.
Again your dishonesty got caught. Twisting quotes out of context. Read the rest of the paragraph and you get the context of what he is talking about.
Again your dishonesty got caught. Twisting quotes out of context. Read the rest of the paragraph and you get the context of what he is talking about.
You are arguing for the sake of argument. Ok, if we believe as you are saying that Ertugrul was not a Muslim, then still he deserves our respect as he bore such a great son who Allah SWT choose to spread Islam and he founded the Islamic empire.
Sometimes Allah SWT makes pagans do his work e.g. Allah turned mongols who accepted Islam and they fought their own kins for the sake of Islam.
In a nut shell, we respect him because he was the father of a great person.
Vitamin_C
Chief Minister (5k+ posts)
I never said do not respect him. All I am saying is that the drama is no where close to reality but most Pakistanis do not understand that we have no written history of Ertugrul, he may have converted to Islam later but creating a drama that details his life is nothing more than fiction.
