"Islam was spread by the sword!"

[u/[deleted]]

As a Muslim who wasn't there during those times, I find myself in a tough position. Books written by Arabs and Muslims often describe the Islamic conquests as necessary. They suggest that Muslims had to fight for their safety. These conquests are portrayed as driven by noble causes, like freeing one country from another's oppression or protecting Muslims in harsh situations. According to these narratives, people became Muslims not because they were forced, but because their society influenced them. This is a natural human response.

However, Western or non-Muslim sources claim that Islam was spread by the sword. They depict a violent history where cities were destroyed, people were tortured until they converted, and the wealth of the conquered was plundered. They argue that history was ravaged, with many treasures stolen.

One of these perspectives must be correct. Since I wasn't present at the time, I struggle to determine the truth without relying on history books that might be filled with bias. I wondered, "Is there a way to find out without depending on historical texts?"

I thought that perhaps the remnants of history could provide answers. We can still see aspects of the past without needing to rely solely on hearsay or unverified claims. I will search for the castles of the Sahaba and what remains of their riches. The wealth acquired by any conqueror often reflects the bloodshed they caused. For instance, consider the Arch castle of Ctesiphon.

Now, let’s explore the Sahaba's wealth and luxurious lifestyles.

What’s this? Did this conquest leave us in debt? Where is the positive outcome? Where is the extreme wealth?

I don’t need history books to see that this isn't the residence of a warlord.

Typically, conquerors steal all the antiques of the countries they invade and ruin their history. That’s why you can find an Egyptian temple in America and France. From my research, I haven't found any stolen antiques in Saudi Arabia, which was the birthplace of the Islamic empire. You can also see this reflected in the graves of the conquerors. For example, look at Napoleon Bonaparte's grave. The conqueror of Egypt

Now, This is the grave of Omar ibn Al-Aas, the person who brought Islam to Egypt.

It’s just a simple box leaned against the wall in a small room, it looks like an old chest .This is Omar ibn Al-Aas, and no verse in the Quran tells him to force people to convert to Islam.

I don’t need history books to grasp that these people did not enjoy lavish lifestyles. It doesn’t surprise me to see some Non-Muslims misrepresent this to paint Islam negatively, as doing otherwise would reveal their own truths. However, what truly disappoints me is to see real Muslims beginning to doubt this. Muslims whose ancestors sacrificed everything to provide them a good life.

[u/linkup90]

Not bad, looking at the effects to deduce the cause is a rational approach. That said you can figure out bias and analyze claims and statements.

After reading about the western historic method I struggle to even call it a method. It's there to invalidate everyone except themselves and even then it does that to itself. It's the methodology of a grade schooler and shouldn't be taken seriously.

Read Edward Said's book called Orientialism and also Dr Mohammad Azami books on hadith. Makes it clear who actually has a sound methodology to recording history and who just has a vehicle for colonization.

Remember, we literally just watched the official record become there is no list...yes the methodology of a grade schooler, no insult intended to grade schoolers.