The cage of Jihad: Looking at Islamic apologetics from the inside
If the last Hamas attack had occurred two years ago, I would have been among those who sympathized with it and rejoiced in it as a victory. But today I watch it from inside the “cage”. If I forget, even for a short moment, my defeat as a defender of Islam and think that what I see now is a victory for Hamas, all I have to do is step back a little bit and I will see the iron bars of the “cage” and I will soon realize that there is no escape from this “cage”. It is the same “cage” that Tamerlane put Sultan Bayezid “I” in, and the fate put Saddam in, and every defeated jihadist will certainly be placed in it sooner or later.
Having an insider’s perspective on Islamic apologetics, that is, an inner appreciation of the mindset and strategy of Muslim apologists is key to fully understanding the impact of Islamic doctrine. What drives the different kinds of actions and attitudes we see everyday in Muslim apologists? What sets the "fire" inside them to want to debate and win? You must know that Jihad (‘Struggle’) is their conceptual and motivational tool; they try their best and use every available method to force their doctrine down everyone's throats.
Jihad is divided into the following types:
- Jihad by heart (Jihad bi I-qalb)
- Jihad by tongue (Jihad bi’I-lisan)
- Jihad by hand (Jihad bi ‘I-yad)
- Jihad by sword (Jihad bi ‘s-sayf)
Which form of Jihad to adopt depends upon the particular situation in which the Muslim finds himself. Muslim scholars and apologists adopt *Jihad by tongue*, because this fits their field of specialisation. They desire to make their contribution along this line to become ‘heroes’ of Islam, just as other Muslims wish to become ‘heroes’ in *Jihad by the sword*. And just as the Qur’an prohibits the jihadi to flee from the battlefield (Surah 8:15), in the world of Islamic apologetics there is an unspoken rule that it is strictly forbidden to surrender or be defeated by non-Muslims.
What all of us who have left Islam now clearly perceive is the overconfidence that Islam gives its devotees. Indeed, there can be no doubt that it is this overconfidence, this absolute faith in the superiority of Islam, that leads Muslims to proselytise without being familiar with the arguments for other religions.
They say that Muslim apologists never give up fighting or debating non-Muslims. Okay, but here is an example of one who surrendered; I am a defeated Muslim apologist who had to give up when proven wrong with my own sources. Although I initiated the war (debate) I couldn’t defend against the truth and was forced to fall on my own sword. For my part, this was *not* a show of respect or humility - I prepared to win, and prepared for debates for about 20 years, but underwent a total defeat and humiliation. Islam simply cannot stand up to scrutiny.
Just as I used to be, so many Muslims and Muslim apologists are not neutral in seeking the truth. We did our research, but only to reinforce our prejudices, especially towards non-Muslims. We were far from neutral, and quite unashamed about dismissing out of hand any new information that appeared on the face of it, to contradict any sacred belief we happened to hold. And the only reason Muslim apologists keep getting away with this is that the rest of the world treats them nicely. In their dealings with critics Muslim apologists display all the arrogance of the Ottoman Sultan, Bayezid “I”, who adopted Jihad by sword (Jihad bi ‘s-sayf) as a method to spread Islam.
However, this was the end of Bayezid “I”; he was captured by Timur (Tamerlane) at the Battle of Ankara variously dated to 20 or 28 July 1402 Julian (28 July or 6 August 1402 Gregorian). The Hijri dates are 19 or 27 Dhu'l-Hijjah 804, either way, within the holy month. The sultan’s haughty pride remained undiminished, in contrast to his captor’s continued respect. Timur’s remedy for the sultan’s arrogance was to have him shackled in fetters and chains of gold in a small iron cage exposed on all sides, and carried up and down like a bird in a cage amongst his other trophies (source: Köprülü 1937: 591–98; Milwright and Baboula). Byzantine officials on their way to hand the sultan the keys of their city, were instead given the key to his cage. The *Terroriser of the World* was plucked from the highest jihad victory and put on display in a cage during one of Islam’s holiest months.
The Sultan was brought low for his hubris and aggression. I was brought low for my insistence on wrong logic. I am convinced that the tools of the information-age represent the best firefighting foam to turn off the "fire" of error and arrogance in Muslim apologists. When he was imprisoned, the people could see Bayezid “I” from all sides of his iron cage, just as everyone can observe defeated Muslim apologists from all points of view within their virtual ‘cages’ on social media. The apostasy of a Muslim apologist is similar to the Sultan’s defeat and humiliation; both end in a cage.
Jalal Tagreeb is a freelance researcher and translator from the Levant, his major is Islamic Studies and History. He is a big fan of and supporter of the Western civilisation mission's views of the Middle East in a very objective way. He understands that his predecessors fought against that, but he thinks that was completely wrong. He believes that the level of education and awareness at that time were insufficient. He has a strong passion to research the topic, mainly the role of modern colonialism and global power politics in shaping the Middle East.