The author, based on Islam's own sources gives an exemplary definition of Jihad He cuts through the Islamic apologist rhetoric and gets to the heart of the issue. This was a very well researched and documented book. The Author has ambiguously attested to the true violent nature Jihad. This book is a must read for anyone who wants to know the true meaning Of Jihad and violence and Islam.
Cook helps his readers do exactly what his title says. He carefully works his way through the sources about Jihad from Mohammad until the present day. He finds the evidence that jihad meant an internal struggle rather than military conflict historically wanting. He is sympathetic with Muslims who make these claims in the hope of reforming Islam, but he finds these claims historically inaccurate. Cook also finds fault with those who believe that since Islam historically spread by the sword that modern day Islamic terrorists stand within the mainstream of Islamic jihad. The use of martyrdom or suicide bombers and the targeting of non-military targets are two significant departures from the jihad tradition. The careful discussion of primary sources and the distinctions of varying views of jihad make this perhaps the best book on the subject.
After reading a quartet of books on jihad, this one emerges as the most comprehensive and detailed. Cook systematically traces the history of jihad across the centuries and the globe to demonstrate how vital this principle has been in Muslim history. His point that jihad was waged in the context of an end of the world view is intriguing but this argument is not clearly established. Cook is especially diligent at presenting 20th century jihdist and Islamist movements and in his appendix offers a rich selection of literature from contemporary jihadists.
A very good introduction to jihad and Islamism. My main criticism is that he spouted out so many names (of people and books) that it can be overwhelming but it gave me a better understanding and more background information to synthesize the events of the Middle East right now. I wonder what he has to say about the rise of ISIS and Boko Harem...
David's argument has some of the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, arguing that the "spiritual jihad" has no historical legitimacy, because jihad was at one point military, and condemning all who say otherwise as "apologists writing for a western audience." That seems to deny the ability of religions to reinterpret themselves- I'd argue that most do. At the same time, I think he does genuinely attempt to be even-handed, and articulates some of the appeal of jihad. It goes unobserved that one of the verses cited concerning warfare is 9:111... and the most lethal jihadi attack on American soil took place on 9/11/01.