Life on earth is a constant confrontation between truth and falsehood. If the notion of a level playing field is applied, there will always be only one winner: truth. This is because truth, to succeed, only needs to be asserted and brought to light in its full strength.

When this happens, no form or degree of falsehood and its dark forces can withstand the overwhelming power of truth and its own forces.

When pitted against each other in such a context, it is predetermined that there will be only one outcome. Indeed, as darkness, falsehood can take root only in the absence of the light of truth.

However, as soon as the latter is brought forth and affirmed, the former is bound to vanish. The two cannot coexist. It is either truth or falsehood, with the latter only gaining relevance when truth is lacking, altered, or incapacitated.

Knowing this, falsehood and its protagonists have no choice but to resort to dirty tactics, which is not surprising given that the shameless bosom of falsehood is so vast that it can accommodate any eventuality. Being right or wrong is off the table. Prioritizing expediency and maintaining vainglorious authority is all that matters.

One of the tactics of falsehood is to lie about truth as well as itself. Both are to be projected in their opposite colors in order to deceive. Truth is to be repellant and loathsome, and falsehood attractive and pleasant. And that is how the ideas of “white-sweet lies” and “the end justifies the means” were rationalized and defended.

The fate of Islam as the ultimate truth

Islam, revealed by Almighty Allah to all prophets as the only guidance for humankind, is the ultimate truth. All other religions and ideologies are manifestations of falsehood, either as distortions and manipulations of the revelations given to prophets or as man-made philosophies that have partly or completely assumed the role of religion.

Islam as such has always been targeted as the greatest nemesis. Lies have been spread about it, its voices silenced, and its followers mistreated. The community of falsehood feared being exposed and overshadowed. It understood that its future depended not on its ostensible strengths, but on its ability to weaken and suppress the true strengths of truth. Falsehood was more concerned about truth than about itself.

Satan, as the embodiment and source of all falsehood, was the originator of this paradigm. He knew everything about truth and falsehood, having directly conversed with Allah, witnessed His miracles firsthand, and resided among the angels. Yet, he chose to rebel against these realities and submit to the demands of his inflated ego and his whims.

It goes without saying that all those who side with the ambiguities of falsehood against the certainties of truth follow in the footsteps of Satan. What is more, they are devils of Satan’s ilk themselves.

The examples of Pharaoh, Nimrud and the Quraysh

Among the historical figures, Pharaoh stood out as an exceptionally cruel and formidable opponent of truth, fiercely opposing it at every turn. His monumental clashes with Prophet Musa were truly remarkable. In many ways, Pharaoh's attitude and behavior encapsulated the entire spectrum of earthly struggles that pit truth against falsehood and good against evil.

However, Pharaoh’s approach was a subtle mix of shadowy, manipulative and oppressive elements. Despite this, it is remarkable that he knew exactly who Musa was and that the signs (miracles) given to Musa were from no one else but the Lord of the universe.

This fact was something Musa pointed out to Pharaoh during one of their debates (al-Isra’, 102). Musa warned him that he was doomed to destruction for denying the revealed truth and replacing it with self-made false life systems.

The clear difference between the performances of truth and falsehood was revealed when Musa and Pharaoh debated in the latter’s court. Musa spoke rationally, confidently and based on facts and real experiences, while Pharaoh, struggling with his arrogance and ignorance, could not offer anything of substance. He could only mumble, ultimately embarrassing himself.

Lacking any sensible engagement in the debate, Pharaoh could only say: “Do you not hear (what he says)?”; “Indeed, your messenger who has been sent to you is a madman”; “If you take a god other than me, I will surely place you among those imprisoned” (al-Shu’ara’, 25-29).

Indeed, Pharaoh’s case was an epitome of falsehood’s powerlessness, impotence and humiliation whenever it is directly measured against or put in opposition to truth. After a series of failures in arguments and “civilizational” encounters, Pharaoh, predictably, had recourse to what he knew best and what, by extension, is the only language of falsehood: deception, lies, allegations and violence.

The Qur’an also brings to light that not only Pharaoh, but also his people, in their wickedness and self-exaltation rejected Allah’s light-giving messages and signs, “although their minds (souls) were convinced of their truth” (al-Naml, 14).

They rejected those messages and signs out of their wickedness, as it was the despicable behavior to which they were accustomed, and out of their arrogance, as they were too proud to accept the truth (Tafsir Ibn Kathir).

A similar pattern has been presented with regard to Prophet Ibrahim’s debate with king Nimrud. Nimrud’s falsehood was so unconstrained and complex that he even claimed to be a god and to be the source of life and death on earth. His denigration of Ibrahim and the truth revealed to him were proportionally boundless.

However, when the two squared off in a debate, it was not long before Nimrud’s lies were unmasked and his entire case shuttered by Ibrahim’s revealed truth and guided self-assurance: “So the disbeliever (Nimrud) was utterly defeated (humiliated and abashed)” (al-Baqarah, 258). After the debacle, Nimrud was left with only the choice of more lies, more manipulation and more cruelty.

Finally, the Quraysh of Makkah stood firm in opposing Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him and his family). Their antagonism was among the severest in history. However, just like Pharaoh, Nimrud and many others of the same breed, they too discerned that the Prophet was in the right and they were in the wrong. His mission was noble and universally significant, while theirs was low, self-centered and focused exclusively on their tribalist bents.

Thus, in order to safeguard their limited and self-serving interests against the formidable challenge posed by Islam, they found themselves with no alternative but to deliberately distort the facts and fabricate narratives that were in stark opposition to the irrefutable verities of Islam. This manipulation served to bolster their own vacuous and insubstantial categories of falsehood, which lacked any real substance or credibility.

They did all this while knowing the true state of affairs, which they simply wanted to reject: “We know that you, (O Muhammad), are saddened by what they say. And indeed, they do not call you untruthful, but it is the verses of Allah that the wrongdoers reject” (al-An’am, 33).

Once Abu Jahl, the principal enemy of Islam and the Prophet, was asked if the Prophet was truthful or a liar. He replied: “Muhammad is truthful and he has never told a lie. But, if the sons of Qusayy acquire the standard, the distribution of water for pilgrims, the custodianship of the Ka`bah and (now) prophethood, what will be left for the rest of the Quraysh?

In other words, the core problem was not about the existence or non-existence of truth; instead, it revolved around the personal agendas and self-interests of those engaged in the matter. The Quraysh often met in secret to establish a common false narrative about the Prophet, intended for pilgrims and other visitors to Makkah. They were careful to avoid any discrepancies in their positions to prevent the possibility of embarrassment.

The situation of modern times

The Islamic truth versus falsehood dynamics have remained constant in essence and intensity. What normally changes are the actors, styles, methods and contexts. Therefore, in modern times, the situation is no different from any painful historical episode. The types and indexes of falsehood abound, as do the crusades against Islam, the only standing truth, which are centered on lies, prejudices and forgeries.

Nobody can deny that Islam, as the fastest-growing religion and the most powerful force in the world, is both a commanding and intriguing idea. It presents a significant challenge to the prevailing but collapsing West-dominated world order.

However, it is shocking to find that, at the same time, the West is both most ignorant and most misinformed about Islam and Muslims, even though these two worlds have interacted for ages. The main reason for this is that the West has never honestly wanted to learn about real Islam or about genuine Muslims, nor to engage with them as they actually are on an equal footing.

The West did not want to be exposed as the falsifier of religions and history, and as the manipulator of its own people. Islam and Muslims needed to be portrayed in negative terms so that the plans of Western religious and political leaders could succeed. Only in dark socio-political environments could harmful ideologies and their destructive campaigns thrive.

The West has always had its own army of people on both sides: politicians, scholars, renegades, ordinary citizens, and institutions such as colleges, universities, government agencies, businesses, and social organizations, all working tirelessly to serve the agendas of the West. The main objective was to replace actual situations with illusory and misleading ones, ensuring that this approach could gain acceptance in both the East and the West and become a sustainable alternative.

The result was that the West became progressively obsessed with Islam and the Muslim world, yet remained misled and ignorant about them. Misguided beliefs, such as the ideas that Prophet Muhammad was a violent man and a sexual psychopath, that Muslims are terrorists, that Islam encourages violence against those who are different, that it has spread by the sword, that it undervalues and mistreats women, and that it is anti-progress, anti-science and anti-civilization - these and other similar views have become the hallmark of the Western misunderstanding of Islam. One cannot help but think that the creation, spread and persistence of these misconceptions was a deliberate and well-coordinated strategy.

What does this reality prove?

If this unfortunate reality proves one thing, it is that Islam is the only and ultimate truth. If Islam were a fake religion, as claimed by its enemies, especially in the West, and it had nothing constructive to offer the world, why did those enemies not simply outline and extensively discuss the clear aspects of the fraudulent disposition of Islam, sharing them with the world? They would have made their lives much easier and their anti-Islamic case more convincing.

But they did not, and they never will, because there is no such thing as false aspects of Islam.

Since they could not produce anything of that nature, they had to resort to fabricated, misrepresented, or completely imaginary things to somehow manufacture any “results” and justify their efforts.

In any case, this led the enemies of Islam, instead of proving it wrong, to proving it true. An indirect declaration has thus been made to the world that despite centuries of coordinated efforts and countless resources invested, only a quantity of nonsensical drivels could be invented against Islam, its people and civilization.

No genuine deficiency, about which the entire West would have loudly proclaimed, was found. Islam remains unscathed, and the prospects of an Islamic renaissance have only improved.

The campaign acted like a boomerang, returning to its originators and revealing who the malicious liars and counterfeiters are, as well as who the truth-tellers and its promoters are.

In our increasingly globalized world, this sentiment is becoming ever more powerful and revealing. People are rebelling against the culture of indoctrination and brainwashing. As outlandish as it may seem, the West may in the end be somewhat thanked for the disservice-turned-service.