Qur'an, Hadith and Scholars:Scholars on Jihad: Difference between revisions

Qur'an, Hadith and Scholars:Scholars on Jihad (view source)

Revision as of 19:54, 7 March 2021

3,019 bytes added , 7 March 2021

no edit summary

[checked revision]

IbnPinker

Editors, recentchangescleanup, Reviewers

6,632

edits

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 {{QuranHadithScholarsIndex}}
-Islamic scholars have written many works on the topic of Jihad, some of which are reproduced below.
+{{QualityScore|Lead=2|Structure=2|Content=3|Language=4|References=4}}
+Jihad has been a perpetual subject of interest for Muslim scholars throughout the ages, and Muslim scholars have spent a great deal of time writing about how, when, where, why, and in what fashion Jihad may be undertaken.
 ==Sunni==
@@ Line 269: / Line 272: @@
 {{Quote||'''''The Order to Fight the Poeple of the Scriptures until They Give the Jizya''''<BR><BR>
 Allah said, ''"Fight against those who believe not in Allah, nor in the Last Day, nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth among the People of the Scripture, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued."'' Therefore when the People of the Scripture disbelieved in Muhammad, they had no beneficial faith in any Messenger or what the Messengers brought. Rather they followed their religions because this conformed with their ideas, lusts, and the ways of their forefathers, not because they are Allah's laws and religion. Had they been true believers in their religions, that faith would have directed them to believe in Muhammad because all Prophets gave the good news of Muhammad's advent and commanded them to obey and follow him. Yet when he was sent, they disbelieved in him, even though he is the mightiest of all Messengers. Therefore, they do not follow the religion or earlier Prophets because these religions came from Allah, but because these suit their desires and lusts. Therefore, their claimed faith in an earlier Prophet will not benefit them because they disbelieved in the master, the mightiest, the last and most perfect of all Prophets. Hence Allah's statement, ''"Fight against those who believe not in Allah, nor in the Last Day, nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth among the People of the Scripture.''"<BR><BR>This honorable Ayah was revealed with the order to fight the People of the Book, after the pagans were defeated, the people entered Allah's region in large numbers, and the Arabian Peninsula was secured under the Muslims' control. Allah commanded His Messenger to fight the People of the Scriptures, Jews and Christians, on the ninth year of Hijrah, and he prepared his army to fight the Romans and called the people to ''Jihad'' announcing his intent and destination. The Messenger sent his intent to various Arab areas around Al-Madinah to gather forces, and he collected an army of thirty thousand. Some people from Al-Madinah and some hypocrites, in and around it, lagged behind, for that was a year of drought and intense hear. The Messenger of Allah marched, heading towards Ash-Sham to fight the Romans until he reached Tabuk, where he set camp for about twenty days next to its water resources. He then prayed to Allah for a decision and went back to Al-Madinah because it was a hard year and the people were weak, as we will mention, Allah willing.<ref>Ibn Kathir, ''Tafsir Ibn Kathir'' (Riyadh, 2000), vol. 4, pp. 404-406.</ref>}}
+====Al-Misri====
+Al-Misri (1302–1367) was an Islamic scholar. His manual of fiqh consists of the soundest positions of the Shafi'i school, and its modern translation became the first standard Islamic legal reference in a European language to be certified by Al-Azhar university.
+{{Quote||o9.0 (O: Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and is etymologically derived from the word mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion.<BR>o9.1 Jihad is a communal obligation (def: c3.2). When enough people perform it to successfully accomplish it, it is no longer obligatory upon others.<BR>o9.8 The caliph makes war upon Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians [kafirs] (N: provided he has first invited them to enter Islam in faith and practice, and if they will not, then invited them to enter the social order of Islam by paying the non-Muslim poll tax (jizya, def: o11.4) - which is the significance of their paying it, not the money itself-while remaining in their ancestral regions) (O: and the war continues) until they become Muslim or else pay the non-Muslim poll tax (O: in accordance with the word of Allah Most High.
+(A: though if there is no caliph (def: o25), no permission is required).<ref>Ahmad Ibn Lulu Ibn Al-Naqib, translated by Noah Ha Mim Keller - [http://www.amazon.com/Reliance-Traveller-Classic-Islamic-Al-Salik/dp/0915957728 Reliance of the Traveller: The Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law Umdat Al-Salik] - Published by Amana Corporation; Revised edition (July 1, 1997), ISBN-13: 978-0915957729</ref>}}
 ===Other===
@@ Line 350: / Line 360: @@
 {{Quote||'''INTRODUCTION'''<BR>
-<blockquote>Had they Lord pleased, He would have made mankind one nation; but those only to whom they Lord hath granted his mercy will cease to differ... -Qur'an 11.120</blockquote><BR>
+<blockquote>Had they Lord pleased, He would have made mankind one nation; but those only to whom they Lord hath granted his mercy will cease to differ... -Qur'an 11.120</blockquote>
-The state which is regarded as the instrument for universalizing a certain religion must perforce be an ever expanding state. The Islamic state, whose principal function was to put God's law into practice, sought to establish Islam as the dominant reigning ideology over the entire world. It refused to recognize the coexistence of non-Muslim communities, except perhaps as subordinate entities, because by its very nature a universal state tolerates the existence of no other state than itself. Althrough it was not a consciously formulated policy, Muhammad's early successors, after Islam became supreme in Arabia, were determined to embark on a ceaseless war of conquest in the name of Islam. The jihad was therefore employed as an instrument for both the universalization of religion and the establishment of an imperial world state. ...<BR><BR>
+The state which is regarded as the instrument for universalizing a certain religion must perforce be an ever expanding state. The Islamic state, whose principal function was to put God's law into practice, sought to establish Islam as the dominant reigning ideology over the entire world. It refused to recognize the coexistence of non-Muslim communities, except perhaps as subordinate entities, because by its very nature a universal state tolerates the existence of no other state than itself. Althrough it was not a consciously formulated policy, Muhammad's early successors, after Islam became supreme in Arabia, were determined to embark on a ceaseless war of conquest in the name of Islam. The jihad was therefore employed as an instrument for both the universalization of religion and the establishment of an imperial world state.<BR>. . .<BR>
-The world accordingly was sharply divided in Muslim law into the dar al-Islam and the dar al-Harb. These terms may be rendered in less poetic words as the "world or Islam" and the "world of War." The first corresponded to the territory under Muslim rule. Its inhabitants were Muslims, by birth or conversion, and the communities of the tolerated religions who preferred to hold fast to their own cult, at the price of paying the jizya (poll tax). The Muslims enjoyed full rights of citizenship; the subjects of the tolerated religions enjoyed only partial rights, and submitted to Muslim rule in accordance with special charters regulating their relations with the Muslims. The dar al-harb consisted of all the states and communities outside of the world of Islam. Its inhabitants were often called infidels, or, better, unbelievers.<BR><BR>
+The world accordingly was sharply divided in Muslim law into the dar al-Islam and the dar al-Harb. These terms may be rendered in less poetic words as the "world or Islam" and the "world of War." The first corresponded to the territory under Muslim rule. Its inhabitants were Muslims, by birth or conversion, and the communities of the tolerated religions who preferred to hold fast to their own cult, at the price of paying the jizya (poll tax). The Muslims enjoyed full rights of citizenship; the subjects of the tolerated religions enjoyed only partial rights, and submitted to Muslim rule in accordance with special charters regulating their relations with the Muslims. The dar al-harb consisted of all the states and communities outside of the world of Islam. Its inhabitants were often called infidels, or, better, unbelievers.
-On the assumption that the ultimate aim of Islam was worldwide, the dar al-Islam was always, in theory, at war with the dar al-harb. The Muslims were requited to preach Islam by persuasion, and the caliph or his commanders in the field to offer Islam as an alternative to paying the poll tax or fighting; but the Islamic state was under legal obligation to enforce Islamic law and to recognize no authority other than its own, superseding other authorities even when non-Muslim communities had willingly accepted the faith of Islam without fighting. Failure by non-Muslims to accept Islam or pay the poll tax made it incumbent on the Muslim State to declare jihad upon the recalcitrant individuals and communities. Thus the jihad, reflecting the normal war relations existing between Muslims and non-Muslims, was the state's instrument for transforming the dar al-harb into the dar al-Islam. It was the product of a war-like people who had embarked on a large-scale movement of expansion. Islam could not abolish the warlike character of the Arabs who were constantly at war with each other; it indeed reaffirmed the war basis of intergroup relationship by institutionalizing war as part of the Muslim legal system and made use of it by transforming war into a holy war designed to be ceaselessly declared against those who failed to become Muslims. The short intervals which are not war-and these in theory should not exceed ten years-are periods of peace. But the jihad was not the only legal means of dealing with non-Muslims since peaceful methods (negotiations, arbitration, and treaty making)  were applied in regulating the relations of the believers with unbelievers when actual fighting ceased.<BR><BR>
-...<BR><BR>
+On the assumption that the ultimate aim of Islam was worldwide, the dar al-Islam was always, in theory, at war with the dar al-harb. The Muslims were requited to preach Islam by persuasion, and the caliph or his commanders in the field to offer Islam as an alternative to paying the poll tax or fighting; but the Islamic state was under legal obligation to enforce Islamic law and to recognize no authority other than its own, superseding other authorities even when non-Muslim communities had willingly accepted the faith of Islam without fighting. Failure by non-Muslims to accept Islam or pay the poll tax made it incumbent on the Muslim State to declare jihad upon the recalcitrant individuals and communities. Thus the jihad, reflecting the normal war relations existing between Muslims and non-Muslims, was the state's instrument for transforming the dar al-harb into the dar al-Islam. It was the product of a war-like people who had embarked on a large-scale movement of expansion. Islam could not abolish the warlike character of the Arabs who were constantly at war with each other; it indeed reaffirmed the war basis of intergroup relationship by institutionalizing war as part of the Muslim legal system and made use of it by transforming war into a holy war designed to be ceaselessly declared against those who failed to become Muslims. The short intervals which are not war-and these in theory should not exceed ten years-are periods of peace. But the jihad was not the only legal means of dealing with non-Muslims since peaceful methods (negotiations, arbitration, and treaty making)  were applied in regulating the relations of the believers with unbelievers when actual fighting ceased.<BR>. . .<BR>
-'''THE DOCTRINE OF JIHAD'''<BR><BR>
+'''THE DOCTRINE OF JIHAD'''
 <blockquote>"Every nation has its monasticism, and the monasticism of this [Muslim] nation is the jihad." -a hadith.</blockquote>
-'''''The Meaning of Jihad'''''<BR><BR>
+'''''The Meaning of Jihad'''''
 The term jihad is derived from the the verb jahada which means "exerted"; its juridical-theological meaning is exertion of one's power in Allah's path, that is, the spread of belief in Allah and in making His word supreme over this world. The individual's recompense would be the achievement of salvation, since the jihad is Allah's direct way to paradise. This definition is based on a Qur'anic injunction which runs as follows:
 <blockquote>O ye who believe! Shall I guide you to a gainful trade which will save you from painful punishment? Believe in Allah and His Apostle and carry on warfare in the path of Allah with your possessions and your persons. That is better for you. If ye have knowledge, He will forgive your sins , and will place you in the Gardens beneath which the streams flow, and in fine houses in the Gardens of Eden: that is the great gain.</blockquote>
-The jihad, in the bread sense of exertion, does not necessarily mean war or fighting, since exertion in Allah's path may be achieved by peaceful as well as violent means. The jihad my be regarded as a form of religious propaganda that can be carried on by persuasion or by the sword. In the early Makkan revelations, the emphasis was in the main on persuasion. Muhammad, in the discharge of his prophetic functions, seemed to have been satisfied by warning his people against idolatry and inviting them to worship Allah. This is evidenced by such a verse as the following: "He who exerts himself, exerts only for his own soul," which expresses the jihad in terms of the salvation for the soul rather than a struggle for proselytization. In the Madinan revelations, the jihad is often expressed in terms of strife, and there is no doubt that in certain verses the conception of jihad is synonymous with the words war and fighting.<BR><BR>
+The jihad, in the bread sense of exertion, does not necessarily mean war or fighting, since exertion in Allah's path may be achieved by peaceful as well as violent means. The jihad my be regarded as a form of religious propaganda that can be carried on by persuasion or by the sword. In the early Makkan revelations, the emphasis was in the main on persuasion. Muhammad, in the discharge of his prophetic functions, seemed to have been satisfied by warning his people against idolatry and inviting them to worship Allah. This is evidenced by such a verse as the following: "He who exerts himself, exerts only for his own soul," which expresses the jihad in terms of the salvation for the soul rather than a struggle for proselytization. In the Madinan revelations, the jihad is often expressed in terms of strife, and there is no doubt that in certain verses the conception of jihad is synonymous with the words war and fighting.
-The jurists, however, have distinguished four different ways in which the believer may fulfill his jihad obligation: by his heart; his tongue; his hands; and by the sword. The first is concerned with combating the devil and in the attempt to escape his persuasion to evil. This type of jihad, so significant in the eyes of the Prophet Muhammad, was regarded as the greater jihad. The second and the third are mainly fulfilled in supporting the right and correcting the wrong. The fourth is precisely equivalent to the meaning of war, and is concerned with fighting the unbelievers and the enemies of the faith. The believers are under the obligation of sacrificing their "wealth and lives" (Q. 61.11) in the prosecution of war.<BR><BR>
-...<BR><BR>
+The jurists, however, have distinguished four different ways in which the believer may fulfill his jihad obligation: by his heart; his tongue; his hands; and by the sword. The first is concerned with combating the devil and in the attempt to escape his persuasion to evil. This type of jihad, so significant in the eyes of the Prophet Muhammad, was regarded as the greater jihad. The second and the third are mainly fulfilled in supporting the right and correcting the wrong. The fourth is precisely equivalent to the meaning of war, and is concerned with fighting the unbelievers and the enemies of the faith. The believers are under the obligation of sacrificing their "wealth and lives" (Q. 61.11) in the prosecution of war.<BR>. . .<BR>
 Thus the jihad may be regarded as Islam’s instrument for carrying out its ultimate objective by turning all people into believers, if not in the prophethood of Muhammad (as in the case of the dhimmis), at least in the belief of God. The Prophet Muhammad is reported to have declared ‘some of my people will continue to fight victoriously for the sake of the truth until the last one of them will combat the anti-Christ’. Until that moment is reached the jihad, in one form or another will remain as a permanent obligation upon the entire Muslim community. It follows that the existence of a dar al-harb is ultimately outlawed under the Islamic jural order; that the dar al-Islam permanently under jihad obligation until the dar al-harb is reduced to non-existence; and that any community accepting certain disabilities- must submit to Islamic rule and reside in the dar al-Islam or be bound as clients to the Muslim community. The universality of Islam, in its all embracing creed, is imposed on the believers as a continuous process of warfare, psychological and political if not strictly military.<ref>Khadduri, Majid, "Introduction" and "The Doctrine of Jihad," in ''War and Peace in the Law of Islam, Book 2:The Law of War: The Jihad'' (Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 1955), pp. 49-73.</ref>}}
 ===Sayyid Qutb===
-[[w:Sayyid Qutb|Sayyid Qutb]] <span class="plainlinks">[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayyid_Qutb (1906 -1996)]</span> was an Egyptian author, educator, Islamist, poet, and the leading intellectual of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood in the 1950s and '60s.
+[[w:Sayyid Qutb|Sayyid Qutb]] <span class="plainlinks">[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sayyid_Qutb (1906 -1996)]</span> was an Egyptian author, educator, Islamist, poet, and the leading intellectual of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood (one of the world's largest Islamic organizations) in the 1950s and '60s.
-{{Quote||'''''A Fight until Submission'''''<BR><blockquote>Fight against those who-despite having been given Scripture - do not truly believe in God and the Last Day, and do not treat as forbidden that which God and His Messenger have forbidden, and do not follow the religion of truth, till they pay the submission tax with a willing hand, after they have been humbled. (Verse 29)</blockquote>This verse and the ones that follow were meant to prepare the Muslims for their expedition to Tabuk and the confrontation with the Byzantines and their puppet regime of Christian Arabs, known as the Ghassanld. This suggests that the descriptions we have here were true of the people on the other side of the confrontation. They simply show the reality of those people. These descriptions are not mentioned here as conditions for fighting the people of earlier revelations, but as qualities inherent in their distorted beliefs and the actual reality of those people. Hence they provide the justification for fighting them. The ruling also applies to all those who share the same beliefs and characteristics.<BR><BR>This verse specifies three such characteristics. (1) They do not believe in God and the Last Day; (2) they do not treat as forbidden what God has forbidden what God has forbidden and (3) they do not believe in the religion of truth.
+{{Quote||'''''A Fight until Submission'''''<BR><blockquote>Fight against those who-despite having been given Scripture - do not truly believe in God and the Last Day, and do not treat as forbidden that which God and His Messenger have forbidden, and do not follow the religion of truth, till they pay the submission tax with a willing hand, after they have been humbled. (Verse 29)</blockquote>This verse and the ones that follow were meant to prepare the Muslims for their expedition to Tabuk and the confrontation with the Byzantines and their puppet regime of Christian Arabs, known as the Ghassanld. This suggests that the descriptions we have here were true of the people on the other side of the confrontation. They simply show the reality of those people. These descriptions are not mentioned here as conditions for fighting the people of earlier revelations, but as qualities inherent in their distorted beliefs and the actual reality of those people. Hence they provide the justification for fighting them. The ruling also applies to all those who share the same beliefs and characteristics.
-Firstly, the Jews claim that Ezra is the son of God, and the Christians assert
+This verse specifies three such characteristics. (1) They do not believe in God and the Last Day; (2) they do not treat as forbidden what God has forbidden what God has forbidden and (3) they do not believe in the religion of truth.
-that Christ is His son. These claims echo similar ones made by the pagans of
-former times. Hence, they are to be treated on the same basis as people who do
-not believe in God and the Last Day. Secondly, they treat their rabbis and their
-monks, as well as Jesus Christ, as their Lords, in place of God. This is in total conflict
-with the principles of the faith of truth which is based on total submission to
-God alone, who has no partners. As they make such claims they demonstrate that
-they are idolaters who do not follow the true faith. Thirdly, they try to put out the
-light of God's guidance with their mouths. In other words, they are at war with the
-divine faith. No one is ever at war with the divine faith if he truly believes in God.
-Fourthly, many of their monks and rabbis devour peoples property without any
-justification. They do so knowing that their claims to such property are false.
-Hence they do not treat as forbidden what God and His Messenger have made forbidden,
-whether we take this statement as referring to the Messenger sent to them
-or to the Prophet Muhammad.
-All these characteristics were true of the Christians in Syria and the Byzantines,
+Firstly, the Jews claim that Ezra is the son of God, and the Christians assert that Christ is His son. These claims echo similar ones made by the pagans of former times. Hence, they are to be treated on the same basis as people who do not believe in God and the Last Day. Secondly, they treat their rabbis and their monks, as well as Jesus Christ, as their Lords, in place of God. This is in total conflict with the principles of the faith of truth which is based on total submission to God alone, who has no partners. As they make such claims they demonstrate that they are idolaters who do not follow the true faith. Thirdly, they try to put out the light of God's guidance with their mouths. In other words, they are at war with the divine faith. No one is ever at war with the divine faith if he truly believes in God. Fourthly, many of their monks and rabbis devour peoples property without any justification. They do so knowing that their claims to such property are false. Hence they do not treat as forbidden what God and His Messenger have made forbidden, whether we take this statement as referring to the Messenger sent to them or to the Prophet Muhammad.
-as well as other Christians ever since Church Synods distorted the faith
-preached by Jesus Christ and claimed that he was the son of God and invented the
-concept of the Trinity, the conflict between the different sects and churches over
-the concept of Trinity notwithstanding. What we have here then is a general order
-stating a universal rule that applies to all those among the people of earlier revelations
-who share the same characteristics as the Christians of Syria and Byzantium.
-Aggression has been committed in the first place, against God's Lordship of
-the universe and against human beings who are forced to submit to deities other
-than God. As Islam tries to defend God's Lordship and human dignity, ignorance
-will try to stop it by aggression and war. This is the reality we have to realize.
-This Qur'anic verse commands the Muslims to fight against those among the
-people of earlier revelations who "do not believe in God and the Last Day." A
-person who claims that Ezra or Jesus is the son of God cannot be described as a
-believer in God. The same applies to a person who says that the Christ is the Lord,
-or that God is one of a Trinity, or that He manifested Himself in Jesus. It further
-applies to all concepts formulated by the Synods, diverse as these concepts are.Nor can we describe as believers in God and the Last-Day-those who say
-that they will suffer God's punishment only for a few days no matter what sins
-they may commit because God loves them as His sons and daughters, or because
-they are God's chosen people. The same applies to those who claim that all sins
-are forgiven through a holy communion with Jesus Christ, which is the only way
-to achieve forgiveness. Neither of these two groups can be described as believers
-in God or in the Last Day.
-This verse also describes the people of earlier revelations as ones who do not
+All these characteristics were true of the Christians in Syria and the Byzantines, as well as other Christians ever since Church Synods distorted the faith preached by Jesus Christ and claimed that he was the son of God and invented the concept of the Trinity, the conflict between the different sects and churches over the concept of Trinity notwithstanding. What we have here then is a general order stating a universal rule that applies to all those among the people of earlier revelations who share the same characteristics as the Christians of Syria and Byzantium. Aggression has been committed in the first place, against God's Lordship of
-treat as forbidden what God and His Messenger have made forbidden. Whether
+the universe and against human beings who are forced to submit to deities other than God. As Islam tries to defend God's Lordship and human dignity, ignorance will try to stop it by aggression and war. This is the reality we have to realize. This Qur'anic verse commands the Muslims to fight against those among the people of earlier revelations who "do not believe in God and the Last Day." A person who claims that Ezra or Jesus is the son of God cannot be described as a believer in God. The same applies to a person who says that the Christ is the Lord, or that God is one of a Trinity, or that He manifested Himself in Jesus. It further
-the term "His Messenger" refers to the Messenger whom God sent to them in particular
+applies to all concepts formulated by the Synods, diverse as these concepts are.Nor can we describe as believers in God and the Last-Day-those who say that they will suffer God's punishment only for a few days no matter what sins they may commit because God loves them as His sons and daughters, or because they are God's chosen people. The same applies to those who claim that all sins are forgiven through a holy communion with Jesus Christ, which is the only way to achieve forgiveness. Neither of these two groups can be described as believers in God or in the Last Day.
-or to the Prophet Muhammad, the import is the same. The following verses
-explain this by saying that they devour other people's property by false claims, an
-action which has been forbidden in all divine messages and by all God's messengers.
-Some of the clearest examples of this are usurious transactions, the sale of
-bonds of forgiveness by the Church, opposition to the divine faith with brutal
-force as well as trying to turn believers away from their faith. Another clear
-example is forcing people to submit to beings other than God, and forcing them
-to implement laws other than those revealed by God. All these examples are covered
-by the description: "who do not treat as forbidden what God and His Messenger
-have forbidden." All this applies today to the people of earlier revelations
-as was applicable to them when this verse was revealed.
-The Qur'anic verse also describes them as not following "the religion of
+This verse also describes the people of earlier revelations as ones who do not treat as forbidden what God and His Messenger have made forbidden. Whether the term "His Messenger" refers to the Messenger whom God sent to them in particular or to the Prophet Muhammad, the import is the same. The following verses explain this by saying that they devour other people's property by false claims, an action which has been forbidden in all divine messages and by all God's messengers. Some of the clearest examples of this are usurious transactions, the sale of
-truth." This is clear from what we have already said. It is not part of the religion
+bonds of forgiveness by the Church, opposition to the divine faith with brutal force as well as trying to turn believers away from their faith. Another clear example is forcing people to submit to beings other than God, and forcing them to implement laws other than those revealed by God. All these examples are covered by the description: "who do not treat as forbidden what God and His Messenger have forbidden." All this applies today to the people of earlier revelations as was applicable to them when this verse was revealed.
-of truth to believe in the Lordship of anyone other than God, or to apply a law different
-from God's law, or to accept legislation enacted by any authority other than
+The Qur'anic verse also describes them as not following "the religion of truth." This is clear from what we have already said. It is not part of the religion of truth to believe in the Lordship of anyone other than God, or to apply a law different from God's law, or to accept legislation enacted by any authority other than God, or to submit to anyone other than Him. All these qualities are today true of the people of earlier revelations, as it was true of them then. The condition simply that they should pay the tribute, or the submission tax,
-God, or to submit to anyone other than Him. All these qualities are today true of
+with a willing hand and that they be utterly subdued. What is the purpose of this condition, and why is it the end at which all fighting must stop? The answer is found in the fact that with such characteristics, the people of earlier revelations place themselves at war with the divine faith, both in belief and in practical terms. They are also at war with Islamic society because of the inherent conflict between the codes of living derived from the divine faith on the one hand and ignorance, or jahiliyyah, on the other. As described in these verses, the people of earlier revelations belong to jahiliyyah in both beliefs and practices. History also proves the nature of conflict, and the impossibility of co-existence between the two codes. The people of earlier revelations were determined in their opposition to the Islamic faith in the period preceding the revelation of this verse, and in the period following it, up to the present day.
-the people of earlier revelations, as it was true of them then.
-The condition simply that they should pay the tribute, or the submission tax,
-with a willing hand and that they be utterly subdued. What is the purpose of this
-condition, and why is it the end at which all fighting must stop?
-The answer is found in the fact that with such characteristics, the people of
-earlier revelations place themselves at war with the divine faith, both in belief and
-in practical terms. They are also at war with Islamic society because of the
-inherent conflict between the codes of living derived from the divine faith on the
-one hand and ignorance, or jahiliyyah, on the other. As described in these verses,
-the people of earlier revelations belong to jahiliyyah in both beliefs and practices.
-History also proves the nature of conflict, and the impossibility of co-existence
-between the two codes. The people of earlier revelations were determined in their
-opposition to the Islamic faith in the period preceding the revelation of this verse,
-and in the period following it, up to the present day.
 As the only religion of truth that exists on earth today, Islam takes appropriate action to remove all physical and material obstacles that try to impede its efforts to liberate mankind from submission to anyone other than God. That submission is translated in following the religion of truth, provided that every human being is given free choice. There must be no pressure either from the religion itself or from those forces putting up the physical obstacles. The practical way to ensure the removal of those physical obstacles while not forcing anyone to adopt Islam is to smash the power of those authorities based on false beliefs until they declare their submission and demonstrate this by paying the submission tax. When this happens, the process of liberating mankind is completed by giving every individual the freedom of choice based on conviction. Anyone who is not convinced may continue to follow his faith. However, he has to pay the submission tax to fulfill a number of objectives...by paying this tax, known as jizyah, he declares that he will not stand in physical opposition to the efforts advocating the true Divine faith. <ref>Sayyid Qutb, ''In the Shad of the Qur'an'', vol. 4, pp. 404-405</ref>}}
@@ Line 450: / Line 401: @@
 ===Ruhollah Khomeini===
-[[Ruhollah Khomeini]] <span class="plainlinks">[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imam_Khomeini (1900-1989)]</span> was a Shi'ite Marja and leader of the 1979 Islamic Revolution.
+Ayatollah [[Ruhollah Khomeini]] <span class="plainlinks">[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imam_Khomeini (1900-1989)]</span> was a Shi'ite Marja and leader of the 1979 Islamic Revolution.
+{{Quote||Islam's jihad is a struggle against idolatry, sexual deviations, plunder, repression, and cruelty. The war waged by [non-Muslim] conquerors, however, aims at promoting lust and animal pleasures. They care not if whole countries are wiped out and many families left homeless. But those who study jihad will understand why Islam wants to conquer the whole world. All the countries conquered by Islam or to be conquered in the future will be marked for everlasting salvation. For they shall live under [God's law]. ....
+Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against was. Those [who say this] are witless. Islam says: Kill all the unbelievers just as they would kill you all! Does this mean that Muslims should sit back until are devoured by [the unbelievers]? Islam says: Kill them [the non-Muslims], put them to the sword and scatter [their armies]. Does this mean sitting back until [non-Muslims] overcome us? Islam says: Kill in the service of Allah those who may want to kill you! Does this mean that we should surrender [to the enemy]? Islam says: Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword! People cannot be made obedient except with the sword! The sword is the key to paradise, which can be opened only for holy warriors!
-{{Quote||Islam's jihad is a struggle against idolatry, sexual deviations, plunder, repression, and cruelty. The war waged by [non-Muslim] conquerors, however, aims at promoting lust and animal pleasures. They care not if whole countries are wiped out and many families left homeless. But those who study jihad will understand why Islam wants to conquer the whole world. All the countries conquered by Islam or to be conquered in the future will be marked for everlasting salvation. For they shall live under [God's law]. ....<BR><BR>
-Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against was. Those [who say this] are witless. Islam says: Kill all the unbelievers just as they would kill you all! Does this mean that Muslims should sit back until are devoured by [the unbelievers]? Islam says: Kill them [the non-Muslims], put them to the sword and scatter [their armies]. Does this mean sitting back until [non-Muslims] overcome us? Islam says: Kill in the service of Allah those who may want to kill you! Does this mean that we should surrender [to the enemy]? Islam says: Whatever good there is exists thanks to the sword and in the shadow of the sword! People cannot be made obedient except with the sword! The sword is the key to paradise, which can be opened only for holy warriors!<BR><BR>
 There are hundreds of other [Koranic] psalms and hadiths urging Muslims to value war and to fight. Does all that mean that Islam is a religion that prevents men from waging war? I spit upon those foolish souls who make such a claim.<ref name="Anti-American Terrorism and the Middle East Khomeini">Excerpted from "Islam Is Not a Religion of Pacifists" (1942), "Speech at Feyziyeh Theological School" (August 24, 1979). English translation in Barry Rubin and Judith Colp Rubin, ''Anti-American Terrorism and the Middle East'' (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002), pp. 29, 32-36.</ref>}}
-{{Quote||Islam grew with blood. The great religions of the preceding prophets and the momentous religion of Islam, while clutching divine books for the guidance of the people in one hand, carried arms in the other. Abraham ... in one hand carried the books of the prophets; in the other, an ax to crush the infidels. Moses, the interlocutor of God ... in one hand carried the Pentateuch and in the other a staff, which reduced the pharoahs to the dust of ignominy, a staff that was like a dragon swallowing up the traitors.<BR><BR>
+{{Quote||Islam grew with blood. The great religions of the preceding prophets and the momentous religion of Islam, while clutching divine books for the guidance of the people in one hand, carried arms in the other. Abraham ... in one hand carried the books of the prophets; in the other, an ax to crush the infidels. Moses, the interlocutor of God ... in one hand carried the Pentateuch and in the other a staff, which reduced the pharoahs to the dust of ignominy, a staff that was like a dragon swallowing up the traitors.
-The great prophet of Islam in one hand carried the Koran and in the other a sword; the sword for crushing the traitors and the Koran for guidance. For those who could be guided, the Koran was their means of guidance, while as for those who could be guided and were plotters, the sword descended on their heads. ... Islam is a religion of blood for the infidels but a religion of guidance for other people.<BR><BR>
-We have sacrificed much blood and many martyrs. Islam has sacrificed blood and martyrs.<BR><BR>
+The great prophet of Islam in one hand carried the Koran and in the other a sword; the sword for crushing the traitors and the Koran for guidance. For those who could be guided, the Koran was their means of guidance, while as for those who could be guided and were plotters, the sword descended on their heads. ... Islam is a religion of blood for the infidels but a religion of guidance for other people.
-We do not fear giving martyrs. ... Whatever we give for Islam is not enough and is too little. Our lives are not worthy. Let those who wish us ill not imagine that our youths are afraid of death or of martyrdom. Martyrdom is a legacy which we have received from our prophets. Those should fear death who consider the aftermath of death to be obliteration. We, who consider the aftermath of death a life more sublime than this one, what fear have we? The traitors should be afraid. The servants of God have no fear. Our army, our gendarmerie, our police, our guards have no fear. Our guards who were [killed] ... have achieved eternal life. ...<BR><BR>
+We have sacrificed much blood and many martyrs. Islam has sacrificed blood and martyrs.
+We do not fear giving martyrs. ... Whatever we give for Islam is not enough and is too little. Our lives are not worthy. Let those who wish us ill not imagine that our youths are afraid of death or of martyrdom. Martyrdom is a legacy which we have received from our prophets. Those should fear death who consider the aftermath of death to be obliteration. We, who consider the aftermath of death a life more sublime than this one, what fear have we? The traitors should be afraid. The servants of God have no fear. Our army, our gendarmerie, our police, our guards have no fear. Our guards who were [killed] ... have achieved eternal life. ...
 These people who want freedom, who want our youths to be free, write effusively about the freedom of our youth. What freedom do they want? ... They want the gambling casinos to remain freely open, they want heroin addicts to be free, opium addicts to be free. They want the seas to be free everywhere for the youth [i.e. mixed bathing].<ref name="Anti-American Terrorism and the Middle East Khomeini"/>}}
+{{Quote|Ayatollah Khomeini. Speech delivered on the commemoration of the Birth of Muhammad, 1981.|Mehrab (niche in a mosque) means a place of war, a place of fighting. Out of the mosques, wars should proceed. Just as all the wars of Islam proceeded out of the mosques. The prophet had a sword to kill people. Our Holy Imams were quite militant. All of them were warriors. They used to wield swords. They used to kill people. We need a Caliph who would chop hands, cut throats, stone people. In the way that the messenger of Allah used to chop hands, cut throats, and stone people.}}
+=== Ayatollah Sadegh Khalkhali===
+Sadegh Khalkhali was a hardline Shia cleric of Iran and the Head of its Islamic Revolutionary Court.
+{{Quote|''Holy Terro'', Amir Taheri, Sphere Books Limited, London 1987, p. 36; Scott, Peterson (2002), ''Me Against My Brother: At War in Somalia, Sudan and Rwanda'', Routledge (London).|Those who are against killing have no place in Islam. Our Prophet killed with his own blessed hands. Our Imam Ali killed more than seven hundred on a single day. If the survival of the faith requires the shedding of blood, we are there to perform our duty}}
 ===Bassam Tibi===
@@ Line 467: / Line 431: @@
 {{Quote||'''THE GROUNDS FOR WAR'''<BR>
-The Western distinction between just and unjust wars linked to specific grounds for war is unknown in Islam. Any war against unbelievers, whatever its immediate ground, is morally justified. Only in this sense can one distinguish just and unjust wars in Islamic tradition. When Muslims wage war for the dissemination of Islam, it is a just war (''futuhat'', literally "opening," in the sense of opening the world, through the use of force, to the call to Islam); when non-Muslims attack Muslims, it is an unjust war ('''idwan'').<BR><BR>
+The Western distinction between just and unjust wars linked to specific grounds for war is unknown in Islam. Any war against unbelievers, whatever its immediate ground, is morally justified. Only in this sense can one distinguish just and unjust wars in Islamic tradition. When Muslims wage war for the dissemination of Islam, it is a just war (''futuhat'', literally "opening," in the sense of opening the world, through the use of force, to the call to Islam); when non-Muslims attack Muslims, it is an unjust war ('''idwan'').
 The usual Western interpretation of jihad as a "just war" in the Western sense is, therefore, a misreading of this Islamic concept. I disagree, for example, with Khadduri's interpretation of jihad as ''bellum justum''. As Khadduri himself observes:<BR>
 <blockquote>The universality of Islam provided a unifying element for all believers, within the world of Islam, and its defensive-offensive character produced a state of warfare permanently declared against the outside world, the world of war. Thus jihad may be regarded as Islam's instument for carrying out its ultimate objective by turning all people into believers.</blockquote>
-According to the Western just war concept, just wars are limited to a single issue; they are not universal and permanent wars grounded on a religious worldview.<BR><BR>
+According to the Western just war concept, just wars are limited to a single issue; they are not universal and permanent wars grounded on a religious worldview.
-The classical religious doctrine of Islam understands war in two ways. The first is literal war, fighting or battle (''qital''), which in Islam is understood to be a last resort in following the Qur'anic precept to guarantee the spread of Islam, usually when non-Muslims hinder the effort to do so. The other understanding is metaphorical: war as a permanent condition between Muslims and nonbelievers. The Qur'an makes a distinction between fighting (''qital'') and aggression ('' 'idwan'') and asks Muslims not to be aggressors: "Fight for the sake of Allah against those who fight against you but do not be violent because Allah does not love aggressors" (al-Baqara 2.190). The same Qur'anic passage continues: "Kill them wherever you find them. Drive them out of places from which they drove you. ... Fight against them until idolatry is no more and Allah's religion reigns supreme" (al-Baqara 2.190-92). The Qur'anic term for fighting is here qital, not jihad. The Qur'an prescribes fighting for the spread of Islam: "Fighting is obligatory for you, much as you dislike it" (al-Baqara 2.216). The qital of Muslims against unbelievers is a religious obligation: "Fight for the cause of Allah ... how could you not fight for the cause of Allah? ... True believers fight for the cause of Allah,. but the infidels fight for idols" (al-'Nisa 4.74-76).<BR><BR>
-As noted above, Muslims tend to quote Qur'an selectively to support their own ethical views. This practice has caused a loss of specificity in the meaning of jihad, as Saddam Hussein's use of the term during the Gulf War illustrates. The current dissension about the concept of jihad dates from the rise of political Islam and the eruption of sectarian religious strife. Present-day Islamic fundamentalist groups - groups whose programs are based on the revival of Islamic values - often invoke the idea of jihad to legitimize their political agendas. The reason for this misuse of the concept is simple: most fundamentalists are lay people who lack intimate knowledge of Islamic sources and who politicize Islam to justify their activities. Before the Gulf War, for example, this occurred in Egypt, during the Lebanon War, and in the civil war in Sudan. Through such overuse and misuse, the concept of jihad has become confused with the related Islamic concept of "armed fighting" (''qital''). Therefore, there is a great need for a historical analysis of the place of scripture in Islamic tradition. Although Islamic ethics of peace and war indeed mostly scriptural, scriptural references can be adequately interpreted only in a historical context.<BR><BR>
+The classical religious doctrine of Islam understands war in two ways. The first is literal war, fighting or battle (''qital''), which in Islam is understood to be a last resort in following the Qur'anic precept to guarantee the spread of Islam, usually when non-Muslims hinder the effort to do so. The other understanding is metaphorical: war as a permanent condition between Muslims and nonbelievers. The Qur'an makes a distinction between fighting (''qital'') and aggression ('' 'idwan'') and asks Muslims not to be aggressors: "Fight for the sake of Allah against those who fight against you but do not be violent because Allah does not love aggressors" (al-Baqara 2.190). The same Qur'anic passage continues: "Kill them wherever you find them. Drive them out of places from which they drove you. ... Fight against them until idolatry is no more and Allah's religion reigns supreme" (al-Baqara 2.190-92). The Qur'anic term for fighting is here qital, not jihad. The Qur'an prescribes fighting for the spread of Islam: "Fighting is obligatory for you, much as you dislike it" (al-Baqara 2.216). The qital of Muslims against unbelievers is a religious obligation: "Fight for the cause of Allah ... how could you not fight for the cause of Allah? ... True believers fight for the cause of Allah,. but the infidels fight for idols" (al-'Nisa 4.74-76).
+As noted above, Muslims tend to quote Qur'an selectively to support their own ethical views. This practice has caused a loss of specificity in the meaning of jihad, as Saddam Hussein's use of the term during the Gulf War illustrates. The current dissension about the concept of jihad dates from the rise of political Islam and the eruption of sectarian religious strife. Present-day Islamic fundamentalist groups - groups whose programs are based on the revival of Islamic values - often invoke the idea of jihad to legitimize their political agendas. The reason for this misuse of the concept is simple: most fundamentalists are lay people who lack intimate knowledge of Islamic sources and who politicize Islam to justify their activities. Before the Gulf War, for example, this occurred in Egypt, during the Lebanon War, and in the civil war in Sudan. Through such overuse and misuse, the concept of jihad has become confused with the related Islamic concept of "armed fighting" (''qital''). Therefore, there is a great need for a historical analysis of the place of scripture in Islamic tradition. Although Islamic ethics of peace and war indeed mostly scriptural, scriptural references can be adequately interpreted only in a historical context.
 As we have seen, Islam understands itself as a mission of peace for all humanity, although this call (''da'wa'') can sometimes be pursued by war. In this sense, the ''da'wa'' is an invitation to jihad, which means fundamentally "to exert one's self" and can involve either military or nonmilitary effort. Jihad can become a war (''qital'') against those who oppose Islam, either by failing to submit to it peacefully or by creating obstacles to its spread. Although Islam glorifies neither war nor violence, those Muslims who fight and die for the ''da'wa'' are considered blessed by Allah.<ref>Bassam Tibi, "War and Peace in Islam," in ''the Ethics of War and Peace: Religious and Secular Perspectives'', ed. Terry Nardin (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1996), pp. 128-45.</ref>}}
@@ Line 711: / Line 679: @@
 ==See Also==
-*[[Jihad (Primary Sources)]] ''- A hub page that leads to other articles related to Jihad (Primary Sources)''
+{{Hub4|Jihad (Primary Sources)|Jihad (Primary Sources)}}
-*[[Terrorism]] ''- A hub page that leads to other articles related to Terrorism''
 ==External Links==
-* [http://www.answering-islam.de/Main/Books/Hughes/jihad.htm The "Dictionary of Islam" by Thomas Patrick Hughes: Jihad]
-==References and Citations==
+* [http://www.answering-islam.de/Main/Books/Hughes/jihad.htm The "Dictionary of Islam" by Thomas Patrick Hughes: Jihad] ''- Answering Islam''
-{{reflist}}
+*[http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/In-The-Name-of-Allah.htm<!-- *[{{Reference archive|1=http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/In-The-Name-of-Allah.htm|2=2012-09-05}} ] --> In the Name of Allah: Why terrorists do what they do... in their own words.] ''- The Religion Of Peace''
+==References==
+{{Reflist|30em}}
 [[Category:QHS]]
-[[Category:Jihad and Terrorism]]
+[[Category:Shariah (Islamic Law)]]
-[[Category:Islamic Law]]
+[[Category:Jihad]]
+[[Category:Slavery]]

Qur'an, Hadith and Scholars:Scholars on Jihad: Difference between revisions

Qur'an, Hadith and Scholars:Scholars on Jihad (view source)

Revision as of 19:54, 7 March 2021

Navigation menu

Search