Jihad: What Is It?
Jihad is a word heard often in the news. Its meaning is complex, its application diverse, and its interpreters give it differing degrees of expression. As persons struggle to understand the complexities facing our nation in relating to the Islamic world a better understanding of the word is needed.
It literally means “struggle” or “exertion.” In its religious setting it always refers to fighting evil. It can mean jihad of the heart, of the mouth or pen, of the hand, and of the sword.
All Muslims are to engage in jihad of the heart which means to fight personal evil desires.
Jihad of the mouth refers to verbal disparagement on all that is in opposition to Islam. This can involve defense of their faith by advocating its virtues or saber-rattling. Saddam Hussein did the latter before the Gulf War in declaring “the mother of all battles” was about to begin.
Jihad of the pen involves either or both tactics as jihad of mouth in written form.
Jihad of the hand involved doing good deeds.
Jihad of the sword has four progressive stages advocated in the Qur’an. It is a summons to combat on behalf of Islam. Muhammad engaged in such and urged his followers to do so. As the followers of Muhammad increased in number his writings in the Qur’an on the topic grew more aggressive.
As his small movement began it was heavily persecuted. During this stage they were encouraged to engage in peaceful persuasion (Sura 16: 125-126). Many Muslims today still believe this to be the best approach.
In 622 when Muhammad fled to Medina he was still opposed and survived by raiding caravans. He now declared fighting was permissible to oppose aggression and recover property form infidels (Sura 22:39).
Soon rewards in the highest heights of heaven were promised those who sacrificed their lives in battle. Also those who were able to engage in battle and did not were to receive divine punishment (Sura 9: 38, 39). Armies expanded immediately. The next progressive move involved military offensive jihad. Muslims were told to take the initiative in war but to avoid doing so during four sacred months.
“When the forbidden months are past then fight and slay pagans wherever you find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, lie in wait for them in each and every ambush. But if they repent, perform the prayers and give alms, then leave their way free” (Sara 9:5).
The ultimate state of jihad removes all restraints against battle in any season and land not yielded to armies of Islam (Sura 9:29).
The law of abrogation in Qur’anic hermeneutics says the last revelation always takes precedence over previous ones (Sura 2: 106 13:39). It should be noted that though many Muslims do not advocate the latter posture on war there are those who do. It is expedient to try to discern between the groups and befriend those who do not advocate aggression while governments try to deal with those who do.
Islamic Violence
Our nation is confronted with a conflict that must be fought whether we want to or not. It is on a battlefield less than ideal yet more to be desired than the one preferred by the enemy. The war in Iraq is not one of our choosing. The combat was initiated by our President but the conflict was envisioned long before in palaces and desert tents.
Trying to link various factions is complex. Understanding their common goal is simple. The common objective is the destruction of the United States, the Great Satan. Our opponents had chosen the battlefield of our streets. Our President chose the sands of their desert.
To be casual about casualties is to be calloused. Every one changes the world of those related to the one killed. That brings sadness to the nation.
When considering casualties contemplate this. At the rate we are losing personnel in Iraq the conflict would have to last fifteen years for us to lose as many as died in the World Trade Center. What this is basically about is preventing other such events. That is plural, not just another, but many more. There are those who desire such devastation.
If we pull out of Iraq that will be perceived as weakness and they will come into the United States to continue to conflict.
It is my good fortune to have contact with civilian personnel working in Iraq who share interesting insights. Our media reports we have approximately 133,000 military personnel in Iraq. These civilians say our dedicated troops are actually 133,000 social miracle workers befriending the masses of citizens who are thrilled they are there.
Well, if that is true why all the shooting and bombing? This is where the plot thickens according to my friends inside Iraq.
When the Ottoman Turks were run out of the region around 1870 it became the Protectorate of France and England. England sought a strong tribe in the region to support which could help control all others. The cunning and forceful Saud family was chosen. Out of the Saud family, who were Sunni Muslims, developed two schools of thought. One was the Wahabi faction.
After Desert Storm in 1991 they became Muslim evangelists and spread their militant philosophy throughout the Muslim world into Indonesia, the Philippines, and other areas. Through the International Islamic Relief Organization (IIRO) they funded their movement and built mosques in Arab cities where even the smallest Christian work existed.
Keep in mind this is only a faction of Islam, but a large and energetic segment. They promised suppressed impoverished people Islam would bring them blessings. This attracted many. When the plight of these persons didn’t improve they complained to their spiritual leaders who told them blessings were not in this life but in the after life. Many of these became candidates for suicidal attacks in an effort to receive higher blessings. It is this element that has infiltrated Iraq since the end of the major conflict.
There are over 5,000 Saudi princesses today. Many of them are more moderate than the Wahabi element. This however is how the Royal Family became involved in the current conflict.
Islamic Sects: Peaceful Or Not?
A distilled depiction of America would be a contemporary, progressive, diverse, independent, free enterprise, freedom loving culture.
Around the globe many suppressed and oppressed people being held hostage by totalitarian regimes admire and aspire to these traits. These people want the freedom we enjoy.
These same traits are the very attributes that ignite and unite others in bitter hatred of our culture. These people want to destroy the freedom we enjoy in favor of a totalitarian government.
Both schools of thought have deep roots in the religion of Islam. Our American mentality prompts us to wants to know which is true Islam. The answer is both.
If you think Christianity has a lot of denominations the diversity in Islam will amaze you. As the Sunni and Shi’a branches of Islam jockeyed for dominance various groups emerged.
The Murji’tes became advocates of tolerance and equality. They were proponents of peace and espoused equality.
The Mu’tazilites promoted the principal that reason could determine truth without the benefit of revelation. Evil and good could be discerned simply by reason without revelation.
A third group, the Kharijites, opposed any persons they considered to have strayed from the perfect practice of Islam. Such persons were considered worthy of death. Any leader not holding to the true tenants of Islam was considered illegitimate and should be overthrown and killed.
Is the picture getting clear? Currently modern radical Islamizes emulate this ancient sect.
The Mu’tazilites emerged as the dominant power in the early 800s. Classical learning blossomed. Science, math, architecture, and art flourished under their guidance. However, a resentful fourth party began to solidify during this time. These proponents of legalism supplanted the Mu’tazilites within a century. They were a coalescence of three parties.
One group, the qadis, were administrators in the government. A group of intellectual legal scholars paralleled them and developed a definitive school of law. A third group, the pietists, opposed them and advocating the empire adopting Koranic standards. These three merged to become the legalists. Legalism closed the door on Islamic creativity. They advanced what they consider immutable divinely authored law.
It is that system of law that today’s fanatics want to see replace our American contemporary, progressive, diverse, independent, free enterprise, freedom loving culture. They are a resurrection of the legalists that ended the era of progressive Muslim societies.
Their hope is that by creating global terror governments and people will capitulate and allow them to Interlink Islamic theocracies under their control. If you wonder what that would be like reflect on Afghanistan of two years ago.
In the past other more rational Islamic groups brought their totalitarian dominance to an end.
Islamic Schools Of Thought
A distilled depiction of America would be a contemporary, progressive, diverse, independent, free enterprise, freedom loving culture.
Around the globe many suppressed and oppressed people being held hostage by totalitarian regimes admire and aspire to these traits. These people want the freedom we enjoy.
These same traits are the very attributes that ignite and unite others in bitter hatred of our culture. These people want to destroy the freedom we enjoy in favor of a totalitarian government.
Both schools of thought have deep roots in the religion of Islam. Our American mentality prompts us to wants to know which is true Islam. The answer is both.
If you think Christianity has a lot of denominations the diversity in Islam will amaze you. As the Sunni and Shi’a branches of Islam jockeyed for dominance various groups emerged.
The Murji’tes became advocates of tolerance and equality. They were proponents of peace and espoused equality.
The Mu’tazilites promoted the principal that reason could determine truth without the benefit of revelation. Evil and good could be discerned simply by reason without revelation.
A third group, the Kharijites, opposed any persons they considered to have strayed from the perfect practice of Islam. Such persons were considered worthy of death. Any leader not holding to the true tenants of Islam was considered illegitimate and should be overthrown and killed.
Is the picture getting clear? Currently modern radical Islamists emulate this ancient sect.
The Mu’tazilites emerged as the dominant power in the early 800s. Classical learning blossomed. Science, math, architecture, and art flourished under their guidance. However, a resentful fourth party began to solidify during this time. These proponents of legalism supplanted the Mu’tazilites within a century. They were a coalescence of three parties.
One group, the qadis, were administrators in the government. A group of intellectual legal scholars paralleled them and developed a definitive school of law. A third group, the pietists, opposed them and advocating the empire adopting Koranic standards. These three merged to become the legalists. Legalism closed the door on Islamic creativity. They advanced what they consider immutable divinely authored law.
It is that system of law that today’s fanatics want to see replace our American contemporary, progressive, diverse, independent, free enterprise, freedom loving culture. They are a resurrection of the legalists that ended the era of progressive Muslim societies.
Their hope is that by creating global terror governments and people will capitulate and allow them to Interlink Islamic theocracies under their control. If you wonder what that would be like reflect on Afghanistan of two years ago.
In the past other more rational Islamic groups brought their totalitarian dominance to an end.
Islam The Peaceful Religion
Islam is a peaceful religion we are told. Most of us accept that. However, that being true, there are some confusing facts.
Why is it that in Cairo’s largest mosque Friday prayer time is used to call for people to take up arms against America?
Why is it that in Pakistan during the anti-American riots protesters hold up signs with pictures of Osama Bin Laden and the words: “Hero of Islam?” Irony of irony these signs are not written in the language of Pakistan but English.
Why is it Imams threaten America in worship assemblies? Why are anti-American films depicting violence and glorify killing shown in Islamic schools in their homelands while here in America tolerance is encouraged?
Our president stopped using the term “crusade” and Billy Graham discontinued calling his meetings “crusades” out of respect for persons of the Moslem faith. Yet the religious leaders in Islamic nations call for a Jihad, a holy war against America.
Perhaps those who engage in these confusing acts have read only part of the Qur’an. Qur’an is Arabic for “recitation.” The injunction Mohammed said Gabriel gave him meant “make vocal what is already written.”
After Mohammed’s military victory at Medina he continued to fashion his revelations. The portion of the Qur’an “sent down” during his early writings were poetic and mystical. After the Medina conquest his works took on a more aggressive political and legal tone.
Mohammed learned about “the people of the Book” (Jews and Christians) in his youth. The post-Medina portion of the “recitations” became more warlike. It is these segments some have evidently come to rely upon almost exclusively. Moslems of good faith need to help others understand how they should properly interpret these passages. Recitations such as the following are hard for some People of the Book to whom they relate to understand:
“God fight them, what liars they are” (Surah 9:30).
“O believers take not Jews and Christians as friends; they are friends to each other.
Whoso of you makes them his friends is one of them. God guides not the people of the evil doers” (Surah 5:56).
There are radicals and extremist in every movement. They give all who rally around their banner a bad name. We must avoid stereotyping all Moslems as fanatical anti-Americans as well as Jew and Christian haters. They simply are not. Many friendships exists between people in these differing groups and there are many pro-US Moslem American citizens.
Moslems in America could do much to aid their image if they would be more outspoken in condemnation of violence. Such statements by their Imams would be meaningful. It would improve public opinion if they would voluntarily turn in their colleagues thought to have terrorist leanings. If political and religious leaders in their homelands would be as discrete in their expressions as President Bush and Billy Graham it would make for a better understanding and cool hot heads among their own.