Know Jihad

[JohnRN]

"The best jihad [struggle] is (by) the one who strives against his own self for Allah, The Mighty and Majestic," Hadith (sayings of the Prophet Muhammad). 1"Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loves not transgressors." Qur'an, Chapter 2, verse 190.



Meanings of "Jihad:"

"Jihad" and "Mujahid" (one who carries out a jihad) are two religious words that have been given multiple meanings:

-- Many accounts in the media define "jihad" as a synonym for "holy war," -- a vicious clash between followers of different religions, each of whom believes that God is on their side and that the other side is is of Satan. This usage often appears on Western TV, radio, and other media during news about the Middle East, where it is used to describe a call for Muslims to fight against non-Muslims in the defense of Islam. Some Muslims have begun to adopt this meaning of "jihad" as a result of Western influence.

-- Others use the term as a synonym for a struggle of any type. This reflects the origin of the word from the Arabic verb "jahada" which means to struggle or fight.




The conventional interpretation of "Jihad":

According to Beliefnet, 2 Al-Hajj Talib 'Abdur-Rashid, imam of the Mosque of Islamic Brotherhood in Harlem, NY, defines three levels of jihad -- personal, verbal and physical. Considering each in turn:

--- Personal Jihad: This is the most important form. This type of jihad, called the Jihadun-Nafs, is the intimate struggle to purify one's soul of evil influences -- both subtle and overt. It is the struggle to cleanse one's spirit of sin. In a brochure, the Institute of Islamic Information & Education describes several different contexts in which The Qur'an (the Islamic Holy Book) and the Hadith (the collected sayings of Muhammad) use the word "jihad" to refer to personal struggles:
>> Putting "Allah ahead of our loved ones, our wealth, our worldly ambitions and our own lives."
>> Resisting pressure of parents, peers and society; strive against "the rejecters of faith..." (Quran 25:52)
>> "...strive and struggle to live as true Muslims..."
>> "Striving for righteous deeds."
>> Spreading the message of Islam. "The (true) believers are only those who believe in Allah and his messenger and afterward doubt not, but strive with their wealth and their selves for the cause of Allah. Such are the truthful." (Quran, 49:15)

Verbal Jihad: To strive for justice through words and non-violent actions. Muhammad encouraged Muslims to demand justice in the name of Allah. When asked: "'What kind of jihad is better?' Muhammad replied, 'A word of truth in front of an oppressive ruler!'" 3 According to the Institute of Islamic Information and Education: "The life of the Prophet Muhammad was full of striving to gain the freedom to inform and convey the message of Islam. During his stay in Makkah [Mecca] he used non-violent methods and after the establishment of his government in Madinah [Medina], by the permission of Allah, he used armed struggle against his enemies whenever he found it inevitable." 1


Physical Jihad: This relates to the use of physical force in defense of Muslims against oppression and transgression by the enemies of Allah, Islam and Muslims. Allah commands that Muslims lead peaceful lives and not transgress against anyone. If they are persecuted and oppressed, the Qur'an recommends that they migrate to a more peaceful and tolerant land: "Lo! Those who believe, and those who emigrate (to escape persecution) and strive (Jahadu) in the way of Allah, these have hope of Allah's mercy..." (Quran, 2:218). If relocation is not possible, then Allah also requires Muslims to defend themselves against oppression by "fighting against those who fight against us." 2 The Qur'an states: "To those against whom war is made, permission is given [to defend themselves], because they are wronged - and verily, Allah is Most Powerful to give them victory." (22:39) The defensive nature of physical jihad (or "jihad with the hand") is frequently lost among many, Muslims, Christians, secularists and others.
In her book "Muhammed," author Karen Armstrong writes: "Fighting and warfare might sometimes be necessary, but it was only a minor part of the whole jihad or struggle. A well-known tradition (hadith) has Muhammad say on returning from a battle, ' We return from the little jihad to the greater jihad,' the more difficult and crucial effort to conquer the forces of evil in oneself and and in one's own society in all the details of daily life." 4

Other interpretations of "Jihad":

Both the Judeo-Christian Holy Bible and the Muslim Holy Qur'an are large religious books, containing a great range of material dealing with religion, spirituality, justice, laws, love, etc. And they also contain references to violence, hate, murder, war, and even genocide.

It would be quite possible to assemble passages from the Bible -- particularly the Hebrew Scriptures (a.k.a. Old Testament) which describe genocide, rape, execution of non-virgin brides, murder of homosexuals, torture of prisoners, the rape of female prisoners of war, murder of a family because of the act of the father, the regulation and condoning of human slavery, and many other acts, cultural traditions, and laws which are profoundly immoral by today's religious and secular standards. If all one read of the Bible was a collection of such passages, one might conclude that the Bible is an evil document that promotes violence, unethical behavior. One might even conclude that it should be banned as hate literature. Similarly, it is possible to scan the Bible for passages relating to humans' love of God; love of humans by God; striving for justice; supporting widows, orphans, the sick, the imprisoned; love and concern for fellow humans; spirituality; and may other acts, cultural traditions, and laws which promote a loving, moral and ethical life. If all one read of the Bible was a collection of such passages, one might conclude that the Bible is a precious document indeed -- one worthy of emulating.
Which group of passages represent the real Bible? They both do! For centuries, Christians have searched for guidance on social conflicts like the abolition of human slavery, equal rights and opportunities for women, equal rights and protections for gays and lesbians, etc. Some search for specific passages in the Bible dealing with these issues. A few concluded that slavery is an acceptable institution, that women should be oppressed and denied rights, and that gays (and perhaps lesbians as well) should be executed. Others search for passages dealing with general themes, such as love, justice, and caring for ones fellow humans, and concluded the opposite. Others have used other techniques to assess the Bible's messages. Which represents the "true" message of the Bible? They both do. And this is the reason why there are over 1,000 Christian groups in North America, all basing their beliefs and practices on the Bible, and yet teaching conflicting many beliefs about deity, humanity and the rest of the universe.

The Qur'an is similar.

A small percentage of Muslims who are from the extreme, radical and violent wing of Islamic Fundamentalism, and who are "...passionate, [deeply] religious and anti-Western..." 5 might dwell on passages or verses dealing with conflict, war, and resistance to oppression. Many conclude that the Qur'an expects them to engage in acts of terrorism, assassinations, suicide bombings, armed aggression against persons of other religions, oppression of women, executing innocent persons, etc.Those Muslim Fundamentalists who are not extreme, violent and radical, and those Muslims from mainline or liberal wings of the religion might concentrate on passages and themes of spirituality, justice, personal struggle, peace, freedom, etc.
They are consulting the same book, with a different emphasis, and achieve very different results.

We see the same split among Christians as they study Islam and the Qur'an.

Some emphasize the earlier passages in the Qur'an which emphasize cooperation with the Jews and Christians -- the "People of the Book." They tend to interpret "Jihad" in terms of personal struggle towards purity.Others emphasize later passages of the Qur'an which were received during a time of conflict. They tend to interpret "Jihad" as holy war.
They come to opposite conclusions about whether Islam is a religion of peace or war.

[sfga6970]

Excellent post John. It just shows that two people can read the same words and arrive at opposite conclusions. That is human nature, you perceive the words the way you want to in support of your beliefs.

[JohnRN]

Now how much of this do we hear in the main stream media?

[AT3Weins]

Great post John.! I'm going to share this with a few mis guided people that I know.

[sfga6970]

Originally Posted by John.

Now how much of this do we hear in the main stream media?

Almost none, because they want people to believe that their interpretation is the only correct one.

[Snowden]

Originally Posted by sfga6970

Almost none, because they want people to believe that their interpretation is the only correct one.

This is another truth about human nature.

Who we are now fighting fit into this category:

"A small percentage of Muslims who are from the extreme, radical and violent wing of Islamic Fundamentalism, and who are "...passionate, [deeply] religious and anti-Western..." 5 might dwell on passages or verses dealing with conflict, war, and resistance to oppression. Many conclude that the Qur'an expects them to engage in acts of terrorism, assassinations, suicide bombings, armed aggression against persons of other religions, oppression of women, executing innocent persons, etc."

They also go by the life lived by Mohammad, which was far from peaceful. The aim is for Islam, which they believe to be the only true religion, to be spread worldwide. All other religions would be either abolished or subject to Islamic rule. bin Laden is a proponent of this belief.

I think we know that the Wahabbi branch of Islam is the most violent; the Shi'ites the second. It's because they, like Falwell and Robertson, are fanatical religionists. The difference is that even Falwell and Robertson don't behead people on tape while praising God - definitely a tactic of these terrorists who are fighting their jihad in the way they understand the word.

Is Wahabbism a heresy of Islam? Many Muslims would say so, I believe. It's the reason for the existance of Abu Dhabi, the Emirates - possibly Yemen and some others of those Saudi break-off countries. I'm really unsure which they are, but I do know they broke away from Saudi because they considered Wahabbism to be a heresy.

But the history of Islam is very bloody, and so is the history of Christianity. The difference is in what the teacher of each religion said and how he lived as an example. That's a big difference.

And, as G. K. Chesterton said, "Christianity is not a religion that has been tried and failed, it is a religion that has failed to be tried."

Think about it. Christians have two commandments given us by Jesus; "Love God with all your heart, mind and soul" and "Love your neighbor as yourself." He added "on these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets."

Then there is the great commission to go forth and tell the Good News. That's is. No war, no killing, no threatening. Nobody doing it... Except small pockets of people here and there.

[JohnRN]

Here, consider this ::

Originally Posted by Snowden

They also go by the life lived by Mohammad, which was far from peaceful. The aim is for Islam, which they believe to be the only true religion, to be spread worldwide. All other religions would be either abolished or subject to Islamic rule. bin Laden is a proponent of this belief.

The aim for Christianity, which they believe to be the only true religion, is to be spread worldwide. All other religions should cease to exist and all peoples must be 'rescued' and brought within the 'flock'. Father Joseph Dias and Bishop D'souza are proponents of this vision.

Originally Posted by Snowden

I think we know that the Wahabbi branch of Islam is the most violent; the Shi'ites the second. It's because they, like Falwell and Robertson, are fanatical religionists. The difference is that even Falwell and Robertson don't behead people on tape while praising God

The Catholic branch of Christianity seems the most violent, followed by the Pentacoastals. It's because they, like Bin laden, are fanatical religionists. The difference is that they don't behead people, they decieve by giving food and aid to the starving while converting them to the Belief and thereby 'saving their souls'.

Originally Posted by Snowden

Then there is the great commission to go forth and tell the Good News. That's is. No war, no killing, no threatening. Nobody doing it... Except small pockets of people here and there.

The same can be said of the islamic terrorists.

The muslims hold great respect for the innocent and people of the book as well. Akbar the Great ran his kingdom on Sharia Law, and yet, it was the most peaceable kingdom in India. One of his descendants, Aurangzeb, also ran the kingdom under Shariyat, and it was like Ivan the Terrible had visited India.

I think many people are missing the point here - there are many interpretations of the book. Would you consider Falwell representative of Christianity? Well, many pious muslims don't believe in Osama either. But do you hear about them? No.

Why? How come most people seem to support the media when it comes to reports from the Middle-East? Especially if it is news about islamic terrorism? Or about how those 'savage muslims' reports? The same media you wouldn't look at if it said the current President couldn't count from 1-100.

And people complain of media bias. Media bias exists because the people who view them are biased.

Pick up decent newspapers once in a while and you'll read about the condemnation pouring out from the muslim community. They weep bitter tears about how muslims are slaughtering each other, how is it affecting the Ummah and how they are straying from the one true purpose among all this petty bickering - Allah.

There are literally scores of organisations in the US who protested against 9/11. But who ever gives a **** about what 'those bloody muslims have to say' ? After all, theirs is a vile, corrupt and defiled religion, right?

"[T]his is nothing but a manifestation of injustice, oppression and tyranny . . . and it is amongst the greatest of sins." Sheik Abdul-Azeez Aal ash-Sheik, grand mufti of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and head of the Council of Senior Scholars, commenting on the 9-11 attacks

17th Sep, 2001

"These terrorist acts contradict the teaching of all religions and human and moral values."

Organisation of the Islamic Conference [10th october, 2001]

Qatari Foreign Minister Sheikh Hamad bin Jassem al-Thani told a news conference at the end of the meeting that: "We don't generally support military action but then again we don't support terrorism either and we also have to identify terrorism and see its causes, which is why we asked for it to be discussed...at the United Nations in future."

Shaykh Abdul Aziz al-Ashaikh (Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia and Chairman of the Senior Ulama): "Hijacking Planes, terrorizing innocent people and shedding blood constitute a form of injustice that can not be tolerated by Islam, which views them as gross crimes and sinful acts." 2001-SEP-15.

Shiek Mohammed Sayyed al-Tantawi, leader of Egypt's great mosque, Al-Azhar: "[The attacks] will be punished on the day of judgment."

Fatwa, signed by: Shaykh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, Grand Islamic Scholar and Chairman of the Sunna and Sira Countil, Qatar; Judge Tariq al-Bishri, First Deputy President of the Council d'etat, Egypt; Dr. Muhammad s. al-Awa, Professor of Islamic Law and Shari'a, Egypt; Dr. Haytham al-Khayyat, Islamic scholar, Syria; Fahmi Houaydi Islamic scholar, Syria; Shaykh Taha Jabir al-Alwani, Chairman, North America High Council: "The terrorists acts, considered by Islamic law,... [constitute] the crime of hirabah (waging war against society)." 2001-SEP-27.

Zaki Badawi, Principal of the Muslim College in London: "Neither the law of Islam nor its ethical system justify such a crime." Cited in Arab News, 2001-SEP-28.