Jihad

[TheOlderGuy]

My wife heard a story on NPR today, that i looked up online: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6392989 , about how foolishly this administration has used the word "jihad". Because so many Islamic militants have been jihad this and jihad that, Bush and Co, figured they could use it as a pejorative to make their point, that "Muslim is evil, Democrats are almost as bad, and Republicans are good".

But to most Muslim people around the world, jihad is "striving in the path of God", a very holy activity. and when the Washington thugs say "we will fight jihad around the world", it is a very serious threat to all that is most scared in them. we offend millions of people who would otherwise be our allies in the war against terror.

What we should be doing is using the word "hirabi", sinful warfare. if Bush and Co, had any understanding of the muslim world, they would point out that what terroists do is NOT jihad, but hirabi. then all those muslims who hate terror as much as we do, would understand that it is not their God that we are warring against, but the scum who use God to condone violence against innocents.

 

[cantdog]

I'm afraid most people are really uninterested in understanding the world.

 

[jeninflorida]

islam embraces death, while the U.S. embraces life
source from OBL

My wife heard a story on NPR today, that i looked up online: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6392989 , about how foolishly this administration has used the word "jihad". Because so many Islamic militants have been jihad this and jihad that, Bush and Co, figured they could use it as a pejorative to make their point, that "Muslim is evil, Democrats are almost as bad, and Republicans are good".

But to most Muslim people around the world, jihad is "striving in the path of God", a very holy activity. and when the Washington thugs say "we will fight jihad around the world", it is a very serious threat to all that is most scared in them. we offend millions of people who would otherwise be our allies in the war against terror.

What we should be doing is using the word "hirabi", sinful warfare. if Bush and Co, had any understanding of the muslim world, they would point out that what terroists do is NOT jihad, but hirabi. then all those muslims who hate terror as much as we do, would understand that it is not their God that we are warring against, but the scum who use God to condone violence against innocents.

 

[rgraham666]

My wife heard a story on NPR today, that i looked up online: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6392989 , about how foolishly this administration has used the word "jihad". Because so many Islamic militants have been jihad this and jihad that, Bush and Co, figured they could use it as a pejorative to make their point, that "Muslim is evil, Democrats are almost as bad, and Republicans are good".

But to most Muslim people around the world, jihad is "striving in the path of God", a very holy activity. and when the Washington thugs say "we will fight jihad around the world", it is a very serious threat to all that is most scared in them. we offend millions of people who would otherwise be our allies in the war against terror.

What we should be doing is using the word "hirabi", sinful warfare. if Bush and Co, had any understanding of the muslim world, they would point out that what terroists do is NOT jihad, but hirabi. then all those muslims who hate terror as much as we do, would understand that it is not their God that we are warring against, but the scum who use God to condone violence against innocents.

All very true.

But the Shrubbies really don't give a shit. The Muslim world is simply a straw man to frighten Americans into supporting the Shrubbies kleptocratic and megalomaniacal program.

They'd have used Alpha Centauri if they thought they could get away with it.

And lets face it. For a lot of people in The West the Muslim world is on Alpha Centauri.

 

[Liar]

Al-jihād al-akbar - the Greater Jihad - the internal struggle to keep one's soul in faith

Al-jihād al-asghar - the Lesser Jihad - the external struggle to keep one's soul in faith
This includes anything physical. Like building a house or feeding the poor in the name of faith. Only one part of this lesser jihad, the al-jihād bis saif is the violent struggle. The silent majority of modern muslims regard it as outdated as the modern christian regard the Spanish Inquisition.

 

[TheOlderGuy]

All very true.

But the Shrubbies really don't give a shit. The Muslim world is simply a straw man to frighten Americans into supporting the Shrubbies kleptocratic and megalomaniacal program.

They'd have used Alpha Centauri if they thought they could get away with it.

And lets face it. For a lot of people in The West the Muslim world is on Alpha Centauri.

all very sadly true.

 

[Guest]

 

[jeninflorida]

What utter horseshit.

sorry, but its true. he was interviewed and that was the comment he made!

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

You know, I never know whether to believe this kind of shite. I mean, sometimes I have the feeling that they are all just jerking us around with these various interpretations. Because some muslims sure as heck use this term a lot themselves to urge blowing the hell of non-Islamic people. And I trust NPR about as much as I do a politician talking about his record.



Warning: The following is an extremely long article from wiki on jihad. I have not read this. I posted it here as a reference.

Wiki:
Jihad, sometimes spelled Jahad, Jehad, Jihaad, Djehad, Jawwad, or Cihad, (Arabic: جهاد‎ ǧihād) is an Islamic term, from the Arabic root ǧhd ("to exert utmost effort, to strive, struggle"), which connotes a wide range of meanings: anything from an inward spiritual struggle to attain perfect faith to a political or military struggle. Individuals involved in the political or military forms of jihad are often labeled with the neologism "jihadist" or "jihadi".

The term "jihad" is often used to describe purely physical and military "religious war", through physical struggle. Some Muslim scholars say that this only makes up part of the broader meaning of the concept of jihad. The denotation is of a struggle, challenge, difficulty or (frequently) opposed effort, made either in accomplishment or as resistance. A person who engages in any form of jihad can be called a mujahid (in plural: mujahidin) (Arabic: striver, struggler). Such a person might engage in fighting as a military struggle for religious reasons, or for example, struggle to memorize the Qur'an. Jihad has gained a negative connotation and reputation in much of the West because of its usage by various groups classified by the United States of America as terrorist organizations as part of its War on terror. The Jihad had a reputation for this at the time.

Greater and lesser Jihad
Nearly all Muslims believe that the non-military jihad is the "greater jihad" and the military jihad is the "lesser jihad."[citation needed] The Sufis as well as the traditions of Hadith (sayings of the Holy Prophet) are particularly known for supporting this tradition, though some Sufis prefer to use the Arabic word mujahada instead of "greater jihad."[citation needed]

Islamic scholar Gibril Haddad has analyzed the basis for the belief that internal jihad is the greater jihad. ("Jihad al-akbar"). Haddad identifies the primary historical basis for this belief in a pair of similarly worded hadeeth, in which Muhammed is reported to have told warriors returning home that they had returned from the lesser jihad of struggle against unbelievers to a greater jihad of struggle against lust. Although Haddad notes that the authenticity of both hadeeth is questionable, he nevertheless concludes that the underlying principle of superiority internal jihad does have a reliable basis in the Koran and other writings.[2], [3]

As stated, the validity of those hadeeth is disputed, especially by Western Orientalists and Islamic Fundamentalists- other hadeeth indicate that violent jihad is the greater of the two, and Islamic scholar and alleged founder of Salafi thought, Ibn Taymiyya, famously criticized some of the non-violent hadeeth and went so far as to say that "Jihad against the disbelievers is the most noble of actions, and moreover it is the most important action for the sake of mankind." [4].

However, Ibn Taymiyya also made statements supporting the concept of internal struggle as the greater jihad. Near the end of Rawdat al-Muhibbin, Ibn al-Qayyim quotes Taymiyya as follows: "I heard our Shaykh say, 'The jihad of "nafs" (the inner self) and "hawa" (desires) is the foundation of jihad of the disbelievers and hypocrites; one cannot do jihad of them before he first does jihad of his nafs and hawa, then he goes out and fights them.'" Ibn al-Qayyim too writes about the jihad of the ego as the "prime" (al-muqaddam) and "most obligatory" (al-afraD) jihad in al-Fawa'id, Zad al-Ma`ad, al-Ruh, Ighathat al-Lahfan, etc.[5]. Similarly, Sunni scholars consider a number of hadeeth supporting non-violent jihad to be authentic [6]. So although there seems to be a controversy about the authenticity of certain hadiths and certain interpretations of hadiths, Muslims agree that the struggle for purification of self (Jihad bin nafs) is extremely important.


[edit] Jihad as warfare
See also: Offensive jihad, Defensive jihad, Ghazw, Opinion of Islamic scholars on Jihad, and Itmam al-hujjah
The Qur’an asserts that if the use of force would not have been allowed in curbing the evils by nations, the disruption and disorder caused by insurgent nations could have reached the extent that the places of worship would have become deserted and forsaken. As it states:

“ And had it not been that Allah checks one set of people with another, the monasteries and churches, the synagogues and the mosques, in which His praise is abundantly celebrated would have been utterly destroyed. „
—Qur'an, 22:40


Javed Ahmed Ghamidi divides warfare into two types:[7]

Against injustice and oppression
Against the rejecters of truth after it has become evident to them
The first type of Jihad is generally considered eternal, but the second is specific to people who were selected by God for delivering the truth as an obligation. They are called witnesses of the truth (شهادة); the implication being that they bear witness to the truth before other people in such a complete and ultimate manner that no one is left with an excuse to deny the truth.[7] There is a dispute among Islamic jurists that whether the act of being "witness" was only for the Companions of Muhammad or this responsibility is still being hold by modern Muslims, which may entitle them to take actions to subdue other Non-Muslim nations. Proponents of Companions of Muhammad as being "the witness" translate the following verse only for the Companions[7] while others translate it for the whole Muslim nation.[8] As in Qur'an:

“ And similarly [O Companions of the Prophet!] We have made you an intermediate group[9] so that you be witnesses [to this religion] before the nations, and the Messenger be such a witness before you. „
—Qur'an, 2:143


Similarly, proponents of Companions of Muhammad as being "the witness" present following verse to argue that Companions of Muhammad were chosen people as witnesses just as God chooses Messengers from mankind. As in Qur'an:[7]

“ He has chosen you, and has imposed no difficulties on you in religion; it is the religion of your father Abraham. It is He Who has named you Muslims, both before and in this [Qur’an]: [He chose you so that] the Messenger may be a witness [of this religion] to you, and you be witnesses of this religion to non-Muslims [of your times]. „
—Qur'an, 22:78


Following is the first verse of the Qur’an in which the Companions of Muhammad, who had migrated from Mecca were given permission to fight back if they were attacked:[7]

“ Permission to take up arms is hereby given to those who are attacked because they have been oppressed – Allah indeed has power to grant them victory – those who have been unjustly driven from their homes, only because they said: “Our Lord is Allah”. „
—Qur'an, 22:39-40


The reason for this directive in Medina instead of Mecca considered by most Muslim scholars is that without political authority armed offensives become tantamount to spreading disorder and anarchy in the society. As one of Islamic jurist writes:

Among Kafayah obligations, the third category is that for which the existence of a ruler is necessary e.g., Jihad and execution of punishments. Therefore, only a ruler has this prerogative. Because, indeed, no one else has the right to punish another person.
—Sayyid Sabiq, Fiqhu’l-Sunnah, 2nd ed., vol. 3, (Beirut: Daru’l-Fikr, 1980), p. 30



[edit] Directive of warfare
The directive of the Jihad given to Muslims in Qur'an is:[7]

“ And fight in the way of Allah with those who fight against you and do not transgress bounds [in this fighting]. God does not love the transgressors. Kill them wherever you find them and drive them out [of the place] from which they drove you out and [remember] persecution is worse than carnage. But do not initiate war with them near the Holy Kabah unless they attack you there. But if they attack you, put them to the sword [without any hesitation]. Thus shall such disbelievers be rewarded. However, if they desist [from this disbelief], Allah is Forgiving and Merciful. Keep fighting against them, until persecution does not remain and [in the land of Arabia] Allah’s religions reigns supreme. But if they mend their ways, then [you should know that] an offensive is only allowed against the evil-doers. A sacred month for a sacred month; [similarly] other sacred things too are subject to retaliation. So if any one transgresses against you, you should also pay back in equal coins. Have fear of Allah and [keep in mind that] Allah is with those who remain within the bounds [stipulated by religion]. „
—Qur'an, 2:190-194


These verses told Muslims that they should not merely fight the Banu Quraish if they resist them in offering Hajj, but the Qur’an goes on to say that they should continue to fight the Banu Quraish until the persecution perpetrated by them is uprooted and Islam prevails in the whole of Arabia. Initially Muslims were required to fulfill this responsibility even if the enemy was ten times their might. Afterwards, the Qur'an reduced the burden of this responsibility.[7] As in Qur'an:

“ Prophet! Rouse the believers to wage war. If there are twenty amongst you, patient and persevering, they will subdue two hundred: if a hundred, they will subdue a thousand of the disbelievers: for these are a people without understanding. „
—Qur'an, 8:65

“ [From] now, God has lightened your [task] for He knows that there is now weakness amongst you: But [ever so], if there are a hundred of you, patient and persevering, they will subdue two hundred, and if a thousand, they will subdue two thousand, with the leave of God: for God is with those who patiently persevere. „
—Qur'an, 8:66


Some interpret above verses that Jihad never becomes obligatory unless the military might of the Muslims is up to a certain level. In the times of Muhammad, when large scale conversions took place in the later phase, the Qur'an reduced the Muslim to enemy ratio to 1:2. It seems that Muslims should not only consolidate their moral character, but it is also imperative for them to build their military might if they want to wage Jihad when the need arises. The Qur’an gave a similar directive to Muslims of Muhammad times in the following words:[7]

“ Muster against them all the men and cavalry at your disposal so that you can strike terror into the enemies of Allah and of the believers and others beside them who may be unknown to you, though Allah knows them. And remember whatever you spend for the cause of Allah shall be repaid to you. You shall not be wronged. „
—Qur'an, 8:60


While other scholars consider the later command of ratio 1:2 only for a particular time.[10]

A policy was adopted regarding the extent of requirement that arose in wars that the Muslims had to fight. In the battles of Badr, Uhud and Tabuk, the responsibility was much more and each Muslim was required to present his services as a combatant.[7] As in Qur'an:

“ Not equal are those of the believers who sit [at home] without any [genuine] excuse and those who strive hard and fight in the cause of Allah with their wealth and their lives. Allah has given preference by a degree to those who strive hard and fight with their wealth and their lives above those who sit [at home]. [In reality], for each, Allah has made a good promise and [in reality] Allah has preferred those who strive hard and fight above those who sit [at home] by a huge reward. Degrees of [higher] grades from Him and forgiveness and mercy. And Allah is Ever Forgiving, Most Merciful. „
—Qur'an, 4:95-96


Qur'an also states that turning backs in the battle field, except for tactical purposes, is a big sin and will bring wrath of God.[11] As in Qur'an:

“ O you who believe! when you meet those who disbelieve marching for war, then turn not your backs to them. And whoever shall turn his back to them on that day-- unless he turn aside for the sake of fighting or withdraws to a company-- then he, indeed, becomes deserving of Allah's wrath, and his abode is hell; and an evil destination shall it be. „
—Qur'an, 8:15-16



[edit] The driving force
Islamic scholars agree that Jihad should not be undertaken to gratify one’s whims nor to obtain wealth and riches. Many also consider that it must also not be undertaken to conquer territories and rule them or to acquire fame or to appease the emotions of communal support, partisanship and animosity. On the contrary, it should be undertaken only and only for the cause of Allah as is evident from the words.[7] As in Qur'an:

“ Those who believe, fight in the cause of Allah, and those who disbelieve, fight in the cause of Satan. So fight you against the friends of Satan. Ever feeble indeed is the plot of Satan. „
—Qur'an, 4:76


Muhammad, at various instances, also explained very forcefully this purport of the Qur’an:

Abu Musa Ash‘ari (rta) narrates that once a person came to the Prophet (sws) and said that some people fight for the spoils of war, some for fame and some to show off their valour; he then asked the Prophet (sws): “Which one of them fights in the way of Allah”. The Prophet (sws) replied: “Only that person fights in the way of Allah who sets foot in the battlefield to raise high the name of Allah”. Sahih Bukhari 2810
Abu Hurayrah (rta) narrates from the Prophet (sws): “I swear by the Almighty that a person who is wounded in the way of Allah – and Allah knows full well who is actually wounded in His way – he would be raised on the Day of Judgement such that his colour be the colour of blood with the fragrance of musk around him”. Sahih Bukhari 2803
Ibn Jabr narrates from the Prophet (sws): “A person whose feet become dust ridden because of [striving] in the way of Allah will never be touched by the flames of Hell”. Sahih Bukhari 2811
Sahal Ibn Sa‘ad says that the Prophet (sws) once said: “To reside in a border area for a day to protect [people] against an enemy [invasion] is better than this world and everything it has”. Sahih Bukhari 2892
Similarly as a reward for participation in such a strive, the Qur'an states:

“ Consider not those who are killed in the way of Allah as dead. Nay, they are alive with their Lord, and they will be provided for. They rejoice in what Allah has bestowed upon them of His bounty and rejoice for the sake of those who have not yet joined them, but are left behind [not yet martyred] that on them too no fear shall come, nor shall they grieve. They rejoice in a grace and a bounty from Allah, and that Allah will not waste the reward of the believers. „
—Qur'an, 3:169-171



[edit] Ethical limits
See also: Rules of war in Islam
Qur'an forbids fighting in sacred month and similarly within the boundaries of Haram. But if disbelievers disregard these sanctities, Muslims are asked to retaliate in equal measure.[12] It is stated in Qur'an:

“ A sacred month for a sacred month; [similarly] other sacred things too are subject to retaliation. So if any one transgresses against you, you should also pay back in equal coins. Have fear of Allah and [keep in mind that] Allah is with those who remain within the bounds [stipulated by religion]. „
—Qur'an, 2:194


Observance of treaties and pacts is stressed in Qur'an. When some Muslims were still in Mecca, and they couldn't migrate to Medina, the Qur'an stated:

“ And to those who accepted faith but did not migrate [to Madinah], you owe no duty of protection to them until they migrate; but if they seek your help in religion, it is your duty to help them except against a people with whom you have a treaty of mutual alliance; and Allah is the All-Seer of what you do. „
—Qur'an, 8:72


Similar reports are attributed to Muhammad:

Abu Sa‘id (rta) narrates from the Prophet (sws): “On the Day of Judgement, to proclaim the traitorship of a traitor and the betrayal of a person who betrayed his words, a flag shall be hoisted which would be as high as [the extent of his] traitorship”, and [the Prophet (sws) also said]: “Remember that no traitor and betrayer of promises is greater than the one who is the leader and ruler of people”. Sahih Muslim 1738
Other directives may include:[7]

A display of pomp and pride should be avoided when an army sets out for a battle. As in Qur'an:
“ And be not like those who came out of their homes boastfully and to display their grandeur and who stop [people] from the way of Allah even though Allah fully encompasses what they do. „
—Qur'an, 8:47


People who want to remain neutral in war should be left alone and not be troubled in any way. As in Qur'an:
“ Or those who approach you such that they neither have the courage to fight you nor their own people [and are such that] had Allah willed, indeed He would have given them power over you, and they would have fought you. So if they withdraw from you, and fight not against you, and offer you peace, then Allah does not give you permission to take any action against them. „
—Qur'an, 4:90


People who neither take part in a battle nor are able to take part in it – as per the dictates of custom as well as sense and reason – should not be killed. As according to a hadith:
‘Abdullah Ibn ‘Umar (rta) reports from the Prophet (sws) that once in a battle when it became known that a woman had been killed, the Prophet (sws) emphatically forbade the killing of the women and children. Sahih Bukhari 3015
People among the enemy should not be killed by setting them ablaze.[13]
Plundering and looting should be abstained from. As according to a hadith:
A person from the Ansar narrates that once while traveling for a Jihad, because of great compulsion, some people of the Muslim army snatched some goats to quench their hunger. When the Prophet (sws) came to know about this, he overturned all the utensils and remarked: ‘plundered [food] is not better than dead meat’. Sahih Bukhari 2705
Dead bodies should not be mutilated.[14]
Setting up obstructions and robbing travellers is forbidden. As according to a hadith:
Mua‘adh Ibn Anas narrates that once when he and others in the company of the Prophet (sws) embarked upon a campaign of Jihad it was observed that people had been obstructing the place where the army was to disembark and were busy robbing the passersby. When this complaint reached the Prophet (sws), he publicly announced at once that any person who obstructs the place of disembarkment and loots the passersby is in fact not doing Jihad. Sahih Bukhari 2629
Ibn Athir further adds:[15]

Wrong no one and exercise no torture.
Do not touch the children, women and the old.
Do not destroy fruit-trees and fertile lands.
Do not kill sheep and cattle.
Respect all religious persons who live in hermitages or convents and spare their edifices.

[edit] Objectives of warfare
According to verses 2:190-194, the Qur'an implies two objectives:[7]

Uproot fitnah (فتنة) or persecution (forcing people to renounce their religion)
Establish supremecy of Islam in the Arabian peninsula

[edit] Against persecution
Directives for action against persecution can be found in verse 8:39. At another place, the Qur'an states:

“ And what has come over you that you fight not in the cause of Allah, and for those weak, ill-treated and oppressed among men, women, and children, whose cry is: ‘Our Lord! Rescue us from this town whose people are oppressors, and raise for us from You one who will protect, and raise for us from You one who will help. [You should know that] those who believe fight in the cause of Allah, and those who disbelieve, fight in the cause of Satan. So fight you against the friends of Satan. Ever feeble indeed is the plot of Satan. „
—Qur'an, 4:75-76


Most Muslim scholars consider it an eternal directive and believe that all types of oppression should be considered under this directive.[7][16] Similarly, if a group of Muslims commit unwarranted aggression against some of their brothers and does not desist from it even after all attempts of reconciliation, such a group according to the Qur’an should be fought with:

“ And if two parties or groups among the believers start fighting, then make peace between them both. But if one of them outrages against the other, then fight you against the one which outrages till it complies with the command of Allah. Then if it complies, make reconciliation between them justly, and be equitable. Verily! Allah loves those who are the equitable. The believers are brothers to one another. So make reconciliation between your brothers, and fear Allah that you may receive mercy. „
—Qur'an, 49:9-10


If Muslims do not have a state, then in such a situation, Muhammad while answering a question raised by one of his followers, directed Muslims to dissociate themselves from such anarchy and disorder:

I asked: If there is no state or ruler of the Muslims? He replied: In this situation, dissociate yourself from all groups, even if you have to chew the roots of a tree at the time of your death. Sahih Bukhari 7084

[edit] Supremecy of Islam in Arabian peninsula
It is stated in Qur'an:

“ Indeed those who are opposing Allah and His Messenger are bound to be humiliated. The Almighty has ordained: ‘‘I and My Messengers shall always prevail’’. Indeed Allah is Mighty and Powerful. „
—Qur'an, 58:20-21


After Itmam al-hujjah (clarification of religion to the addressees in its ultimate form), Jews were the ones who were subdued first. They had been granted amnesty because of various pacts. Those among them who violated these pacts were given the punishment of denying a Messenger of God.[7] Muhammad exiled the tribe of Banu Qaynuqa to Khyber and that of Banu Nadir to Syria.[17] The power they wielded at Khyber was crushed by an attack at their strongholds.[18] Prior to this, Abu al-Rafi and Ka'b ibn al-Ashraf were put to death in their houses.[19] The tribe of Banu Qurayza was guilty of treachery and disloyalty in the battle of the Ahzab.[20] When the clouds of war dispersed and the chances of an external attack no longer remained, Muhammad laid siege around them. When no hope remained, they asked Muhammad to appoint Sa'd ibn Mua'dh as an arbitrator to decide their fate. Their request was accepted. Since, at that time, no specific punishment had been revealed in the Qur’an about the fate of the Jews, Sa'd ibn Mua'dh announced his verdict in accordance with the Torah. As per the Torah, the punishment for treason was that all men should be put to death; the women and children should be made slaves and the wealth of the whole nation should be distributed among the conquerors.[21] In accordance with this verdict pronounced, all men were executed.[22] John Esposito writes that Muhammad's use of warfare in general was alien neither to Arab custom nor to that of the Hebrew prophets, as both believed that God had sanctioned battle with the enemies of the Lord.[23]

No other incident of note took place regarding the Jews until the revelation of At-Tawba, the final judgement, was declared against them:[7]

“ Fight those who believe not in Allah or the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission and are subdued. „
—Qur'an, 9:29


This directive related to both the Jews and the Christians. The punishment mentioned in these verses was in fact a show of lenience to them because of the fact that they were originally adherents to monotheism. However, they did not benefit from this lenience because after the death of Muhammad they once again resorted to fraud and treachery.[24][25][26][27] Consequently, the Jews of Khyber and the Christians of Najran were exiled once and for all from the Arabian peninsula by the second Sunni Caliph Umar. This exile actually fulfilled the following declaration of the Qur’an about them:[7]

“ And had it not been that Allah had decreed exile for them, He would certainly have punished them in this world; and in the Hereafter theirs shall be the torment of the Fire. „
—Qur'an, 59:3


When the Idolaters of Arabia had been similarly subdued, it was proclaimed in At-Tawba that in future no pact would be made with them. They would be given a final respite of four months and then they would be humiliated in retribution of their deeds and would in no way be able to escape from this punishment. After this time limit, This declaration was made in the Qur’an in the following words:[7]

“ And a declaration should be made from Allah and His Messenger to these people on the day of the great Hajj that Allah is free from [all] obligations to these Idolaters and so is His Messenger. So if you [O Idolaters!] repent, it is better for you, but if you turn away, then know that you cannot escape from the grasp of Allah. And give tidings [O Muhammad (sws)] of a painful torment to these disbelievers. Except those of these Idolaters with whom you have a treaty, and who have not shown treachery in it nor have supported anyone against you. So fulfill their treaty to the end of their term. Indeed, Allah loves those who abide by the limits. Then when the sacred months [after the Hajj] have passed, kill these Idolaters wherever you find them, and capture them and besiege them, and lie in wait for them in each and every ambush. But if they repent and establish the prayer, and give Zakah, then leave them alone. Indeed, Allah is Ever Forgiving, Most Merciful. „
—Qur'an, 9:3-5


After the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, Muhammad himself singled out nations by writing letters to them. In all, they were written to the heads of eight countries.[28] Consequently, after consolidating their rule in the Arabian peninsula, the Companions launched attacks against these countries giving them two options if they wanted to remain alive: to accept faith or to accept a life of subjugation by paying Jizya. None of these nations were adherents to polytheism in the real sense, otherwise they would have been treated in the same way as the Idolaters of Arabia.[7]


[edit] Warfare in Muslim societies
History records instances of the "call for jihad" being invoked by Islamic leaders to 'legitimate' wars of conquest. The major imperial Muslim dynasties of Ottoman Turkey (Sunni) and Persia (Shia) each established systems of authority around traditional Islamic institutions. Part of this incorporation involved various interpretations of jihad.[citation needed] For example, in the Ottoman empire the concept of ghaza was promulgated as a sister obligation to jihad. The Ottoman ruler Mehmed II is said to have insisted on the conquest of Constantinople by justifying ghaza as a basic duty. Later Ottoman rulers would apply ghaza to justify military campaigns against the Persian Safavid dynasty. Thus both rival empires established a tradition that a ruler was only considered truly in charge when his armies has been sent into the field in the name of the true faith, usually against giaurs or heretics -often meaning each other-, often invoking some Sufi or other theological dispute, but rather driven by the universal craving for power, prestige, and if possible booty or territory.[citation needed]. The 'missionary' vocation of the Muslim dynasties was prestigious enough to be formally reflected in a formal title as part of a full ruler style- the Ottoman (many also had Ghazi as part of their name) Sultan Murad Khan II Khoja-Ghazi, 6th Sovereign of the House of Osman (1421 - 1451), literally used Sultan ul-Mujahidin[citation needed].

The so-called Fulbe jihad states and a few other jihad states in western Africa were established by a series of offensive wars.[citation needed]

The commands inculcated in the Quran (in five suras from the period after Muhammad had established his power) on Muslims to put to the sword those who will neither embrace Islam nor pay a poll-tax (Jizya) were not interpreted as a general injunction on all Muslims constantly to make war on the infidels (originally only polytheists who claimed to be monotheists, not "People of the Book", Jesus is seen as the the last of the precursors of the Prophet Muhammed; the word infidel had different historical uses, notably used by the Crusaders to refer to the Muslims they were fighting against). It was generally supposed that the order for a general war can only be given by the Caliph (an office that was claimed by the Ottoman sultans), but Muslims who did not acknowledge the spiritual authority of the Caliphate (which is vacant), such as non-Sunnis and non-Ottoman Muslim states, always looked to their own rulers for the proclamation of a jihad; there has been in fact no universal warfare by Muslims on non-believers since the early caliphate. Some proclaimed Jihad by claiming themselves as mahdi, e.g. the Sudanese Mahommed Ahmad in 1882.

 

[Guest]

 

[jeninflorida]

And you heard about this in an e-mail? From a cousin's brother-in-law's co-worker?

Feh.

obl, was being interviewed for a tv show, I will have to search for the program. but i'm sure it was a muslim camera crew and journalist. pretty sure it was discovery or bbc last night

 

[cantdog]

You know, I never know whether to believe this kind of shit. I mean, sometimes I have the feeling that they are all just jerking us around with these various interpretations. Because they sure as hell use this term a lot themselves to urge blowing the hell of non-Islamic people. And I trust NPR about as much as I do a politician talking about his record.

Similar lengthy quotes from Deuteronomy prove the same point about Bible believers. I'll stick with chapter 13, for a start.

So?

If your point is, Islam is bad, I'll trot Deuteronomy and Jesus out for ya. If your point is, religion is full of life-destroying claptrap from one end of everyone's holy book to the other, then I'm right with you.

 

[jeninflorida]

radical, any religion is bad....

Similar lengthy quotes from Deuteronomy prove the same point about Bible believers. I'll stick with chapter 13, for a start.

So?

If your point is, Islam is bad, I'll trot Deuteronomy and Jesus out for ya. If your point is, religion is full of life-destroying claptrap from one end of everyone's holy book to the other, then I'm right with you.

 

[TheOlderGuy]

You know, I never know whether to believe this kind of shit. I mean, sometimes I have the feeling that they are all just jerking us around with these various interpretations. Because they sure as hell use this term a lot themselves to urge blowing the hell of non-Islamic people. And I trust NPR about as much as I do a politician talking about his record.

<hugesnip>.

i can't believe you actually read even ten percent of what you just cut and paste here, or that you think anyone else will, but . . .

yes, the islamic extremists have appropriated the word, and use it to justify their ungodly acts. the point was that this administration has seriously erred (what else is new?) by using the word in that way, because it legitimizes the actions as holy in the eyes of other muslims who hold jihad in the highest regard. our purposes would be better served by pointing out the misuse of the term, rather than, in essence, cursing all of the muslim faith.

 

[neonflux]

islam embraces death, while the U.S. embraces life
source from OBL

I'm sorry, but hundreds of thousands of Iraqi deaths is indicative of the Bush Regime embracing what??? Also, I apologize for being dense but I do want to know what OBL stands for... Neon

 

[TheOlderGuy]

I'm sorry, but hundreds of thousands of Iraqi deaths is indicative of the Bush Regime embracing what??? Also, I apologize for being dense but I do want to know what OBL stands for... Neon

OBL, also known as 'the one that Bush let get away' while he went jousting at windmills in Iraq. hint: often confused with the rising star black senator from Illinois.

 

[rgraham666]

I'm sorry, but hundreds of thousands of Iraqi deaths is indicative of the Bush Regime embracing what??? Also, I apologize for being dense but I do want to know what OBL stands for... Neon

Osama Bin Laden.

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

Ok... look. If you are a guy and you get killed in a Jihad you get 72 virgins in Heaven, right? What do you get if you are a woman? I sure as hell wouldn't want 72 male virgins. What a waste of time.

 

[jeninflorida]

I'm sorry, but hundreds of thousands of Iraqi deaths is indicative of the Bush Regime embracing what??? Also, I apologize for being dense but I do want to know what OBL stands for... Neon

OBL = osama bin laden

Iraq is a mess, and what is the solution?

the current plan is not working, so should the county be split up just like Yugoslavia? After all, when sadam’s uncle was in power there were many violent clashes. Not sure how long the violence goes back, before WWI?

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

OBL = osama bin laden

Iraq is a mess, and what is the solution?

the current plan is not working, so should the county be split up just like Yugoslavia? After all, when sadam’s uncle was in power there were many violent clashes. Not sure how long the violence goes back, before WWI?

How about 1000 years, Jenn. I'm afraid that's close.

 

[jeninflorida]

How about 1000 years, Jenn. I'm afraid that's close.

sorry, but we didn't learn that much about that part of the world in school. not sure i would ever want to. what would happen, if the world didn't need oil from the middle east?

 

[jeninflorida]

OBL, also known as 'the one that Bush let get away' while he went jousting at windmills in Iraq. hint: often confused with the rising star black senator from Illinois.

sorry, Clinton was the one who let him get away...then again, it was in regan's time that we started to deal with him.

it also seems that Obama is not your typical senator...from what i've read about him he doesn't support the DC life style.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

Similar lengthy quotes from Deuteronomy prove the same point about Bible believers. I'll stick with chapter 13, for a start.

So?

If your point is, Islam is bad, I'll trot Deuteronomy and Jesus out for ya. If your point is, religion is full of life-destroying claptrap from one end of everyone's holy book to the other, then I'm right with you.

Well, I'll sign on to that last, certainly as far as these "revealed" exclusivist faiths like Islam and Christianity, but of course it's a gross oversimplification. They lard up their "what God said" books with something for everybody and every purpose, so you have to take it all with a big grain of salt, and also take with a big grain of salt any characterization of any part of it by adherents. I believe NPR has an ideological and political agenda that is no served by being too critical of Islam at this time, so I don't trust them.

Life is too short for me to read any of the holy book nonsense, so I am forced to judge what these religions are really about on the basis of what their adherents actually do, not what they say. With Christians, on the positive side, I see a lot of altruistic projects that often are beneficial. On the negative side I see a lot of fulminating and guilt-generating about acts that if you're hanging out on a smut site you think are nothing to feel guilty about. I don't see very many murders attributable to Christianity in the current era.

With Islam I assume there are some good works, but don't know that. There are a lot of murders performed in the name of Islam in the current era. In almost every Islamic society women definitely are second class citizens with limited rights. In some this is downright brutal. All in all, it's not a pretty picture, and provides little basis to believe "Islam a religion of peace and justice" claims. Rather the opposite, in fact.

Both faiths have problems with modernity, but Christianity has gone a long way to accomodate it. Overall Islam is responding very badly to modernity, with a few exceptions. Christianity is in general resigned to the separation of chuch and state, with certain exceptions that in the grand scheme of things are really rather minor. Islam is in general strongly opposed to the separation of church and state. Often violently opposed.

In addition to fickle "holy" books loaded with stuff that can be used to justify or condemn anything, there is great variety in the types of followers of a given faith, so the adherents can always say, "No, that's not the real Islam or the real Christianity represented by the actions of those particular members of the faith."

Who knows. If it's not, then I would say, "Police your movement."

I think religion is a relic of humankind's childhood. Certianly these kind of 'revealed,' 'here's what God said' religions are. My hope is that in the centuries and millennia ahead we grow out of it.

 

[jeninflorida]

Ok... look. If you are a guy and you get killed in a Jihad you get 72 virgins in Heaven, right? What do you get if you are a woman? I sure as hell wouldn't want 72 male virgins. What a waste of time.

That is too funny Jenny. What do women get for a suicide bombing? Islamic women in most countries are not allowed to work, yet fully capable for a suicide bombing

I don’t understand that, how islamic leaders can support that point of view.

 

[Roxanne Appleby]

dupe post