The recent bombings in Boston by the Tsarnaev brothers, once again brings our attention to the Jihadist ideology adopted by terrorist organizations operating around the world and the effect it has on Muslims living world over. Jihad has become one of the most debated topics around the world and also the primary reason for dreading Muslims. This topic warrants unparalleled importance because of the effect it has on the image of the huge population of Muslims around the world.
The Jihadist ideology has evolved from the advent of Islam to the present times in a way that the essence of the ideology is lost. The usual approach adopted by people whenever a terrorist attack in the name of religion is carried out, is to hold the religion responsible for such heinous attacks. However, if we look at the Quran and Sharia closely, it is quite evident that the approach taken by these terrorists is in complete contradiction with the teachings of the religion. In order to understand what the actual concept of Jihad is and how it is different from the rationale provided by these extremists is to study the concept of Jihad as provided in the Quran.
Jihad literally means to strive for a cause with full force; in the Quran it is used in a general context as well as in the sense of an armed offensive in the name of Allah. For the purposes of this topic, the latter sense of the word is our concern. The two most essential elements of a society are peace and freedom and protecting them sometimes requires penal measures to be imposed on individuals that cause evil and disorder. Similarly, if a state or nation perpetrates evil and disrupts peace of the world then force might be needed to curb it. However, if things can be solved through dialogue and negotiations then the need for an armed conflict is eliminated.
The first thing to note about Jihad is that it can be only authorized by the state. No organization or groups of people have the authority to start an armed attack for any reason. This permission to take up arms is given in the Quran in the following words:
“Permission to take up arms is hereby given to those who are attacked because they have been oppressed” (22:39-40)
The right here is given to Muslims in their collective capacity, meaning that any decision to take up arms should emanate from the collective system of Muslims. The eminent Muslim scholar Javed Ahmed Ghamdi explains that the linguistic style of the Quran shows that verses addressing Muslims to use force have to be taken as addressing the Muslim community as a whole and not the individual.
There exists a consensus between all authorities of Islam that Jihad can only be authorized by a State. Sayyid Sabiq explains it in the following manner; ‘among collective obligations, there is a category for which the existence of a ruler is necessary e.g., Jihad and administering punishments’. The Hanfi jurist Uthman, Ibn Qudamah a Hambalite jurist, Mawaradi belonging to the Shafiite school of thought, all agree that authorization of a State is essential for Jihad. In case Muslims do not have a ruler or a state, the Prophet (PBUH) is reported to have said that Muslims should then distance themselves from any disorder or chaos that ensues (Bukhari, No:7084).
Secondly, an Islamic state can only wage Jihad in order to curb oppression and persecution in another state; whether Muslim or non-Muslim. Also, it cannot be carried out for territorial expansion or the forcible conversion of people to Islam. Supporters of the school of thought that believes no such limitations are imposed, justify it on the rationale that Prophet (PBUH) and his Companions carried out Jihad for reasons other than oppression and persecution. It is important here to understand that the Jihad carried out at that time was governed by a special law meant for that time period only. The Jihad waged by them was a punishment for people who despite being convinced had denied the truth. Today, that is not applicable and is thus limited to oppression and persecution only. Moreover, the Quran clearly provides in Surah 2, Verse 256 that there shall be no compulsion in religion. Thus, forcible conversion cannot be a basis for Jihad.
Thirdly, Jihad becomes compulsory for a state only if in the opinion of the rulers it has moral grounds and the military capability to curb the oppression and injustice of the state against which Jihad is to be waged. In order to understand this point, it is important to see what the moral grounds and the military might mean here. As far as the military capability is concerned, the Quran provides that the Muslims to enemy strength must be at least 1:2, for the Muslims to expect victory and only in these circumstances would Jihad be compulsory.
Moral grounds are given priority in all matters including Jihad. Meaning that even at times of war, the ethical limits imposed by the Quran should not be crossed. The first thing that needs to be maintained is the sanctity of sacred places; Muslims are not allowed to initiate any acts that would cause damage to sacred places. Secondly, Muslims can only inflict as much damage as has been inflicted by the enemy; they are not allowed to indulge into any excesses as it displeases the Almighty. This was provided for in Surah 2, Verse 194 in the following words;
“A sacred month for a sacred month; [similarly] other sacred things too are subject to retaliation. Therefore, if anyone transgresses against you, you should also pay back in equal terms. Have fear of Allah and [keep in mind that] Allah is with those who remain within the bounds [stipulated by religion].”
Another ethical limit imposed by the Quran is the fulfillment of promises. The Quran holds the sanctity of pacts and treaties in high regard. As per Ghamdi, Surah Anfal specifically mentions that where a nation with which Muslims are under obligation of a contract, is guilty of oppressing the Muslims in matters of their religion, the Islamic state does not have the right to help these Muslims if this amounts to a breach of contract made with that nation. Thus, a state cannot wage Jihad against another state with which it has pacts and treaties to the opposite effect. Also, even where the state has waged Jihad, there should be no damage to civilians.
Fourthly, a Muslim is only obligated to participate in Jihad if he is called by a Muslim State, other than that he cannot be regarded to have committed a sin by not participating. Even in such circumstances, Surah Nisa provides that people who are timid and frail or those who want to stay neutral are not to be troubled in any way and are to be left alone.
Having established the requirements of Jihad as provided in the provisions of the Quran, it is clear that terrorist attacks by these extremists do not fall anywhere close to the tenets of Islam. Islam does not allow an individual or a group or an organization to take the life of any human. This right vests with the State only and even there it is restricted by ethical, moral, military and ideological boundaries. Islam provides that civilians and innocent lives must be protected even where the State is to undertake an armed activity. The Quran holds human life in such high regard that it calls the killing of one human being as the killing of the whole of mankind. It is explicitly provided in the Quran in the following words (5:32):
“He who killed a human being without the latter being guilty of killing another or being guilty of spreading disorder in the land should be looked upon as if he had killed all mankind.”
Thus, individuals who indulge in the killing of innocent civilians are actually violating the principles of Islam, thereby committing grave sins. Attributing such acts to Islam and basing it on the principles provided in Quran is in complete violation to the principle of Jihad and also in violation to the basics of the religion.
View the Original article
0 comments:
Post a Comment