It is now more commonly understood that the word Jihad means to struggle, to strive and to exert one’s effort. As such it is a very broad term and one that has a very positive connotation and is a central doctrine in Islamic thought. Sometime the word is used to imply warfare – and this is simply because that would be seen as an extreme act of physical exertion. However the Qur’an uses the term mostly in its broader meaning.
Jihad is thus a part of everyday life for Muslims – waking up for the early morning prayer, controlling one’s greed or anger, being kind to someone you do not like, working to better other people’s lives – would all be seen as a part of the daily jihad. The Prophet said that the greatest act of jihad is to speak the truth in the face of tyrant.
To extrapolate on the military context of the term (also known as the lesser jihad) - Islam does believe in a just war theory, like most Christian traditions, and envisages that violence can be used as a last resort in defence of one’s life and property or to stem oppression. For example, if a country is invaded by an aggressor. The Qur’an and the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad lay down very explicit conditions for the controlled and disciplined use of military aggression – even going as far as saying that animals, crops and trees should not be harmed, that innocent bystanders should not be attacked, that places of sanctuary such as churches and monasteries should not be desecrated and that as soon as the aggression stops the defensive force should also show restraint.
Suicide is forbidden in Islam. This tactic of bombing was adopted by some Muslim militants in the 1980s, including Hezbollah, and then spread to others. It has been heavily criticized and condemned in Muslim circles.
A few scholars have endorsed its usage as legitimate Islamic practice – e.g. some scholars have given limited license for its usage in occupied Palestinian territories as a last course of action – however this is not a consensus and particularly after 9/11 numerous scholars have been very outspoken against any form of suicide bombing. Among these one can count prominent Salafi/Wahabi and Sufi scholars, from across the spectrum of Islamic thought.
Some commentators have noted that attacks involving a potential suicide dimension have been carried out throughout the ages by people from different backgrounds. Perhaps the oldest recorded story is of the Biblical Samson bringing the building down upon himself and his captors. Stories of the Knights Templars during the Crusades have also been recorded, and more recently the Kamikaze pilots of Japan reached notoriety.
A study by Robert Pape, University of Chicago, shows some interesting results. Pape has catalogued every act of suicide attack between 1980 and 2001. His results show that the largest number of attacks was conducted by the Tamil Tigers, a Marxist, atheist, revolutionary movement. This contradicts the popular assumption that suicide attacks are purely religiously motivated, and his study also shows that in every case a clear political objective lies behind the attacks.
There is much debate about this subject and it can’t really be given justice in a few sentences. However it is important to point out that in the name of Islam, there has been much misogynistic practice that has been carried out across the world.
Many would argue that this is due to regional cultural influences rather than the actual teachings of Islam as a faith, which seemed to have a remarkably emancipating approach for its time when it began in the 7th century. One can see differential cultural influences at play in the Muslim world – so for example, in Malaysia one can find Muslim women who are business leaders, professors and highly educated academics, whereas in Saudi Arabia they are not allowed to drive cars, or in Afghanistan in recent years even their basic education was contested by some!
Certainly the teachings of Muhammad tried to create a clear space for women in 7th century Arab society – they were recognised as individuals with their own agency, allowed to contract marriage, to own property, to engage in commercial transactions, allowed to inherit, to have a political voice, to become scholars and great teachers, etc. But some thinkers now acknowledge that cultural trends quickly changed and women were sidelined from the ‘mainstream’ and were left with quite distinct roles, mainly focusing on rearing and educating the next generations. Perhaps this was the way of the world until very recently; after all it was only in the 1970s that women in Switzerland got the vote, and only around World War II that women began to be seen commonly in the workplace in Europe. However the advances made in Western nations, particularly in the latter half of the 20th century, have left many in the Muslim world quite dazed.
The current debate is therefore a crucial one, in which Muslim women (and men) – by re-examining the Islamic teachings in light of changes in the west – are beginning to articulate new positions and with an increasing confidence.
This is an old debate and has largely been settled. The acceptance of democracy was seen to be a controversial point some decades ago in certain Muslim circles. However, the point has been made that the Islamic sources do not identify a single model of governance; rather, certain values such as justice, accountability, equality of subjects do come across as prominent Islamic notions. Democracy is seen by some Muslim thinkers, as an imperfect system, but one that nonetheless manifests those values most authentically. It is definitely preferable to monarchy, oligarchy or dictatorship, and in the words of Churchill democracy could be seen as the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried.
It must also be acknowledged that there is no single form of democracy – British, American, French, Canadian, Indian; all function differently with quite different constitutional frameworks, legal frameworks, relationships between religion and political life, etc. In this context, Muslim countries may also evolve new models of democracy, in which the rule of law, separation of powers, equality of citizens, freedom of speech, accountable governance can all be combined with respect for Islamic traditions.
In describing the way in which Muslims should interact with non-Muslims the Qur'an uses very positive imagery of gracious behaviour, mutual co-operation and that Muslims should be open and inviting to others.
Some Muslims have a very distorted and negative picture, which is due to a twisted reading of certain verses of the Qur’an that talk of a context of warfare and betrayal. Naturally in such circumstances one would be cautious and aloof from the 'other'. This is further compounded by some anti-colonial Muslim discourses which have developed a strong anti-Western attitude, particularly during the 19th and early 20th centuries, some of this feeding into the modern context of the discourses of 'Clash of Civilisations' or the 'War on Terror'.
The general principle however, as is naturally lived by people, is of kindness, openness and generosity. A very famous verse of the Qur’an reminds people: "O mankind we created you from a single male and female and made you into nations and tribes that you may come to know each other".
Looking for further information? Want to see another topic covered here?
Please let us know. Email: admin@citrusmango.co.uk