Chapter Two
The Problem of the Quest Jihad
I shall go on with the investigation of the misunderstanding of which I have expressed my opinion as I expressed my opinion of the wrong that is being carried out by the United States today against the peoples of the earth, as it strives to impose its authority and approach on the countries of the world by force and coercion. This corresponds to, and even exceeds, the wrong and practice carried out by some Muslims in this regard. These Muslims with erroneous understanding have come up, in relation to the concept of jihad in Islam, with what is called the quest jihad, i.e. jihad by the sword, to justify or legitimize with this term the mistaken understanding of jihad that they have.
· To begin with, I say that had they used a term as the jihad of advocacy, or the jihad of information or presentation, no one would have differed with them. They would rather have been saluted and supported by all Muslims, because advocacy and presentation of God’s religion with wisdom and pleasant preaching is a type of jihad that is prescribed and encouraged in religion. It is the normal and permanent approach of jihad. They insist, however, that the term they have invented serves the purposes of their mistaken understanding in dealing with non-Muslims, giving all other people on earth in relation to Muslims, according to that understanding, three options:
1. to embrace Islam,
2. to submit to the sovereignty of the Islamic state and pay a tribute (Jiziyah), or
3. to fight.
To justify such understanding and such a concept, they say the Qur'an “sword verses” canceled all others dealing with jihad and its types. For them, the Qur'an settles the question of jihad with what some verses, which they call “sword verses” say, such as:
Fight them, and God will punish them with your hands, bring disgrace upon them, grant you victory over them, and grant heart-felt satisfaction to those who are believers (Al-Tawbah IX: 14).
Fight those who do not believe in God nor in the Hereafter, nor forbid what is forbidden by God and His messenger, nor follow the True Religion, and who have received a Holy Book, until they submit and pay Jiziyah, having been subdued (Al-Tawbah IX: 29).
Believers fight those of the unbelievers who are near you, let them find you tough, and be sure that God is with those who fear Him (Al-Tawbah IX: 123).
Fight them so that there is no oppression, and submission is made to God. If they desist, let there be no aggression except against the wrongdoers (Al-Baqarah II: 195).
Where does this term, “Quest jihad” come from?
What is its evidence in Islamic Law?
Is it something promoted by God’s Messenger, blessings and peace be upon him?
Did any of the well-guided caliphs speak of it?
Was the term uttered by any member of the early, upright generations?
The promoters of this term have no answer for any of these questions. They claim to have the right to innovate, while others and their innovations are destined for hellfire.
On the other hand does not this mistaken understanding agree with the claim of some Islam-hating orientalists, repeatedly made in their venomous books and research works, that Islam was spread by the sword, coercion, and violation of the freedom and dignity of nations, which were ruled by Muslim by fire and arms, as they claim? Does not this innovated and objectionable doctrine in Islam contribute to, and serve, the purposes of both orientalists and occidentalists while they wage their fierce campaign against Islam? These orientalists and occidentalists are trying, at the same time, to present a distorted image of its immortal, tolerant, international message, the message of justice and peace, of mercy and affection, of construction on earth and establishment of life, of preserving the environment and respecting human life and dignity? Is not the claim of that group, in its promotion of the sword culture, in contradiction, at the same time, with what we speak of with pride when we tell others, and when we answer orientalists and their followers, that Islam has been spread by the sincerity of its words and honesty of its dealings, by justice and mercy? Is it not in contradiction with our statements that people accepted and believed in Islam because of the loftiness of its values and principles, and because of the evidence and proof they recognized in its discourse? In support of this, the well known French writer Gustave Le Bon says in his book Arab Civilization:
Force was definitely not a factor in spreading the Qur'an. The Arab gave the defeated the freedom of holding to their religion. If Christian nations did embrace the religion of their vanquishers, it is because these new conquerors seemed more just in dealing with them than their earlier masters.
On the other hand, how is this understanding and conviction entertained by such Muslims compatible with the words of God, the Most Sublime:
There shall be no coercion in religion. The right way is now distinct from error (Al-Baqarah II: 256).
“You have your religion; and I have one” (Al-Kafiroon CIX: 6).
It is not for you to guide people to the right faith, bur God guides whom He will (Al-Baqarah II: 272).
Had your Lord so willed, all people on earth collectively would have believed. Are you, then, going to coerce people to become believers? (Yunus X: 99).
Had God so willed, He could have made you all one nation; but He wants to test you by means of that which He has bestowed on you (Al-Maidah V: 48).
Say, ‘People, the truth has come to you from your Lord. Whoever chooses to follow the true guidance does so for his own good; and whoever chooses to go astray, does so at his own peril. I am not responsible for your conduct’ (Yunus X: 108).
Then give warning; your task is only to warn. ◘ You have no control over them (Al-Ghashiyah LXXXVIII: 21 – 22).
Whoever obeys the Messenger would be obeying God. As for those who turn away – We have not sent you to be their keeper (Al-Nisaa IV: 80).
Follow what has been revealed to you by your Lord, other than whom there is no deity, and turn your back on polytheists. ◘ Had God so willed, they would not have been polytheists. We have not made you their keeper, nor are you responsible for them. ◘ Do not revile what they invoke instead of God, lest they should revile God spitefully out of ignorance. Thus have We made the actions of every community seem goodly to them. Then to their Lord shall they all return, and He will explain to them all that they have been doing (Al-An' am VI: 106-08).
Your Lord knows best what you are. If He so wills, He will bestow His mercy on you, and if He so wills, He will inflict punishment on you. We have not sent you to be their guardian (Al-Israa XVII: 54).
We have sent you only as a herald of good news and of warnings (Al-Israa XVII: 105).
Once a Jewish woman approached Omar Ibn Al-Khattab, may God be pleased with him and please him, complaining of poverty, need, and inability to secure treatment for her sick child. The well-guided caliph sympathized with her, took her by the hand to the treasury house, gave her some money, and expressed his consolation for her child’s sickness. Her face and tongue gave an expression of satisfaction, and that made Omar wonder whether she would embrace Islam if he invited her to do so. He said, “Servant of God, I invite you to embrace Islam, for it has the benefit of this world and the Hereafter.” She said, “As for this, the answer is no, Prince of Believers.” Omar regretted that he had invited her, taking advantage of her psychological condition after he had been generous with her. He used to say, “Is this not a form of coercion in religion?” He repeated time and again, “Two days keep Omar worried at nighttime.” He meant the Day of Al-Hudaibiyah and the day he had his encounter with that woman.
I believe, on the other hand, that the fallacy in using the phrase “quest jihad,” advanced by a group of Muslims is the result of a failure to distinguish between a state of war against the other and the state of peace or the state of a mutual pledges or of non-aggression between Muslims and others. A state of war has, of course, its rules, values, ethics, and controls, the same way that a state of peace has its. The same is true about the cases of covenants, treaties, and reconciliation. Because of this, those people had to cancel those rules, cases, and conditions in the relation with the other, or to reduce them all to one state and consider that the Islamic nation is in a state of constant war with other nations, and the other cases of peace, covenants, and agreements no longer exist. The way they understand it, the sword verses cancel those cases and affirm the state of continuous war with the other. They consider that Islamic conquests support their interpretation and are decisive evidence that they are right in their interpretation and belief.
This question of “conquests” is another problem added to the problems in the interpretation of some people. No doubt, the idea that the conquests are military campaigns to spread Islam by force and that these campaigns offer non-Muslims one of three options (embracing Islam, paying a tribute, or fighting) is considered, as this group of Muslim understands it, legal evidence. They hold that whoever objects to this interpretation falls into such a serious religious difficulty that might exclude him from being a Muslim, because, in such a case, he would be objecting to something known in religion as a necessity. Certainly, this question is extremely serious and must be investigated, and the problem it poses must be resolved.
· A group of Muslims believes that the spread of Islam among people, whether this mean their embracing it or submitting to Muslim authority, was achieved by the sword and through the military campaigns waged by Muslims against human communities by order from God and His Messenger. They argue that this belief is a known basic principle of religion and that it should be followed and adhered to at all times.
· Another group of Muslims believes that fighting is not the means to spread Islam or to subject people and communities to Muslim authority. They maintain that fighting in Islam is an exceptional means of jihad, dictated and made an obligation by one of three situations: injustice, oppression, and aggression that are exercised against Muslim by the force of arms and fighting. In such a case, fighting against these situations has to begin, and it stops when the situation and its consequences end. In any situation other than these three, Muslims do not initiate fighting against any one.
We have, then, two doctrinal opinions concerning the legitimacy of fighting.
1. One opinion asserts that fighting is a constant obligation to spread Islam and cleanse the earth of infidels and infidelity. This is the opinion of an abnormal minority.
2. Another opinion asserts that fighting is an exceptional, defensive duty dictated by situations of injustice, oppression, and aggression, rather than to spread Islam or to eradicate infidelity on earth.
At the beginning, I submit that I am with those who maintain that fighting is a duty in the situations pointed out – injustice, oppression, and aggression – and that it has nothing to do with spreading Islam or with dealing with infidelity and infidels. This point will be elaborated on in my discussion of the question of jihad and fighting.
We all believe, in principle, in the authenticity of the approach of the Islamic “conquests” and are proud of their ethics, values, and controls. As for the way to understand these “conquests,” however, I would like, in the hope of ending this problem, to remind those brothers, may they and I be granted good guidance and rationality, that the first time the word “conquest” was mentioned in the Islamic system was in the opening of the sura of Al-Fattah (The Conquest): “We have given you an evident conquest” (Al-Fattah XLVIII: 4). It is known that this sura was revealed to the Messenger, blessings and peace be upon him, on his way back from Al-Hudaibiyah, where he had signed a treaty with Quraish, which did not allow him to enter Makkah for a minor pilgrimage and insisted upon that. The Muslims with the Prophet had pledged support to God’s Messenger, blessings and peace be upon him, to fight Quraish, having received the news that Quraish had killed 'Othman Ibn 'Affaan, the envoy of God’s messenger, sent to negotiate with that tribe. The treaty included harsh provisions which Muslims found hard to accept and they felt bitter about it. Still, they ultimately submitted to the command of their Messenger, blessings and peace be upon him, who approved that reconciliation. His acceptance of the reconciliation was endorsed by his Lord, Who even described the achievement that had kept blood from being shed as an “evident conquest.” Hence, a conquest in Islam is achieved by saving lives rather than by shedding blood, by wisdom and wise action rather than foolishness and recklessness in speech and action. It goes with peace and security, rather than wars and destruction. As for situations of injustice, oppression, and aggression, there can be no compromise and no laxity. That is why Al-Radhwan Pledge was made before the reconciliation as a reaction to the report that reached Muslims to the effect that Quraish had killed 'Othman Ibn 'Affaan, may God be pleased with him. When it turned out that what happened was different and Quraish accepted the principle of dialogue and reconciliation, the inclination changed from engaging in war to repulse an aggression to following the normal approach of jihad, which is the jihad of words and explanation, argument and evidence.
The normal thing in the doctrine of Islamic conquests is to resort to wisdom and pleasant preaching in introducing God’s religion to other people, explaining to them its values and immortal, international message. When, however, Muslims are prevented from carrying out the obligation of introducing their religion to others, when they are kept from explaining its immortal, international message, Islam has set a clear approach for Muslims to deal with the cases of prevention that they face. This approach can be summed up as follows.
· If the prevention is combined with a declaration of war against Muslims and actually fighting them, the ruling on such a situation is clear and evident: “Fight for the cause of God those who fight you, and do not commit aggression” (Al-Baqarah II: 190). Naturally all rules and conventions go into effect in such a situation, as well as all penalties, controls, and ethics that apply to a state of war in accordance with the immortal divine rule: “If anyone commits aggression against you, attack him just as he has attacked you. Have fear of God, and be sure that God is with those who fear Him” (Al-Baqarah II: 194).
· If it is a case of prevention only, where Muslims are not allowed to contact others, but no fighting or aggression against Muslims is committed, the ruling is to resort to dialogue and argument with the other party in the best possible way, and to fall back on patience and pacification, using all possible peaceful means with the source of prevention, until an understanding, on valid grounds, between it and Muslims is reached:
Therefore, invite to that and be straight as you have been commanded. Do not follow their inclinations, and say, “I believe in the Book revealed by God and am commanded to be just among you. God is our Lord and yours, and we have our deeds and you have yours. There is no argument between us and you. God will bring us together, and to Him is the destination (Al-Shura XLII: 15).
Reason with the People of the Book only in a graceful manner, except the unjust among them, and say, “We believe in what is revealed to us and revealed to you. Our God and yours is one, and we submit to Him” (Al-'Ankaboot XXIX: 46).
· If Muslims are allowed to promote their mission and introduce their religion, the ruling in this case is peace and friendliness.
God does not forbid you, in regards to those who did not fight you nor driven you out of your homes, to be kind and just to them. God loves the just (Al-Mumtahinah LX: 8).
The history of Muslims confirms that they have never started to fight any body while telling people about their religion. In fact, many nations welcomed Muslims and preferred them over others who were known for their injustice and oppression of people. The examples are too many to be counted, which is something not unknown to those who believe that fighting is the decisive factor in the relationship between Muslims and others and the obligatory means, at all times, to spread Islam and force others into it.
On the other hand, this mistaken understanding of the relationship between Muslims and others results from the erroneous understanding of the method used historically to introduce Islam to people and explain the religion of God to communities. It was, beyond doubt, a method compatible with the potential and conventions of people and the traditions prevailing at the time. We and the people around us used to live in the state of closed communities and closed doors, the state of isolated cultures and civilizations, hiding behind forts and citadels. Islam came to make people move from the culture of isolation and separation to that of coexistence and communication, from the drift towards conflicting and disagreeing nationalist movements to the ties of human brotherhood and complementary interests. Muslims were entrusted with the task of bringing these divine values to the attention of all other human beings, but they found themselves facing the problem of these closed communities and locked up forts. This reality posed for them a great and difficult question: how to reach other people! They discovered that, entrusted with this great divine task, they could only go out to reach people and “conquer”—and that, to my mind, is the source of the term “conquests” – their way to get to them and inform them of the message of God, and to be thus excused by God, the Most Sublime, as regards delivering His guidance to all human beings. This reaching out – “You are the best nation that mankind has known – to carry out this noble humanitarian task was faced at that time with gigantic obstacles. Muslims had to follow the routes of the desert and face its hazards; to cut through mountain ranges and the gloom of their undulations; to navigate along rivers and across seas, despite their limited experience in this field; and to be ready to deal with human impediments, such as bands of highway robbers and gangs of thieves and murderers, which were common and powerful in those days. Faced with these various difficulties, Muslims had to equip themselves with everything that could help them to overcome those obstacles, including food, arms, astronomy experts, and geographical guides. This is what makes some people believe that this method of getting ready and preparing is a type of military campaign, adopted by Muslims in their approach, in order to vanquish human communities and force them into Islam. Actually, all the preparedness was only to be equipped with the means of self-defense against the obstacles and hazards of the way and against attackers and murderer and robber bands that stood in the way of Muslims in their drive to carry out the task of introducing and explaining Islam and its divine values to people with wisdom and pleasant preaching.
Today we live in an open world that allows communication between societies, and we are engulfed by the communication revolution and dissemination of information. Nations enjoy the freedom of movement and contact to the utmost degree. All means of contact with the other are open to Muslims, and they have at their disposal all the tools and facilities to introduce their religion and culture, with encouragement from the other himself. At the same time, Muslims reside today in countries ruled by the other, and they are entrusted with responsibilities and have social and economic, and even political, influence in many world countries. Their mosques and Islamic and cultural centers stand high in all countries of the world. They even have their own universities, academies, and research centers, where Islam is introduced and taught without any restrictions.
Moreover, many outstanding universities in the world – such as the universities of Harvard, Georgetown, Cambridge, the Sorbonne, Moscow, Tokyo, and Oxford, and other universities – have today Islamic centers and mosques and have academic programs and official academic chairs for various Islamic studies. Conferences and symposia are being held all the time and in all countries of the world for dialogue and mutual acquaintance, and it is surprising that the initiative of the majority of such conferences and meetings comes from the other, who also shoulders the expenses. The attendance and participation of Muslims is facilitated, and they are allowed to speak with unrestricted freedom about their religion and explain the purposes of its mission.
I can say, with great confidence, that Muslims, unfortunately, are completely incapable of taking advantage of the opportunities to introduce Islam and its international message. This requires that we reconsider our understanding of the doctrine of time and place and to set ourselves and our human approach and skills right in a way that qualifies us to take advantage of opportunities and of what is available to introduce to people the treasures of Islam that are concealed by our flawed method and stupidity of the approach of some of us. Indeed, Islam today is concealed by Muslims themselves.
In short, a Muslim must realize the true nature of this great Islam and follow a sound approach in dealing with its rulings, principles, and controls. He also has to realize that the presentation in the Qur'an of the message of Islam and the divine religion in general is, by God’s Wisdom, a universal presentation. This means that the Qur'an is a universe in itself, with overlapping worlds of verses, texts, events, rulings, and ethics. These require objective handling and extensive deliberation, all of which should be based on the instructions of the Prophet’s guidance and within the framework of statements by upright predecessors. This is required for a sound grasping of the miraculous and encyclopedic nature of its values and implications. Short of this, I believe there will always be a defect of some sort in Muslim circles as concerns their understanding of their religion and the purposes of the immortal, international message of their Lord.
From His Book (Partners ... not Guardians) Part Four / Chapter Two
|
To the Nation’s leaders - To the Nation’s scholars and intellectuals - To leaders of the world |
All Rights Reserved For The Author Prof. Dr. Hamid Al-Rifaie