Jihad in Relation to Other Islamic Tenets - Admission/Application Essay Example

Arguably the most well-known conflict arising from religion is that of the various Islamic extremists, like al-Qaeda, against America. Al-Qaeda in particular has been in conflict with America since at least 1993 – the day Ramzi Yousef and his comrades bombed the World Trade Center (BBC News, accessed 12/17/09). And, more successfully, al-Qaeda attacked the WTC again on September 11, 2001 – the single most devastating act of terrorism on American soil that placed them in the global eye – in an act of jihad (at least, according to them). Jihad has become their most frequent excuse for perpetuating their acts of terrorism; that is, according to them, they are merely retaliating for America’s (real or perceived) oppression of Muslims. Such a cause – defense and vengeance on behalf of their Muslim brethren - would have been noble, were it not contrary to what Islam and jihad are really about – that is, it places greater focus on peace and self-improvement than on armed conflict. Thus, this paper’s content will delve into the Islamic faith, specifically the concept of jihad, both as most understand it, and as how it is really defined. More importantly, it is intended to serve as a look into al-Qaeda’s mindset – how and why they use the tenets of their faith to justify their acts of terrorism – and explain why such terrorism cannot truly be considered Islamic, let alone acts of jihad. Introduction: Jihad in Relation to Other Islamic Tenets For starters, the rootword for jihad is ‘jahada’ – one’s utmost exertion of power, efforts, endeavors, and ability when contending with something one disapproves of (Heidi Trost, 2004). It can be applied to most if not all aspects of daily life on varying levels, and is almost always done with the goal of personal improvement in mind. In particular, the greater, inner jihad entails struggling against one’s inclination to do evil. In contrast, the lesser, outer jihad entails conversion of non-believers, defense against evil, and actively opposing and fighting it, whether physically or otherwise. Regardless of what most of us think, it is not synonymous with taking up arms (Islam by Questions, accessed 12/17/09), although it does involve such when necessary – and only when done in Allah’s name. As a matter of fact, the same site affirms that Islam outright commands war and conflict, especially when overthrowing injustice, tyranny, and oppression (accessed 12/18/09), and when striking back against someone who has done you wrong. At the same time, Islamic precepts hold that, even then, believers must not resort to less than moral methods themselves (accessed 12/18/09) – which is what al-Qaeda and other terrorists are doing. In all aspects, evil should be opposed with white-hot rage and hatred, foremost with the knowledge that it is wrong. Lesser jihad, then, is outward – a struggle against the evil one sees around him, while inner jihad involves struggling against the evil within. Lesser jihad, according to Robert Wuthnow (1998), is closely associated with Allah’s command to the prophet Muhammad – to command what is right and forbid what is wrong – and is further characterized as a struggle for justice by the hadiths, the sayings and teachings of the Prophet. Muslims have the moral obligation to oppose injustice – by actions if possible, or by words or at least intentions where action is not an option. The two are said to be inseparable; one cannot exist without the other. Specifically, only by rising above one’s evil and sinful nature can he fight the evils and injustices of this world, which will in turn inspire others to similarly transcend themselves. Specifically, abandoning the lesser jihad is said to make one complacent. Jihad vs. Terrorism: Why al-Qaeda and its Methods are un-Islamic That jihad is mandated by Islam cannot be questioned; in fact, both the greater and lesser jihads are said to be essential to the practice of true Islamic faith. However, as said by Pakistan’s Federal Information Minister Sheikh Rashid, and as quoted on JihadWatch.org (2004), a clear difference exists between jihad and terrorism that should be kept in mind. The key point here is that, even in a jihad, innocent lives must be spared (TheWayToTruth.org, accessed 12/17/09). Among other things, believers are to avoid fighting neutral parties, underhanded methods, and wanton violence and slaughter, lest they become no better than the evil they fight. Specifically, hurting women, children, and the elderly is condemned, as is mindless destruction. Force must be used only when absolutely necessary – and only to the extent which is necessary. In other words, one must only take up arms when all other methods of resistance have failed, and even then, he must take care not to shed more blood than he needs too, if at all. In fact, Islam by Questions (accessed 12/18/09) cites that the Islamic faith explicitly condemns terrorism: if, for instance, a ship holds nine criminals, and one innocent man, to sink the ship to kill the criminals would still be an un-Islamic act for it would kill the innocent man as well. This, clearly, is something the likes of al-Qaeda are either ignorant or apathetic to. And yet, in a fatwa read at the World Islamic Front in 1998, Osama bin Laden stated that Americans – civilian or military – deserved to die at the hands of Muslims, and that Muslims all over the world had a moral duty to kill Americans (FAS.org, accessed 12/17/09). It should be noted that no distinction between combatants and noncombatants was made; on the contrary, the fatwa clearly stated that both civilians and military were legitimate targets. Clearly, such a proclamation violates one of the most fundamental rules of waging jihad, to say nothing of the most basic tenets of Islam. Declaring open war on America would probably have been fine, if al-Qaeda refrained from attacking civilian targets. Regardless of their fervent belief that they have the moral high ground in defending Muslims, al-Qaeda is undeniably even worse than the ‘evil’ it claims to fight – something supported by Islam itself. Al-Qaeda: How the World Sees Their Cause In the same speech where he delivered his now-infamous fatwa, Osama cites reasons for his hatred of America. Among other things, he says, they have squatted in Saudi Arabia, one of the holiest places to Islam, and meddled in its affairs. The American government has supposedly been stealing the land’s natural resources (oil fields, presumably), interfered in the affairs of the Saudi government, humiliating its people in the process. Even worse, he says, the American presence there is due to the fact that they want to bully the neighboring nations – in particular, the Iraqi people have been hit the hardest by the Americans. He also alludes to a Crusader-Zionist conspiracy – that the invasion of Iraq, among other things, is meant to ensure the survival of the State of Israel. As such, he says, Islam mandates that they have a moral duty to go to war with America. Whatever the reasons, al-Qaeda has definitely managed to do what few had ever done before: bring America to her knees. 9/11 was the single most devastating act of terrorism in American history, so much so that even other Muslims were appalled. In a journal by the Middle East Policy Council (2003), Quintan Wiktorowicz and John Kaltner quote various notable figures such as Abdulaziz bin Abdullah al-Ashaykh, a mufti (religious scholar) from Saudi Arabia, who slammed 9/11 as a decidedly unjust, gross, sinful and un-Islamic act. Muhammed Sayyid al-Tantawi of Cairo’s al-Azhar University vowed that such an act would be punished on judgment day, while Sheikh Yussuf al-Qaradawi of Qatar emphasizes the great value Islam places on human life, and the gravity of the sin of murdering an innocent. More tellingly, even other fundamentalist groups slammed the act. In a letter, groups such as Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, Pakistan’s Jamaat al-Islami, and Hamas strongly rebuked 9/11, saying that it went against both human and Islamic norms, and that Allah himself expressly forbade such slaughter. It should be noted that these groups are hardly paragons of virtue; indeed, Hamas in particular has quite a bit of blood on its hands as well. And if even otherwise-hardened extremists have condemned al-Qaeda for what they did that day, that must say something about the monstrosity of such an act. If anything, al-Qaeda may have acted on a self-fulfilling prophecy. As detailed in a report by the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (2006), the attacks served as a wake-up call for America to step up its security measure in order to better protect its people. This report acknowledges and emphasizes the threat al-Qaeda poses to the American people, and highlights steps the government has been taking to prepare for confrontations. According to this report, al-Qaeda and other like-minded terrorist groups pose the biggest threat to America’s national security, and the American government is doing all it possibly can to guard against them. In particular, this may also have moved them to launch preemptive attacks against both Afghanistan and Iraq. While in the latter’s case, some reasonably argue that former President Bush’s true agenda was to claim the oil fields to be found in Iraq, al-Qaeda carrying out the 9/11 attacks only gave such measures an air of legitimacy and morality. That is, if the oil fields were indeed Bush’s real reason for invading Iraq, the terrorists handed him a believable excuse for what would otherwise have been a clear mistake on America’s part. Even the otherwise heinous, unjustifiable acts committed at Abu Ghraib could probably be mitigated and/or explained, however feebly, by saying that they (the terrorists) threw the first stone. Neither does al-Qaeda’s endorsement of Salafist beliefs help. Salafism, to be short, is a belief that the only morality that matters is that of the Koran, the Prophet and his companions, and that such should be the standard in contemporary Muslim communities. This would be fine on its own, but al-Qaeda aims to impose such rule even on less-than-willing states such as America – this from practitioners of a religion which places little focus on compulsion. There are few who would allow or tolerate having someone impose their religion on them – the Muslims should be more aware of this than most, having had lots of experience wherein they chose war over forced conversion (the colonization of the Philippines, for one). In this way, one might be able to argue, and rightly so, that al-Qaeda’s opposition of America is more because of what it is than what it has done. In short, salafism – and al-Qaeda, by extension – contradicts the very religion it is based on. Conclusion Acts like 9/11 have unfortunately, yet understandably, tainted the world’s perception of Muslims and Islam in general. ‘Jihad’, ‘Muslim’, and ‘Islam’ have become words to run away from really fast, as well, and have practically become synonymous with terrorism and extremism. In an article on IslamOnline.net, Nadia Moustafa (2003) cites the Intifada in Palestine, calling that particular instance a legitimate jihad; according to her, such is an act of resistance against Israeli aggression, yet has been denounced by the US as another act of terrorism. The Palestinians, who would normally be seen as victims, are instead branded ‘terrorists’ – no thanks to groups like al-Qaeda who gave jihad and Islam a bad name. Osama and his comrades claim that they fight for their fellow Muslims, especially the Arabs who they in their view are being oppressed by the USA. However, they usually target, not military forces, but civilians and those who have little defense – something contrary to Islam, whose tenets declare that peace is best. To be sure, al-Qaeda’s methods have drawn the ire and the disgust of the whole world, even and especially their fellow Muslims. A good number of Muslim authorities, such as those mentioned above, agree that 9/11 was an un-Islamic act of barbarism, to say the least, and that Allah strongly condemned it – in fact, it is said that no terrorist can be a true Muslim, nor can a true Muslim be a terrorist. Al-Qaeda may well be one of the exceptions to the old argument that ‘one man’s terrorist is another’s freedom fighter’. In their case, most of the people and even their religion itself, for whom they ostensibly fight, see them as terrorists. References Moustafa, Nadia How to Comprehend Jihad 25 Mar 03 IslamOnline.net 17 Dec 09 http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&pagename=Zone-English-Living_Shariah/LSELayout&cid=1158658521626 Stages of Jihad and Its Main Principles 17 Dec 09, The Way to Truth, 17 Dec 09, http://www.thewaytotruth.org/jihad/stages.html 1993: World Trade Center bomb terrorizes New York 26 Feb 93, BBC News, 17 Dec 09, http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/february/26/newsid_2516000/2516469.stm Al-Qaeda: The Many Faces of an Islamic Extremist Threat United States House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, June 06 http://intelligence.house.gov/Media/PDFS/IslamicExtremism051506v2.pdf Spencer, Robert Pakistani official: “It is the moral duty of our religious and political leaders to differentiate between Jihad and terrorism” 12 Nov 04, Jihad Watch, 17 Dec 09, http://www.jihadwatch.org/2004/11/pakistani-official-it-is-the-moral-duty-of-our-religious-and-political-leaders-to-differentiate-betw.html Trost, Heidi Jihad Fall 2004, Nazareth College of Rochester, 17 Dec 09, http://www.naz.edu:9000/~hon313/jihad-HeidiTrost.htm Wuthnow, Robert Encyclopedia of Politics and Religion 425-426 Vol. 2. Washington D.C., Congressional Quarterly, Inc., 1998 Islam’s attitude towards war 18 Dec 09, Islam By Questions, 18 Dec 09, http://www.islambyquestions.net/jihad/war.htm Islam’s attitude towards terror 18 Dec 09, Islam By Questions, 18 Dec 09, http://www.islambyquestions.net/jihad/attitude.htm Aspects of Jihad 17 Dec 09, Islam By Questions, 17 Dec 09, http://islambyquestions.net/jihad/aspects.htm Rules for Jihad 18 Dec 09, Islam By Questions, 18 Dec 09, http://www.islambyquestions.net/jihad/rules.htm Bin Laden, Osama Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders 23 Feb 98, World Islamic Front, 17 Dec 09, http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/docs/980223-fatwa.htm Wiktorowicz, Quintan and Kaltner, John Killing in the Name of Islam: Al-Qaeda’s Justification for September 11 Summer 2003, Middle East Policy Council, 17 Dec 09, http://www.mepc.org/journal_vol10/0306_wiktorowiczkaltner.asp Read More