Obviously muslims do not agree across the board on a large swath of issues so i'm curious if there is any islamic school of thought that embraces the idea of absolute Pacifism, and how they justify this as an islamic belief.
Also what do you guys think of the idea in general?
Innovation and it is from the devil.
Absolute pacifism as I understand is to just sit and do nothing?
if this is it then noway can it be a part of religion.
The Quran is replete with refernces to battles, the Holy Prophet salallahu alayhi wa sallam fought in numerous battles, lead numerous battles, was magnificent warrior and killed the enemies of God in the battlefield.
salallahu alayhi wa sallam.
Ya ALLAH Madad.
Haq Chaar Yaar
good...
its a need for self defensive purposes, not for unnecessary violence which is hardly or never the case.
Pacifism is being naive.
You MUST defend yourself.
Islam allows self defence.
However it does not allow aggression. So you cannot attack someone else unless it is a defensive move, or a resonse to aggression.
I do not think this is an issue that has diverse muslim positions.
Becoming a pacifist mens you deny the rights given to you in the qur'an.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
Oh one more question.
Name an offensive war in history which wasn't sold to the public as a defensive war.
Actually you will find that the classical books contain reference to OFFENSIVE jihad as well as defencive but I cant be bothered to get into it.
Ya ALLAH Madad.
Haq Chaar Yaar
I have no idea.
I have not studied the subject.
However there is what it is sold as, and then there is the truth.
The UK/US invasion of iraq was aggression, even though it was sold as a defensive war.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
How is offensive Jihad justified in Islam?
I am not fully aware of the details, I vaguely remember having read about it somewhere.
If my memory serves me correctly Imam Ibn Taymiyyah wrote a lengthy work on the subject but I may be mistaken.
Perhaps som1 else who knows better will be able to furnish a satistfactory answer.
Ya ALLAH Madad.
Haq Chaar Yaar
I thought it was banned...
So it will not be me. Unless I stumble across something.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
lol there is always [url=www.google.com]shaykh google[/url]
Which for as much as yall make fun of it I still find it very useful.
Okay I googled his name and Jihad and came across this extremely shady website:
http://www.sullivan-county.com/z/tay.htm
I don't know if they are accurately quoting real books in there but do any of the titles or quotes spark your memory on the one he wrote you were referring to?
...wow pretty much ignore the rest of this website, it's extreme whatever it is
From Wikipedia.
Offensive Jihad is the waging of wars of aggression and conquest against non-Muslims in order to bring their territories under Islamic rule. Although the basis of any decisions, made by Muslims regarding war, should be derived from the Quran and Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad, many people are increasingly quoting the works of non-Muslims or those Muslims that issue inciteful fatwas to justify their opinions of violence in Islam. However, without direct evidence from the Quran and Sunnah these opinions are merely the words of man
The majority of Jihad undertaken at the time of our Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W.) was within the category of offensive Jihad.
This in interesting - the concept of "Just War" from several centuries ago in Christianity was based on classical writings rather than scripture.
If people don't have a justification for what they want - they'll find it somewhere else
Wow, i'm surprised.
Most muslims i've talked to almost completely reject the [i]idea[/i] of offensive jihad, and usually present the battles of Muhammad as defensive.
Which battles were offensive?
I would like to know.
I know the battle of Badr happened when the muslims went to regain their possessions that were being sent elsewhere for sale...but instead of meeting a caravan, they met an army...
Apart from that Uhud, battle of the ditch were all defensive... The recapture of Makkah was in response to the slaughter of some muslims...
The wars against the major poweres were due to the reaction of the major powers to the letters sent to them...
(waging war to allow people who were previously prevented to practice Islam is not an offensive war...)
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
I’ve ordered a copy of Martin Lings book- autobiography of the Prophet which covers all the battles in the Prophet saw time. I’ll be happy to ship it over once I have finished it. Maybe if you search on the Internet you could read it online.
Islam doesn’t allow itself to be ruled under tyranny and if one army is spreading fitnah in the Muslim lands then it's an obligation to expel that evil.
That does not describe a war of aggression.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
Chapter 2: Al-Baqarah
[b]2:191[/b]. And fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but do not transgress. Surely, Allah loves not the transgressors.
[b]2:192.[/b] And slay these transgressors wherever you meet them and drive them out from where they have driven you out; for persecution is worst than slaying. And fight them not in and near the Sacred Mosque until they fight you therein. But if they fight you, then fight them. Such is the requital for the disbelievers.
[b]2:193.[/b] But if they desist, then surely, Allah is Most Forgiving, Merciful.
[b]2:194[/b]. And fight them until there is no persecution, and religion is professed only for Allah. But if they desist, then remember that no hostility is allowed except against the wrongdoers.
And none of that is in favour of aggression, but defence.
From the verses:
1. fight those who fight you.
2. kill the transgressors.
3. If they desist no hostility is allowed.
All three point towards defence, and not an aggression.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
2:192. And slay these transgressors wherever you meet them [b]and drive them out from where they have driven you out[/b]
Which is offensive Jihad.
The word "Jihad" has nowhere been used in the Quran to mean in the sense of war in the sense of launching an offensive. It is used rather to mean struggle. For fighting and war another word called qital is used. Qital is to engage in war at the time of aggression on the part of the enemies. The qital or war is purely in self-defence in accordance in accordance with God's commandment also involves a struggle this came to be called jihad as well.
and read THE VERY NEXT verse: If they desist, Allah is most forgiving, most merciful.
You are taking that verse out of context.
The verses as a whole say fight those who fight you. slay them whereever you find them. But if they desist, be merciful.
Take it as a whole.
If you go for halves, the qur'an also says 'do not approach prayer'. That is finished 'and you are drunk'.
So make sure you do not take such things out of context. The qur'an can guide, and it also can lead astray...
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
What about offensive Jihad started by a Caliph?
what about it?
were there any? I have no idea.
After the Khulafa rashidoon (the rightly guided caliph's) the new rulers did alot. some good. some bad.
The history at that time wasrather brutal. You would read the hero's from the time of one caliph imprisoned and slaughtered by he successor... (I decide to read the history of the Ummayyads and the abbasids on wikipedia. it was the first time I had read anything in chronological order... previouslyI had read bits... And mostly the religious teachers go from first 5 to Amir Muawiyyah, to yazid, miss a few eyars, go to Umar the second.... miss a few years go to harun Rashid... Miss a few years go to Salahuddin Ayubi... and that is 1400 years covered!)
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
Get any good book explaining the rules of jihad according to the Quran and sunnah and you will see like Brother Med said there is the offensive jihad and defensive jihad. These days i duno maybe some muslims are ashamed to admit that offensive jihad exists coz of all the recent violence in the name of Islam. No one wants our religion to be dragged through the mud by ignorant ppl who claim to be performing jihad but are really using Islam as a pretence for their personal interests. But at the same time we shouldn't pretend certains aspects of jihad don't exist or are not part of Islam.
There is a time and place for physical jihad, sad as it may seem. But every nation wages war for it's own interests, and to protect it's ppl and way of life, even the west. So what have we to be ashamed of?
there's a classical text which most scholars refer to on the subject of Jihad: Mashari al-Ashwaq ila Masari al-Ushaq.
Shaykh Anwar Al-Awlaki has done a lecture series based on this text which is excellent. it used to be available on the net, but the site no longer seems to be working. :?
[size=9]I NEVER WORE IT BECAUSE OF THE TALIBAN, MOTHER. I LIKE THE [b]MODESTY[/b] AND [b]PROTECTION[/b] IT AFFORDS ME FROM THE EYES OF MEN.[/size] [url=http://www.adherents.com/lit/comics/Dust.html]Dust, X-Men[/url]
i thght anwar awlaki was wanted by the USA government soon after he did those tapes, apparently they saw him as glorifying jihad. Well it's ok if the west makes out it's a noble thing to die for ones country, but it's seen as a crime for a muslim man does the same. Anwar awlaki used to draw in the crowds he was popular, USA gov don't like popular scholars need to silence them.
Dave, that website about Imam Ibn Taymiyyah I have skimmed over the article and dont find anything new in there. Pretty standard ISLAMIC teaching but like I said I only skim read it.
Yes there is offensive Jihad. Infact Admin every single battle AFTER GHAZWAH E KHANDAQ Battle of the Trench was offensive.
Let us be honest, after that immensely testing battle the muslims in Madinah were established as a power and began the offensive jihad. It is a true fact.
Islam is expansionist and part of this involves jihad.
Ya ALLAH Madad.
Haq Chaar Yaar
well practically every scholar we consider 'mainstream' is 'wanted' by the US government. heck, yusuf islam was 'wanted' by the US - its a joke. :roll:
[size=9]I NEVER WORE IT BECAUSE OF THE TALIBAN, MOTHER. I LIKE THE [b]MODESTY[/b] AND [b]PROTECTION[/b] IT AFFORDS ME FROM THE EYES OF MEN.[/size] [url=http://www.adherents.com/lit/comics/Dust.html]Dust, X-Men[/url]
Pacifism is personal choice, sometimes it is in a person’s nature.
However in Islam there is no room for pacifism. Jihad for expansion and jihad for self defense is permissible.
As everyone is aware many rules and regulations accompany the basis for jihad.
Foolish people may take war lightly but in Islam Jihad is no light matter and all manner of protocols need to be met before such an act is taken. Then as history has proved once a territory has been taken or an evil ruler stopped fair steps are taken to ensure the wellbeing of the non Muslims or opposition.
There is no room for senseless violence or the killing of innocents.
In my opinion if every country followed the principles of jihad there would be no unnecessary killing or wars based on greed and economic expansion.
In today’s world though Muslims have many reasons to declare Jihad on oppressors they do not have the capability and that is why there is no consensus amongst the Muslim world to rise up in jihad. Silly people who do rise up and shout jihad are very much mistaken.
Pages