How war can be holy? almost all the religious scriptures contain this concept of holy wars and we find history full of such wars. Be it war between Israel and Canaanites or wars between Muslims and non-Muslims?
What do you think religion makes people indulge in such wars or people involve religion in indulging such wars? 
Re: Holy Wars
People almosty always involve religion to control others and further thier own personal ambitions.
Some religions also get hijacked by corrupt mullahs and other political figures.
However there is one way War can be holy or at least serve a higher purpose.
To illustrate that point I will use several Philosophical examples.
Most recent would be the Likes of Marx and others from the Socialist camp... they would argue that somtimes war is neccassary to release the masses from opression by the few.
Also several centuries before Marx, the great Samurai warrior and political statesman Yagyu Munanori wrote in his book of "Fammily Traditions" that...
"The sword is a weapon of evil and it takes the life of others which is an act of evil. Thus weapons and especially the sword are instruments of evil. The
sword and those who use it thus follow a way of life that is against heaven. However when the evil acts of one man are so great that they threaten a myriad
people, then by dispatching the life of the one that commits evil, swords can also be tools that lead to the way of heaven."
Likewise in the teachings of almost all ancient religions and belief systems there is this central poitn that sometimes there has to be a just battle for the greater good.
Its not neccassarily a holy war but as Munenori pointed out and goes further to say...
"While the sword is a tool that takes lives, it can also by killing those who threaten many more lives, be a giver of life too."
Its a point central in almost all faiths that one has a right to defence but also sometimes aggression against that which threatens others can also be met with greater aggression.
All wars are bad and there is very little glory but sometimes there can be a just cause and there is seldom any alternative but to draw ones sword... or these days ready your guns.
Re: Holy Wars
Do you mean that religions only support retaliations and not aggressions?
Re: Holy Wars
Most of the time yes.
Remember that Moses was first instructed to lead his people away from Slavery... only permission to fight was granted after they met hostility.
Likewise Jesus always preached to turn the other cheek, although he did have one violent outburst in the Temple again though he had been goaded into it.
Also our own Prophet Muhammad sallalho alayhi wassalam, suffered for years in Makah and had to make Hijrah (retreat) to Medina and only when pursued there did the Muslims fight back... becuase they were driven to the edge of the Sea.
I dont remember any Religion where the founder actually led an offensive mission... they were all forced to fight to survive and even when they went on conquest it was always a matter of staying alive... if you look at the tactical decisions they always had a defensive goal.
Moses (Musa Alaysalaam) always fought his battles toe to toe and there was always high risk involved. It was only after his passing that Yusha Bin Noon. His leuitenant led aggressive total war.
Likewise it was a couple of generations after Muhammad Sallalhoalayhi wassalam that under Caliphs like Umar did the Muslims go on aggrssive wars of total conquest... during the Prophets life armies had clashed with Rome and Persia but they always withdrew once they saw the enemy off thier turf... it was only later that they went all out and took the complete offensive with no holds barred.
Re: Holy Wars
But didn't Moses (AS) asked Israelite to attack Canaanites to expel them from the land Canaanites get hold in the absence of Israelite who traveled from Canaan to Egypt for better prospects in the time of Yusuf (AS) centuries ago?
Re: Holy Wars
Moses asked sure enough, but there little evidence of there having been any tangible results.
As far as I'm aware in fact Moses passed away without ever reaching Canaan and it was under Yusha Bin Noon that the Isrealites went on to win that territory.
Re: Holy Wars
Moses asked sure enough, but there little evidence of there having been any tangible results.
As far as I'm aware in fact Moses passed away without ever reaching Canaan and it was under Yusha Bin Noon that the Isrealites went on to win that territory.
You are right that Moses didn't reach Cannan and it was later conquered by Yusha... But Israelite were punished for not following Moses orders to attack Canaanites and therefore they had to wander in desert for forty years.
Re: Holy Wars
There is hardly anything holy about wars:)
Re: Holy Wars
There is hardly anything holy about wars:)
How about Jihad? Jihad for a holy cause?
Re: Holy Wars
How about Jihad? Jihad for a holy cause?
Is Jihad initiative or retaliatory ?
Say we have 2 countries which are neighbors . Country A has a muslim majority with a significant christian minority (60:40). Country B has a christian majority and muslim minority population (again 60:40). Country A decides to implement Shariah. So christian minorities are asked not to preach their religion, asked to pay taxes and not allowed to hold top governing posts . Country B sympathizes with the minorities of country A and take out their frustration on their own minority. So the muslim minority is asked to conform with a particular style of dressing (say no headscarfs, face coverings or beards) . They are also removed from positions of influence . So the muslims of Country B are suffering due to suspicion and unemployment. So is country A justified to announce Jihad against country B ? If it is what stops country B from launching a crusade against A? How do you divorce religion from politics? I don't think there is any thing holy about the scenario described above.
Re: Holy Wars
Is Jihad initiative or retaliatory ? Say we have 2 countries which are neighbors . Country A has a muslim majority with a significant christian minority (60:40). Country B has a christian majority and muslim minority population (again 60:40). Country A decides to implement Shariah. So christian minorities are asked not to preach their religion, asked to pay taxes and not allowed to hold top governing posts . Country B sympathizes with the minorities of country A and take out their frustration on their own minority. So the muslim minority is asked to conform with a particular style of dressing (say no headscarfs, face coverings or beards) . They are also removed from positions of influence . So the muslims of Country B are suffering due to suspicion and unemployment. So is country A justified to announce Jihad against country B ? If it is what stops country B from launching a crusade against A? How do you divorce religion from politics? I don't think there is any thing holy about the scenario described above.
nothing holy in that scenario.
But if we see it from Islamic point of view (as I understood personally), Jihad starts from a person's own deeds. We have been told stages of Jihad and the best stage is when someone fight against his / her own weaknesses.
Re: Holy Wars
What is the difference between concept of Jihad and Qital?
Re: Holy Wars
What is the difference between concept of Jihad and Qital?
Jihad is the overall struggle, where as Qital refers to killing. Jihad is not restricted to Qital. You can have Jihad in other ways. In initial days of Islam, we find some traditions that Prophet discouraged those persons from Jihad who had other responsibilities (e.g. having old parents without anyone to take care of them) and looking after their aged parents was considered as Jihad for those persons.
Re: Holy Wars
Jihad.
Literally " A struggle" it can be to overcome some difficuilty be it smoking or gambling or taking up arms to repel an invader. Very rarely can there be a justification for aggresive jihad unless its literally to strike an overwhelming offensive blow against an opponent to prevent future prolonged engagements.
Qital is literally killing... theres not much excuse for that, unless your fighting for your life and even then one need not strike mortal blows.
Re: Holy Wars
Jihad.
Literally " A struggle" it can be to overcome some difficuilty be it smoking or gambling or taking up arms to repel an invader. Very rarely can there be a justification for aggresive jihad unless its literally to strike an overwhelming offensive blow against an opponent to prevent future prolonged engagements.
Qital is literally killing... theres not much excuse for that, unless your fighting for your life and even then one need not strike mortal blows.
Where ever Quran mentions Qitaal it mentions it as bad act and allow it only against the fitna (acts of other, which make existence / survival of the faithful people difficult). So, in Islam there is no aggression, Jihad is retaliation.
Re: Holy Wars
I do not find the arabic words for holy war in Quran or in the sayings of Prophet (saw).
It's always aggravates me to see this term coined with the concept of Jihad/Qital. The term is un-islamic and was first used by Christian Crusadors against muslims.
Re: Holy Wars
True, there is no specific terminology for holy war in Islam. Its the modern talibaan version of Jihaad that create bad name for Islam and Muslims.
Re: Holy Wars
^ Actually theres a whole chapter in Quran called. Anfaal which means "Spoils of War", Sadam Hussain even based a campaign on it... but then he was a military cuckoo.
Militant Islam is an ancient tradition but it is not all about killing and slaughtering the infidel... it was originally a code set for hunting and gathering people and later watered down by different people down the ages.
Re: Holy Wars
^ Actually theres a whole chapter in Quran called. Anfaal which means "Spoils of War", Sadam Hussain even based a campaign on it... but then he was a military cuckoo.
Militant Islam is an ancient tradition but it is not all about killing and slaughtering the infidel... it was originally a code set for hunting and gathering people and later watered down by different people down the ages.
Isn't anfaal means war booty 'maal e ghaneemat'?
As far as I remember, it was very common in some Arab tribes to loot the travelers passing through their area and during Ghazwa e Badr a group of Muslims was longing to hunt Abu Sufyan's carvan carrying trading goods from a route near Medina.
Re: Holy Wars
Where ever Quran mentions Qitaal it mentions it as bad act and allow it only against the fitna (acts of other, which make existence / survival of the faithful people difficult).
Isn't that a pretty subjective definition of fitna? Can one define fitna objectively so that qitaal becomes wajib-ul-qitaal ?