islam has offensive war. if you dont believe it its fine, but all ulama have decreed that offensive war is in islam and it is justified. new age peacemongers can not change islam no matter how hard they try.
Re: War booty (Mal-e-Ghanimat): Bait al mal: 21st century version
Could you please elaborate on that …and I am NOT a new age peacemonger.
And please mention which ulema have decreed this.And in your opinion whether any offencive wars were fought at the time of the Prophet(PBUH)
Re: War booty (Mal-e-Ghanimat): Bait al mal: 21st century version
this book is a good for someone who just wants basic verdict regarding this aspect of islam. detailed information is avaliable but it requires extensive reading. inshallah if people are interested allah creates for us ways to learn His religion.
Re: War booty (Mal-e-Ghanimat): Bait al mal: 21st century version
and i m sorry if i assumed you to be a new age peacemonger because there are so many of them on this forum
Re: War booty (Mal-e-Ghanimat): Bait al mal: 21st century version
Fight against those who believe not in Allaah, nor in the Last Day, nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allaah and His Messenger and those who do not acknowledge the Deen of Truth among the people of the scripture, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission." [EMQ 9: 29]
Allaah (swt) has made Jihaad an obligation upon all Muslims, just like your five daily prayers, fasting in Ramadaan or making a once in a life time pilgrimage to the House of Allaah (swt).
What is Jihaad?
The word Jihaad is derived from the term "al-Juhd" which means "To make substantial effort". The scholars of Islaam have agreed that Jihaad means to fight in the path of Allaah or anything aiding this course. The great classical scholar Imaam Abu Haneefah said that Jihaad means to be involved in fighting in the path of Allaah by one's life, wealth and speech (e.g. by calling for it).
The types of Jihaad
In Islaam there are 2 types of physical Jihaad:
1) Offensive Jihaad (Jihaad ul-Mubaa-da'ah)
This type of Jihaad is usually only carried out by the Islaamic state. There are three stages, which lead to Jihaad. Firstly, the people are invited to embrace Islaam. If they refuse to become Muslims then they are requested to become citizens of the state (dhimmees) and are asked to pay jizyah (a small tax). If even this is refused then the State declares war upon them.
2) Defensive Jihaad (Jihaad ud-Dafi')
"And why should you not fight in the cause of Allaah and of those who being weak (and oppressed) - men, women and children, whose cry is 'Our Lord! Rescue us from this town. Whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from You one who will protect; and raise from us from You one who will help!" [EMQ an-Nisaa, 4: 75]
Defensive Jihaad is an obligation upon the Muslim whose life, honour and wealth are being attacked. They are required by Allaah (swt) to fight and protect these. Thus this type can be carried out without the existence of an Islaamic state. The foreign policy of the Islaamic state is offensive jihaad.
The purpose of Jihaad
The purpose of offensive Jihaad is to remove any obstacle which is in the way of implementing the laws of Islaam (i.e. the Sharee'ah). The Sharee'ah is a comprehensive system of life, covering all aspects of life to govern mankind by. Whether Muslim or non-Muslim, the State would protect the life, honour and wealth of every one of its citizens.
Difference between the Foreign Policy of the West and Islaam
When the Islaamic army enter and fight they are not allowed to kill women, children or the elderly. Neither are they allowed to mutilate the dead bodies, cut down trees or burn down buildings etc. Compare this to the foreign policy of the West that seeks to destroy everything and everyone in their path to gain power. Examples of this can be seen when the British and French colonised the "developing world". Women were raped, land and natural resources were pillaged and plundered and the rich were made richer whereas the poor became even poorer.
In Islaam, material benefit is not what motivates Muslims to carry out the command of Jihaad; rather it is obeying and submitting to the Creator. Regarding the matter of Jihaad Allaah (swt) says in the Qur'aan: "Fighting is prescribed upon you, and ye dislike it. But it is possible that ye dislike a thing which is good for you, and that ye love a thing that is bad for you. But Allaah knows and ye know not." (EMQ 2: 216)
Re: War booty (Mal-e-Ghanimat): Bait al mal: 21st century version
jazakallah khair akhi
Re: War booty (Mal-e-Ghanimat): Bait al mal: 21st century version
Mashallah Faisal bhai excellent post.I learnt a lot thank you
Although one point should be noted unfortunately muslim armies have behaved just as savagely as the western colonial powers many times in the past.The only muslim armies who have behaved in an islamic way are the armies of the Holy Prophet(PBUH) and the Pious Caliphs(RA).
Re: War booty (Mal-e-Ghanimat): Bait al mal: 21st century version
No offence taken
Very good link …all four Fiqahs are given but what is the view of Fiqah-e-jafaria on this matter?
Re: War booty (Mal-e-Ghanimat): Bait al mal: 21st century version
Faisal, I quickly skimmed through your post, great post. Could you please provide reference for it?
In addition, I was of the opinion that the word 'jihaad' itself more or less means 'to struggle' with a few more details added to it. I thought 'qitaal' is where the fighting takes place. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Also, your post states that it's fard just as salah is fard upon us. To the best of my knowledge, jihaad/qitaal is a collective duty (I forget the exact term) where if some participate and if they don't need other individuals, then others don't have to take part in it. Ie. they would be exempt from it. Jihaad/qitaal is fard (from what I have read), but not on every single individual when others are actively taking part in it, unless they need assistance. Again, correct me if I'm wrong.
Clarifications would be helpful, insha'Allah.
Re: Jihaad - Offensive or Defensive?
I’ve split the thread, as it could be better discussed separately and it wasn’t exactly in relation to the initial post.
Here’s the other thread: http://www.paklinks.com/gs/showthread.php?t=196653
Re: War booty (Mal-e-Ghanimat): Bait al mal: 21st century version
What people? People as in neighboring countries? or People withing the Islamic state?
Lets not go bashing “others” when defining/discussing our own policy/rulings/acts, otherwise our own history is not much clean.
Re: War booty (Mal-e-Ghanimat): Bait al mal: 21st century version
Jihaad is derived from the root word Juhd, which means to struggle. Jihaad means **to struggle against **something. That is the literary meaning of the word Jihaad.
Now as you know, when Islam came it gave Share’ee meaning to many of the words. For example, in pre-Mohammad times the word Salah would be used for dua. Actually it is still used in that sense, in arabic if you would ask someone to send durood on the Prophet (sas) you would say: *Sallah al aNabee. *But Islam gave a new meaning to Salaah, and now when someone says Salaah, it means Namaaz. And that is the Share’ee meaning of the word.
In a similar way Islam gave a Share’ee meaning to Jihaad too, and the Share’ee meaning of Jihaad is Qitaal, which is fighting. To confuse the two would be an equally grave mistake as someone getting confused between Namaaz and Dua.
The term for collective duty is called Fardh Kifayah, and jihaad is *Fardh Kifayah *only when there is no Muslim Land occupied by unbelievers, when there are no Muslim POWs or Islamic scholars detained by the unbelievers, and the muslim lands are not in danger of any attack. *Fardh Kifayah *would be an offensive Jihaad.
But when the armies of the Kuffar have left their homes to invade muslim lands, or when they have invaded muslim lands, or when the muslim POWs and scholars are in the jails of the unbelievers, or when the armies come face to face, regardless of weather it is an offensive or defensive jihaad, it becomes *Fardh al Ain. Fardh al Ain *is the term for a compulsory duty on every single Muslim to perform, like praying and fasting.
Re: War booty (Mal-e-Ghanimat): Bait al mal: 21st century version
Abay, the Ullema are making a judgment, not pronouncing devine decree. Their ruilings can change depending on circumstance, and even a different understanding or a deconstruction of their logic.
Problem is, the Ullema are a stale lot.
Re: War booty (Mal-e-Ghanimat): Bait al mal: 21st century version
I’ve been looking for a long time for primary references that list the different kinds of Jihad (say, a Hadith that discusses all of them), but have never been able to find one…would you or anyone else know of any?
I’m well aware of the scholar’s opinions on the matter, but they’re exactly that. It irks me that introductory material is not widley available that backs up these well known positions with justifications from the primary sources of Islam.
It’s interesting to note, though, that in early Islamic history (i.e. until the last of the Noble Caliphs), no offensive Jihad seemed to have been taken (there were raids, but that’s a different story altogether)…Persia and Byzantium had declared war against the Arabs well before they were defeated…
Having said that, offensive Jihad in the classical context makes perfect sense, and I don’t fault the Islamic rulers for practicing it. Basically, the bare minimum is this: i) guard your borders and ii) Seek to expand or at the very least demonstrate the potency of your might
This was what EVERYONE was doing at the time, and EVERY time we let our guard down (the Mongol invasions, the European invasions) we got screwed…and it was because our leaders got comforatable and arrogant.
To this day, we are in a pathatic state because our leaders in the 18th and 19th centuries did not modernize their armies…one would have thought that the Napoleonic invasions would have been a wake up call, but the Ullema in particular for some reason thought that Muslims could never be defeated by Kufar and to this day this arrogance sticks.
The theory behind offensive Jihad is to simply gaurantee one nation’s territorial integreity.
Re: War booty (Mal-e-Ghanimat): Bait al mal: 21st century version
Let me get this straight. Out of the blue, an Islamic state will first invite people in a different independent land to become muslims. Then request them to become citizens and if not, then war is declared.
Just FYI, if any other nation in the world (non muslims) espouses such views, you’d call them war-mongers. Like, for example, if America orders all people in Bahrain to either accept Christianity, or pay tax to US, or get ready for war… what will you call it?
Re: War booty (Mal-e-Ghanimat): Bait al mal: 21st century version
Although by the time of european invasions and mongols the moslem countries ceased to be a islamic state.Can such moslem states whose ruling classes atleast do not follow islamic principles can they wage offensive Jihad?Are they justified in doing so?
Re: War booty (Mal-e-Ghanimat): Bait al mal: 21st century version
is this a euphemism for forcible conversions
Re: War booty (Mal-e-Ghanimat): Bait al mal: 21st century version
I used to think the same and responded similarly…but I think it’s time to get real here.
First, they dont’ care about religion but about markets. For example, America did blockade Japan and forced them to open their markets to American goods…tribute is so middle-ages dude…nobody does that anymore 
In the future, Muslim states may well be (if they aren’t already) blockaded (an act of war, btw) if they don’t alter their social or economic set-up. Basically, punishing a nation for pursuing different policies is acceptable, but the power brokers are exempt…
Religion was an umbrella term for these things in the past, so in a way what America does practice is an offensive Jihad, or what we would call now days " pursuing self-interest". “With us or against us”…ring a bell?
ALL nations do it, sad to say, and it hit it’s peak during the European Imperial age. In recent history (with the advent of the league of nations), it hasn’t been that bad, and international structures have been put in place which could theoretically guarantee Muslims some degree of security and sovereignty…but so far these institutions have been damaged by rogue elements who go off and do their own thing because it’s in their best interests.
Now days, those who advocate offensive Jihad do so precisely because of the bad behavior of other nations. Offensive Jihad began as a paranoid attempt at securing Muslim lands, then it became a rationale for Muslim Imperialism, and in the modern era it became the “ideal” way to achieve independence (and rightly so, imho), and now it’s not even considered much since we’re in a state of disarray.
The cost of waging war is so high now, I think as Muslims become more sophisticated they’ll simply start playing the game all the other powers (and wannabe powers) are playing, namely focusing on economic dominance.
Insofar as an offensive war being religiously mandated as a communal responsiblity…it’s impossible to tell. During the early Islamic history, Muslims had only ever fought against people who had been openly hostile against them first, although offsensive raids were conducted during periods of open hostility.
Re: War booty (Mal-e-Ghanimat): Bait al mal: 21st century version
I think this is a bit of a cop-out. The concepts of offensive and defensive Jihad (together with the notions of dar-ul-harb and dar-ul-Islam) were formulated by the Ulema in those times - this was how they interpreted the events during the Prophet’s (pbuh) mission - not during the time of the Prophet(pbuh). Again, we could with indsight look back on the Early Islamic history and claim that such-and-such raid was in fact an “offensive” Jihad akin to one state invading another…but that’s a matter of interpretation, or more likely of scholarly categorization of historical events.
So it’s a bit of a still born debate if those guys could do offensive Jihad, as it was they who coined the term.
Re: War booty (Mal-e-Ghanimat): Bait al mal: 21st century version
If they had a right to refuse conversion, then obviously not…