Re: War booty (Mal-e-Ghanimat): Bait al mal: 21st century version
Hold on there…
The Prophet(pbuh) himself made the distinction between greater(nothing to do with fighting) and lesser Jihad, and that is not to be played down (as it has been at various points in our history). It’s not a simple trick of semantics peacenicks play, nor the musings of scholars…it’s core Islamic theology direct from a primary source and it’s unambiguous and quite context-free…
Re: Jihaad - Offensive or Defensive?
Picocio very good posts again
but i still do not understand one thing
can offensive Jihaad be "used as a rationale for moslim imperialism" by muslim rulers?
it seems that this was a revisionist interpretation of the battles of Prophet(PBUH) by the ulema and it is extremely hard now to tell which interpretation is the right one ......is that correct?
thanks will appreciate your reply
Re: Jihaad - Offensive or Defensive?
Das: The 'offensive jihaad' you are talking about was not 'jihaad', it was greed for land and assets. Jihad, IMO ended after khulafa-e-rashideen (the first 4)
Re: Jihaad - Offensive or Defensive?
While my knowledge is limited on this matter but I am also coming to the same conclusion.Ummayyads and later Abbassids totally distorted this concept and it would not be an exaggeration to say that some religious leaders gave their blessings to such invasions to curry favor with the rulers
Re: Jihaad - Offensive or Defensive?
I have read at least 1 book of history from Hazrat Abu Bakr RA time to decades after Hazrat Ali RA and also many other articles and that is what I concluded.
Re: War booty (Mal-e-Ghanimat): Bait al mal: 21st century version
The hadith you’ve mentioned is a fabricated one. Studying the biography of the Prophet(sas) and doin some research on this issue will be much beneficial.
This was the practice of the Prophet (sas) and the Caliphs that followed him. What would you call them?
Salamah bin Nufail said: While I was sitting with Rasulullah a man came to him and said, “O Messenger of Allah Horses are being humiliated (ignored), and weapons are being laid down and people are claiming there is no more Jihad and war has ended” Rasulullah said: “They are lying! Fighting has just begun! Fighting has just begun! And a party of my Ummah will remain fighting on the true path and Allah will deviate the hearts of some men and Allah will provide the fighters from them until the final hour starts and the promise of Allah is fulfilled and good is on the foreheads of horses until the day of Judgment. It is being revealed to me that I will be departing you soon and you would follow me while you are fighting each other and the house of the believers is in al Shaam”.
(Al Shaam refers to Syria, Lebanon, Palestine and Jordon. It could be used to refer to part or all of these countries. Narrated by Imam al Nasa’i and is hasan )
Re: Jihaad - Offensive or Defensive?
Sharaabi: There is also another hadith the exact text of which I'm forgetting right now which will be in conflict with this one.
Re: War booty (Mal-e-Ghanimat): Bait al mal: 21st century version
All these countries were counquered in the caliphate of Hazrat Umar (RA) and nobody disputes the fact that this jihad was defensive,the rot started with the umayyads
Re: Jihaad - Offensive or Defensive?
hmm..so egypt was conqured as "defensive" measure?
all this is crap..if we assume islam is the divine religion then it is our obligation to spread the message to everyone right? and if govt.s put hurdles against our wish, then they must go. you can call it defensive but whatever..we just want to destroy those governments who oppose our spreading the religion.
and peaceloving "mod muslims" cant change islam no matter how much they cry to mommy about it.
Re: War booty (Mal-e-Ghanimat): Bait al mal: 21st century version
And what does that have to do with what i posted.
The rot actually started way before, with the murder of Umar (rah).
Re: War booty (Mal-e-Ghanimat): Bait al mal: 21st century version
sigh…they are not chainless (i.e. baseless), or neccessarily fabricated…they contain single transmitters of questionable nature, and so are considered “weak” (not fabrications)…but the general idea captures eloquently (like it or not) the concept of Jihad-al-nafs, which is very real.
See http://www.abc.se/~m9783/n/dgjh_e.html
There is a tendency of modern scholars (especially those who are Salafists) to make light of the concept of Jihad-al-nafs as it is construed as an excuse to avoid fighting…I can see the problem, but that’s a poltical concern.
Perhaps the blanket term “greater” Jihad is a bit much, but then, the question is: is Jihad-bis-saif the best (or ONLY) form of Jihad?
Classically, there are the following forms of Jihad:
*jihad fi sabilillah *(fighting for God)
*jihad bin nafs/qalb *(fighting one’s heart/soul/ego)
*jihad bil lisan *(fighting with one’s toungue)
jihad bil qalam/ilm (fighting with knowledge)
*jihad bil yad *(fighting with one’s “hand”/wealth, e.g. Hajj)
*jihad bis saif *(fighting with the sword/military action)
Salafists insist that Jihad bis saif is the BEST form of Jihad, (even if they do recognize Jihad al-nafs).
One can find Haidth to suport this, but then the definition of Jihad-al-nafs covers some aspects that can’t be discounted. Those who stress the equal importance of Jihad al-nafs and the others cite hadith like the following (and yeah, they’re authentic):
A man asked: “What kind of jihad is better?” The Prophet replied, upon him peace: “A word of truth spoken in front of an oppressive ruler.” (Sunan Al-Nasa’i #4209)
A man asked: “Should I join the jihad?” The Prophet asked, upon him peace, “Do you have parents?” The man said yes. The Prophet said: “Then do jihad by serving them!” (Sahih Al-Bukhari #5972)
The Prophet said, upon him peace: “The strong one is not the one who overcomes people, the strong one is he who overcomes his nafs [ego].” Al-Haythami declared it authentic in Majma` al-Zawa’id.
The Prophet, upon him peace, said to Abu Sa`id al-Khudri: “Even if one strikes unbelievers and idolaters with his sword until it breaks, and he is completely dyed with their blood, the Rememberers of Allah are above him one degree.”
BTW, the last two, and not that one weak hadith, are what support the idea that Jihad-al-nafs is a “greater” Jihad. They simply don’t speak to the “greatness” of Jihad-al-nafs, but actually make a value comparison to fighting.
In any case…not all relate to fighting, so the equation of Jihad=fighting is most likely an innovation that’s constantly being enforced by political figures.
Re: Jihaad - Offensive or Defensive?
Weather it’s justified or not I can’t say as it’s complex and requires us to revisit the dynamics of Muslim conquests and their motivation…typically the attitude is that for the most part, what motivated the conquerors was the love of wealth, and not the love of God.
What the Prophet(pbuh) did were raids, and hardly considered “offensive” conquests.
The conquests by the Noble Caliphs involved two major powers: Byzantium (which controlled Egypt, and parts of Sham), and Persia (modern day Iran, and again parts of Sham).
Byzantium and Persia were traditional enemies and the Arabs often got caught in between. Both were spent powers at their time. Rather than accomodate Muslims, they chose to attack them.
Byzantium was in a state of defacto war with Muslims after their aggression at Mootah.
The Persians executed a Muslim envoy, declaring defacto war.
Subsequent conquests were related to these early skirmishes and problems with these empires.
Once the Noble Caliphate disintegrated, Islamic society made the transition from a federation of tribes to a proper empire…this while core Islamic theology was being formulated. No doubt this transition had an influence on how early Islamic history was being interpreted.
I wouldn’t call these “revisionist” interpretations of the battle sof the Prophet(pbuh)…but “relevant” ones. I mean, the breaking of treaties made with the Prophet(pbuh) by the Pagans is bound to make the early scholars skeptical of any kind of peace treaty with non-Muslims… and so reinforces the need for a heavy handed foreign policy…I think those were the dynamics at work in the day.
Times are different, and I think we need to revisit the history in a holisitc manner. Again, the pattern wasn’t total all-out Jihad…the Prophet (pbuh) gave peace a chance…that’s a lesson Salafists just don’t want to admit to…
BUT, seeing as how we’re being victims of “preemptive” strikes and what not, this talk is nothing but academics. The focus, IMHO, should be on other kinds of Jihad and a re-visitation of say, how we can use economics and media to secure ourselves, as well as knowledge. TOO much emphasis has been placed on the “pick up a gun and go fight” kind of Jihad, and as a policy it’s been an abysmal failure.
Re: War booty (Mal-e-Ghanimat): Bait al mal: 21st century version
There is a saying, "We have returned from the lesser Jihad (battle) to the greater Jihad", which the people quote on the basis that it is a hadeeth, which is infact false, fabricated hadith which has no basis. According to this belief, striving against desires of the self is considered the Greater Jihad, which makes the Jihad of the battlefield the Lesser Jihad. However, this so-called hadith is only a saying of Ibrahim bin Abi Ablah one of the Successors, and it contradicts textual evidences and reality.
Ibn Taiymiyyah said in Al-Furqan PP. 44-45: "This hadith has no sources and nobody whomsoever in the field of Islamic knowledge has narrated it. Jihad against the disbelivers is the most noble of actions and moreover it is the most important action for the mankind."
Al-Khateeb al-Baghdadi reports it is daeef (weak) due to the narrator Khalaf bin Muhammad bin Ismail Al-Khiyam. Al-Haakim says, "His hadeeths are unreliable". Abu Ya'la Al-Khalili says, "He often adulterates, is very weak and narrates unknown hadith." (Mashari-ul-Ashwaq, Ibn Nuhas 1/31).
There is also the narrator Yahya bin Al-Ula who is a known liar and forgerer of hadith (Ahmad). Amru bin Ali, An-Nasai and Ad-Daraqutni state, "His hadith are renounced." Ibn Adi states, "His hadith are false." (Tahzeeb-ut-Tahzeeb 11/261-262)
Ibn Hajar said, "He was accused of forging hadith." (At-Taghrib). Adh-dhahabi said, "Abu Hatim said that he is not a strong narrator, Ibn Ma'een classified him as weak and Ad-Daraqutni said that he is to be neglected."
This hadeeth also contradicts clear verses of the Qur'an. Allah the Mighty, the Majestic, says, (Translation of the Meaning),
"Not equal are those of the believers who sit (at home), except those who are disabled (by injury or are blind or lame, etc.), and those who strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with their wealth and their lives. Allah has preferred in grades those who strive hard and fight with their wealth and their lives above those who sit (at home). Unto each, Allah has promised good (Paradise), but Allah has preferred those who strive hard and fight, above those who sit (at home) by a huge reward; Degrees of (higher) grades from Him, and Forgiveness and Mercy. And Allah is Ever OftForgiving, Most Merciful." Qur'an (4:95-96)
*By: Shaykh Abu Qatadah Al-Filistini *
Re: Jihaad - Offensive or Defensive?
Alright I understand it now …thanks
Re: War booty (Mal-e-Ghanimat): Bait al mal: 21st century version
Sharaabi,
I am famailiar with this rebuke, and does not address the hadiths I provided, and side steps the issue of Jihad al-nafs.
Re: War booty (Mal-e-Ghanimat): Bait al mal: 21st century version
Just to point out as others did, I was hoping that you had mentioned something about the concept of Jihad as to struggle againt doing evil work or to stay in the path of truth and taqwa.
You jumped right into physical jihad which gives wrong impression to uneducated muslims or non-muslims.
Re: Jihaad - Offensive or Defensive?
Egypt was defeated as part of the war initiated by Byzantium. Egypt was their protectorate. In fact, it was easy to conquor as the local coptic Christians were opressed by the orthodox Byzantians.
The concept of offensive Jihad as described by Salafists has nothing to do with governments being hostile to Islam. They simply claim it’s an Islamic duty to invade non-Muslims and bring them under Muslim control. It’s a very political view, and is in fact what all powers strive to do (prefferbly with little effort), so I would be the last to look down on it. But, is this what the Prophet(pbuh) did?
Re: Jihaad - Offensive or Defensive?
Yes here is a short account of what happened
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_conquest_of_Egypt
Re: Jihaad - Offensive or Defensive?
the reason i jumped into physical jihaad is because Jihaad is physical. those who speak about jihaad un nafs have no clue. The greatest Jihaad is with ones life. As Allah said in the qur'aan
"Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and receive no hurt, and those who strive and fight in the cause of God with their goods and their persons. God hath granted a grade higher to those who strive and fight with their goods and persons than to those who sit (at home). Unto all (in Faith) Hath God promised good: But those who strive and fight Hath He distinguished above those who sit (at home) by a special reward,- " (4:95)
all four madhabs have agreed that when Jihaad is refered to in the Qur'aan or sunnah it is with ones life.
Al-Hanafiyah:
It says in Fath al-Qadeer by Ibn Humaam 5/187: "al-Jihaad: calling the Kuffar to the religion of truth and to fight them if they do not accept". al-Kaasaani said in al-Badaa’i’, 9/4299 "To sacrifice ones strength and energy in Fighting in the way of Allah ‘Azza wa-Jal with ones life, property and the tongue and whatever besides".
Al-Maalikiyah:
For a Muslim to fight against a Kaafir who is not under oath, to raise the word of Allah, or if he (Kaafir) is in his (Muslim’s) presence (in order to attack him), or upon his (Kaafir) entering his (Muslim’s) land. (Haashiya al-‘Adawi/as-Sa’eedi 2/2 and ash-Sharh as-Sagheer/Aqrab al-Masaalik by ad-Dardeer 2/267)
Ash-Shaafi’iyah:
Al-Baajawari said, "al-Jihaad means: al-Qitaal (fighting) in the way of Allah", al-Baajawari / Ibnul-Qaasim 2/261. Ibn Hajr said in al-Fath 6/2, "…and legally (it means) sacrificial striving in fighting the Kuffar"
check out this article done by shaykh abdullah azzam on jihaad.
There is a misunderstanding of the word "Jihaad" amongst many of the Muslims today, who think it to mean any sort of struggle in the path of Allah, most commonly translated as "striving". This struggle (or striving) for them ranges from waking up in the morning for Fajr to giving Khutbahs and lectures on Islaam in Universities and other institutes. Whereas "Jihaad" is a shara’ee term which implies al-Qitaal (physical fight), even though linguistically it may mean Jihaad with the parents, like the statement of the Prophet SAW "Fa Feehima Fajaahid" meaning "strive in them (your parents)" or "Thumma Jahadaha fa qad wajab al-Ghusl" meaning "…then he strove on her, Ghusl becomes waajib". Just like the word "Salaah" which linguistically means D’ua as in the saying of Allah, "Sali ‘Alaihim" (at-Tawbah) meaning "…pray (or make du’a) for them…" but technically it means actions and statements from Takbeer to Tasleem. Similarly the Zakah, Sawm, Hajj and rest of these terms have their own linguistic meanings as well as legal meanings and it is not permissible for anyone to act upon the linguistic meaning while ignoring the legal shara’ee meaning. So a person cannot have performed Zakah (purification) by taking a shower each morning, rather Zakah in sharee'ah is performed by giving 2.5% of the annual savings to charity as an obligation. Similarly, one cannot perform Jihad by giving lectures, feeding the family or serving the parents, rather Jihad can only be performed in the field of al-Qitaal (lit. fighting), as the sharee'ah dictates.
Therefore when the word Jihad is used in the Qur'an and the Sunnah, in a general sense then it means Qitaal, and when it is mentioned in its linguistic sense (as in to strive with your parents and family etc.) then that is regarded to be Muqayyid (restricted) by the rules of Usoolul-Fiqh.
The following text is the translation of a section from the work of the Mujaahid Sheikh of this century ash-Sheikh ash-Shaheed ‘Abdullah ‘Azzam - may Allah have Mercy upon him - who was referred to as the "reviver of Jihad of this century" by the TIMES magazine. In this piece he explains the word "Jihaad" as an Arabic word and a Shara’ee term according to the classical scholars of the four Madhaahib.
Unfortunately, whenever Allah guides the Muslim youth to get up and fulfil the obligation and the Sunnah of Qitaal in the way of Allah, we find some people amongst the Muslims hindering the youth away from the legal Jihaad to linguistic Jihaad, which is what lead me to translate this piece of work, so that it may be beneficial to the Muslims in general and a final blow to the obstacles in the path of the youths seeking martyrdom in the way of Allah...
Re: Jihaad - Offensive or Defensive?
faisal, thanks for sharing. It cleared up a few misconceptions that I had.
Could you please provide the source for what you've posted?