Re: What does fighting in the cause of Allah mean?
The Holy Quran, it should be remembered, is the only Divine book which absolves all the prophets of the world, wherever and in whichever age they were born, of the crime of coercion in relation to the spread of their message. Hence it is inconceivable that the Quran should present its Holy Prophet (sa) as the harbinger of an era of bloodshed in the name of peace, and hatred in the name of love of God. This is no place to engage in intricate polemical discussions, so this brief introduction should suffice here. According to the Quran, the Holy War, called Jihad, is in reality a holy campaign which uses the help of the Quran to bring about a spiritual revolution in the world.
Fight against them by means Of it (the Quran) a great fight Surah Al-Furqan (Ch. 25, V,53)
These are the very words of the Quran which throw light on the nature of Jihad. It must be fought by means of the Quran and the Quranic message alone.
The highest Jehad, therefore, is Jehad with the help of the Quran. Is it such a Jehad to which Muslims are invited today? How many are there who turn out to strive against disbelievers with only the Quran in their hands? Are Islam and the Quran so utterly devoid of inherent merit and attractiveness? If Islam and the Quran cannot attract people today by their intrinsic beauty, what evidence have we for the truth of Islam? Human speech can change hearts. Can the speech of God change no hearts? Can it bring about no change in the world except with the help of the sword? Long human experience shows that the sword cannot effect a change of heart, and, according to Islam, it is a sin to try and convert a people through fear or favor. Has not God clearly said in the Holy Quran:
‘When the hypocrites come to thee, they say: “We bear witness that thou art indeed the Messenger of Allah.” And Allah knows that thou art indeed His Messenger, but Allah bears witness that the hypocrites are most surely liars.’ (Al-Munafiqun, 2)
Here is a description of the hypocritical believers. If it were correct to spread Islam by the sword, then would it be meet or necessary to describe in this way those who had accepted Islam outwardly but were inwardly unbelievers still? If it were correct to convert people to Islam by force, then even such converts as did not believe in their hearts would have been true converts, according to the Holy Quran. Nobody can hope to win sincere converts by the sword. It is wrong, therefore, to think that Islam teaches the use of the sword for the conversion of non-Muslims. On the other hand, Islam is the first religion which lays down the principle of freedom in religious matters in clear and unambiguous terms. The teaching of Islam is:
‘There shall be no compulsion in religion. Surely, right has become distinct from wrong.’ (Al-Baqarah, 257)
According to Islam, every human individual is free to believe or not to believe. He is free to follow reason.
Of course, defensive war is permitted only on the condition that the enemies initiate hostilities and raise sword against a weak, defenceless people for having committed the only crime of declaring that God is their Lord. All offensive wars according to Islam are unholy.