The Quranic Understanding of Jihad

The word ‘jihad’ is a broad term that connotes making strenuous efforts for a certain purpose. Jihad is not limited to waging war with external enemies. Nor does it always have that connotation. For war against one’s opponents the Quran uses another word—qital—which is an exceptional form of jihad.

Jihad, in the basic sense of making great effort for a noble purpose, appears in numerous verses of the Quran.

Thus, the Quran says (29: 69):

We will surely guide in Our ways those who strive hard for Our cause, God is surely with the righteous.

The Quran also speaks of believers engaging in jihad through their wealth (49:15) and through the Quran (25:52). The Prophet is said to have remarked that a mujahid is one who engages in jihad with his nafs (baser self).  To engage in jihad against one’s nafs is to struggle against one’s base desires and evil inclinations. Itis called jihad-e akbar or the ‘greater jihad’ in another hadith report.  But in addition to this sort of jihad is, as mentioned above, another one that is generally termed as qital in the Quran, permission for which is also granted in Islam. However, this permission is subject to various conditions. Accordingly, not every war fought in the name of jihad (in the sense of qital) deserves to be called a jihad. Its intention must be proper and pure, and so must its purpose.

Misunderstanding about jihad abounds, among not just non-Muslims, but among many Muslims, too. This is basically because they have not tried to understand the Quranic conception of jihad in its proper perspective. A large section of Muslims—in addition, of course, to non-Muslims—make major blunders in their understanding and application of Quranic verses that speak about jihad. They err in assuming that the illat or cause or rationale for qital in these verses is ‘infidelity’ (kufr), and so they conclude that Muslims must engage in jihad in the sense of qital against all ‘disbelievers’ and ‘polytheists’.

This, however, is not correct. The illat of qital is not kufr, but, rather, muharaba or waging war against God and an Islamic polity. The Hanafi scholars of jurisprudence and the majority of the ulema of the other schools of Muslim jurisprudenceuphold this opinion. Had infidelity been the illat of qital, then numerous hadith of the Prophet and reports of his Companions would not have forbidden the killing of non-Muslim women, children and recluses living in non-Muslim places of worship.

                                                          *

The Quran gives permission for jihad in the sense of qital for two reasons: putting an end to fitna, understood here as religious persecution (2:193), and defence (2:191). The Quranic term fitna refers to the situation that prevailed at the time of the Prophet when people did not have the freedom of belief and conscience, and when those who accepted any belief system different from the socially dominant one were persecuted. We can term the sort of jihad that was permitted in order to put an end to this situation as ‘offensive jihad’. All other forms of war in Islam are defensive.

The Quran ordains mostly this defensive jihad, and the fact is that today only this command remains applicable. Following the ending of the state of fitna by the Prophet and his Companions, who put an end to religious persecution, today the need for war to abolish fitna no longer remains. A very large section of the ulema, from early Muslims like Sufyan ath-Thawri (d.778) and Ibn Shuburma, to important ulema of our times, have insisted that war in Islam is permissible only in defence. This is linked to the argument that after the Prophet and his Companionsput an end to fitna or religious persecution, the illat for offensive jihad, no longer exists. In this sense, Imam Awza‘i (d. 774) and some other ulema of the early Muslim period confine jihad in the sense of qital only against the Quraysh opponents of the Prophet of Mecca or against the polytheists of Arabia in general of the times of the Prophet.

The noted Indian Muslim scholar and political leader Maulana AbulKalam Azad makes a related point in his book Rasul-e Rahmat (‘The Prophet of Mercy’):

It should be remembered that the commandment for war is only in relation to those groups of polytheists who were engaged in fighting to stop the Islamic dawah [at the time of the Prophet], and not the polytheists of the whole world. Hence [in the Quran], reference is, from first to last, to these particular groups.

Voicing a similar opinion, the Egyptian scholar Shaikh Abu Zahra opined in his Nazariyat al-Harb fi al-Islam (‘The Concept of War in Islam’):

Qital was restricted just to the Quraysh, because it was they who had launched aggression and were continuously persecuting the Muslims who had remained behind in Mecca. The battles of Badr and Uhud were specific to the Quraysh, but in the battle of Ahzab, the Quraysh had brought together the whole of Arabia, who wanted to uproot the Islamic polity of Madinah. That is why qital had become necessary with regard to the whole of Arabia—because all these people had launched aggression [against Islam]. It was in connection with this that this Quranic verse (9:36) calling for war against all the polytheists was revealed: ‘Fight the polytheists all together, as they fight you all together’.                                                    *

In the Quran, when the commandment to engage in qital is given, it is generally explained that the reason for this is the believers’ undergoing oppression, their being driven from their homes, or war being unleashed against them, and so on. The first Quranic verses (22: 39-40) to grant permission to engage in qital read as follows:

Permission [to fight] has been given to those who are being fought, because they were wronged. And indeed, Allah is competent to give them victory. [They are] those who have been evicted from their homes without right - only because they say, "Our Lord is Allah." At the time when these verses were revealed, the Muslims and the polytheists of Arabia were engaged in violent confrontation with each other, and so these verses should be seen in that particular context.This very clearly indicates that particularly in today’s context the Quran gives permission only for qital for the sake of defence.

In addition, it is important to remember that while the Quran does give permission to engage in qital in unavoidable situations, this is with the following condition:

Thus you may exact retribution from whoever transgresses against you, in proportion to his transgression (2: 194)Further, while the Quran permits war in defence, it says that patience in the face of oppression is a better response: If you want to retaliate, retaliate to the same degree as the injury done to you. But if you are patient, it is better to be so (16:126) In this regard, it should also be noted that with regard to people of other faiths, the Quran (9:7) advises Muslims that:

‘As long as they act straight with you, act straight with them’.

Here, it should also be noted that the aim of jihad is not just the protection of Islam and its followers, but also to protect places of worship of people of other faiths. As the Quran (22:40) says:

And were it not that Allah checks the people, some by means of others, there would have been demolished monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques in which the name of Allah is much mentioned. (In this verse, mosques are mentioned at the very last of the list of places of worship).

                                                *

In the light of this discussion, it is clear that the issue of jihad is greatly misunderstood, not just by non-Muslims but also by many Muslims themselves, and that this urgently needs to be addressed. The wrong policies and actions of radical Muslim groups in this regard have only further magnified these misunderstandings. It is necessary for Muslim thinkers and organizations to counter their wrong interpretations of jihad and to present the proper, Quranic understanding of the concept.

Need for a New Hilf al-Fudul

Some two decades before the Prophet Muhammad was appointed as a prophet, a trader from Yemen sold some goods to a Meccan man called ‘Aas ibn Wa’il, but the latter did not pay him for them. In order to secure justice for the trader, a meeting was held at the house of Abdullah ibn Jud‘an, attended by several respected inhabitants of Mecca. They entered into a pact, according to which in incidents like this, collective efforts would be taken to ensure justice for those rights had been violated. This treaty is known as the Hilf al-Fudul, which is often translated as ‘League of the Virtuous’.

The Prophet was present on this occasion. At that time, he was around 20 years old. After he was appointed as a prophet, he expressed his contentment at having joined the association, saying that the oath of the Hilf al-Fudul was more pleasant than owning red-haired camels (This sort of camel was very rare and so was very expensive, being considered very precious). If he were summoned to it during the Islamic era, too, the Prophet said, he would accept it.

The Hilf al-Fudul and the Prophet’s response to it can form the basis for joint efforts by people irrespective of religion to work together for the preservation, protection and promotion of human values. This sort of unity can be envisaged at various levels—from the local to the regional to the national and even to the international level. True, some people who simply cannot tolerate the idea of Muslims and non-Muslims joining hands may balk at this idea, as might those who take a very narrow view of ‘Islamic’ causes. But the Hilf-e Fudul shows how such unity can bring people of different faiths and ideological persuasions to work together for the collective good of humankind.

Today, people across the world—from diverse countries, faith backgrounds and cultures—are closely inter-connected, perhaps as never before. Hitherto largely mono-religious countries are increasingly becoming multi-religious—and this is happening in both the Muslim and non-Muslim ‘worlds’. Both these ‘worlds’ are now being impacted upon by external religious, cultural and economic influences. This is leading to the walls that have stood for centuries around them beginning to crumble. No longer is it considered necessary for religious minorities to have to completely assimilate into majority populations and lose their faith and identity. In an atmosphere of increasing tolerance and respect, they can now maintain their faith and culture and at the same time work with people of other faiths for common purposes. True, there may be some exceptions in these regard, but these are temporary, and are definitely not the rule.

This coming closer together of various religious groups is in line with the Prophet’s saying that all creatures are [part of] God’s family. The Hilf al-Fudul underlies the need for us to unite this family of God by rising above religious and other ideological differences and working together for protecting and promoting common human values.

In today’s world, there are numerous problems that necessitate such joint cooperation and untied action by people of different faiths and ideologies—endemic poverty, global warming, the nuclear race, ecological devastation, rampant immorality, the crisis in the institution of the family, violence in the name of religion, racism, war, terrorism and so on. These problems are not specific to just one community or nation. Rather, they have become global phenomena. They simply cannot be effectively solved without the joint efforts of all communities and nations. In the absence of such unity, humanity’s race towards destruction cannot be halted. Some people might think that such unity is a foolish dream. But, then, the fact is that we simply have no choice but to dream this dream and try to work to make it a reality. All communities, Muslims included, need to enkindle the spirit of the Hilf al-Fudul. Muslims especially should pay attention to this task.

‘Westophobia’ is Dangerous for Muslims

In recent years, what is called ‘Islamophobia’ has become a major issue globally, including and especially in the West. Many non-Muslim political leaders, scholars, journalists and ‘ordinary’ people in the West have come to think of Islam as a grave threat to their culture and values. At the same time, the ‘Muslim world’ has witnessed the emergence of a certain sort of xenophobia that may be termed as ‘Westophobia’. Many Muslims who have fallen prey to Westophobia consider the West and everything that has to do with it to be a source or symbol of a menacing threat to Islam and Muslims. They look at all such things with hatred and dread, mistakenly taking this hate to be almost like a necessary article of faith for them.

This mentality has its roots in the period of Western colonialist control over most of the ‘Muslim world’. It saw its genesis in the late 19^th and early 20^th century. At that time, Muslims who had been infected by Westophobia believed that even the best and most useful scientific inventions of the West were against Islam and a threat to Muslim culture. These included the printing press, the telegraph, the radio, the wall-clock, railways, trams, and even loudspeakers! The Shaikhul-Islam of Turkey, who was considered that country’s top-most religious authority by his followers, even issued a fatwa declaring that the printing press and Western-style military training to be forbidden according to  the Shariah!

This hatred for the West gradually declined in the years following the decolonization of Muslim lands, when Muslim countries became political independent. However, in recent years, his mentality is emerging once again. Contemporary Westophobia is a worrying development for the West—because Western interests are crucially linked to the ‘Muslim world’—but the ‘Muslim world’, too, will also have to pay the heavy price of this phenomenon if necessary steps are not taken soon enough.

Islamophobia and Westophobia feed on each other, and both, it must be realized, are gravely harmful for both the non-Muslim West as well as for Muslims. As a result of growing Westophobia, there is a very real danger of the good things of the West being ignored or even condemned by Muslims who fall prey to this tendency, with ominous consequences for Muslims in general. In blindly denouncing the West, Muslim Westophobes ignore the goodness to be found in the West—for instance, values such as honesty, punctuality, the spirit of social service, respect for the law and human rights, discipline and so on. Muslim Westophobes either completely ignore these things or else cynically claim that they are simply a cover-up to promote Western economic interests. They just do not want to see anything good in anyone but themselves. 

Like hardened Islamophobes, blind Muslim Westophobes imagine themselves to be paragons of virtue and consider those whom they berate as having a virtual monopoly on vice. While it is true that, like every other civilization, the West has its share of drawbacks, it is hardly acceptable to insist that the West is incorrigibly and wholly evil. The fact of the matter is that all civilizations—including both Muslim and Western civilizations—have their good and bad aspects and they should freely learn from and adapt and adopt good things from each other. However, victims of both types of phobia—Islamophobia and Westophobia—insist that this is impossible or unwanted.

A good number of Muslim preachers routinely rant and rave against the West. It is almost impossible to hear them praising anything about the West. Many ulema and other Muslim religious leaders who themselves live in the West never tire of railing against it. This is indeed very lamentable. The issue here is not how far this anti-Western sentiment is a result of or response to actual realities, but, rather, of how this sentiment further reinforces the fear of Islam among many non-Muslims.

Westophobia makes Muslims who have been infected with it blind even to the many good things that have been developed by the West that are today helping the cause of Islam and Muslims. The printing press and the Internet, for instance, which are today being used on a vast scale to introduce Islam to others, are inventions of Western scientists. It is because of the freedom of thought and expression in Western countries that Muslim missionary organizations there are able to work in those countries and freely invite people to Islam.

Many years ago, while talking with a teacher of mine, I expressed my anguish that the ‘Muslim world’ has become simply a consumer of goods made in the West, deriving benefits from the inventions of the West but not doing anything creative itself. He replied, very smugly, ‘Our status is that of masters, and the West are our servants’. Needless to say, with a mentality such as this, such Muslims fool themselves into imagining that the Muslims’ decline and degeneration are actually a cause to celebrate, fondly imagining that their downfall is actually their victory!

Westophobia has become so extreme in some Muslim circles that adopting anything that departs from traditional ways of thinking is lambasted as ‘blind imitation of the West’. What is called ‘modernity’ is a result of the development of human civilization. The fact is that contemporary modern civilization is led by the West. That is why those who are infected by Westophobia see almost every modern thing as ‘Western’ and, therefore, supposedly something to be shunned. They simply have no idea that there are still some traditionalist circles in the West who may be even more traditionalist than they themselves are. They wrongly equate ‘modernity’ with Westernisation, although the two are not the same. That is why they roundly condemn every new thing or thought as ‘Western’.

It must be admitted, though, that, to some extent, this is a reaction to the tendency in some circles where blind imitation of the West is seen as necessary in order to be considered ‘modern’.

Muslim Westophobes are often ignorant of the fact that there are many Muslims in the West today and that these Muslims have the freedom to practice and propagate Islam and lead their lives in accordance with it. There are numerous mosques, madrasas and Islamic centres in Western countries. Despite widespread Islamophobia there, many Westerners are ardent advocates of understanding and dialogue with Muslims. All this Muslim Westophobes are either ignorant of or willfully turn a blind eye to.

Muslims and the non-Muslim West cannot wish each other away—which is what both Islamophobes and Muslim Westophobes both might ardently hope for. The fact is that Muslims and non-Muslim Westerners have no choice but to seek to relate to each other through dialogue and understanding. Muslims, for their part, must make efforts to establish good relations with non-Muslims (including non-Muslim Westerners), even through unilateral means and even if the other side initially does not reciprocate. By reaching out with genuine well-wishing for others, Muslims will also disprove the claims of Islampohobes, who insist that Muslims are necessarily inimical to other people and that they are addicted to terrorism. In addition, good relations with others are a means for Muslims to learn from them and benefit from their knowledge and experiences in various fields.

Islamopbhobia and Westophobia are two sides of the same coin. They cannot survive without each other.  Mounting Westophobia can only further strengthen the forces of Islamophobia. This is something Muslims must realise. They must also recognise that hatred for the West is no solution for anything—unlike what Muslim Westophobes might insist. On the contrary, it can only further exacerbate the problems that Muslims face. Westophobia can only take Muslims even further away from the urgent need to engage in introspection and see where they have gone wrong, instead of blaming others for all their woes.

Reflections on the ‘Conspiracy’ Theory and Muslim Attitudes

Many Muslims think that a fundamental cause of the current problems of Muslims globally is what they decry as a ‘Western conspiracy’ against Islam and Muslims. They think that over the last few centuries Western countries have reduced Muslims to such a state of utter helplessness that the latter can hardly do anything to change their own conditions, try as hard as they might. The ‘hidden hand’ of what they call the ‘enemies of Islam’, will, they argue, simply not allow Muslims to get out of the unenviable situation in which they find themselves today. The Muslim religious and politically-oriented media is replete with stories of what are termed as ‘conspiracies’ of non-Muslims, particularly the West, against Islam and Muslims. This, in fact, is the only topic that a great many self-styled Muslim thinkers and writers can write about.

The simple fact is that this way of thinking only reveals the present-day Muslims’ extreme intellectual crisis. This crisis does not have to do with material resources or the lack thereof. Rather, it is a crisis of thought. Whatever Muslims might have faced, or are facing today, at the hands of others is plain enough to see—but it is all the price of the Muslims’ own weaknesses and wrongdoings, which they try to conceal blaming it on what they brand as the immorality of others. This is despite the fact that the Muslims’ own moral condition is woefully lamentable—this being so obvious a fact that it needs no elaboration at all.

Thinking in terms of the so-called ‘conspiracy theory’ is absolutely un-Islamic. If this theory were accepted as true, it would mean that the collective fate of Muslims is not in their hands but, rather, in the hands of their supposed opponents. It would mean that their supposed opponents, rather than Muslims themselves, are writing the Muslims’ fate. If this absurd claim is accepted, one would have to invent an entirely new meaning of the following Quranic declaration (13:11):

God does not change the condition of a people’s lot, unless they change what is in their hearts.

God does not change the condition of a people’s lot, unless they change what is in their hearts.

It is not completely untrue to say that Muslims have been the victim of some Western conspiracies. But the way that this is sought to be generalized and exaggerated completely out of proportion is utterly nonsensical, being indicative of deep-rooted and widespread intellectual bankruptcy among Muslims.

If you survey the 1400-year history of Islam, you will notice that Muslims have gone through numerous ups and downs. One of the most tragic developments in Muslim history was the enormous devastation wrought by the Tartars in the 13^th century, who rampaged through many Muslim lands. They brought widespread slaughter and destruction in their wake, provoking a contemporary historian to comment that it seemed that Islam would be wiped off from the face of the earth. The Tartars seemed so utterly invincible that people thought it impossible that they could ever be defeated. Yet, even in such a trying situation, the ‘conspiracy theory’ did not seem to have had many takers among Muslims of that period. Generally speaking, the Muslims believed that whatever had befallen them was a result of their own misdeeds, in accordance with the Quranic teaching: ‘Whatever misfortune befalls you is of your own doing’ (42:30). This is why not long after the Muslims had been militarily crushed by the Tartars, the latter were won over to Islam.

There are several reasons why the ‘conspiracy theory’ has so many takers among Muslims today. One basic reason is the marked tendency in Muslim intellectual circles to refuse to engage in self-criticism and introspection. A second reason is the failure of movements and parties that arose in the 20^th century in the name of defending Muslims and reviving Islam in securing their basic goals. This led to mounting frustration in their ranks, accompanied by extreme emotionalism, fear, suspicion and confusion—all of which made themmore prone to thinking in terms of conspiracy theories.

Thinking in terms of conspiracies is entirely opposed to the teachings of the Quran. It is a result and a symbol of a defeatist mentality, of a destructive, not constructive, mind-set.

This issue needs to be understood in the light of the teachings of the Quran. The Quran mentions conspiracies (secret planning) against Muslims on the part of their enemies. The Quran relates:

And they schemed but God also schemed and God is the Best of Schemers.(3:54)

Remember how those who bent on denying the truth plotted against you to imprison you or kill you or expel you: they schemed—but God also schemed. God is the best of schemers (8:30)

They are planning a scheme, and so am I (86:15-16)

From these Quranic verses one learns that for one’s enemies to make conspiracies or secret plans against one is to be expected .But since conspiring against others is an act against nature, it cannot be so decisive as to overturn someone’s fate. Therefore, the misfortune of Muslims today is an outcome of their own handiwork. Another important point that emerges from these Quranic verses is that God has made a natural arrangement to cause the conspiracies of one’s foes to fail. No party, community can subordinate or destroy Islam or its followers on the basis of a conspiracy.  This is why in numerous hadiths reports that foretell about the weakness and disgrace of Muslims, the responsibility for this is placed on Muslims themselves. For instance, it is related that the Prophet said: "The nations are about to call each other and set upon you, just as diners set upon food." It was said: "Will it be because of our small number that day?" He said: "Rather, on that day you will be many, but you will be like foam, like the foam on the river. And Allah will remove the fear of you from the hearts of your enemies and will throw wahn (weakness) into your hearts." Someone said: "O Messenger of Allah! What is wahn?" He said: "Love of the world and the hatred for death." (Source: Abu Daud, hadith no.4297).

The notion that other communities have reduced Muslims to a state of utter helplessness and weakness through their ‘conspiracies’ and that they have, as it were, sealed the Muslims’ fate, is nothing but absurd escapism and an excuse for Muslims not to do anything positive and practical to help improve the situation that they find themselves in. For instance, vast numbers of Muslims rant and rave against the West’s conspiracies, but a huge proportion of these very same people pines to get to live in those countries and lead a life of luxury! I have met numerous Muslims who never tire of expressing hatred for the West, but who, with the very same passion, also long to get an American ‘green card’ or British passport for themselves or their children! This is a very obvious and regrettable case of double-standards.

By constantly harping on their perceived victimhood, weakness and vulnerability at the hands of others such Muslims are certainly not helping themselves. This attitude does nothing to get them out of the situation they find themselves in, at the same time as it makes others also believe that Muslims are a spent people, a people who are capable only of agitating, protesting, wailing and shrieking and of nothing good and positive.

The fact of the matter is that in this world, an individual or community’s progress or regress, prosperity or degeneration, victory or defeat, rise or fall are all linked to the laws of Nature. The principles on which these laws are based are one and the same for all people. They are unchangeable. As the Quran (35:43) says:

‘You will never find any change in the ways of God’.

 These principles and laws apply in exactly the same way to Muslims as they do to other people. There are simply no short-cuts especially for Muslims, and nor can any exceptions be made for them.

The conspiracies of one community simply cannot block the path of another community. If, as a result of a conspiracy, a person or community finds one door closed to it, there will be other doors that remain, at the same time, open to it. But one needs to look for these doors and then set out on the path that these doors lead to, instead of banging against the one blocked door and destroying oneself in the process.

Islamophobia and Terror in the Name of Islam Feed on Each Other

What is called ‘Islamophobia’ has become an almost universal phenomenon today. The media is awash with stories of hate-crimes and prejudice directed against Muslims. In this regard, Muslims must ask themselves, ‘What is it that makes so many people fear Islam and think of Muslims as monsters? How far are Muslims themselves responsible for this?’

If we approach the issue dispassionately, in a spirit of genuine introspection, Muslims are bound to realize their own culpability in creating and sustaining Islamopbhobia. This stems from our wrong religious and political views and actions based on them. We will be forced to recognize that many aspects of traditional Muslim thought that are based on human ijtihad or independent reasoning have lost their significance in today’s context and that they require fresh thinking. However, a large and influential section of Muslims continues to refuse to consider rethinking these issues in the light of changing contexts and demands, in the process creating ever more problems for Muslims themselves.

In this regard, one central issue that needs to be urgently addressed are some dominant and conventional understandings of jihad, which some self-styled Islam ideologues deploy to give sanction to almost every sort of violence. Because of the unbridled violence in the name of Islam unleashed by some so-called Islamic groups in various countries, many people have come to think of Islam as an inherently violent and cruel religion. This is definitely one of the major factors for contemporary Islamophobia.

In seeking to understand and counter growing Islamophobia, Muslims bear in mind that the misinterpretation of the concept of jihad by some self-styled Islamic groups is definitely one of the major causes of anti-Islamic and anti-Muslim sentiments. The fact of the matter is that in traditional Muslim jurisprudence or fiqh, as developed by Muslim scholars down the centuries, the concept of jihad has not been fully or satisfactorily clarified and continues to be characterized by several weaknesses and limitations. Many Muslim scholars today acutely feel this problem. Certain conventional notions of jihad are rooted in the fiqh tradition that goes back to the period of Muslim political dominance, which impacted on all aspects of Muslim political jurisprudence. With the passage of time, the fuqaha or scholars of Muslim jurisprudence, could not give the same sort of focus to Islamic politics as they did to other branches of Muslim jurisprudence. Consequently, many aspects of Islamic political jurisprudence that were in need of rethinking in the light of changes in the spatio-temporal context, were not rethought. This is one reason why some of these conventional understandings of jihad failed to be re-thought in the light of changing contexts.

The term ‘jihad’ has a very wide connotation. The noted scholar, Imam Raghib, explains in his Al-Mufradat fi Gharib al-Quran, that jihad relates to making strenuous efforts in any matter. He outlines three types of jihad: jihad against external enemies; jihad against Satan; and jihad with one’s nafs or baser self. It is crucial to note that in present times, the notion of jihad has wrongly come to be seen exclusively in the sense of qital, or physical jihad against external opponents, although qital is actually just an exceptional form of jihad. Furthermore, qital is permitted only in defence, and, that too in last resort, when there is no option left.

It must be remembered that jihad in the sense of qital is allowed only in defence, and not in offence or aggression. Further, there does not seem to be any justification—from the point of view of reason, religious belief and the Shariah—to engage in jihad in the sense of qital just to end kufr or denial of Truth. The Quran (2:190) says:

And fight in God’s cause against those who wage war against you, but do not commit aggression—for surely, God does not love aggressors.

However, despite this, the notion of offensive jihad emerged as Muslims became politically dominant, reflecting the mind-set of the medieval period as well as certain political interests. It soon became deeply-entrenched, so much so that it became such a seemingly inseparable part of Muslim jurisprudence that, sadly, Muslim scholars ignored the need to review or rethink it. Needless to say, those Muslims who wrongly consider the concept of offensive jihad in traditional fiqh to be legitimate and regard that even in the absence of any aggression on its part, a non-Muslim government can be targetted in order to expand the domain of an ‘Islamic’ government, and to bring lands ruled by others under the sway of an Islamic polity are a major cause of horrific violence that the world is today witnessing and a major threat to the possibility of Muslims living together peacefully with people of other faiths.

It can hardly be denied that in order to address the problem of Islamophobia, there is an urgent need for rethinking certain aspects of conventional Muslim religious and political thought. Without the terror and turmoil unleashed in the name of jihad by self-styled Islamic groups being clearly condemned by the ulema and other Muslim intellectuals, it is simply not possible for Islamophobia to be effectively countered. After all, Islamophobia, based on hatred for Muslims, and the violent, terror-driven activities in the name of jihad in many countries, which are a complete violation of Islamic principles, feed on each other. The one cannot exist without the other.

Benefiting from Other Religious Traditions: A Muslim Perspective

In a well-known verse in the Quran, God says:

“O men! Behold, We have created you all out of a male and a female, and   have made you into nations and tribes, so that you might come to know one another. Verily, the noblest of you in the sight of God is the one who is most deeply conscious of Him. Behold, God is all-knowing, all-aware.”

This Quranic verse mentions that all human beings are children of the same set of primal parents. Thus, they all have, by birth itself, an equal status. They also possess a similar nature (fitrah), the nature on which God has created every human being. In the Islamic understanding, as we learn from this verse, the only criterion for distinguishing between people in terms of their nobility is their level of taqwa, i.e. God-consciousness. Taqwa is the only source of dignity and superiority in the sight of God.

Another fact that this Quranic verse highlights is that God has divided the whole of humanity into groups and tribes, and this is with the purpose that they should know each other.

The question here arises as to what it means ‘to know each other’?

Knowing each other is a means for people from diverse backgrounds, including religious backgrounds, to come closer to each other and assist one another to achieve common goals. This verse can also be read, then, as a call for interfaith and inter-community understanding and cooperation.

By underscoring the fact that human diversity is a God-given phenomenon, the Quran teaches us about the importance of ‘unity in diversity’. Nature dislikes uniformity because the universe that God has created is characterized by diversity and pluralism. The Quran very beautifully says:

“Did you not see how God sent down water from the sky with which We bring forth fruit of diverse colours. In the mountains there are streaks of various shades of white and red, and jet-black rocks; in like manner, men, beasts, and cattle have their diverse hues too. Only those of His servants, who possess knowledge, fear God. God is almighty and most forgiving (35:27-28).

Taking a cue from Nature, which displays incredible harmony amidst immense diversity, human beings are required to act in accordance with the principle of respecting the unity of human beings amidst diversity, which is only truly possible if we consider all of humankind as one vast family of  God.

In my view, when the above-quoted Quranic verse talks about people from different social groups getting to know one another, this is to be understood not simply in the sense of gaining information about one another—or information just for information sake. Rather, it could also include learning about and from each other’s religious, spiritual, social and cultural traditions in order to benefit from them.

In this regard, it is instructive to note that the Quran says that the Torah contains ‘guidance and light’ (5:44). Those who have read the Quran would know that it refers to the Bible in several places. Many famous commentators on the Quran draw on the Bible in explaining several Quranic verses. Likewise, it is worth mentioning here that the Quran (26:196) talk about zubur al-awwaleen, which means ancient books.Some Muslim scholars point out that this might also include Hindu scriptures, which according to Hindu belief contain Divinely-revealed knowledge and are called in sruti in Vedic terminology. Like the Bible and other religious books, the Vedas and Upanishads also contain many teachings similar to those in the Quran.

These similarities in different scriptures speak of the same Divine Source. It has been explained in several verses in the Quran that to every community God has sent a ‘guide’ (hadin) and a ‘warner’ (nazeer), who received revelations from God. Many of these revelations may have not have been protected from corruption over time, but one cannot over look the wisdom and insight they still contain. This treasure of wisdom is a collective or universal human inheritance, which every human being deserves to avail of. And that is in accordance with the Islamic spirit. In this regard, it is instructive to recall a well-known hadith, reported by Abu Huraira:

The Messenger of God said, “The wise saying is the lost property of the believer, so wherever he finds it then he has a right to it.”(Source: Tirmidhi)

This is a very valuable and insightful tradition. It implies that no community has a monopoly over wisdom and that everyone is entitled to wisdom wherever he or she may find it.

In this regard, it is striking to consider the tendency among many religionists to benefit as much as they can from other communities’ worldly knowledge and experiments but to avoid doing the same when it comes to their spiritual experiences and wisdom. This lamentable tendency can be overcome if we train our minds to realise that the essence of every religion is ethics and moral values and hence that they are not as different from each other as many people sadly think. If almost every religion stresses ethical values and moral character, there is really no reason why people of different faiths should think of religions other than the one they claim to follow as something totally contrary to their own.

A number of verses in the Quran and many hadith reports talk about ‘wisdom’ (hikmah). Now, what exactly does this word mean? Can we, Muslims, attempt to discover hikmah in the other religious and spiritual traditions as well? Can we spiritually benefit from this wisdom and insight that is found in other religious traditions? Some sayings attributed to the Prophet Muhammad, irrespective of how reliable they may be,do not allow Muslims to come into touch with scriptures of other religions. But here it needs to be considered that even the traditionalist ulema are unanimous on the point that this relates to some specific circumstances when the revelation of the Quran had not been completed and the first generation of Muslim community was yet to be fully educated and trained. In this phase of early Islamic history, even Muslims were asked not to gift or carry the Quran to people of other faiths. This was similar to the prohibition on writing down of hadith reports for a certain period of time, for fear that they may be mixed with the Quranic revelations that were so far not compiled. The prohibition on reading scriptures of other religions at this time must be seen in that particular context, because those who had become Muslims had only recently embraced the faith and needed to grow fully in it. The restriction must then be seen as contextual, not as a general rule for all times.

While talking about the responsibilities of the prophets of God, the Quran (2:129) specially states that they teach people the Book and wisdom (hikmah). Commentators on the Quran have defined the word hikmah in many ways. I firmly believe that this word also includes the spiritual insights and wisdom that are contained in other religious scriptural traditions and transmitted through the generations. They nurture the human soul, illuminate the human mind and expand our spiritual experiences. They are a common human legacy and we should not remain deprived of it. In this regard, it is important to note that some commentators on the Quran suggest that hikmah includes, among other things, the Jewish and Christian scriptures—or what are conventionally called the Old and the New Testaments. In further support of our argument, it is also interesting to note that Ali bin Abi Talib, the forth Caliph, has been quoted as saying that one should seek knowledge even though it is from polytheists (Source: Jame Bayan ul-Ilm).

Some Muslim scholars expound the view that anything not found in established Islamic tradition is mere ‘ignorance’ (jahiliyyah) and hence, that there is no need for Muslims to study or benefit from it. I do not agree with this. Here the concept of jahiliyyah requires to be understood in proper sense.It is not right to think that every single thing related to the pre-Islamic period is absolutely wrong and the Prophetic mission was aimed at putting an end to it entirely, as is widely interpreted. The fact is that many social and cultural traditions in the jahiliyyah period possessed common human and moral value, which, instead of being eliminated, was promoted by Islam. One saying of the Prophet appropriately proves this fact. The Prophet said: “People are like gold and silver; those who were best in Jahiliyyah [the pre-Islamic Period of Ignorance)] are best in Islam, if they have religious understanding”(Source: Bukhari).

A story related to the Prophet make this point even more clear and visible. Once, a group of people called on the Prophet and informed him that they had learned five moral teachings in the jahiliyyah period. When the Prophet asked them to elaborate, they said: “Expressing thanks to God when hope for achieving something is fulfilled, exercising patience in the time of tribulation, firmness in front of fighting enemies, reliance on destiny and exercising patience with regard to enemies (not taking revenge) and rejoicing in grief and misfortune.” It was so amazing for the Prophet that he said: “How much wise and knowledgeable they are! They are talking like a prophet’’. (Source: Jame ul-Masaneed wa al-Sunan).

It can be inferred from this Prophetic report that wisdom and virtue are definitely not a monopoly of a certain religion or community.

Something being good does not inevitably need to be proved to be so from a religious text if it is not incompatible with reason and human nature and is not harmful to human society. If something promotes human causes and proves useful for social and human welfare, it can be availed of by everyone, irrespective of where it is found and who finds it. The Prophet is reported to have said that the best of people are those who benefit humankind (Source: Kanz ul-Ummal). This clearly indicates that what Islam teaches is not odd and unusual. Apart from a set of beliefs, it is essentially the same moral teachings and guidance of all the prophets, religious leaders and sages (rishi munis) who have appeared among the human race ever since it came to this planet. That said, it is also important to keep in mind that not everything in every culture or religious tradition is good, laudable or worthy of emulation. Benefiting from others does not mean blindly imitating them. In learning and imbibing from others one must make sure the norms and teachings of one’s own faith are preserved. 

It is a well-established fact that what is called the ‘Muslim Golden Age’ was indebted to several religious and cultural traditions, including the Greek, Iranian, Indian, Coptic, Nestorian etc..This clearly shows how willingness to learn good things from other peoples and cultures is itself a good thing and is not something banned in Islam. The Sufistic tradition is the best example of bringing the best human values together in itself, for it has borrowed from several religious, non-religious and philosophical traditions, combining them with the spirit of Islam. Authentic Sufism reflects this inclusive nature of Islam and its true teachings of love for the whole of humanity.

Muslims believe that Islam embodies Truth. But that does not necessarily mean that everything pertaining to any other religion is false or ‘un-Islamic’. We should not deny the goodness in them and their great contributions to human society. Rather, we should readily acknowledge this goodness. I believe Islam, far from preventing its followers from benefiting from it, actually encourages it.

All Creatures Are One Family          

According to a hadith report, the Prophet Muhammad said: “All creatures are [like] a family of God, and He loves the most those who are kindest to His family.” (Source: Baihaqi).

The hadith report uses the term al-khalq, which means ‘creatures’. And so, the hadith applies to both human as well as non-human beings, including animals, plants and the natural environment, all of which are also creatures of God. That said, of course the hadith also applies to the whole of mankind as such. The whole mankind is like a family of God, we learn from this saying of the Prophet.

According to another hadith report, the Prophet said: “O God, ‘I bear witness that all human beings are brothers of each other’” (Source: Abu Daud). It is narrated that the Prophet pronounced this sentence after every prayer (namaz).

Unfortunately, most Muslim writers argue that only Muslims have a brotherly relationship to each other. However, these two sayings of the Prophet Muhammad clearly negate this notion, affirming, as they do, that even people of other faiths are our brothers and sisters, the only difference being that while Muslims are brothers and sisters to each other in religion, Muslims and people of other faiths are brothers and sisters to each other in humanity.

 In the same vein, another hadith declares that the Prophet Muhammad said that people areas equal to each other as the teeth of a comb. (Source: Ghareebul Hadith by Khattabi)

All above sayings of the Prophet reflect two very significant aspects of human relationships, which the Quran, too, emphasizes. The first aspect is the unity of humankind, because all human beings are descendants of Adam and Eve. The second aspect is human dignity, according to which every human being, in her or his capacity of being human, deserves dignity and respect. The Quran (17:70) says:

We have honoured the children of Adam, and have borne them on the land and the sea, given them for sustenance things which aregood and pure; and exalted them above many of Our creatures.

This is why the Prophet Muhammad respected the human soul. It is this concept which prompted prominent Muslim jurists and scholars to affirm that every human being is dignified, no matter what his or her religion may be.

It is reported that once, a funeral passed by the Prophet Muhammad and he stood up. It was said to him, “It is a Jew.” And the Prophet replied, “Was he not a soul?” (Source: Bukhari) This incident clearly tells us that irrespective of a person’s affiliation to any particular creed or religion, community or caste, merely as being a human being God has given him equal rights, because it is God who has created him. God loves every person, even if a person does not love God. According to a hadith report, the Prophet said that God loves a person 70 times more than a mother loves her child. From another hadith we learn that he who most serves people is most beloved to God. By ‘people’ here is meant not Muslims alone but everyone else, too. This means that the one who serves people, irrespective of their religion, the most is most beloved of God.

 Good and evil, beautiful and ugly, all creatures are God’s handiwork.  An artist never thinks of destroying his or her art, no matter how ugly it may be. Had this not been so, God would already have destroyed those who are not obedient to Him. But God may not even wish to do so, because this is not in accordance with His preordained design for the universe. Since time immemorial it is in His infinite knowledge that humankind would be divided into two groups: people of faith and virtue and others. This is why He has left it to a person‘s free will to adopt or to reject the way of faith and virtue. As the Quran (18:29) clearly says: “Let him who will, believe in it, and him who will, deny it.”

 The actual problem lies with the concept of ‘otherness’. Every social, including religious, group has its own concept of the ‘other’, and this ‘other’ can number one or more other groups. Again, common to all social groups are notions of external and internal ‘others’. The hadith “All creatures are [like] a family of God, and He loves the most those who are kindest to His family”, cited earlier, is against any demeaning concept of otherness. Every human being, irrespective of religion and creed, caste and community, belongs to God’s family. God has divided humankind into groups for God to know who the best among them in good deeds are, and for them to learn about each other. As the Quran (49:13) says:

 Mankind! We have created you from a male and female, and made you into peoples and tribes, so that you might come to know each other. The noblest of you in God's sight is the one who fears God most. God is all-knowing and all-aware.

 This world which God has created, for which He has appointed human beings as His trustees, is very beautiful. Its beauty lies in its pluralistic nature. The various religious communities of this world are like the flowers of a single garden. Every flower has a different colour and fragrance, but put together, they increase the beauty and splendour of the garden.

Today, the family of God is fighting each other. The garden of God has turned into a battlefield. Such thick and high walls have been erected in the name of religion that they have almost completely veiled the face of humanity, even though our common humanity excels over all identities.

One’s religious life relates, in particular, to the life after death, where, according to the Quran, God will make a final judgment about our fate. The theory of truth and falsehood has always been very confusing to many, with different groups considering themselves alone as true and all others as false. One cannot be allowed to suppress others on this basis, as, however, unfortunately continues to happen. It is totally inhuman and is against the nature of God’s universal plan. To fight and try to destroy fellow members of the one family of God is fighting God Himself—and, needless to say, one cannot win a war against God.

 It is a very important issue that although today we are living in a global village, where we are all dependent on each other, many people harbor deep-rooted hatred for others, including for those who follow other religions other than the one they claim to. It seems as if the very same sources that were meant to bind us together have been misused to create an enormous gulf between us. We are victims of self-interested politics and pseudo-religiosity gone rampant.

Today’s politics is free from every sort of ethical value. It is true that, barring some exceptions, the past examples in this regard are also not very encouraging, but the present situation is extremely bleak. This is because modern society has lost its touch with the true spirit of religious and moral values—or spirituality. Unless we transform ourselves into individuals bearing a high moral character, we cannot transform entire communities and societies.

 From a hadith referred to earlier in this essay we learn that he who most serves the people is most beloved to God can be narrated another way—as telling us that the best of people are those who benefit humankind. This hadith requires us to be a well-wisher for all other people. According to another hadith, the Prophet said that ‘Well-wishing is the religion [in its entirety]’ (al-Deenu al-Naseeha). (Source: Bukhari) One can be a true Muslim and truly a worthy member of God’s family only if one lives according to this hadith. In this regard, it is important to always bear in mind this teaching of the Quran (5:8):

 Believers, be steadfast in the cause of God and bear witness with justice. Do not let your enmity for others turn you away from justice. Deal justly; that is nearer to being God-fearing. Fear God. God is aware of all that you do.

 If every one of us sincerely takes the hadith “All creatures are [like] a family of God, and He loves the most those who are kindest to His family” into consideration and acts upon it, all our major differences will vanish. As a couplet of the famous Persian Sufi Jalaluddin Rumi reminds us:

You have come to unite people

Not to sow seeds of difference.