Jihad by Definition and Implication

Jihad by Definition and Implication There is a clear and definable conflict of interest and action which defines the relationship today between the West and the Muslim world. Well captured by the events of 9/11 and the ensuing War On Terror, lifestyle priorities, cultural differences and spiritual divisions underscore a relationship with prominent geo-political, economic and resource-based implications. This complex array of factors figures into the modern mis- appellation of that which is meant by the increasingly well-known term 'jihad.' Viewed today by those in the West and those in the Muslim World as the call to holy war and the justification for religion violence, this perception actually demonstrates that the core tenets of Islam itself are quite misunderstood both by the West and by those who claim to live by said tenets. In truth, our course reading materials demonstrate that jihad never directly refers to holy war, but instead, commands the followers of Islam to always 'struggle' to live in the way of Allah. (Crone, 359) The notion of struggle, across generations of political and geographic change, has come to take on myriad forms and implications, with ideas drawn from the Qur'an regarding the need to wage war in defense of Islam being used to exact myriad purposes either peripherally related or unrelated to the struggle of Allah. Today, the military context of the divide between Islam and the so- called infidels of the West both echoes an historical conflict between imperial and tribal forces and causes a visible dominance in policy discussion, military strategy and, importantly, media provocation of the image of the holy warrior. To the point, in spite of its diversion from the strict interpretation of the term, "it does however seem a perfectly adequate term for warfare enjoined by God, fought for His sake, and rewarded by Him. Jihad was not holy in the sense of ritually distinguished from profane activities. Neither the soldiers nor their weapons were consecrated, no special rules of ritual purity applied to the camp, no sacrifices were offered for victory, and no mobile sanctuaries or sacred objects were brought along to indicate God's presence." (Crone, 363) Instead, as the findings here have show, the basis of its distinction as being holy is that this particular struggle is distinguished as being done in God's will and in his name. To the point, there is an expectation for purity of intention which is supposed to overarch the absence of any of the above-noted indicators of holiness. Therefore, it is generally argued by Muslim scholars that those failing to meet these purest of intentions in the state of making war will not be seen as true Mujahideen but will be understood as invoking Allah for their own glory. This is an important point to consider in light of the way that many Muslim forces, though armed with verifiable political objectives in the face of American aggression, have exploited the purposes of jihad through various means of political and media-based propaganda. Underlying a front wave of media doled ideas is an infrastructure of potential beneficiaries. The cause of jihad, precious to terrorist organizations and members within many active Arab governments, is supposedly driven by the purest of spiritual obligations. However, in many cases, the source of the message calls question to the actual purity of the ideology. It is fair to suggest that the internal characteristics of this stance against infidels belies the theoretical motivation of religiosity. Governments that have vociferously appealed to Allah's demands have been successful in attracting the attention of their constituencies and that region of the world has been inundated with holy warriors willing, and sometimes eager, to die for the cause. This is the mixed outcome of real and genuine political disenfranchisment and the persuasive quality of propaganda on both sides since the inception of the War on Terror. This allows respective governments to act on instincts of politic, power or personal vendetta all in the name of Islamic jihad, often deeply bastardizing that which was originally meant by struggling in the way of Allah. The public presentation of information seeks to capitalize on images of western brutality while simultaneously pushing home the need to act for Allah. Beneath, however, leaders who have successfully indoctrinated their people thusly, are free to vie for all of their wills and desires with the staunchest buttresses of human tenacity. A growing interest in the correlation between Islam and hatred for America is evidence that two concepts have been inextricably linked by a heavily integrated, and by now ingrained, canon of ideas. Still, in no small way, this is directly concordant with the historical impetus of the jihad, which was emergent in its current form as much as a result of the behavior of infidels as by the spiritual ideals of Islam. To the point, the Sachedina essay makes the case that "the exegetical and juristic though of Islamic scholars were inspired by the socio-political circumstances of the Muslim community. Consequently, these scholars had to formulate terminological stratagems that could reconcile the apparently tolerant tone of the Qur'an with the use of jihad as a means of 'calling' people to the divine path." (Sachedina, 35) In other words, the core demand imposed upon Muslim leaders by the incursion of foreign invaders and imperialist forces required the justification of violence as existing within the context of doctrine and scripture. Therefore, explanations for jihad which rendered it to mean something explicitly related to the waging of holy war, as opposed to its purer meaning relating to a less exactly defined 'struggle,' would persist so long as would the political and geographical needs seem to demand it. This would be true as early as the Medieval times that direct the gaze of Crone's discussion. Here, the author notes the policy of belief that "if the infidels conquered Muslim land, all the Muslim inhabitants had to make a hijira to a place under Muslim government, and to engage in holy war for the recovery of their lost land from there. . . which was to figure prominently in the Muslim response to European colonialism." (Crone, 361) This idea that there was a direct relationship between the spiritual calling of Islam and the political impositions designed by the West to reduce Islam to modernity and secularism seems consistent with the same argument used not just to promote, but in fact to continually redefine, jihad. As point of fact, though the core of this discussion denotes a misuse of the term according to Islamic theology, the recreation of its means as referring to holy war, though false or at least extrapolated at one point, is today the dominant meaning for all intents and purposes. Perhaps only a period of political and geopolitical relaxation of tensions will allow a return to its purer meaning.