To Jihad or Not to Jihad…

            After reading Jihad and the Modern World by Sherman Jackson, I am left feeling even more secure in my position that Islam is a religion of peace. Now I can even make my argument better, by using Jackson’s. I was always under the assumption that the radical Islamic groups were less tactful in building their arguments about Jihad and that they instead preyed on individuals searching for something to belong to; individuals with animosity already growing in their hearts from some possible wrongs done to them, their friend, or their family from wars or other “Western” encroachment. As Jackson points out, some of those that might be considered by some as radical, are well respected for their interpretations, and have valid arguments (in many cases), like Sayyid Qutb of the Muslim Brotherhood.

            Qutb suggested that Muslims are to be in a continual state of aggressive Jihad against non-believers, Jews and Christians to be specific, because of historic hostility. He uses the Qur’anic verse 9:29 to substantiate this view, and suggests that the ninth chapter is the final and thus prevailing view of the non-believers and how Muslim should regard them. Jackson points out that not only is another chapter (the fifth) considered by many scholars to be the final one, but that this chapter sets a standard toward the Jews and Christians that is much different than in the ninth, for example, 5:82: “You will find those who are most closely drawn to the Believers in love to be those who say, ‘We are Christians’”. Jackson also refutes Qutb’s idea that peace efforts must be entirely Muslim by showing how the Prophet Mohammed waged peace with pagans in the “Forbidden Months” alliance.

            As a whole, I like how Jackson shows how Shari’a law is meant to be dynamic and set in historical and customary context. I will certainly be placing this article in my repertoire for my future interfaith work. 

Written on 2/6/12 for my Modern Muslim Thought class