+ Reply to Thread
+ Post New Thread
Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 85

Thread: Defining Jihad: its early inception and modern use.

  1. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MegadethFan View Post
    I replied to your question and proved my point and now you are crying about it. haha typical. One document in NO WAY details the motives of the ENTIRETY of a social group especially when the audience of the document is directed to change the minds of the rest of the group, as I outlined - ie, why would you have to change a social group's general thought if it is exactly the same as your own? Answer is - you dont. So the fact this single MB document seeks these ends reveals the fact that it is the ends of a small group who have a long way to go as they themselves outline. I already went through this.

    As I said before there is no such thing, in Islamic theology, history or REALITY that can be seen as "stealth jihad". This is the fringe concept of some ignorant Islamophobes. I dont know what you want me to do with this lengthy list above, but please state it so that I can cease with this rebuttal I am forced to render continually to you.
    I'm not quite sure what you are babbling about in the first very unclear part, but whatever it is, if you think the Muslim Brotherhood still does not adhere to the proclamations in the Explanatory Memorandum, and you think they are not to be taken very seriously, you can argue that out with the US Justice Department who certainly does think they adhere to it and are to be taken seriously, and proved that when thy just sent 5 leaders of that rogue organization to prison for the rest of their lives, after the recent US vs Holy Land Foundation trial.

    As for your second utterance, so you don't know what I want you to do with the Quiz, huh ? HA HA HA. Well, that's amazing. LOL. Especially when the last line that you quoted me saying was this > "We're still waiting for you to Identify them. Waiting.....Waiting......Waiti ng.........Waiting.. ............ZERO !" Maybe you just don't know what the word "IDENTIFY" means ? HA HA. Well, got a dictionary ? This shouldn't be too hard.

    Now, that I've had a little fun with you MR QUIZ ZERO, it's been obvious all along, and still is, that you have no clue who the people in the quiz are, or what the things in the quiz are, you are lost on the subject of stealth jihad, and your only pathetic recourse is to pretend that you think it doesn't exist. Right. Like a little kid says bugs are bad. I don't like bugs. There's no such thing as bugs. There that takes care of it. HA HA HA.

  2. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MegadethFan View Post
    haha! yes because anyone that disagrees with you is an Islamist of course
    No, it depends on how they present their positions. You present yours like an Islamist. Simple as that.

  3. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MegadethFan View Post
    Are you asserting Muslims wanted to submit the whole world and/or convert enslave or kill others?

    I disagree. The Rushidun never went anywhere near the real "west". The closest was, perhaps, the raids conducted on the Spanish coast in response to merchant warfare (totally political as per virtually every other violent encounter of the time) that occurred late in the reign of Uthman (the last of them). The only "West" they confronted, which was done mutually, as I explained, was with the Byzantines. You are correct in asserting that early European, or more generally, Christian views of Islam, in terms of reigning socio-political commentary was highly critical, but again this was entirely due to the displacement of the Byzantines as the main source of power in the region during that time - they were going to be pissed with Islam because he had kicked out Christianity as the reigning authority.

    In regards to the concept of jihad, and Islam generally, within mainland Europe, particularly its West heartland, these ideas were, as I correctly described, defined and described during an age of warfare BEGUN by these same Christian groups. It would be extremely ignorant to conflate what is hundreds of years of history in the way you, not surprisingly, have done. The Crusades began in the 11th century - the Rushidun Caliphs had ceased to exist by the beginning of the 8th. The Crusades had nothing to do with religion - Western Europe didnt give care at all about the Eastern remnants of the Roman Empire - and even the Byzantines never considered Islam, as a socio-political force, anything unusually violent or aggressive that it had faced. Europe itself was not Christian in any serious sense until just before this Crusading era, when Catholic hegemony had become king through integration with the Roman administrative system of rule - it still had the process of slowly converting, peacefully and forcibly, the local population. Islam experienced social expansion differently in this way because as it expanded politically, the inhabitants most close to the Arabian Peninsula were primarily Christians and Jews. The Middle East was then, in terms of population, the heartland of Christianity at the time, which meant Islam was embraced, or was implanted, far more easily, however a lack of Roman social organization as was left to the Christians in Europe meant the hierarchy of Islamic theology developed and functioned differently to its European counterpart, but that's another story. But the diverse, unChristian character of the West at that time was the reason why there were so many pagan groups, customs, and even rebellions and social movements at this time that were violently suppressed by Christian rulers.

    As I stated above the expansion of Arab rule was entirely political. You speak of dimmitude and violent expansion of Islam, but as I highlighted, and sourced, this was by no means the goal or driving force of these events. This is evident in the fact the identity of 'Muslim' was a very elite, ie an unimposing one and Arab rule was extremely beneficial for its recipients at the time.

    No, it was not legitimate at all. There was no mass conversions, no 'subjection' in any serious way. You need to analyze the context of the propaganda of the Crusades, which shows that Western views of Islam were intrinsically linked to the political characteristics of the movement, rather than reality. This is EXACTLY the same as when you read Islamic sources describing the Crusaders when they lived and operated in the region - they must be contextualized.

    But it isnt fact at all. It is as much fact as the antisemitism formed in Europe at the same time that dominated Western intolerance with regards to Jews and other religious minorities - Muslims included.

    Of course, although that being said there are pacifist tendencies, but I completely agree with what you have just written.

    I like to think I represent, as does essentially everyone else, only one side - my own. And I like to think my own side is that of truth and reality. I'd happily change my position when it is invalidated.
    Islamist. Islamist all the way. One of the sure signs and highly typical characteristics of Islamist is their perpetual practice of turning history on its head, of rewriting it in such a way as to portray Muslims as the "good guys" when that is as far from the truth as anything could ever be. It's not possible to "assert" that Muslims wanted to submit the whole world and/or convert, enslave, or kill others", when this is common historical knowledge, and has been for centuries.

    For an accurate account click this :

    Last edited by protectionist; Oct 27 2011 at 11:22 AM.

  4. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MegadethFan View Post
    Definition of Jihad:

    Of all the Islamic precepts discussed, debated and explored, not to mention ‘most often misquoted, misused and misunderstood’ in the West, none seems to more abused than that of jihad. ‘The word itself means “to strive or struggle in the way of Allâh”, not the more popular but incorrect usage, “holy war”.’[1] ‘
    Biggest bunch of crap Ive heard in a while. Here are the first 23 of 56 verses from the Bukhari hadith that contain the word Jihad. THE most authoritative hadith among the sunnis. As we can see, the so called "popular but incorrect" usage is the popular and correct usage in the bukhari hadiths.
    Should give some pause to ponder the motives of someone putting out such misinformation on Islam.

    Volume 1, Book 2, Number 25:
    Allah's Apostle was asked, "What is the best deed?" He replied, "To believe in Allah and His Apostle (Muhammad). The questioner then asked, "What is the next (in goodness)? He replied, "To participate in Jihad (religious fighting) in Allah's Cause."

    Volume 1, Book 2, Number 25:
    The Prophet said, "The person who participates in (Holy battles) in Allah's cause and nothing compels him to do so except belief in Allah and His Apostles, will be recompensed by Allah either with a reward, or booty (if he survives) or will be admitted to Paradise (if he is killed in the battle as a martyr). Had I not found it difficult for my followers, then I would not remain behind any sariya going for Jihad and I would have loved to be martyred in Allah's cause and then made alive, and then martyred and then made alive, and then again martyred in His cause."

    Volume 1, Book 10, Number 505:
    I asked the Prophet "Which deed is the dearest to Allah?" He replied, "To offer the prayers at their early stated fixed times." I asked, "What is the next (in goodness)?" He replied, "To be good and dutiful to your parents" I again asked, "What is the next (in goodness)?" He replied, 'To participate in Jihad (religious fighting) in Allah's cause."

    Volume 2, Book 15, Number 86:
    The Prophet said, "No good deeds done on other days are superior to those done on these (first ten days of Dhul Hijja)." Then some companions of the Prophet said, "Not even Jihad?" He replied, "Not even Jihad, except that of a man who does it by putting himself and his property in danger (for Allah's sake) and does not return with any of those things."

    Volume 2, Book 24, Number 547:
    Allah's Apostle (p.b.u.h) ordered (a person) to collect Zakat, and that person returned and told him that Ibn Jamil, Khalid bin Al-Walid, and Abbas bin 'Abdul Muttalib had refused to give Zakat." The Prophet said, "What made Ibn Jamll refuse to give Zakat though he was a poor man, and was made wealthy by Allah and His Apostle ? But you are unfair in asking Zakat from Khalid as he is keeping his armor for Allah's Cause (for Jihad).

    Volume 2, Book 26, Number 594:
    The Prophet was asked, "Which is the best deed?" He said, "To believe in Allah and His Apostle." He was then asked, "Which is the next (in goodness)?" He said, "To participate in Jihad in Allah's Cause."

    Volume 3, Book 29, Number 84:
    I said, "O Allah's Apostle! Shouldn't we participate in Holy battles and Jihad along with you?" He replied, "The best and the most superior Jihad (for women) is Hajj which is accepted by Allah.

    Volume 3, Book 31, Number 121:
    ...So, whoever was amongst the people who used to offer their prayers, will be called from the gate of the prayer; and whoever was amongst the people who used to participate in Jihad, will be called from the gate of Jihad;

    Volume 3, Book 46, Number 724:
    Allah's Apostle said, "A pious slave gets a double reward." Abu Huraira added: By Him in Whose Hands my soul is but for Jihad (i.e. holy battles),

    Volume 4, Book 51, Number 33:
    When 'Umar got a piece of land in Khaibar, he came to the Prophet saying, "I have got a piece of land, better than which I have never got. So what do you advise me regarding it?" The Prophet said, "If you wish you can keep it as an endowment to be used for charitable purposes." So, 'Umar gave the land in charity (i.e. as an endowments on the condition that the land would neither be sold nor given as a present, nor bequeathed, (and its yield) would be used for the poor, the kinsmen, the emancipation of slaves, Jihad, and for guests and travelers; and its administrator could eat in a reasonable just manner, and he also could feed his friends without intending to be wealthy by its means."

    Volume 4, Book 52, Number 41:
    I asked Allah's Apostle, "O Allah's Apostle! What is the best deed?" He replied, "To offer the prayers at their early stated fixed times." I asked, "What is next in goodness?" He replied, "To be good and dutiful to your parents." I further asked, what is next in goodness?" He replied, "To participate in Jihad in Allah's Cause." I did not ask Allah's Apostle anymore and if I had asked him more, he would have told me more.

    Volume 4, Book 52, Number 42:
    Allah's Apostle said, "There is no Hijra (i.e. migration) (from Mecca to Medina) after the Conquest (of Mecca), but Jihad and good intention remain; and if you are called (by the Muslim ruler) for fighting, go forth immediately.

    Volume 4, Book 52, Number 43:
    (That she said), "O Allah's Apostle! We consider Jihad as the best deed. Should we not fight in Allah's Cause?" He said, "The best Jihad (for women) is Hajj-Mabrur (i.e. Hajj which is done according to the Prophet's tradition and is accepted by Allah)."

    Volume 4, Book 52, Number 44:
    A man came to Allah's Apostle and said, "Instruct me as to such a deed as equals Jihad (in reward)." He replied, "I do not find such a deed." Then he added, "Can you, while the Muslim fighter is in the battle-field, enter your mosque to perform prayers without cease and fast and never break your fast?" The man said, "But who can do that?" Abu- Huraira added, "The Mujahid (i.e. Muslim fighter) is rewarded even for the footsteps of his horse while it wanders bout (for grazing) tied in a long rope."

    Volume 4, Book 52, Number 56:
    ,,,Later on it happened that she went out in the company of her husband 'Ubada bin As-Samit who went for Jihad and it was the first time the Muslims undertook a naval expedition led by Mu awiya.

    Volume 4, Book 52, Number 79:
    On the day of the Conquest (of Mecca) the Prophet said, "There is no emigration after the Conquest but Jihad and intentions. When you are called (by the Muslim ruler) for fighting, go forth immediately." (See Hadith No. 42)

    Volume 4, Book 52, Number 81:
    In the life-time of the Prophet, Abu Talha did not fast because of the Jihad, but after the Prophet died I never saw him without fasting except on 'Id-ul-Fitr and 'Id-ul-Aclha.

    Volume 4, Book 52, Number 85:
    ....He told us that Zaid bin Thabit had told him that Allah's Apostle had dictated to him the Divine Verse:
    "Not equal are those believers who sit (at home) and those who strive hard and fight in the Cause of Allah with their wealth and lives.' (4.95)
    Zaid said, "Ibn-Maktum came to the Prophet while he was dictating to me that very Verse. On that Ibn Um Maktum said, "O Allah's Apostle! If I had power, I would surely take part in Jihad."

    Volume 4, Book 52, Number 87:
    Allah's Apostle went towards the Khandaq (i.e. Trench) and saw the Emigrants and the Ansar digging in a very cold morning as they did not have slaves to do that for them. When he noticed their fatigue and hunger he said, "O Allah! The real life is that of the Here-after, (so please) forgive the Ansar and the Emigrants." In its reply the Emigrants and the Ansar said, "We are those who have given a pledge of allegiance to Muhammad that we will carry on Jihad as long as we live."

    Volume 4, Book 52, Number 88:
    The Emigrants and the Ansar started digging the trench around Medina carrying the earth on their backs and saying, "We are those who have given a pledge of allegiance to Muhammad that we will I carry on Jihad as long as we live."

    Volume 4, Book 52, Number 104:
    The Prophet said, "Good will remain (as a permanent quality) in the foreheads of horses (for Jihad) till the Day of Resurrection, for they bring about either a reward (in the Hereafter) or booty (in this world."

    Volume 4, Book 52, Number 112:
    The one for whom they are a source of reward, is he who keeps a horse for Allah's Cause (i.e. Jihad)

  5. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MegadethFan View Post

    Early Islamic Empires and beyond.

    With the death of Mohammad, the early Muslim community was met with several challenges to its stability, both internal and external, and the concept of jihad entered a new phase of development. Within the early political landscape of the Muslim community, in securing their borders, crushing rebellions and maintaining alliances the early Caliphs become embroiled in regional wars. It is disputed whether the Caliphs actually pursued these conflicts,

    What horse (*)(*)(*)(*) apologetics. Within 80 years of Muhammads death, Muslims were waging a jihad of conquest in Spain in the west and Afghanistan in the east. Muhammads death marked the beginning of the Ridda Wars, Wars of Apostasy.

  6. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MegadethFan View Post
    Are you asserting Muslims wanted to submit the whole world and/or convert enslave or kill others?

    Ibn Khaldoon defined it as: A representation, of the one who has the right to adopt the divine rules, aimed at protecting the Deen and ruling the world (Dunia) with it.

    Al-Mawardi defined it as: Succession of the Prophethood aimed at protecting the Deen and ruling the world (Dunia).

    Islam is not merely a belief, so that it is enough merely to preach it. Islam, which is a way of life, takes practical steps to organize a movement for freeing man. Other societies do not give it any opportunity to organize its followers according to its own method, and hence it is the duty of Islam to annihilate all such systems, as they are obstacles in the way of universal freedom. ...
    This declaration means that the usurped authority of God be returned to Him and the usurpers be thrown out-those who by themselves devise laws for others to follow, thus elevating themselves to the status of lords and reducing others to the status of slaves. In short, to proclaim the authority and sovereignty of God means to eliminate all human kingship and to announce the rule of the Sustainer of the universe over the entire earth. ...
    . After annihilating the tyrannical force, whether it be in a political or a racial form, or in the form of class distinctions within the same race, Islam establishes a new social, economic and political system, in which the concept of the freedom of man is applied in practice.

    Their fascination was arisen after the defenders of democracy and the
    defenders of other such false ideologies (who have no religion) defended democracy simply for the sake of it, and they mixed the falsehood with the Truth.
    ..... They distort the Truth with Falsehood, and mix the Light with the Darkness, and the Polytheism of democracy with the Monotheism of Islam. But we, with the help of Allah, replied to all of these fallacies, and showed that democracy is a religion. But it is not Allah’s religion. It is not the religion of monotheism, and its parliamentary councils are just places of polytheism, and safe havens for paganistic beliefs. All of these must be avoided to achieve monotheism, which is Allah’s right upon His servants. We must destroy those who follow democracy, and we must take their followers as enemies - hate them and wage a great Jihad against them.

  7. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MegadethFan View Post
    It is rampant in all religion, simply due to the fact all religion requires reflection, reinterpretation etc..

    Interpretation of islamic doctrine is called ijtihad. The Sunnis believe the "gates of jihad" were closed. Islamic scholars at the time took all the interpretations of Islamic doctrine, agreed to by the all the sunni, islamic schools of thought at the time, and declared them off limits to new interpretations. Essentially freezing Islam into a 10th century framework where it remains today.

  8. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RoccoR View Post

    Languages, like imagery, convey something --- invoke something. Whatever the original intent, it has evolved and imparts something new; something sinister, dangerous and evil.

    Most Respectfully,
    Thats the same intent it had from the beginning. The AK47 has simply replaced the sword.
    Last edited by dixon76710; Oct 31 2011 at 01:21 PM.

  9. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gypzy View Post
    I concur. Duality is rampant in Islam, SOP as it were.

    I haven't read through his essay yet but I give anyone credit for an annotated effort.
    I am, however, very curious as to why someone would go through so much effort only to abandon the thread.
    He copied and pasted it.


  10. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dixon76710 View Post

    Thank you, Dix!

    I am reporting this thread because the author presented this as his own work. He did not include any link to his lengthy dissertation. However another poster *was* able to provide that link in post #39.

    I don't know if it is against forum rules to pass off someone else's work as your own, but it should be. It is extremely misleading, and dishonest.

    I respectfully request that the author be contacted re: his dishonesty and the link to his OP be placed within the OP.

    Thank you for your consideration.

    ~ g
    Given that the nineteenth century was the century of Socialism, & Liberalism...it does not necessarily follow that the twentieth century must also be a century of Socialism & Liberalism: doctrines pass...humanity remains, and it may rather be expected that this will be a century of authority ... of Fascism. For if the nineteenth century was a century of individualism it may be expected that this will be the century of collectivism and hence the century of the State. - Mussolini

+ Reply to Thread
+ Post New Thread
Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread