At long last, a group of Islamic scholars is going to cut through all the confusion and explain what the word jihad really means: "The Council of Religious Ministers for Brunei Darussalam, Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore (MABIMS) will publish a comprehensive working paper for explaining Jihad (crusade or holy war) to their Ummah (followers of Islam) by its target date next year.
Such a move is needed to avoid confusion and will also serve as a guideline for Muslims, especially young Turks, who could be misguided by certain elements, caused by lack of definition to the phrase's real meaning." This from Borneo Bulletin.
The article makes a start: "Jihad is a religious conviction for able Muslims towards defending the integrity of Islam. Those who may die because of Jihad are promised good returns and paradise in the afterlife."
Hmmm. If someone could die during jihad, it must involve more than just a personal spiritual struggle. Heck, it may even involve violence. (For an overview of what Muslims really teach about jihad, see my book Onward Muslim Soldiers.)
I have said this before, but it is worth repeating forever:
There is no distinction between Islam and 'militant' Islam. As Robert Spencer points out, in "Islam Unvelied", but seems to backtrack on in "Onward Muslim Soldiers" (Daniel Pipes also makes this false distinction), Islam already contains everything that a believer needs to be a 'militant'. A militant is someone who acts on what is there.
This false distinction leads to the erroneous creation of the idea of the peaceful Muslim, as if someone who believes in the words of Allah that say to 'kill the infidels wherever you find them', but does not act is a peaceful person at heart.
Someone who does not believe in the totality of the Koran, hadith and Sharia is simply not a Muslim in my book. The proof is for that someone to go the heart of Islam, Saudi Arabia, and proclaim his thoughts, which would be heresy. No 'Muslim' would ever do that.
Dear Mr. Kopman,
I am aware of no change in my views between my books "Islam Unveiled" and "Onward Muslim Soldiers." I use the term "moderate Muslim" to refer to Muslims who do not wage violent jihad or even, in many cases, approve of it. Of these there are many, and their existence is simply a fact. But I have pointed out many times that radical (i.e. violent) Islam represents a broad Islamic tradition, and that those who represent this tradition as being somehow a perversion of Islam are either ignorant of or intending to conceal unpleasant aspects of Islamic theology, law, and history. That said, however, it is still true that not all Muslims subscribe to these justifications for violence.
Cordially,
Robert Spencer