In "Meaning of 'Jihad' unknown to many" in the Evansville Courier Journal, Mohammad Hussain, "a pediatrician and a member of the Islamic Society of Evansville," explains it all for us. It seems that "the word 'Jihad' arouses the images of sword- or gun-waving individuals or suicide bombers, bent on killing or getting killed," and that "since Sept. 11, 2001, it has also become synonymous with terrorism."
But actually, "neither is true." In fact, "Jihad is misunderstood as fighting, which is just one type of Jihad."
Whew! That's a relief!
This is, of course, the kind of thing we have seen many, many times. Articles like this appear in papers around the country on a regular basis. The universal problem that all these clarifications of jihad have is that they're all aimed at Western audiences, and suggest that it is non-Muslims who have misunderstood jihad and need to be corrected.
In real life, of course, the Muslims who have, at least by Mohammad Hussain's lights, "misunderstood" jihad by equating it with violence are legion -- and what is he writing to them?
I have been reading Bing West's book about the fighting in and around Fallujah during 2003 and 2004 (title:"No True Glory"). It seems that the insurgents thought that they were responding to a call to jihad ... issued in the mosques ... by the local imams.
The motivation of the jihadis is well understood by our troops. Some people, like our most senior leaders, really never do get the word.
This is obviously the typical claptrap of "Islam means peace"
There are many Muslim deceivers that try to put a happy face on Jihad
But at the same time there are lots of Muslims that honestly believe that Jihad means inner struggle and that the Osama Bin Ladins of the world are hijacking Islam and the word Jihad. This Muslim author might be one of them. But I place him on the side of evil. He presents the acceptable face of Islam which misleads Americans as to Islam's true nature of conquest, forcible conversions and bloody Jihad. Muhammad fought many battles& wars to expand Islam's domain and so did the Four Caliphs. These Jihads were essential to Islam establishing itself so this is the true definition of Jihad for me.
Does a non Muslim really care if a Muslim claims he is perfecting himself via an "inner struggle" Jihad? Not really
But the non Muslim does care if Muslims are waging Jihad wars against his people. Jihad doesn't always mean guns. We see the demographic Jihad in Europe. We see the Jihad of lawsuits and foot baths in the United States. Plus there are at least ten bloody Jihad wars going on globally
"which is just one type of Jihad"
Might the good Doctor wish to explain all the other types of Jihad that bode ill fo the Infidel.
"Might the good Doctor wish to explain all the other types of Jihad that bode ill for the Infidel."
Flowerknife makes the same point I would make but rather expressed a little differently.
When the lying doctor says "Jihad" means things like "struggling to eradicate poverty or disease" he forgets to mention that this only applies to "struggling to eradicate poverty or disease" for muslims and not for infidels. Remember that the Doctors in Britain that recently went to blow up the night club in London and airport were muslim doctors who had taken the "hypo critic" oath. I would feel more comfortable with Dr. Mohammad Hussain's comments if he affirmatively denounced the doctors without borders who tried to murder in Britain. Mohammad Hussain should give a religious denunciation to them of how his fellow muslim doctors have misunderstood Islam. Otherwise, he is just another hypocrite who does not fool Jihad watchers.
"-- and what is he writing to them?" -- Robert S.
Yet Another Excellent Question.
"Jihad is misunderstood as fighting, which is just one type of Jihad."
Hey, this is the plain truth. After all, cheating and lying to kuffars is also part of jihad.
My Dictionary from 1999 defines "jihad" as "Muslim holy war" and "Crusade."
And that's what it is.
1999 - We were still living in a West free from Islamization, free from the horror of 9/11, free from the "political correctness" of not being allowed to say anything bad about Muslims (ditto Mohammed and Qur'an). Those three subjects didn't even cross my mind back in 1999.
Oh, for the good old days. "Ou sont les neiges d'antan...?", Mohammedan-free.
(1)". . . a valuable form of Jihad, . . . [is]struggling to eradicate poverty or disease or (2)to save someone from fire or drowning."
(3)"Jihad is a noble form of struggle against injustice, oppression, tyranny and evil."
from Dr Hussain's article
In regard to (1) I guess that's why the Moslems are killing Sudanese by the hundreds of thousands -- they're eradicating their poverty. And that's why they stone adulteresses and hang gays -- they're eradicating the possible spread of STD's.
As for (2) that means the New York firemen who fought the Twin Towers fires were engaged in jihad; so the hundreds who died must now be in Paradise, enjoying their 72 virgins. But what then of the Saudi firemen, who didn't rescue the schoolgirls in the burning school because they weren't properly dressed? Well, I guess jihad only goes so far.
And then (3). Well, Robert, Hugh, and most of those who post on JW and DW; it means we are all jihadists here. We are all struggling against the tyranny and injustice and evil of Islam. And non-violently, too, just like the apologists say real jihadists do.
People, the good thing about this article is that if you read the Comments underneath, MOST are informed and educated about the REAL (not Mohammed Hussein's lies) Islam. I urge you to read the Comments following the article.
Ingrates struggle (w/ puppets!) @ Kent State;
Money line?KentStater invites you to care here.Jihad is fighting/struggling in Allah's cause...So what is/are Allah's causes? I don't have to list them for this audience. The point is, that there are many forms of jihad, from the most obvious, down to the invisible. We are not concerned with inner struggle jihad, unless it expresses itself in violence, bigotry and a superior attitude.
The jihad(s) we are concerned about are the ones designed to take over in the name of Allah, justice and peace. The learned reader knows what that means.
Violent jihad, terrorism jihad, money weapon jihad, legal jihad, propaganda jihad, whine, snivel, cry, we are victims jihad, vote jihad, infiltrate the enemy jihad, and numerous other jihads with the goal of accomplishing Allah's causes. Allah's main cause, is that everyone on the planet must worship him only. That means 'no dhimmis allowed', except a few to take out the garbage and clean up the toilets.
Under some circumstances, even cleaning toilets can be a jihad...Allah likes a clean restroom...
At the inception of Islam in seventh-century Arabia, Prophet Muhammad and his followers were persecuted and tortured by the people of Mecca for 13 years, but fighting was not allowed. When fighting was permitted, it was only to defend life, property and belief." -from Mohammed Hussein's article, linked above
Now, just what's wrong with the above bullshit taqiyya, people? Anyone knowledgeable about Mo's time in Mecca?
"Jihad is misunderstood as fighting, which is just one type of Jihad."
Okay, so there are other types of jihad. But what does the doctor suggest we do about those who are engaging in "just one type" of jihad - terrorism?
Struggle against injustice, oppression? According to whom? What defines "injustice" or "oppression" to the Muslim engaged in "just one type" of jihad?
"Struggling to eradicate poverty"? Didn't many Palestinians have good-paying jobs in Israel before this noble form of jihad was begun? How many are now unemployed as a result of the "struggle to eradicate poverty"?
Show me a country made prosperous by jihad. (Saudi Arabia doesn't count. They got theirs through that most hated commodity of the Left: oil.)
Darcy: Now, just what's wrong with the above bullshit taqiyya, people?
Brilliant logic (compliment)...you answered your own question. Whats wrong with that statement 'is' that it 'is' BS taqiyya. The only question is as to specific type. I am sure the good Dr, is the best of the best muslims, I am sure he is sincere. But what is he sincere about? First and for most he must be concerned about Allah's causes and secondly how to get into heaven (Paradise). These are hooked together, and are of great concern to muslims, because Allah did not guarantee Heaven to everyone, only those who die actually fighting in jihad, get a free pass. Well almost free. So the good Doctor, as all muslims, if they are interested in Paradise at all, must go along with Allah's program, and never agitate him (Allah) in their direction. He is a good muslim, using the tool of taqiyya, as good muslims do. Taqiyya was not invented to fool muslims, it was invented to fool non muslims. That you have identified the Dr as a BS taqiyya artist, uncovers his jihad...
http://infidelnation.org/DOWNLOADS/Noble%20Qu...
page 54
Noble Qur’an 2:190 Footnote:“Jihad is holy fighting in Allah’s Cause with full force of numbers and weaponry. It is given the utmost importance in Islam and is one of its pillars. By Jihad Islam is established, Allah’s Word is made superior (which means only Allah has the right to be worshiped), and Islam is propagated. By abandoning Jihad Islam is destroyed and Muslims fall into an inferior position; their honor is lost, their lands are stolen, their rule and authority vanish. Jihad is an obligatory duty in Islam on every Muslim. He who tries to escape from this duty, or does not fulfill this duty, dies as a hypocrite.”
The passage itself can be found in two places. It is on page 39 of the Noble Qur’an translation by Muhammad Khan and distributed by “King Fahd Complex for the Printing of the Holy Qur’an—The Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques. It is a footnote to Qur’an 2.190 and is designed to explain Jihad according to Allah as this is the first time the word is used.
And it can be found on page 580 of the Islamic University of Medina’s translation of Sahih al-Bukhari’s Hadith. There it opens Bukhari’s Book of Jihad.
http://infidelnation.org/DOWNLOADS/Bukhari/sb...
In both cases, the Islamic scholars are condensing Allah’s and Muhammad’s teachings on Jihad to a single paragraph.
That's why countries like Pakistan, Sudan, Iran, Afghanistan, and so on are at the forefront of eradicating poverty and disease-- oh, wait.
Meanwhile, the Saudi royals have succeeded in eradicating poverty among themselves, but...
"Jihad" means things like "struggling to eradicate poverty or disease"
That's why countries like Pakistan, Sudan, Iran, Afghanistan, and so on are at the forefront of eradicating poverty and disease-- oh, wait.
Heh® my thoughts exactly.
GrennBeck...I have posted that several times myself, because it is such a good definition. Note especially the last two sentences, this is basically why there can't be moderates in Islam. Ignoring or refusing this 'obligation', means hypocrisy, according to that, apostasy also. There are no hypocrite's in Allah's Heaven/Paradise. Not participating in jihad, is almost a sure ticket on the down elevator, to the furnace heated basement of Allah's Paradise. There, depending on how much Allah likes you, you will be punished more or less, probably more than less, because you failed to heed Allah's call to jihad. This is the reverse of what any good muslim wants for themselves. I can't say as I blame them much, look at the alternatives...
And after all that, they are still not guaranteed a spot at Allah's banquet, unless they die in a battle, even then, I'm not so sure...I am really glad that Allah is watching them and not me...
"Jihad" means things like "struggling to eradicate poverty or disease"- sure thing. You can clearly see it when you visit the Islamic countries. 1400 years of jihad gave them a head-start....
Keep in mind that Muhammad Hussain is doing his Islamic duty to pull the Islamic wool over the eyes and ears of the kuffar:
Ignorance:
“The chief weapon in the quiver of all Islamist expansionist movements, is the absolute necessity to keep victims largely unaware of the actual theology plotting their demise. To complete this deception, a large body of ‘moderates’ continue to spew such ridiculous claims as “Islam means Peace” thereby keeping non-Muslims from actually reading the Qur’an, the Sira, the Hadith, or actually looking into the past 1400 years of history. Islamists also deny or dismiss the concept of ‘abrogation’, which is the universal intra-Islamic method of replacing slightly more tolerable aspects of the religion in favor of more violent demands for Muslims to slay and subdue infidels”
"Jihad" means things like "struggling to eradicate poverty or disease"
Is that why there's so little poverty and disease in the Muslim world?
There's one born every minute, and they all find their way into government service.
Many spiders first paralyze their prey and render them docile and harmless then suck the juicy parts out of them and leave them a dry husk. Sound familiar?
A Terrorist Jihadi died and went to the Pearly Gates.
George Washington was waiting for him, slapped him across the face, and yelled, "How dare you try to destroy the nation I helped conceive!"
Patrick Henry approached next, punched him in the nose, and shouted, "You wanted to end our liberties, but you failed!"
James Madison then followed, kicked him in the groin, and said, "This is why I allowed our government to provide for the common defense!"
Thomas Jefferson was next. He beat Jihadi with a cane, and yelled, "It was evil men like you who inspired me to write the Declaration of Independence."
The beatings and thrashings continued as George Mason, James Monroe, and 66 other early Americans unleashed their anger on the terrorist Jihadi.
As Jihadi lay bleeding and in pain, an angel appeared.
Jihadi wept and cried, "This is not what you promised me."
The angel replied, "I told you there would be 72 VIRGINIANS waiting for you in Heaven. What do you think I said?"
There is but one jihad-a fight to the death with/of the infidels. Let nobody's alternate definitions fool anyone.
Mr. Spencer, first let me say that I have been following this site for a long time now and reading what you have to say on these important matters. I think that the Ummah needs a big mirror so it can look at its self and adapt to realities of this world. I think you are that mirror and I commend you for your truely honest and accurate views on the issues facing the Ummah and the West.
Lets see, I am a Muslim and last tiem I checked it meant Holy War in the cause of Allah (SWA)nothing more, nothing less. I simply would not participate in such nonsense as what I consider false jihad aka Islamic Terror for several reasons that Mr. Spencer has already mentioned in his numerous works on the subject.
Mohammad Hussain is a fool or a toqqiya tactician for even daring to say different. Seems that the khawarij and their enablers are up to their old tricks again. Only the Caliph may call for Jihad and this agrrogance on Mohammad Hussains part angers me deeply.
To the others of the Ummah who watch this site... if my views mean in your eyes that I am commiting an act of kuffr, so be it. I would rather have the company of a learned kuffr than a liar who spreads falsohoods about islam like the man Mr. Spencer references.
DarthMalum,
If only the caliph may call for jihad, who does that mean we should look to? What makes a caliph in the twenty-first century?
Really Dr Hussain?
Perhaps you ought to tell al queda. I remember that the "Al Queda Reader" by Raymond Ibrahim, tells us that jihad unequivocally means what you say it doesn't.
DarthMalum,
I offer the suggestion--hope you understand--that Islam is too important to be left to the imams (that its interpretation and application should solely rely on clerics).
If a Mulim believes in jihad as the Islamic counterpart of the Christian's Just War Theory--war as necessity for just cause--defending the weak and innocent, say--waged by just means--a proportionate response that spares non-combatants--and by lawful authority--then THAT I can understand. That being a limited war for limited ends, for a limited duration. But not an endless war of cosmic dimensions interrupted only by truces of convenience--I suggest that cosmic struggles are Holy God's initiative, that He Alone wage such.
As far as purely human conflict is concerned, I say that we use the innate discernment He gave us to govern the use of force against others of our kind. The Devil, as it's said, is in the details.
--That Islam's interpretation and application should NOT solely rely on the clerics, that is.--