Friday, July 17, 2009

Jihad and Imperialism

By Maulvi Yahya Nomani
(Translated from Urdu by Yoginder Sikand)


Some critics of Islam claim that the Islamic doctrine of jihad is but a license for imperialist conquest. There is, of course, no truth in this argument. When discussing this issue, we need to focus on what Islamic teachings about the subject are, instead of judging Islam by the actions of some self-styled Muslim rulers, who may have wrongly sought to legitimize their wars of conquests in the name of jihad.

The jihad that Islam sanctions is only for certain specified purposes, and to be undertaken only under extreme circumstances. It must abide by certain rules and conditions. It must be inspired solely by the desire for closeness to God and by indifference to worldly pleasures and luxuries. Such a jihad is a need and blessing for humankind to end the darkness of oppression and lead humanity to the pinnacle of blessings. At the same time, we must recognize that it is possible that some Muslim groups who claim to be engaged in jihad are bereft of the character required for those undertake jihad. Yet, this does not mean that the Islamic principle or doctrine of jihad is itself faulty.

Every thinking person will agree with this assertion of the Quran that if the spirit of jihad and people inspired by it were emptied from the world it would mean the victory of evil. The Quran says that in the absence of these there would be nothing to stop strife in the world. In other words, it is a major blessing from God that, through his prophets, He has ordered His chosen slaves to adopt piety and extirpate strife and oppression from the world and guide humankind and work for its welfare, using, if need be, physical violence for this purpose in the form of jihad.

Islam is a religious and spiritual message and invitation. Its real aim is not to capture power for a particular community or to ensure that a particular community should rule. Rather, its aim is to promote the moral values and spiritual truths that form the basis of its message. If Muslim political power helps to promote this aim it is desirable. However, if it proves to be a hurdle in this path it is hateful, and the Quran indicates that God will certainly destroy such power of the Muslims and make them face utter humiliation. Islam has blessed jihad as a struggle in God’s path. Those who are truly engaged in jihad are forever mindful of the Day of Judgment, when each soul will have to stand before God and account for his or her deeds, for as the Quran says:

That House of the Hereafter We shall give to those who intend not high-handedness or mischief on earth: and the End is (best) for the righteous (Quran 28:83).

If, as a result of jihad, God grants His slaves an opportunity to govern, they must realize that this is a custody (amanat), for which they will be accountable to God. If someone misuses this opportunity and, instead of regarding it as a custody from God, uses it to acquire worldly honour, power and luxuries, he will be severely punished on the Day of Judgment. When God appointed Hazrat Daud (David) as a ruler, He instructed him thus:

O David! We did indeed make thee a vicegerent on earth: so judge thou between men in truth (and justice): nor follow thou the lusts, (of thy heart), for they will mislead thee from the Path of Allah: for those who wander astray from the Path of Allah, is a Penalty Grievous, for that they forget the Day of Account. (Quran 38:26)

Being constantly mindful of the Day of Judgment alone can safeguard this custody given to rulers so that, despite having vast powers, they do not transgress the limits set by God. The path exemplified by the Quran and the Prophet’s practice can undoubtedly ensure proper protection of the soul. In a hadith report recorded in the Sahih of Muslim, the Prophet once instructed his companion Abuzar regarding the great responsibilities concerning the custody that governance is, adding that on the Day of Judgment it would cause rulers to suffer, save for those who ruled according to the truth and abided by their responsibilities.

Orientalist scholars have sought to related the jihads of the Prophet in terms of the economic marginalization of the Arabs of that time, especially the Bedouins. Hence, they claim that the real intention of jihad was to acquire wealth. This is not true. If this were really the case, why would the leader of these jihads, the Noble Prophet, have remained poor till he departed from this world? By the time of the Prophet’s demise, the whole of Arabia had been conquered. Wealth had poured into Medina , and had also been distributed to the poor, but still food was cooked only once a day in the Prophet’s house, and, at the time he died, this was made possible only by borrowing money from a Jew.

In the Prophet’s time, the largest war booty was secured in the aftermath of the war of Hawazan. The people of Hawazan had brought along all their wealth with them to the battlefield. When they were defeated, their wealth fell into the hands of the Muslims. If the aim of this or the other jihads of the Prophet’s time was lust for wealth, the booty gained from the Battle of Hawazan would surely have been sent to the homes of Muslims in Medina . Instead of that, the Prophet distributed all this wealth among the Quraish of Mecca and to the leaders of some other tribes who, till the other day, had been the leaders of the enemies of the Muslims. The pious, faithful Muslims of Medina got nothing of this. Consequently, some Ansars, Muslims of Medina, were upset. Hearing this, the Prophet called the Ansars and instructed them, saying, ‘Won't you be happy that the [other] people take away worldly things and you take Allah's Apostle to your homes, reserving him for yourself?’. They replied, ‘Yes.’ Then, the Prophet said, ‘If the people took their way through a valley, and the Ansar took their way through a mountain pass, surely, I would take the Ansar’s mountain pass.’

Syria was a fertile land. It was conquered during the rule of the Caliph Umar. As mentioned in the book Fatah al-Baldan, in many places the Syrians actually welcomed the Muslims. The Muslims had to face confrontations mainly in those cities where the Roman army had its encampments. The Syrians were mainly Christians, followers of the same faith as their Byzantine Roman rulers, but yet they welcomed the Muslims as liberators. It so happened that, on account of certain military compulsions, the Muslims withdrew from the Syrian cities of Homs , Damascus and Baalbek , but as they were doing so the Christians of these cities came to them, appealing to them not to go, and pleading with them not to leave them at the mercy of the cruel Romans. When the Muslims explained to them why they had to leave, the Syrian Christians prayed to God for the Muslims to return. They promised the Muslims that if the Roman army invaded their cities they would join hands with the Muslims to fight them. Naturally, this would not have at all happened if, as some people allege, true Islamic jihad was synonymous with imperial conquest.

0 comments:

Post a Comment