Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Tuesday, Jan 14, 2003

About Us
Contact Us
Open Page Published on Tuesdays

Features: Magazine | Literary Review | Life | Metro Plus | Open Page | Education | Book Review | Business | SciTech | Entertainment | Young World | Quest | Folio |

Open Page

Printer Friendly Page Send this Article to a Friend

Is Jehad sustainable against India?

Aggressive Jehad is sanctioned against "fitna" (oppression). To justify normal territorial disputes (like Kashmir) as Jehad, is raising the stakes too high with religious and emotional overtones to the detriment of not only Muslims, but entire humanity.

"JEHAD" HAS been a subject under discussion both among Muslims and non-Muslims for a long time, and is under sharp focus since the inhuman act of insanity perpetrated by the terrorist attacks in the U.S. on September 11, 2001.

India's national security is threatened by "Jehad" declared by terrorist groups (from Pakistan) and by the likes of Osama/Al Qaeda! Therefore a study of the subject and its applicability in the Indian context in all its ramifications and most importantly the implications of declaring Jehad against a nation with a 150 million strong and second largest Muslim population in the world, can no longer be avoided. Many Muslims rightly argue that Jehad is not terrorism, and Islam abhors terrorism. While a study of the holy Quran does reveal that Islam does not sanction terrorism or killing of innocents in the cause of Jehad, the non-Muslims are asking that if this is so, why did those people resort to such terrorism in the U.S. on September 11, in J&K over the last decade, and in Gujarat recently? An attempt is made to understand the concept of Jehad from a non-Muslim perspective, from the scriptures and writings of Islamic scholars on the subject!

According to some Muslims Jehad is frequently mentioned (in about 28 verses?) in the Quran and is an important tenet of Islam. Jehad, according to some learned Muslims, means struggle in the cause of Allah. Some scholars describe Jehad as (a) striving on the path of God, (b) mental struggle against passion, and (c) struggle to establish justice and human rights. Jehad can broadly be divided into three major segments: (1) Against the enemies of Allah (and His religion, Islam) (2) against Satan (3) against the evil inclinations of one's inner self (Nafs-e-ammarah). The scope for Jehad is wide, and can be exercised physically, through the use of wealth, the pen, speech, and even by migration.

For ease of discussion, let us combine Jehad against Satan and Nafs-e-ammarah (fighting the evil of lust and passion constituting the greatest obstacle to the attainment of God, as yielding to lust is attributable to Satanic influence) being non-controversial aspects of Jehad. Many pious Muslims say that the main emphasis of Jehad is to fight against this evil! "Do not follow the lusts (of your hearts), lest you swerve from the truth," says the Quran (An-Nisa, 135). It is interesting to note that not only Islam, but Hinduism and Christianity too are equally emphatic in this fight (Jehad) against lust. "There is no fire like lust, there is no monster like hatred, there is no snare like folly, there is no torrent like greed," says Hinduism (cf. Dhammapada-251). In about five verses (3:39 to 43) the Bhagawad Gita lucidly emphasises this very aspect. "Do not give in to bodily passions, which are always at war against the soul," says the Bible (1PETER2: 11).

Scope

Some Quranic verses need to be quoted here to examine the scope of Jehad (against the enemies of Allah, and His religion, Islam) in perspective. "And fight in Allah's cause against those who wage war against you, but do not commit aggression — for verily Allah does not love aggressors" (2:190); "And slay them wherever you may come upon them, and drive them away from wherever they drove you away, for oppression is even worse than killing" (2:191); "Hence, fight against them until there is no more oppression and all worship is devoted to Allah alone" (2:193).

A reading of the above three verses together, may be interpreted to mean that the underlying spirit is to curb and eradicate "oppression." Any "believer" who has the means and strength to stand up and resist oppression is encouraged to fight against it until it is quelled. While it is accepted that killing is evil, yet it is enjoined to crush a bigger evil of oppression.

Broadly Jehad has following implications. First, oppression must be resisted. Short of initiating aggression Muslims are directed to crush oppression with everything under their command, as "God does not like/ love aggressors." Second, slay the oppressors wherever they raise their head. Here the point to note is that it is not restricted to oppression against one's own self but is incumbent upon believers to fight against oppression wherever it is committed. Third, to drive out the oppressors from where they have driven you out. Fourth, (to suffer) oppression (fitna) is worse than killing.

Dr. Haykel, a scholar on Islamic studies in the U.S., cited six reasons as to why Jehad declared against the U.S. was not valid and warned world community against falling into the trap of Osama bin Laden. Interestingly all these reasons are equally relevant to hold the Jehad declared in J&K (and against India) as invalid:

(1) Individuals and organisations cannot declare a Jehad (Jehad was initially declared by Osama), only states can. Mulla Omar's Taliban was not recognised the world over. Jehad declared by Pakistan-based terrorist groups and Al Qaeda against J&K/India, is similarly invalid. (2) One cannot kill innocent women and children when conducting a Jehad. (3) One cannot kill Muslims in a Jehad (Muslims too died in the U.S. terrorist attacks on September 11, and in Kashmir). (4) One cannot fight a Jehad against a country in which Muslims can freely practise their religion and proselytise Islam. (5) Prominent Muslim jurists around the world have condemned the September 11 attacks and their condemnation forms a juristic consensus (ijma') against bin Laden's actions (this consensus renders his actions un-Islamic). (6) The welfare and interest of the Muslim community (maslaha) is being harmed by bin Laden's actions and this equally makes them un-Islamic.

Questions have also been raised whether it is justified in a Jehad for Muslim groups to fight and kill each other (Northern Alliance-Taliban now, Iran-Iraq war earlier) for territorial gains and, in the process, condemn one-third of their people to a life in slums to subsist on food handouts coming mostly from the Christian West! Is it permissible to finance a Jehad by growing poppy and selling heroin extracted from it to the "infidels"?

Those who sacrifice their lives in the cause of Allah are called martyrs (shaheed). The Quran in two verses (2:154 & 3:169) says "And say not of those who are slain in God's cause, `they are dead': nay they are alive, but you perceive it not". "They are alive. With their Sustainer have they their sustenance." Some Muslim scholars rightly argue that it is a distortion of the Quran to claim martyrdom for the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks, however genuine they considered their grievances to be. Muslims claim that Islam forbids suicide and the suicide attacks have nothing to do with Islam. Death by suicide does not guarantee the promised heaven and invites the wrath of God.

No justification

The Palestine problem is universally perceived in the Muslim world as "Israeli oppression" and as a fit cause for Jehad by fundamentalists, and the U.S. targeted for supporting Israel. Pakistan's efforts to project "Kashmir" in a similar manner as a fit cause for fighting "oppression by Indian state" have not drawn as much response. "To drive out the oppressors from where they have driven you out," which has some relevance in West Asia, can hardly be justified in J&K from where no Muslim was/ is being driven out! Hence Pakistan's case identifying Kashmir (and India) with Palestine to fight Jehad can hardly be justified.

The perception of what is "oppression" in the eyes of the believers, justifying a Jehad, and whose interpretation in this regard should prevail and be binding on the Muslims, is not clear. By making normal disputes (like Kashmir) between nations as Jehad ("against the enemies of Allah and His religion, Islam") the stakes are pitched very high with religious and emotional overtones, to the detriment of not only the Muslims but also the entire world community.

Brig. (Retd.) V.R.P. SARATHY

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Open Page

Features: Magazine | Literary Review | Life | Metro Plus | Open Page | Education | Book Review | Business | SciTech | Entertainment | Young World | Quest | Folio |



The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription
Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | Home |

Comments to : thehindu@vsnl.com   Copyright © 2003, The Hindu
Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu