Understanding Islamic fundamentalist thought and philosophy is key to understanding the persecution of Christians througout the Muslim world.
The Roots of Jihad
By Ehud Ein-Gil
For The Full Article, Go To Harrets.com
Many Muslims are protesting the identification of Mohammed, and hence of Islam as such, with terrorism. Is terrorism in fact ingrained in Islam?
“This is what the Islamists themselves say, like the spiritual mentor of Ayman al-Zawahiri , who is not second in importance in Al-Qaida, but first in terms of religious law, as well as planning and thought. His mentor is Sheikh Abed al-Qadr bin Abed al-Aziz (whose real name is A-Sayed Imam Abed al-Aziz a-Sharif), who asserted, ‘Terror is from Islam and anyone who denies this is a heretic’. He and others rely on a few verses from the Koran, and I will give you, as an example, only one of them, from the Surah of the Spoils of War [Surah 8:60]: ‘Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into [the hearts of] the enemies of Allah and your enemies’ [translation from Abdullah Yusuf Ali, “The Meaning of the Holy Qur’an”].”
On what, then, do Muslims who deny the identification of Islam with jihad and terrorism rely on?
“There are two Islams from the period of Mohammed. There is Meccan Islam [referring to Mohammed’s period in Mecca ], which is a ‘Christian’ Islam – that is, under Christian influence – and is essentially peace-seeking. The use of violence, even for self-defense, was prohibited. In this Islam, jihad was prohibited. This Islam was the basis for the mystical Sufi movement.
“When Mohammed was forced to move from Mecca to Medina , a second Islam – jihadist Islam – was born. And it is this Islam that the contemporary terrorists have adopted. To justify the passage from the ‘conciliatory’ peace of Mecca to the militant peace of Medina , Mohammed told the Muslims that jihad is permissible only for self-defense [Surah of The Pilgrimage – Surah 22:39]: ‘To those against whom war is made, permission is given [to fight], because they are wronged.’ Mohammed was wronged – he was expelled from Mecca , and the purpose of the defensive jihad is to enable his return.
“Medinaist Islam is terrorist Islam. Sheikh Yusuf al-Kardawi says that terrorism in Islam is positive and should be welcomed. Here he is drawing in part on verse 12 in the Surah of the Spoils of War: ‘I will instill terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: Smite ye above their necks and smite all their fingertips off them.’ Osama bin Laden, in a speech on the occasion of Id al-Adha in 2003, said that it is best to follow the blessed terror about which al-Kardawi speaks.”
Is there anything that can be done so that Meccan Islam will be strengthened and overcome Medinaist Islam?
“My answer is my plan for the reform of Islam, a reform of the Islamic discourse, of religious education, the religious media, the sermons in the mosques, and so forth. The plan is to remove from the textbooks all the violent and jihadist verses and leave them only in the source, in the holy writings.”
“To a certain extent, yes. In Tunisia , this has been done since 1999. The plan is that instead of the violent verses, schoolchildren will be taught the universal verses of peace which exist in the Mecca period. For example, Verse 62 of the Surah of the Heifer, which says, ‘Those who believe [in the Koran], and those who follow the Jewish [Scriptures], and the Christians and the Sabians, any who believe in Allah and the Last Day and work righteousness, shall have their reward with their Lord; on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.’ And there are another two similar verses. The sages of the Sharia all said that these are ‘annulled’ verses. We have to annul the annulment of these three verses and declare that it is the verses against the Jews and the Christians that are ‘annulled.’
“The plan I proposed includes the introduction of modern sciences in the institutions of religious education, as well as comparative history of the religions and psychology and sociology of the religions, so that students will be able to understand the religious text in terms of modern logic. And also courses in philosophy and human rights, in order to instill modern values into Islam, in which there are now only values of permitted-prohibited.
“Several Arab regimes have already begun to implement this plan, or parts of it. In Morocco , for example, philosophy is now being taught in high schools. In Algeria , a year after I sent an open letter to President Bouteflika, calling on him to eliminate Sharia instruction in high-school education, a law in this spirit was enacted last October. And in October 2005, Libya , too, canceled the teaching of jihadist Islam and of the verses that justify violence.”
The ambush of history
Many are convinced that the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip is one of the major reasons for Islamic terrorism. Is this so?
“Not at all. People who say this, including experts on whose opinions Western decision-makers rely, do not truly understand the theology of Islamic terror. What are the goals of the terrorism perpetrated by Al-Qaida? Zawahiri described this clearly in his book, ‘Horsemen under the Prophet’s Banner,’ which he effectively wrote as his last testament shortly before the terrorist offensive of September 11 (he was certain that after the attack the United States would liquidate all of them).
“Here is what he wrote, on pages 327-328: ‘The jihadist movement must strive for the Islamic nation to take part with it in its jihad, and the Islamic nation will not take part as long as the masses of the Islamic nation do not understand the slogans of the Mujahideen.’ And he adds, ‘Therefore the jihadist movement is obliged to abandon the limitation of going into the fray solely under these slogans – al-hakimiya, al-walaa and al-baraa’ – meaning religious rule based on the Sharia, Islamic religious law; forging ties with believers only; and total and immediate severance from the unbelievers.
“The goal of Islamic terror, then, is to establish a state that will implement the Sharia and divorce itself completely from the infidels – from their religions, their customs, their dress, their institutions, their sciences and their values.
“But al-Zawahiri is smart and is aware of the reality. ‘Regrettably,’ he writes, ‘these slogans are not comprehensible to the masses of the nation, who do not find within themselves readiness to sacrifice for slogans they do not understand, even if the slogans are one hundred percent correct.'”
What solution does he propose?
“He knows that a great deal of time is needed before the masses will understand these slogans. However, he writes, ‘It is clear that our enemies will not give us all the time we need to educate the nation.’ What, then, is to be done? His answer: ‘To our slogans [as listed above] we must add other slogans, which are understandable to the masses of the Islamic nation, and instead of viewing them as being of secondary importance, we must move them forward so that they take their place at the forefront’ – on the same level as the three original slogans.”
What are the additional slogans he promotes?
“‘The slogan that the Islamic nation has understood well for 50 years,’ he writes. ‘This is the slogan of the call for a jihad against Israel .’ You have to understand, for him this is a second-rank goal and its use is solely as a Machiavellian means: If we tell them that the goal is a Muslim state that will amputate thieves’ hands, they will say no, but this goal is clea
r and simple.
“Another slogan that Zawahiri promotes is the liberation of the Islamic holy places in Saudi Arabia from the American military presence in the Arabian Peninsula, and in Jerusalem from the presence of the Israeli army. The liberation of Palestine is not the central goal of the terror, but the struggle for it helps the terrorists recruit Muslims for the jihad against the Jews and against the ‘Crusaders.’ In contrast to the left, they hate neither American imperialism nor Zionism; they hate the Christians and the Jews. Not because of what the Jews and the Christians are doing to the Muslims, but only because they are Christians and Jews who did not accept the true faith, Islam.”
Is this also true of the Palestinian Islamic organizations, such as Hamas?
“Yes. True, Hamas asserts that its goal is the liberation of Palestine to the last clod, and its transformation into Islamic Waqf [charitable trust] of all the Muslims in the world. This is undoubtedly an unattainable goal, but its role is to mobilize the Palestinians and the Islamic nation for a jihad against Israel and against its allies in the West.
“Incidentally, al-hakimiya, al-walaa and al-baraa are the foundation in the theology of all the Islamic movements of the modern period. For example, Rashed al-Ghanoushi, in his book ‘The General Freedoms in the Muslim State ,’ says that Ibn Taymiyya viewed hatred of the infidels as a basic goal of the Islamic Sharia. And this Ibn Taymiyya, who lived in the 14th century, is THE sheikh of the modern Islamic terrorists. And who is an infidel? Not only those who believe in other religions. Ibn Taymiyya stated that the Shiites are infidels, and he was the first to state that the Sufis are infidels, and the philosophers are infidels, and in short anyone who departs a little from what true Islam views as the right path is declared an infidel.”
We will return, with your permission, to Hamas.
“And to terrorism. Contrary to the declared goal of Hamas, the establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza can be realized, but its establishment will pull the ground from under the excuse for terrorism (the liberation of Palestine), so that Hamas will be left only with the three slogans, which the Islamic nation does not understand.”
Taking into account the Hamas Charter, is there any prospect that this movement will reach a settlement with Israel ?
“The Hamas Charter is taken from the theology of Islamic Jihad. When Hamas announced the possibility of a long-term hudna [cease-fire] with Israel , Western commentators, who are unfamiliar with jihadist theology, wrote that Hamas had become more moderate. That is a foolish diagnosis. Bin Laden recently offered the United States a long-term hudna – so has he become moderate, too?
“Like bin Laden, Hamas took this straight from the jihad theology. What does this theology say? When the Muslim army is weak and is in an inferior position, it must ask for a hudna of three-four years in order to exploit the time to strengthen itself. This is the ‘long term’ of jihad.”
Is it possible to persuade the Hamas leadership to conduct peace negotiations with Israel ?
“It is difficult. In such a case, jihad theology will view the Hamas leaders as heretics, because that theology prohibits the ceding of even an inch of Muslim land to infidels. After the Oslo accord, Rashad a-Ranoushi issued a fatwa in which he declared Arafat and the PLO leadership infidels and [said] that all the sages of Islam view as a criminal anyone who cedes one iota of the soil of Palestine . But reality is stronger than the Koran, and I have no doubt that the more rational of the Hamas leaders will deviate from that religious law and accept Israel ‘s existence.”
So you also see a positive aspect in the Hamas electoral victory?
“Yes. History has laid an ambush for Hamas. The Hamas movement did not want to win, it wanted to be the second most important force, after Fatah, and to delay the implementation of the ‘road map.’ After the victory, the movement finds itself in a situation in which it must choose: either it forgoes its charter, and the jihad, in order to negotiate with Israel , or the Palestinian people will forgo it.”
Is there also a democratic lesson here – there is no need to seize power by force, there is the possibility of winning at the polls?
“The Islamists are against democracy. For them, the legitimacy of government derives from Islamic religious law, not from elections.”
If Hamas loses the next elections, will its people give up power?
“Giving up power is forbidden in Islam: the ruler rules until his death. Hamas will not be ready for an exchange of government as a result of an election loss, but in the end this will be decided by the balance of power that will prevail at the time; it will depend on the true power that will accrue to the winning side.”