Jihad is the struggle against all forms of evil and injustice, both within one’s own self (nafs) and against others. Thus, jihad is not limited to the use of military force, although such armed struggle is one form of it, and in that sense, jihad has been practiced and sanctioned by all nations since the beginning of time. After all, there is no nation in our world that does not have an army, and in all nations, martyrdom is seen as the ultimate sacrifice. War, then, may be good or bad, depending on the motives of those who engage in it and their conduct during and after the campaign. We believe that armed struggle was prescribed in Islam to defend not only Muslims but also non-Muslims who suffer from oppression, as well as to support God’s cause of justice on Earth. It was also meant to protect the right to worship of God, Who created us, in complete security; it is natural that He would want that right granted to His servants.

There are, however, certain Qur’an verses that may be taken out of context and wrongly described as a declaration of endless war against the unbelievers. For example, Allah says:

}وَقَاتِلُوا الْمُشْرِكِينَ كَافَّةً كَمَا يُقَاتِلُونَكُمْ كَافَّةً{

{…and fight against the polytheists collectively as they fight against you collectively…} (at-Tawbah 9: 36)

And:

}فَإِذَا انسَلَخَ الْأَشْهُرُ الْحُرُمُ فَاقْتُلُوا الْمُشْرِكِينَ حَيْثُ وَجَدتُّمُوهُمْ{

{And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them…} (at-Tawbah 9: 5)

While the vast majority of Muslims do not think that we should be fighting perpetually against the rest of humanity, a fringe minority of mostly youth, inflamed by the real and perceived injustices committed against Muslim peoples, use these verses and others to wage jihad against all of their opponents, both Muslims and non-Muslims. Lacking any means to wage conventional wars, they resort to terrorism to pursue their agenda or to avenge themselves against the enemies who fight them. Such is the dilemma that Muslims are facing nowadays and that mars the name of jihad.

It is true that the verses cited are the words of Allah, Most High. He also said:

}قَاتِلُوا الَّذِينَ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّهِ وَلَا بِالْيَوْمِ الْآخِرِ وَلَا يُحَرِّمُونَ مَا حَرَّمَ اللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ وَلَا يَدِينُونَ دِينَ الْحَقِّ مِنَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوا الْكِتَابَ حَتَّىٰ يُعْطُوا الْجِزْيَةَ عَن يَدٍ وَهُمْ صَاغِرُونَ{

{Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth [that is, Islam] from those who were given the Scripture – [fight] until they give the jizyah (poll tax) willingly while they are humbled.} (at-Tawbah 9: 29)

 He also said:

}وَقَاتِلُوهُمْ حَتَّىٰ لَا تَكُونَ فِتْنَةٌ وَيَكُونَ الدِّينُ لِلَّهِ ۖ فَإِنِ انتَهَوْا فَلَا عُدْوَانَ إِلَّا عَلَى الظَّالِمِينَ{

{Fight them until there is no [more] fitnah and [until] religion [that is, worship] is [acknowledged to be] for Allah. But if they cease, then there is to be no aggression except against the oppressors.} (al-Baqarah 2: 193)

And the Prophet (SA) said:

>>أُمِرْتُ أَنْ أُقَاتِلَ النَّاسَ حَتَّى يَشْهَدُوا أَنْ لَا إِلَهَ إِلَّا اللَّهُ وَأَنَّ مُحَمَّدًا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ، وَيُقِيمُوا الصَّلَاةَ، وَيُؤْتُوا الزَّكَاةَ، فَإِذَا فَعَلُوا ذَلِكَ، عَصَمُوا مِنِّي دِمَاءَهُمْ وَأَمْوَالَهُمْ، إِلَّا بِحَقِّ الْإِسْلَامِ، وَحِسَابُهُمْ عَلَى اللَّهِ تَعَالَى<<

<<I was commanded to fight the people until they testify that none is worthy of worship except Allah, and (until) they believe in me and what I came with. If they do that, then they have safeguarded their blood and wealth from me, except according to it (Islam), and their judgment is upon Allah.>> (Agreed upon, on the authority of Abu Hurayrah)

Not only that, but in previous scriptures, namely the Bible, much more than this is attributed to God, including the killing of infants and children, referred to in the books of Deuteronomy, Joshua, and others.^[1] Certainly, we do not believe that those statements about children and infants are from God, because it would be too hard to provide context that could explain them. However, in Islam, there is an explanatory context for all of these verses. First, it is important to note that Allah also says:

}وَإِن جَنَحُوا لِلسَّلْمِ فَاجْنَحْ لَهَا وَتَوَكَّلْ عَلَى اللَّهِ ۚ إِنَّهُ هُوَ السَّمِيعُ الْعَلِيمُ{

{And if they incline to peace, then incline to it [also] and rely upon Allah. Indeed, it is He Who is the Hearing, the Knowing.} (al-Anfâl 8: 61)

}فَإِنِ اعْتَزَلُوكُمْ فَلَمْ يُقَاتِلُوكُمْ وَأَلْقَوْا إِلَيْكُمُ السَّلَمَ فَمَا جَعَلَ اللَّهُ لَكُمْ عَلَيْهِمْ سَبِيلًا{

{So if they remove themselves from you and do not fight you and offer you peace, then Allah has not made for you a cause [for fighting] against them.} (an-Nisâ’ 4: 90)

 Allah’s Messenger (SA) said:

>>يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ لاَ تَتَمَنَّوْا لِقَاءَ الْعَدُوِّ وَاسْأَلُوا اللَّهَ الْعَافِيَةَ فَإِذَا لَقِيتُمُوهُمْ فَاصْبِرُوا وَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّ الْجَنَّةَ تَحْتَ ظِلاَلِ السُّيُوفِ<<

<<O people, do not wish to meet the enemy, and ask Allah for pardon. But if you meet them, be patient and know that paradise is under the shade of the swords.>> (Agreed upon, on the authority of ‘Abdullâh ibn Abi Awfâ)

Who should be connecting the dots and reconciling the seemingly conflicting reports? The scholars well-grounded in the tradition. One of them, namely Imam Ibn Taymiyah, wrote a treatise on Qitâl al-Kuffâr wa Muhâdanatuhum [War and peace (treaties) with the disbelievers], in which he showed conclusively that the ‘illah (effective cause) for fighting them is their aggression, not their disbelief. He pointed out that the texts implying an open fight against them can never be used as proof for fighting the people at large, because they appear to contradict other evidences (some of which is mentioned above), the consensus, and even the life of the Messenger (SA) himself. Some of them appear to suggest fighting the people at large until there is no religion on Earth except Islam – yet this is contrary to the consensus. Do you not see that the Messenger of Allah (SA) made peace and truces with non-Muslims? In fact, he said:

>>دَعُوا الْحَبَشَةَ مَا وَدَعُوكُمْ وَاتْرُكُوا التُّرْكَ مَا تَرَكُوكُمْ<<

<<Leave the Abyssinians alone so long as they leave you (alone), and leave the Turks (alone) as long as they leave you alone.>> (Abu Dâwood, and deemed ḥasan by al-Albâni in Ṣaḥeeḥ al-Jâmi‘)

This clearly indicates that the command to fight does not apply to the people at large. Rather, Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah bestow mercy upon him) said in Hidâyat al-Hayârâ [Guiding the bewildered]:

When Allah sent His Messenger (SA), most of the religions willingly submitted to him and to his caliphs after him. He never forced the religion upon anyone, and he would only fight those who fought and warred against him. As for those who made peace with him, he did not fight them or compel them to embrace his religion, out of compliance with the command of his Lord (st), Who says:

}لَا إِكْرَاهَ فِي الدِّينِ ۖ قَد تَّبَيَّنَ الرُّشْدُ مِنَ الْغَيِّ{

{There is no compulsion in religion; truth has been made clear from falsehood.} (al-Baqarah 2: 256)

These verses and hadiths, which appear to enjoin fighting the people at large, were referring to specific peoples during the Prophet’s time, or to fighting in specific circumstances – such as defending the oppressed in accordance with the words of the Most High:

}وَمَا لَكُمْ لَا تُقَاتِلُونَ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ وَالْمُسْتَضْعَفِينَ مِنَ الرِّجَالِ وَالنِّسَاءِ وَالْوِلْدَانِ{

{And what is [the matter] with you that you fight not in the cause of Allah and [for] the oppressed among men, women, and children…} (an-Nisâ’ 4: 75)

Or to prevent tyrants from forcing those who embraced Islam to abandon worshipping Allah, the One and Only, as in the words of the Most High: {And fight them until there is no [more] fitnah…} (al-Baqarah 2: 193), or preemptively against (genuine, not imaginary) enemy aggression, as the Muslims did when the Persians sent troops to arrest the Messenger of Allah (SA), or the Romans incited their allies, the Christians of Shâm, against the Muslims. The Christians blocked the Muslims’ roadways and surrounded their trade caravans, and the ally of the Romans, Shurahbeel ibn ‘Amr al-Ghassâni, killed al-Ḥârith ibn ‘Amr al-Azdi, who was the Prophet’s messenger to the ruler of Busra.

Scholars in the past entertained the following question: Is the default in international relations peace or warfare? The majority viewed peace as the default, while others believed it was warfare, although some of the latter may have been referring to the situation at their time, when they had no stable borders or statehood as we know it. Empires were constantly fighting against others to expand their territories (as can be seen in any infographics showing the changes in the map of Europe over the last one thousand years.) If we pose this question to them again, using different wording, asking, “Do we prefer peace or warfare?”, perhaps all of them would answer in favor of peace. Did not the Messenger of Allah (SA) say, in addition to all of the aforementioned?

 <<Indeed, Allah is gentle and loves gentleness, and He grants because of gentleness what He does not grant because of harshness, nor what He grants because of anything else.>> (Agreed upon, on the authority of ‘Â’ishah, and this is the wording of Muslim)

If a nation that essentially rules with justice makes peace with us, grants security to the Muslims within its borders, and does not persecute us, then why should we fight them? If our objectives are that no one is deprived of the right to worship their Lord in peace, that no tyrant subjugates any of the creation of Allah, and that no one threatens the interests of our Ummah, and we can attain all that peacefully, is fighting still justified? Would choosing it in these circumstances embody the gentleness that Allah loves in all matters?

Even after all this discussion, we have still not looked at the essence of the matter in question: war. Was war one thousand years ago the same as war today? This is not an insignificant inquiry because applying the legislative rulings correctly is contingent upon understanding the current reality in the place where these specific rulings are to be applied. In our age, the structure of nations has become stabilized, and the borders of these nations have become distinct, in contrast to previous ages when the nations did not rule themselves. Instead, they were ruled by dynasties and factions whose sovereignty would expand and then contract, only to be occupied by another.

In the past, the ruling factions fought on the battlefield, but this fighting rarely harmed ordinary people, farmers, women, or the weak. Furthermore, the masses would enjoy the rule of a just nation that replaced the tyranny that they had lived under for decades or centuries. This would bring them joy, just as the Christians of Shâm were overjoyed when the Muslims liberated them from Rome and its allies. But nowadays, the price of warfare is widespread chaos, corruption, and tragedy that do not differentiate between soldiers and civilians – for bombs and rockets are not like arrows and spears. If Imam Ibn Taymiyah ruled that a catapult could not be used except for the necessary jihad (to repel the enemy),^[2] what would he say about modern weapons of war?

In the past, jihad was sometimes necessary to secure the deliverance of da‘wah to the entire creation, for it removed the obstacles, such as the tyrants and their oppressive regimes, that were preventing it. In our times, the deliverance of the da‘wah is possible through the jihad of articulation and the tongue, via broadcasts, satellite channels, and especially the Internet, which delivers written, audible, and visual statements alike. Furthermore, the du‘ât can travel to distant lands, mix with their people, and invite them, while enjoying security throughout.

To conclude this point, we can never deny the virtue of jihad and martyrdom in Islam and its raising its people upon courage, dignity, honor, and sacrifice. However, we must also be confident that Islam decisively prefers peace over war.

The default for the relationship with United Nations member states is that of peace. All the Muslim states who signed the charter of this organization committed to peace with the rest of the signatory states. Such a covenant is acceptable in Islam and makes all the world, by default, a land of muwâda’ah (peace). The Ḥanafi fuqahâ’ declared that al-muwâda’at al-mutlaqah (a peace treaty without an agreed-upon term) is one of the types of valid treaties. [See al-Kâsâni, Bada’i‘ as-Sana’i‘, 6:77.] There is a difference of opinion on this issue among the Shâfi‘i and Ḥanbali schools, but Ibn al-Qayyim (d. 751 AH/ 1350 CE), the famous Ḥanbali jurist and disciple of Ibn Taymiyah (d. 728 AH/ 1328 CE), made a strong case for the validity of such treaties. [See Ibn al-Qayyim, Aḥkam Ahl adh-Dhimmah (Beirut: Dâr al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyah, 2002), 1:336-344.] Imam Muhammad ibn Idrees ash-Shâfi‘i (d. 204 AH/ 820 CE) has himself explicitly stated that such a treaty is valid if the parties are given the option to terminate the treaty at will. [See Muhammad ibn Idris ash-Shâfi‘i, al-Umm (Cairo: Dâr al-Fikr, 1961), 4:110.] … ‘Uthmân ibn ‘Affân made a treaty with the Nubians that stated:

We (Muslims) shall not wage war against you, prepare for war against you, or attack you, as long as you observe the conditions of the treaty between us and you… But it will not be incumbent upon the Muslims to drive away any enemy who may encounter you, or to prevent him from you, between the limits of the territory of Ulwah and Aswan. [See Muhammad Hamidullah (1987), The Muslim Conduct of State, p. 293.]

There is another pertinent discussion here, which is that the war that Islam deems justifiable, at times, is an ethical war that must also be Sharia-complaint. It is a war where the civilians, or to be more precise, all non-combatants, are spared. Abu Dâwood reported from Anas that when they had to go to war, the Prophet (SA) would instruct them not to kill “an older man, a child, or a woman,” and he would say, “Do righteousness and show kindness, for Allah loves those who are kind.” Ibn Mâjah added that the Prophet (SA) forbade killing the ‘aseef, which is best translated as a non-combatant attachment to the army.

May Allah bring peace, justice, and security to the distressed and suffering among humankind.

[1] For example, in the First book of Samuel 15: 1-3, Samuel said to Saul:

I am the one the LORD sent to anoint you king over his people Israel; so listen now to the message from the LORD. 2 This is what the LORD Almighty says: `I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt. 3 Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy [a] everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.

According to Deuteronomy 20:10-18, God said:

10 When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. 11 If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be subject to forced labor and shall work for you. 12 If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city. 13 When the LORD your God delivers it into your hand, put to the sword all the men in it. 14 As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, you may take these as plunder for yourselves. And you may use the plunder the LORD your God gives you from your enemies. 15 This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby. 16 However, in the cities of the nations the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes. 17 Completely destroy [a] them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the LORD your God has commanded you. 18 Otherwise, they will teach you to follow all the detestable things they do in worshiping their gods, and you will sin against the LORD your God.

In Numbers 31:17-18, Moosâ said, “17 Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, 18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.”

And in Joshua 6: 21, “They devoted the city to the LORD and destroyed with the sword every living thing in it-men and women, young and old, cattle, sheep and donkeys.”

[2] Majmoo‘ al-Fatâwâ, 24/69.