Disagreement on the meaning of ‘jihad’

I was very disappointed to read Vanessa de la Torre’s article, “At Muslim Sunday school, learning about Islam and correcting misconceptions.” This piece is full of ‘taqiyya,’ the obligatory deception of non-Muslims.

An explanation of this phenomenon can be found in section r8.2 of the “Reliance of the Traveller”: r8.2 “Speaking is a means to achieve objectives. If a praiseworthy aim is attainable through both telling the truth and lying, it is unlawful to accomplish through lying because there is no need for it. When it is possible to achieve such an aim by lying but not by telling the truth, it is permissible to lie if attaining the goal is permissible and obligatory to lie if the goal is obligatory.”

In the article, we’re told the popular line that ‘jihad’ means a personal or spiritual struggle.” Though it can mean that, and that sort of ‘jihad’ is considered the ‘greater jihad,’ nonetheless, approximately 98 percent of the times the word ‘jihad’ appears in Islamic doctrine, its meaning is military warfare. To describe it as a “personal struggle, then, is disingenuous.

And, of course, there’s the ubiquitous claim that Islam is the “religion of peace.” But how peaceful is a religion that mandates death for apostasy? (Section o8.1 of the Reliance) How about a religion that assigns no penalty to a Muslim who kills his children, grandchildren or non-Muslims? (Section o1.2 of the Reliance). Lastly, a thorough reading of the section of ‘jihad’ –military warfare against unbelievers — which begins with Section o9.0, will leave the reader with no doubts that this is no religion of peace.

Jane Bate lives in Cheshire.

CTViewpoints welcomes rebuttal or opposing views to this and all its commentaries. Read our guidelines and submit your commentary here.