Jihad

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Stereotek (talk | contribs) at 17:08, 23 November 2004 (rv. back to last edit by Pename). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Template:TotallyDisputed

"Jihad" (جهاد) is an Arabic word which comes from the Arabic root word "jahada"; which means "exerting utmost effort" or "to strive." The word connotes a wide range of meanings, from an inward spiritual struggle to attain perfect faith to an outward material struggle. During the period of Qur'anic revelation while Muhammad was in Mecca, jihad meant essentially a nonviolent struggle. Following his move from Mecca to Medina in 622 CE, and the establishment of an Islamic state, fighting in self-defense was sanctioned by the Qur'an (22:39). The Qur'an began referring increasingly to the word qital (fighting or warfare), instead of jihad. Two of the last verses on this topic (9:5, 29) suggest a war of conquest against unbeliever enemies. In medieval legal sources, jihad generally referred to a divinely sanctioned struggle to establish Muslim hegemony over non-Muslims as a prelude to the propagation of the Islamic faith.


As a general struggle

In much the same way that the word English word "Crusade" can mean "Christian holy war" but also has a broader meaning of furthering a cause or striving by non-violent means, so too does the Islamic word "Jihad" have this broader meaning. These two meanings of Jihad are sometimes explained by Muslims (particularly Sufis) by citing a hadith recorded by Imam Baihaqi and al-Khatib al-Baghdadi (even though its isnad is categorized as "weak"):

  • "lesser (outer) jihad" — a military struggle, i.e. a holy war
  • "greater (inner) jihad" — the struggle of personal self-improvement against the self's base desires

Other examples of actions that could be considered jihad (on the basis of hadiths with better isnad) include:

The more literal meaning of the word Jihad is simply "a struggle," and so it is sometimes dubbed the "inner Jihad." This "inner Jihad" essentially refers to all the struggles that a Muslim could go through, in adhering to the religion. For example, a scholarly study of Islam is an intellectual struggle that some may refer to as "jihad," though it is not common for a scholar of Islam to refer to his studies as "engaging in Jihad."

As Islamic "Holy War"

To Muslims, a person who dies while fighting Jihad is a shahid (martyr) and is assured a place in Janna (Paradise) where they will have 72 virgins, rivers of wine and fresh fruit called the Houris. If non-combatant Muslims perish in such attacks, they are also considered shahid and thus have also secured a place in paradise. Hence, the only true victims are the kaffir, or unbelievers. The basis of the concept of shahid can be traced back to the words of Muhammad prior to the battle of Badr where he stated:

"I swear by the One in whose hand Muhammad's soul is, any man who fights them today and is killed while he is patient in the ordeal and seeks the pleasure of Allah, going forward and not backing off, Allah will enter him into Paradise."

The Islamic legal tradition identifies two types of armed religious warfare, namely the defensive jihad and the offensive jihad.


Defensive Jihad

Most Muslims consider armed struggle against foreign occupation or oppression by domestic government to be worthy of defensive jihad. In colonial times, Muslim populations often rose up against the colonial authorities under the banner of jihad (examples include Daghestan Chechnya against Russia, the Indian Mutiny against Britain, and the Algerian War of Independence against France). In this sense, defensive jihad is no different from the right of armed resistance against occupation that is sanctioned under the UN and International Law, though armed resistance against one's own domestic government is not sanctioned by international humanitarian law.

Islamic traditional law, which holds that when Muslims are attacked then it becomes obligatory for all Muslim men of military conscription age, within a certain radius of the attack, to take up arms against the attackers - that is, to participate in the defensive jihad. If the attackers are not defeated, then the "radius of obligation," so to speak, continues to expand, until it may encompass the whole world and every Muslim male of military conscription age. When the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan in 1979, the prominent schoalr of Islamic law, Dr. Abudllah Yusuf Azzam, issued a fatwa, Defense of the Muslim Lands, the First Obligation after Faith declaring that both the Afghan and Palestinian struggles were jihads in which killing kuffar (unbelievers) was fard ayn (a personal obligation) for all Muslims. The edict was supported by Saudi Arabia's Grand Mufti (highest religious scholar), Abd al-Aziz Bin Bazz. In his fatwa, Dr. Azzam explained:

... the Ulama [pious scholars] of the four Mathhabs (Maliki, Hanafi, Shaffie and Hanbali), the Muhadditheen, and the Tafseer commentators [classical Muslim commentators of the Qur'an] , are agreed that in all Islamic ages, Jihad under this condition becomes Fard Ayn [personal religious obligation] upon the Muslims of the land which the Kuffar [infidels] have attacked and upon the Muslims close by, where the children will march forth without the permission of the parents, the wife without the permission ofher husband and the debtor without the permission of the creditor. And, if the Muslims of this land cannot expel the Kuffar because of lack of forces, because they slacken, are indolent or simply do not act, then the Fard Ayn obligation spreads in the shape of a circle from the nearest to the next nearest. If they too slacken or there is again a shortage of manpower, then it is upon the people behind them, and on the people behind them, to march forward. This process continues until it becomes Fard Ayn [a personal religious obligation] upon the whole world. [1]

Offensive Jihad

Offensive jihad is the waging of wars of aggression and conquest against non-Muslims in order to bring them and their territories under Islamic rule. The Encylopedia of the Orient explains, "offensive jihad, i.e. attacking, is fully permissible in Sunni Islam." [2]. Dr. Abudllah Yusuf Azzam, in his fatwa, Defense of the Muslim Lands, the First Obligation after Faith, wrote in this regard:

"Jihad Against the Kuffar is of two Types: Offensive Jihad (where the enemy is attacked in his own territory) ... [and] Defensive Jihad. This is expelling the Kuffar from our land, and it is Fard Ayn [personal religious obligation on Muslim individuals], a compulsory duty upon all ...
Where the Kuffar [infidels] are not gathering to fight the Muslims, the fighting becomes Fard Kifaya [religious obligation on Muslim society] with the minimum requirement of appointing believers to guard borders, and the sending of an army at least once a year to terrorise the enemies of Allah. It is a duty of the Imam (Caliph) to assemble and send out an army unit into the land of war once or twice every year. Moreover, it is the responsibility of the Muslim population to assist him, and if he does not send an army he is in sin.- And the Ulama have mentioned that this type of jihad is for maintaining the payment of Jizya. The scholars of the principles of religion have also said: " Jihad is Daw'ah with a force, and is obligatory to perform with all available capabilities, until there remains only Muslims or people who submit to Islam." [3]

Liberal Muslims - progressives who seek break away from the traditional imperial ideology in Islam - dispute the neccessity and obligation of the offensive Jihad; they say that offensive was practiced only to preserve Islam from destruction, and that the concept is now obsolete because freedom of religious practice is present in most of the world. Their more traditional ideological opponents question whether the Muslims established the second-largest empire in the history of the world, through war and conquest, only to preserve Islam from destruction. As Azzam's fatwa showed, such orthodox Muslims believe that it is Islam's goal to establish an ever-expanding theocratic empire. Such Muslims wish to return to the days when a single Islamic Empire was ruled by a single Caliph. Islamists see this as a pious and important ambition, and they find justification for their imperialist beliefs in the mainstream Islamic legal tradition of the four Madhabs, which was codified in the early centuries of the budding Islamic empire. The Muslim masses continue to see their imperial past, such as when Islamic armies conquered Spain, marched half way into France, laid siege to Vienna, and invaded large portions of Eastern Europe, as blessed and legitimate occurrences of jihad.

Offensive Jihad as a Method for the Propagation of Islam

Historians dispute whether forced conversion was or was not carried out during Islamic civilization's 1,300 year history of imperialism. For example, in his monograph "Christians and Muslims in Ottoman Cyprus and the Mediterranean world, 1571-1640" (New York University Press), historian Ronald C. Jennings writes, "Even though no contemporary local sources substantiate the view [of forced conversion], in reality forced conversions were common, and outright proselytism and economic incentives were extensively employed to induce the Greek Orthodox to convert to Islam" (137) [4]

Whether or not "conversion by the sword" was systematically carried out, it is known that the jizyah (a tax laid exclusively on non-Muslims whose proceeds go to the government) created a kind of economic and social apartheid in which non-Muslims were economically and socially punished by the state for not converting to Islam. Non-Muslims paid jizya while Muslims, under the empire, paid a taxed called the zakat (a so-called "charity tax" which all Muslims pay even today, but instead of paying to the state they now pay zakat to charities of their choice). The zakat is a 2.5% tax, while the jizyah was about a 10% income tax; as explained in the Encyclopedia Britannica entry on jizyah, "many converted to Islam in order to escape the tax." [5] Non-Muslims were also usually denied entry to high-ranking military and civil service positions, although there were historical exceptions such as the Mughal Empire where non-Muslims did reach high-ranking positions.

Political military authority

Muslims hold that an "Offensive Jihad" can only be declared by a lawful and legal Muslim authority, traditionally the Caliph. However, no authority is needed for the "Defensive Jihad" to become effective in Islamic traditional law, which holds that when Muslims are attacked then it becomes obligatory for all Muslim men of military conscription age, within a certain radius of the attack, to take up arms against the attackers, as explained in the section on #Defensive Jihad

The question of which Muslim authority, if any, may carry out duties such as declaring Jihad has been problematic since March 3, 1924 CE, when Kemal Atatürk abolished the Caliphate, which the Ottoman sultans had held since 1517. There is no longer a single Muslim authority, which is considered a violation of the shariah (see Caliph). Sunni Islam (the largest denomination) has no religious hierarchy comparable to that of many Christian churches (although Shi'a Islam , which was historically persecuted by the Islamic state, does); its religion and government have been at times tightly woven into a political system known as the Caliphate, or khalifah. (Many of those termed Islamists in contemporary political rhetoric wish to return to this system of government.) Due to this lack of clerical organization amongst the vast majority of Muslims, any adherent may proclaim himself an "ulama" (Islamic scholar) and proclaim a defensive jihad by way of fatwa. Recognition is at the discretion of the listener.

In the absence of a Caliph, the only remaining "de facto" Islamic leaders would be the governments of the modern nation-states in the Muslim world which emerged out of the turmoil of the early 20th century. However, due to the secular origin and nature of the democratic or monarchic nation-state, Islamists believe that these modern democratic or monarchic nation-states which emerged in the mid-20th century are un-Islamic institutions. Indeed, secularism is widely seen by Islamists to be an enemy of Islam. As a result Islamist movements (such as Al Qaida or Hamas) have declared jihad themselves, thus attempting to bypass (and even overthrow) the authority of the nation-state. Some (particularly takfirists) have declared a jihad against the nation-states themselves.

Terrorism by Islamist Extremists

There exist numerous Islamist groups which are also designated terrorist organizations; many use the word "Jihad" as part of their name. Examples include "Egyptian Islamic Jihad" and "Palestinian Islamic Jihad." The vast majority of Muslims reject the wanton killing of innocent civilians. Only a fringe element of extremists are responsible for terrorist incidents, but due to the extreme actions of this fringe element, they have come to dominate the public image of Jihad. In the view of the Muslims terrorists, their religion sanctifies their homicidal actions, even though most Muslims disagree with them.

There are fanatical, extremist Muslim clerics who authorize suicide bombing as a valid form of jihad, especially against Israel, her allies, and her supporters, believing that such attacks are legitimate responses to the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza [6]. One of these so named is the United States.

Suicide is expressly forbidden in Islam, as the following hadith indicates:

"Whoever purposely throws himself from a mountain and kills himself, will be in the (Hell) Fire falling down into it and abiding therein perpetually forever; and whoever drinks poison and kills himself with it, he will be carrying his poison in his hand and drinking it in the (Hell) Fire wherein he will abide eternally forever; and whoever kills himself with an iron weapon, will be carrying that weapon in his hand and stabbing his abdomen with it in the (Hell) Fire wherein he will abide eternally forever." (Bukhari 7:670)

Many Islamic legal rulings view any killing of civilians (whether through combat or any other such militant activity) as against the ethics of Islam. But certain fundamentalist extremists, almost all of whom emerged in the 20th century, thought otherwise. Extremst proponents of Islamist terrorism such as Osama bin Laden argue that economic targets can be seen as military targets, and often cite Muhammad's numerous caravan raids (see Battle of Badr for a description of one such caravan raid and the war that it led to). The Qur'an specifically forbids attacking women, children, elderly people, and civilian buildings during a military campaign. However, there can be exceptions. Just as Western philosophies of war permitted harm to civilians and categorized it as "collateral damage," so too did Muhammad and his followers devise similar justifications. In 630 CE Muhammad led the Siege of al-Ta'if, where the Muslims first discovered catapults. Muhammad deemed it permissible to use the catapults against the enemy, despite the fact that women and children would be put at risk of being killed by the boulders and burning missiles launched from the catapults. Muhammad deemed this to be a sort of permissible collateral damage.

One of the most well known archetects of the Islamist terrorist ideology was the 20th century Egyptian scholar Sayyid Qutb. Qutb who wrote a series of books, while in prison, in which he declared that all people who participated in any form of government that was not an Islamic theocracy (either by participating in the councils of such a form of government, or campaigning for a political party in democratic system, or even encouraging people to vote in a democratic form of government) could be considered guilty persons who could justifiably be killed. In a recently aired documentary by BBC, titled "The Power of Nightmares: The Rise of the Politics of Fear," in its second eposide, it was explained that "The implication [of Qutb's belief] was that these leaders could justifiably be killed, because they had become so corrupted, they were no longer Muslims, even though they said they were." [7]. One of Sayyid Qutb's followers was to become Osama bin Laden's personal mentor; he was an Egyptian named Ayman al-Zawahiri, who wrote (like Qutb, while in prison) an even more radical framework for the contemporary militant Islamic ideology. In the first eposide of the BBC documentary, it was explained that "The mystery, for Zawahiri, was why the Egyptian people had failed to see the truth and rise up [against their un-Islamic secular leaders]. It must be because the infection of selfish individualism had gone so deep into people’s minds that they were now as corrupted as their leaders. Zawahiri now seized on a terrible ambiguity in Qutb’s argument. It wasn’t just leaders like Sadat who were no longer real Muslims, it was the people themselves. And Zawahiri believed that this meant that they too could legitimately be killed. But such killing, Zawahiri believed, would have a noble purpose, because of the fear and the terror that it would create in the minds of ordinary Muslims. It would shock them into seeing reality in a different way. They would then see the truth." [8]

The Qur'an denounces the killing of any person who is not guilty of at least one of two crimes:

"Whosoever killed a person - unless it be for killing a person or for creating disorder in the land - it shall be as if he killed all mankind; and whoso saved a life, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind." (5:32)

This verse raises the question as to who is not an "innocent person," nor is it entirely clear what qualifies as "creating disorder in the land." Within Islam, this quesstion is answered by Islam's legal framework. The usual crime of murder is prohibited in Islamic law, and is punishable by death. However, there are some crimes which the Islamic law concidered to be worthy of death, which non-Muslims would concider to be fundamental rights or freedoms. One example is the freedom of speech. Muhammad considered poetry against his new religion to be a form of "creating disorder in the land" and silenced a number of great poets of his day by having them murdered. One such silenced poetess was Asma bint Marwan. Another such poet was Abu 'Afak. In a similar spirit, "Theo van Gogh (47), a Dutch filmmaker who had made a movie critical of some aspects of Islamic society and culture, has been shot dead in an Amsterdam street on November 2 [2004]. The late great-grand-nephew of famous Dutch painter Vincent van Gogh had received many death threats after releasing Submission last August, a short film detailing the treatment of Muslim women. He shrug off the threats, saying there was nothing offensive in his movie. The killer, a 26-year-old Moroccan residing in Holland, was wearing a long beard and Islamic garb when he shot and stabbed van Gogh in broad daylight. He was arrested after a shootout with the police." 3 Another famous incident of this kind was the death fatwa against Salman Rushdie, issued by Ayatollah Khomeini, in which Khomeini called upon any Muslim in the world to murder Salman Rushdie, because of a book in which Rushdie supposedly blasphemed Islam. Today, most publicly known Western critics of Islam receive a constant stream of death threats from Islamic fanatics seeking to silence them, and have to employ constant the service of body guards (Canadian TV producer and publicly known Muslim critic of orthodox Islam, Irshad Manji, is sometimes cited as the "new Salman Rushdie" and employs the service of a number of Israeli trained body guards). In the Muslim world, those who dare to publicly criticize Islam are usually executed or imprisoned by their governments, under laws against "spreading disorder through the land" and apostasy (a crime punishable by death in Islam)

Islamic Laws Regarding Prisoners of War

Execution of Prisoners of War

The Qur'an states that prisoners should either be freed or ransomed (or exchanged):

"So when you meet in battle those who disbelieve, then smite the necks until when you have overcome them, then make (them) prisoners, and afterwards either set them free as a favor or let them ransom (themselves) until the war terminates." (Qur'an 47:4)

The Qur'an also commands the Muslims to feed their prisoners:

"Lo, the righteous shall ... [go to Paradise] ... (because) they perform the vow and fear a day whereof the evil is wide spreading, and feed with food the needy wretch, the orphan and the prisoner, for love of Him, (saying): we feed you, for the sake of God only, we wish for no reward not thanks from you." (Qur'an 76:4-8)

The kidnapping and execution of Nick Berg was strongly condemned in the Muslim world. Scholars at Al-Azhar University in Cairo issued a declaration of condemnation [9], as did numerous Muslim groups in the West including the Council on American-Islamic Relations. Shiite Islamist group Hezbollah and Palestinian nationalist group Hamas denounced the murder. Hezbollah issued a statement calling it a "horrible act that does an immense wrong to Islam and Muslims by a group which falsely pretends to follow the precepts of the religion of pardon."

The extremist view is that Islam allows the execution of a Prisoner of War (POW), even for the mere purposing of instilling fear in the enemy. As Wall Street Journal (WSJ) columnist Amir Taheri explains,"... The fact is that the seizure of hostages and "exhibition killing" go back to the early stages of Islamic history. In the Arabia of the seventh century, where Islam was born, seizing hostages was practiced by rival tribes, and "exhibition killing" was a weapon of psychological war. The Prophet codified those practices, ending freelance kidnappings and head-chopping. One principle of the new code was that Muslims could not be held hostage by Muslims. Nor could Muslims be subjected to "exhibition killing. Such methods were to be used solely against non-Muslims, and then only in the context of armed conflict." [10] A Muslim researcher explains, "In times of war, Islamic law permits the taking of hostages from the enemy camp and they can be: released, ransomed or punished appropriately." [11] The Sira records that upon defeating the Jewish tribe Banu Qurayza, Muhammad had every male of the tribe, above fourteen years of age, beheaded; the women and children of the Banu Qurayza were enslaved. In modern times, kidnappings and beheadings have been widely seen in the, such as the kidnapping and video-taped beheading of the journalist Daniel Pearl ("Pakistan’s interior minister stated [in a press conference] stated that LeJ (Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, radical Wahabi Sunni group) had a role in the kidnapping and execution of Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl" [12]) as well as the kidnappings and beheadings of foreign workers and journalists in Iraq).

The Qur'an makes this command in regards to the taking of prisoners of war:

"It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war (and free them with ransom) until he had made a great slaughter (among his enemies) in the land. You desire the good of this world (i.e. the money of ransom for freeing the captives), but Allah desires (for you) the Hereafter. And Allah is All-Mighty, All-Wise. Were it not a previous ordainment from Allah, a severe torment would have touched you for what you took." (8:67-68)

Enslavement, Ransoming, and Exchange of Prisoners of War

As was the common practice in medieval times, Islam actually categorizes prisoners of war booty. As such, when Muhammad and his armies would be victorious in a battle, the captured male POWs could be returned to their tribes for a ransom, could be exchanged for Muslim prisoners, could be enslaved, or could be freed. "Another form of ransom assumed an educational dimension; most of the Makkans, unlike the Madinese, were literate and so each prisoner who could not afford the ransom was entrusted with ten children to teach them the art of writing and reading. Once the child had been proficient enough, the instructor would be set free." [13] Women and children who were captured and made prisoners of war as WSJ columnist Amir Taheri reports, "non-Muslim women and children captured in war would become the property of their Muslim captors. Female captives could be taken as concubines or given as gifts to Muslims. The children, brought up as Muslims, would enjoy Islamic rights." [14] The Qur'an speaks in many places (e.g., 33:50) about the permissibility of having intercourse with POWs turned into concubines (euphemistically referred to the Qur'an as "those whome your right hand possess") — a form of sexual slavery. In modern times, this has led to militant Islamist groups raiding the countryside in places like Chechnya to carry out kidnapping and ransom, in order to generate revenue for their cause; "In 1997-1998, more than 60 Chechen groupings kidnapped a total of 1,094 people for ransom, and in 1999, 270. The number of hostages kidnapped for ransom still remaining in captivity is estimated to be more than 1,500. No estimate of the total ransom payments received is available." [15] In a related matter, another source reports, "Since 9/11, ASG (Abu Sayyaf Group) has been involved in hundreds of kidnappings, largely victimizing the local populations of the southern Philippines." [16] Kidnapping and ransom is a common practice for Islamist terrorist organizations; they often become involved in the international black market in human traficing (most often human traficing for the purpose of sexual slavery) in order to generate revenue for their cause. Such extremist groups do not have too much difficulty finding religious justifcations for their actions; according the several news agenecies:

"Slavery is a part of Islam," says Sheik Saleh Al-Fawzan, according to the independent Saudi Information Agency, or SIA.
In a lecture recorded on tape by SIA, the sheik said, "Slavery is part of jihad, and jihad will remain as long there is Islam."
His religious books are used to teach 5 million Saudi students, both within the country and abroad, including the United States. [17]

One authentic hadith, recorded in Malik's Muwatta relates that Muhammad allowed his soldiers to rape an impregnate female prisoners of war:

Yahya related to me from Malik from Rabia ibn Abi Abd ar-Rahman from Muhammad ibn Yahya ibn Habban that Ibn Muhayriz said, "I went into the mosque and saw Abu Said al-Khudri and so I sat by him and asked him about coitus interruptus. Abu Said al-Khudri said, 'We went out with the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, on the expedition to the Banu al-Mustaliq. We took some Arabs prisoner, and we desired the women as celibacy was hard for us. We wanted the ransom, so we wanted to practise coitus interruptus. We said, 'Shall we practise coitus interruptus while the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, is among us before we ask him?' We asked him about that and he said, 'You don't have to not do it [coitus interruptus]. There is no self which is to come into existence up to the Day of Rising but that it will come into existence. " (Malik's Muwatta, Book 29, Hadith Number 29.32.95) [18]

Excerpts from the Qur'an on warfare

The Qur'an uses the term jihad only four times, none of which refer to armed struggle. As such, the use of the word jihad, in reference to holy Islamic war, was a latter day invention of Muslims. However, the concept of holy Islamic war was not itself a latter day invention, and the Qur'an does contain passages laying out the theory and practice of armed struggle (qi'tal) for Muslims. A few examples are as follows:

“Strike terror (into the hearts of) the enemies of Allah and your enemies.; But if the enemy incline towards peace, do thou (also) incline towards peace, and trust in Allah: for He is One that heareth and knoweth (all things).” (8:60-61)
“What! will you not fight a people who broke their oaths and aimed at the expulsion of the Messenger, and they attacked you first; do you fear them? But Allah is most deserving that you should fear Him, if you are believers. Fight (kill) them (non-Muslims), and Allah will punish (torment) them by your hands, cover them with shame.” (9:13-14)
“Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): “I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instil terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them. This because they contended against Allah and His Messenger: If any contend against Allah and His Messenger, Allah is strict in punishment.” (8:12-13)
“But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war) but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. And if one of the idolaters seek protection from you, grant him protection till he hears the word of Allah, then make him attain his place of safety; this is because they are a people who do not know.” (9:5-6)
“Fight (kill) those who believe not in Allah, nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” (9:29)
"Permission (to fight) is given to those upon whom war is made because they are oppressed ... those who have been expelled from their homes without a just cause except that they say: Our Lord is Allah. "(22:39-40)
"O! Prophet! We, Allah, have made lawful to you your wives whom you have paid their dowries and those whom your right hand possesses [concubines] from among those whom Allah has given you as gains of war [prisoners of war] ..." (33:50)

See also

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Jihad&oldid=7785977"