A Critical Analysis of 'Real Islam'. Its People ... - Bukti dan Saksi

eally matters is how millions of self-described devout Muslims understand it today and how they intend
to act on their belief. What it has meant in the past (up to and including today) has already been fully
defined by all previous actions of Muslim Militants in their conduct toward non-believers, and further
debate to clarify or change that historical reality is just plain silly. Any honest review of Islamic history
from 610 to 2004 answers the question of Jihadic definition quite convincingly, a portion of which will be
reviewed in subsequent chapters. As far as majority Muslim understanding and use of the Jihad term goes,
nothing much has changed through the last 1400 years. The lesser Jihad cannot be separated out from the
greater Jihad and ignored; it appears they are both a part of unalterable core Islam. Anyone who suggests
otherwise is either being deceitful …or has been deceived. The basic Islamic worldview sees all lands as
either as Dar al-Islam (the abode of Islam), or Dar al-Harb (the abode of war). All those countries and
societies not currently dominated by Islamic supremacy are by default the abode of war, where Jihad (and
deception) is always fully justified. Those who contend that jihad war is not a main tenet of traditional
Islam do so either deceitfully or in blissful ignorance.
The writings of two contemporary Muslim scholars of jihad, the late Majid Khadduri, and Bassam
Tibi, confirm that Islam in our age is still in uniform compliance with the earlier sacred writings. The
uniquely Islamic conception of "House of War" (Dar ul-Harb) and "House of Islam" (Dar ul-Islam) was a
consensus formulation from the early classical period of Muslim jurisprudence.
Majid Khadduri’s 1955 treatise on jihad remains one of the most respected analyses of this institution,
summarizing the consensus views of these previous Islamic experts as follows:
Thus the jihad may be regarded as Islam’s instrument for carrying out its ultimate objective by turning all
people into believers, if not in the prophethood of Muhammad (as in the case of the dhimmis), at least in the
belief of God. The Prophet Muhammad is reported to have declared "some of my people will continue to fight
victoriously for the sake of the truth until the last one of them will combat the anti-Christ." Until that moment is
reached the jihad, in one form or another will remain as a permanent obligation upon the entire Muslim
community. It follows that the existence of a dar al-harb is ultimately outlawed under the Islamic jural order;
that the dar al-Islam (Islamic community) are permanently under jihad obligation until the dar al-harb is reduced
to non-existence; and that any community accepting certain disabilities- must submit to Islamic rule and reside
in the dar al-Islam or be bound as clients to the Muslim community. The universality of Islam, in its all
embracing creed, is imposed on the believers as a continuous process of warfare, psychological and political if
not strictly military. [19]
And in 1996, Bassam Tibi wrote this:
At its core, Islam is a religious mission to all humanity. Muslims are religiously obliged to disseminate the
Islamic faith throughout the world. "We have sent you forth to all mankind" (Q. 34:28). If non-Muslims submit
to conversion or subjugation, this call (da’wa) can be pursued peacefully. If they do not, Muslims are obliged to
wage war against them. In Islam, peace requires that non-Muslims submit to the call of Islam, either by
converting or by accepting the status of a religious minority (dhimmi) and paying the imposed poll tax, jizya.
World peace, the final stage of the da’wa, is reached only with the conversion or submission of all mankind to
Islam…Muslims believe that expansion through war is not aggression but a fulfillment of the Qur’anic
command to spread Islam as a way to peace. The resort to force to disseminate Islam is not war (harb), a word
that is used only to describe the use of force by non-Muslims. Islamic wars are not hurub (the plural of harb) but
rather futuhat, acts of "opening" the world to Islam and expressing Islamic jihad. Relations between dar al-
Islam, the home of peace, and dar al-harb, the world of unbelievers, nevertheless take place in a state of war,
according to the Qur’an and to the authoritative commentaries of Islamic jurists. Unbelievers who stand in the
way, creating obstacles for the da’wa, are blamed for this state of war, for the da’wa can be pursued peacefully
if others submit to it. In other words, those who resist Islam cause wars and are responsible for them. Only
when Muslim power is weak is ‘temporary truce’ (hudna) allowed (Islamic jurists differ on the definition of
‘temporary’). [20]
Finally, as author Ram Swarup observed in Understanding Islam through Hadis: "Jihad is a divinely
ordained institution in Islam. By many authorities it is counted as one of the pillars of Islam.
Theologically, it is an intolerant idea: a tribal god, Allah, trying to be universal through conquest.
Historically, it was an imperialist urge masked in religious phraseology."
Recent Muslim Views on Islam and Jihad