Ijma' (Consensus)

In situations when Muslims have not been able to find a specific legal ruling in the Quran or Sunnah, the
consensus of the community is sought (or at least the consensus of the legal scholars within the
community). The Prophet Muhammad once said that his community (i.e. the Muslim community) would
never agree on an error.

Qiyas (Analogy)

In cases when something needs a legal ruling but has not been clearly addressed in the other sources,
judges may use the analogy, reasoning, and legal precedent to decide new case law. This is often the
case when a general principle can be applied to new situations. For example, when recent scientific
evidence showed that tobacco smoking is hazardous to human health, Islamic authorities deduced that
the Prophet Mohammad's words; "Do not harm yourselves or others" could only indicate that smoking
should be forbidden for Muslims. 

Ijma (Consensus of Opinion)

Ijma is the third source of Islamic law. Literally, Ijma means agreeing upon or uniting in opinion. It means
the consensus of the Islamic community on some point of law. It can operate only where the Quran and
the Hadis have not clarified a certain aspect of the law. It is a gradual process through which the
community over period of time comes to a consensus over a question of law. The view of Muslims over
the centuries has been that giving opinion on problems of law should be the function of Ulema who
alone are well-versed in the science of law which is very complex and requires deep study before we can
claim to be an authority over them. The laws of the Quran and the Sunnah were, no doubt, supreme but
there was no bar to making laws according to the needs of the people as long as they did not go against
the spirit of the revealed law and the Sunnah. These laws were however, to be made in consultation. It
is reported from the Holy Prophet (PBUH):

"If anything comes to you for decision, decide according to the Book of Allah. If anything comes to you
which is not in the Book of Allah, then look to the Sunnah of Prophet (PBUH). If anything comes to you
which is not in the Sunnah of the Prophet (PBUH) then look to what people unanimously agree upon.”

In reply to Hazrat Ali as to how to proceed in cases where there was no definite direction in the Holy
Quran or the Sunnah, the Prophet (PBUH) is reported to have said:

“Gather together the righteous from among my community and decide the matter by their counsel and
do not decide it by any man opinion.” (Abu Dawud).

And again:

“My nation will not agree unanimously in error.”

Counsel was freely resorted to by the Prophet (PBUH) himself in all important matters. Madinah was
attacked thrice by the Quraish, and every time the Prophet (PBUH) held consultations with his followers
about the best way to repel the enemy. On one of these occasions, he acted upon the opinion of the
majority and marched out of Madinah to meet the enemy, although his own opinion was that the
Muslim army should not leave the town.

The Holy Prophet (PBUH) has said:

“Whatever the Muslims hold to be good is good before Allah. It is incumbent upon you to follow the
most numerous body. Whoever separates himself from the main body will go to Hell. If you yourselves
do not know, then question those who do.”

These traditions of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) are a sanction of Ijma.

Ijma is of three types:

1. Ijma or consensus of the Companions of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) which is also universally accepted
and binding and is therefore, unchangeable.

2. Jjma of the jurists (Islamic scholars).

3. Ijma of the people, i.e., general body of the Muslim community.

Qiyas (Analogy)

The fourth source of Islamic law is Qiyas which, literally, means “judging or comparing with a thing.”
Qiyas means essentially to use human reasoning to compare an existing situation with one for which
legislation already exists. If the Quran as banned wine, it means that by reasoning, it has also banned all
forms of alcoholic drinks, whose effect is like wine or something that causes intoxication.

The death of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) deprived the Muslim community of the means of obtaining
revelation and at the same time of his guidance in political and religious matters. The expansion of the
Muslim Empire and the spread of Islam outside Arabia raised questions previously unknown, the
answers to which could not be found in the Quran or the Sunnah. Thus, they found themselves forced to
take decisions or to regulate their conduct from their own opinion and reasoning.

Such resort to reasoning is often traced back to the conversation between the Prophet (PBUH) and
Muaz ibn Jabal, the Governor of Yemen. When the Prophet (PBUH) appointed Muaz ibn Jabal as
Governor and Judge in Yemen, the Prophet (Pbuh) asked him:

“According to what will you judge?”

“According to the book of Allah.”

“And if you find nothing therein?”

“According to the Sunnah of the Prophet (PBUH).”

“And if you find nothing therein?”

“Then I will exert myself to form my own judgment.” ibn Jabal replied.

According to another Hadis, the Prophet (PBUH) is reported to have told Abu Musa Ashari:

“Judge upon the Book ofAllah. If you do not find in it what you need, upon the Sunnah of the Prophet
(PBUH) and if you do not find in that also, then use your personal opinion.”

The Woman as Human Being

Islam was revealed at a time when a lot of people denied the humanity of the woman;
some were sceptical about it; and still others admitted it, yet considered the woman a
thing created for the humble service of the man.

With the advent of Islam, circumstances improved for the woman. The woman's
dignity and humanity were restored. Islam confirmed her capacity to carry out Allah's
commands, her responsibilities and observation of the commands that lead to heaven.
Islam considered the woman as a worthy human being, with a share in humanity equal
to that of the man. Both are two branches of a single tree and two children from the
same father, Adam, and mother, Eve. Their single origin, their general human traits,
their responsibility for the observation of religious duties with the consequent reward
or punishment, and the unity of their destiny all bear witness to their equality from the
Islamic point of view.

Establishing this fact, the Noble Qur'an says: " O mankind! Be dutiful to your Lord,
Who created you from a single person (Adam) and from him (Adam) He created his
wife (Eve), and from them both He created many men and women and fear Allah
through Whom you demand your mutual (rights), and (do not cut the relations of) the
wombs (kinship). Surely, Allah is Ever an All-Watcher over you. " [ Surah 4:1]

Distinctions justified

Some people harbour certain doubts and raise questions about Islam's stance on the
woman's status as a human being. Here we tackle the more important points of
uncertainty or even scepticism.

One of these questions is: why, if Islam really regards the woman's humanity on an
equal basis with that of the man, does it give the man privilege over the female in
some dealings such as legal testimony, inheritance, blood money, charge of the
family, heading the state and other supporting ministrations?
The distinction (if it can ever be called one) between the man and the woman is not
due to any preference by Allah, The Almighty, of the man or the woman on any
account of being nobler or closer to the Lord. As a rule, it is piety and only piety that
is the measure of ascendancy, nobility and closeness to Allah: " Verily, the most
honour able of you in the Sight of Allah is that (believer) who has At-Taqwa [i.e. one
of the Muttaq 'n: i.e. pious and righteous persons who fear Allah much](abstain from
all kinds of sins and evil deeds which He has forbidden), and love Allah much
(perform all kinds of good deeds which He has ordained)". [Surah 49:13] The
distinctions, however, are merely conditioned by the different tasks assigned to each
of the two sexes by virtue of their natural disposition.

Legal testimony

The Qur'anic verse known as "the indebtedness verse" in which Allah prescribes
writing debt contracts as a precautionary measure is: "And get two witnesses out of
your own men. And if there are not two men (available), then a man and two women,
such as you agree for witnesses, so that if one of them (two women) errs, tile other
can remind her. And the witnesses should not refuse when they are called on (for
evidence). [ Surah 2:282] Thus, the Qur'an makes the testimony of man equal to the
testimony of two women. Moreover, the majority of jurisprudents establish that a
woman's testimony does not count in major crimes and in matters which do not relate
to the rule of retaliation in kind.

Yet the distinction is far from being due to any belief in a deficiency of the woman's
humanity and integrity. It is rather due to her natural disposition and her special
inclinations which may exclude her involvement in such matters while being focused
on motherhood or the household. Hence, there is very likely to be a kind of
characteristic inattention on her part when it comes to handling these matters. For this
reason, Allah commands creditors if they want to verify the value of debt to seek the
testimony of two men or one man and two women. The Qur'an puts it unambiguously:
" so that if one of them (two women) errs, the other can remind her. [ Surah 2:282]

The exclusion of woman's testimony, altogether, from cases of major crimes, and
cases requiring retaliation in kind, is meant to protect women and distance them from
sites of crime and aggressions against souls, honour and property. It is not infrequent,
for instance, to see a woman closing her eyes, or running away in panic from a scene
of bloodshed; therefore , it becomes difficult for that woman to give a reliable account
of the crime.

Nevertheless, this has also meant for the jurisprudents that a woman's testimony
counts in cases of feminine affairs such as foster relationships, menstruation, delivery
and such matters whose knowledge was confined to women in past ages and probably
still is. Yet, Ata'a-tabiei (literally a follower a companion of one of the Prophet's
Companions) establishes that a woman's testimony on such matters does count. In
addition, other jurisprudents accept a woman's testimony in crimes that take place in
female gatherings that are not usually frequented by men, like women [ Surah 2:282]
oriental pools, wedding parties attended solely by women. and other such gatherings.
The question, however, is: if one woman kills, wounds or maims another and the only
witness is a woman, should her testimony be ruled out because it is merely given by a
woman or should men give testimony of something they did not witness? It is more in
the nature of things to accept a woman's testimony in this case so long as she is
reputed to be honest, accurate and mindful. 

Inheritance

The difference between the man and the woman in their respective shares in
inheritance established by Allah's statement: " Allah commands you as regards your
children's (inheritance); to the male, a portion equal to that of two females. [ Surah
4:11], is clearly due to the difference in the duties and costs that each has to cope with
by virtue of the Islamic teachings (shar'a)".

For example, if a man dies leaving a son and a daughter, the son gets married and
pays the obligatory bridal money (dower) to the bride and as soon as they live
together, he has to provide and pay for their living expenses. On the other hand, when
his sister gets married, she receives the bridal money from her bridegroom and when
they live together, the husband provides for her without her paying a single penny,
even if she is among the richest of people. Poor or rich, her living costs are estimated
in proportion to her husband's financial ability. The Qur'an puts it thus:" Let the rich
man spend according to his means". [ Surah 65:7] To simplify matters, if the father
leaves a wealth of about 150,000 dollars, the son would get 100,000 and the daughter
would get 50,000 dollars. Then the son pays the bridal money (dower) gives presents
and furnishes a flat which may cost at least 25,000 dollars. If the daughter gets
married and has the bridal money and the presents, she would get another 25,000.
This makes them about even.

But this is not all; the man's duties and spending increase as he provides for his
children, in some cases his ageing parents, his brothers and sisters who have no
income of their own and no one else to provide for them, and further still his relatives
who are in similar circumstances-all by virtue of the Islamic Teachings (shar'a) and
under certain conditions. For her part, though, the woman is not commanded by the
shar'a to furnish aid unless she chooses to do so out of good manners and morals.

Blood money
There is not a single well-authenticated statement by the Prophet (blessings and peace
be upon him), nor any consensus of religious authorities (Ijm,') to establish that the
blood money paid for the killing of a woman is half the sum paid for the killing of a
man. There are two Hadiths (prophetic traditions), neither perfectly authenticated, that
address the question. The best one on terms of authentication is that narrated Al-
Nisa"i and Al-Daraqatny, which still suffers a time gap in the chain of transmitters up
to the Prophet (blessings and peace be upon him). Statements related to the
Companions suffer in the same manner. What remains then is the only well-
authenticated tradition on the subject "for a soul, a hundred camels."

The general agreement of authorities that make the value of the blood money paid for
the killing of a woman half that for the killing of a man falls short of a consensus. Ibn
Woman's humanity stemming from the same origin as that of the man, her blood is the
same as his, he being from her and she from him and equal retaliation in kind being
the rule common to both cases of homicide and hell and damnation being the other
wordly punishment for the killing of either man or woman, so the rule of the verse
applies to the accidental homicide of either a man or a woman.

Given that our primary frame of reference is the Qur'an, we find that its statement is
general and does not privilege the man with any special status: "and whosoever kills a
believer by mistake (it is ordained that) he must set free a believing slave and a
compensation (blood-money i.e. Diya) be given to the deceased's family". [Surah
4:92]

Guardianship

Allah assigns guardianship to the man by virtue of the Qur'anic verse: " Men are the
protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has made the one of them to
excel the other and because they spend (to support them) from their means". [ Surah
4:34]

There are two reasons for this, one has to do with a natural quality and the other
relates to something acquired. First, Allah has provided the man with a quality of
greater strength whereas he has equipped the woman with a lighter and usually more
delicate physique. Secondly, Allah has delegated the man to be the family provider. If
the family collapses, he must bear the brunt of the collapse. This responsibility
naturally entails deference and support.

Pseudo-arguments for unrestricted mixing

This is the position of Islam on man-woman relations, and their common involvement
on charitable and righteous lines is what we call legitimate mixing; yet "intellectual
imperialism" has managed to create in our countries people who turn a deaf ear to the
ruling of Allah and His Messenger. These people call on us to give the woman free
rein to assert herself, promote her personality, enjoy her life and her femininity. They
want her to mix with men freely, experience them closely where they would be
together and alone, travel with them, go to cinemas or dance till midnight together.
She is supposed to find the "right man" from all those she has known. In this way, it is
said, life is supposed to be more secure and have greater stability in the face adversity.

These people who may well be thinking of themselves as unblemished seraphs, tell us
not to worry about the man or woman as a result of this "decent" communication,
innocent friendship and upright contact. The frequency of their contact will pacify
desire. The two sexes will supposedly find satisfaction in the mere look, conversation
or, in the extreme, dancing together, which is only a form of elevating artistic
impression. Sensual pleasure would have no place. It is a clean vent for energy,
nothing more. This is said to be what the advanced West did after they rid themselves
of complexes and privation.

Pseudo-arguments disproved

In answer to this line of thinking, we must say that we are Muslims first and foremost.
We do not sell our religion in imitation of the vagaries of Westerners or Easterners.
Our religion forbids us from promiscuous mixing with its showiness and
seductiveness: " Then we have put you (O Mohammed, blessings and peace be upon
him) on a plain way of (Our) commandment like the one We commanded Our
messengers before you (i.e. legal ways and laws of the Islamic Monotheism). So
follow you that (Islamic Monotheism and its laws), and follow not the desires of those
who know not. Verily, they can avail you nothing against Allah (if He wants to punish
you). [Surah 45:18]

In addition, the West itself, enamoured by these ideas, is suffering the consequences
of dissipation and decaying morality that has corrupted its youth and doomed its
civilization to ruin and collapse. In the United States, in Sweden, and in other
countries where sexual freedom is the norm, statistics show that feverish lust is not
alleviated by freedom of talk and contact, nor by whatever may follow that. On the
contrary, the more people taste, the thirstier they become.

Effects of promiscuous mixing

Numbers and events that fill statistics and reports provide a more convincing
indictment of this point. Sexual freedom and the sexual revolution has borne its bitter
fruit with the dissolution of the barriers separating men and women and the resultant
effects are set forth as follows.
Moral decay

The consequences of sexual promiscuity have been the disintegration of morality

characterised by the tyranny of desire and the triumph of bestiality over humanity, the
loss of sense of chastity and any sense of shyness and reserve by both men and
women giving rise to an internally disturbed society. In a famous speech in 1962,
President Kennedy said that American young people were loose, indulgent and
decadent; six out of seven young men were not fit to join the army because they were
up to their ears in lustfulness. He warned against the ills of such youth leading the
country.

In a book by the Harvard Research Centre director, entitled The Sexual Revolution,
the author firmly states the United States is heading towards a catastrophic situation of
sexual anarchy, akin to that of the Romans and Greeks. He adds that Americans are
beset the by dangers of sexual intemperance that would overwhelm their culture and
all aspects of their life.

While the communists were more reticent on these matters, and general restrictions
existed on media coverage, in 1962, Khrushchev declared that the Soviet youth had
deviated and had been spoilt by luxury. He threatened to open concentration camps in
Siberia to rid the society of the decadent youth that posed a threat to the future of the
Soviet Union.

Illegitimate children

The rapid increase in the numbers of illegitimate children is directly related to the
unlimited rein given to desire and the removal of barriers between young men and
women. Statistics on the ratio of pregnant school girls in the United States revealed
dreadful dimension. In a newspaper report, one third of the infants born in 1983 were
illegitimate. Most of them were born to young women under nineteen. The total
number of illegitimate children was 112,353 with a percentage of 37% of the births
for that year.

Drops in Marriage Rates

The availability of sex without any liability of marriage and family has led youth take
the route of spending their youth between different partners, enjoying change without
commitment to a "monotonous life" and without having to provide the costs of a
responsible married life and the liabilities of fatherhood. Thus a huge number of
young women are deprived of the opportunity to have a husband, and settle with a
modicum of peace and security, because of the illicit yearnings of easy relationships.
Similarly, there are a lot of young men who are also deprived of a peaceful life.
Statistics published in the United States show, for the first time since the beginning of
the century, the majority of the inhabitants of San Francisco are celibate; fifty-three
per cent are not married. For Bruce Chapman, who announced the findings, this was
probably an indication of the obsolescence of the traditional family pattern. He added
that these social changes were good for the welfare of the city which had witnesses a
forty per cent increase in the number of youth between twenty-five and thirty-four
during the previous ten years. This, however, did not include the homosexuals of the
city who constitute fifteen per cent of the population.

In the face of the sexual degradation which is a predominant social phenomena on the
Western world, it was natural for Swedish women to stage a 100,000-woman
demonstration in protest against unlimited sexual freedom. It must have been woman's
institutes and awareness of their future life and where their interests lie that motivated
them to organise such a huge protest.

High Divorce Rates and Destruction of the Family

Not only is marriage beset by many obstacles, it is also unsafe after its
accomplishment. The family collapses and bonds break with occurrence of the
slightest problem. In all Western countries, divorce rates are skyrocketing.

Spread of Lethal Diseases

The outbreak of sexually transmitted diseases, as well as neurotic, mental and

psychological diseases, the spread of complexes and disturbances that claim hundreds
of thousands of patients are among the acknowledged effects of sexual promiscuity.
One of the most dangerous, and in many cases lethal diseases is AIDS, which is
caused by the HIV virus. This virus is responsible for the body's loss of immunity
leaving it vulnerable to all factors of decay Millions of people have succumbed to this
menace, a fact that provides a modern piece of evidence for the words of the Prophet
Mohammed (blessings and peace be upon him) that, "Lechery never appears in a
community, but with its proclamation, plague and affliction appear throughout, which
did not exist in bygone generations". [ Tranmitted by Ibn Majah on the authority of
Ibn Umar (4019) ; Al-Zawa'ed, Hadith Sahih; and Al-Hakim and Al Dhahaby 4/540,
541 and others.]

Notwithstanding the neurosis and psychological disturbances which have taken

Western societies by storm and have filled hospitals and asylums without patients.

Freud and his followers in psychoanalysis argued that the lifting traditional
restrictions on sexual instincts would relieve the nerves and consciousness, undo
complexes and give souls a sense of comfort and ease. The restrictions have been
lifted, the desires have been released and the complicated souls are only worse off;
nerves are tenser and anxiety is the disease of the age. Not even the opening of a
million clinics have helped.

It is hard to believe this is the picture the proponents of unrestricted mixing would like
to see of us when Allah has protected us against its evils. Or is it only (that they do not
know?

Terrorism:
Terrorism is, in the broadest sense, the use of intentionally indiscriminate violence as a means to
create terror among masses of people; or fear to achieve a financial, political, religious or
ideological aim. It is used in this regard primarily to refer to violence against peacetimetargets or
in war against non-combatants. The terms "terrorist" and "terrorism" originated during
the French Revolution of the late 18th century. There is no commonly accepted definition of
"terrorism". Being a charged term, with the connotation of something "morally wrong", it is
often used, both by governments and non-state groups, to abuse or denounce opposing groups.

Islam and terrorism:

Islam, the religion of peace and harmony has unfortunately been corrupted by the deadly terrorist acts
which have taken place around the world during these past couple of years. Today the people in this
world view Islam as a threatening and terrorist religion. Often, the killing of innocent people, suicidal
bombings and terrorist attacks are carried out people who tend to claim themselves as Muslims, though
in reality, the dissident actions of these so called named Muslims have nothing to do with Islam. Among
all the attributes of God, the Holy Book (Quran) mentions that: he is the source of peace and bestower
of security (59:23) people must establish peace in their life. Terrorism what a complete disgrace,
however people forget one thing that terrorism is not only found in Islam yet also continued in other
religions and countries. But then why Islam? Is it because terrorism has been related to Islam just like
peace is to war. The terrorist that claim they are Muslim with pride are oblivious, ignorant and it shows
their lack of knowledge. The Holy Quran clearly states that: 

It does not behove a Prophet that he should have captives until he engages in regular fighting in the
land. If you take captives, except in regular fighting, you will be regarded as desiring the goods of this
world, while ALLAH desires for you the Hereafter. And ALLAH is Mighty, Wise (8:68 (The Holy Quran) 

ُ ‫ض ال ُّد ْن َيا َوهَّللا‬ َ ‫ض ُت ِري ُد‬

َ ‫ون َع َر‬ ِ ْ‫ون َل ُه أَسْ َر ٰى َح َّت ٰى ي ُْثخ َِن فِي اأْل َر‬
َ ‫ان لِ َن ِبيٍّ أَن َي ُك‬
َ ‫َما َك‬
‫ي ُِري ُد اآْل خ َِر َة َوهَّللا ُ َع ِزي ٌز َحكِي ٌم‬
So then why that unwanted attraction? Maybe Islam is their getaway to shield themselves from any
tangle disastrous situation and being able to escape stating that they are doing it for the good for their
religion. Well they forget one thing that peace is not the source of evil. This shows their unwanted
relationship with Allah. 

Jihad
 The Arabic word "jihad" is often translated as "holy war," but in a purely linguistic sense, the
word " jihad" means struggling or striving.

 The arabic word for war is: "al-harb".

 In a religious sense, as described by the Quran and teachings of the Prophet Muhammad (s),
"jihad" has many meanings. It can refer to internal as well as external efforts to be a good
Muslims or believer, as well as working to inform people about the faith of Islam.

 If military jihad is required to protect the faith against others, it can be performed using
anything from legal, diplomatic and economic to political means. If there is no peaceful
alternative, Islam also allows the use of force, but there are strict rules of engagement.
Innocents - such as women, children, or invalids - must never be harmed, and any peaceful
overtures from the enemy must be accepted.

 Military action is therefore only one means of jihad, and is very rare. To highlight this point, the
Prophet Mohammed told his followers returning from a military campaign: "This day we have
returned from the minor jihad to the major jihad," which he said meant returning from armed
battle to the peaceful battle for self-control and betterment.

 In case military action appears necessary, not everyone can declare jihad. The religious military
campaign has to be declared by a proper authority, advised by scholars, who say the religion and
people are under threat and violence is imperative to defend them. The concept of "just war" is
very important.

 The concept of jihad has been hijacked by many political and religious groups over the ages in a
bid to justify various forms of violence. In most cases, Islamic splinter groups invoked jihad to
fight against the established Islamic order. Scholars say this misuse of jihad contradicts Islam.

 Examples of sanctioned military jihad include the Muslims' defensive battles against the
Crusaders in medieval times, and before that some responses by Muslims against Byzantine and
Persian attacks during the period of the early Islamic conquests.

Forced Conversion?

So the foundation of Jihad is Islamic propagation (da’wah). The question often asked is whether Islam
condones and teaches the forced and armed conversion of non-Muslims. This is the image sometimes
projected by Western scholars and as any Muslim scholar will tell you, is seriously flawed. The Qur’an
clearly states “There is no compulsion in religion, the path of guidance stands out clear from error”
[2:256] and [60:8]. In this verse, the word “rushd” or “path of guidance” refers to the entire domain of
human life, not just to the rites and theology of Islam.

There is no debate about the fact that pre-Islamic Arabia was a misguided society dominated by
tribalism and a blind obedience to custom. In contrast, the clarity of Islam and its emphasis on reason
and rational proofs excluded any need to impose it by force. This verse is a clear indication that the
Qur’an is strictly opposed to the use of compulsion in religious faith. Similarly, Allah addressed Sayiddina
Muhammad r saying, “Remind them, for you are only one who reminds.” [88:21] Allah addresses the
believers, urging them to obey the injunctions of Islam, “Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger, and
beware (of evil): if you do turn back, then know that it is Our Messenger’s duty to proclaim (the
message) in the clearest manner.” [5:92] However, this verse makes it clear that the Messenger’s duty is
only to proclaim and preach the message; it remains to each individual to accept and to follow.

Conditions for Combative Jihad

The ruler, the Imam, is completely answerable to the people and their legal apparatus, the most
important representatives of whom are the scholars. The position of the law is that only at such a time
when it can be reasonably proven that; there are aggressive designs against Islam; and,thereare
concerted efforts to eject Muslims from their legally acquired property; and, that military campaigns are
being launched to eradicate them.  At such a time the ruler can declare and execute the provisions of
Jihad. It is a condition that there be a leader of the Muslims, an Imam, to declare combative Jihad. In al-
Mughni, Ibn Qudama states, 

“declaring Jihad is the responsibility of the Imam and is his independent legal judgment.”7 Al-Dardir
says, “Proclaiming Jihad comes through the Imam’s assignment of a leader.”8 Abu Bakr Al-Jazaa’iri states
that the pillars of Jihad are: “A pure intention and that it is performed behind a Muslim Imam and
beneath his flag and with his permission. …it is not permissible for them to fight without an Imam.” 

Dhikr: the Remembrance of God

The Prophet peace be upon him said: “Shall I tell you something that is the best of all deeds, constitutes
the best act of piety in the eyes of your Lord, elevates your rank in the hereafter, and carries more virtue
than the spending of gold and silver in the service of Allah, or taking part in Jihad and slaying or being
slain in the path of Allah?” They said: “Yes!” He said: “Remembrance of Allah.”21 

Thus one finds the principles of the spiritual Jihad are based on eliminating the ugly, selfish and
ferocious characteristics of the ego through spiritual training and mastery of dhikr, the Remembrance of
God. 
This remembrance takes many forms: each school of Sufism focuses on a different form of ritual dhikr to
enable the seeker to approach the Divine Presence, varying from individual silent recitation and
chanting to vocal group sessions. It is this spiritual struggle that raises humankind and instills in him the
sense of relationship with His Creator, and the proper perspective in relating to all creation, always
calling for love between humanity and striving in Allah’s Way for better understanding between various
communities of all faiths. Through this spiritual Jihad the effect of the selfish ego on the soul of the
seeker will be removed, uplifting his state from depression, anxiety and loneliness to one of joy,
satisfaction and companionship with the Most High.

Jihad and Islamic Propagation

God says in the Qur’an, “Invite (all) to the Way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching; and
argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious: for thy Lord knoweth best, who have strayed
from His Path, and who receive guidance.” [16:125] 

Calling people to Islam and making them acquainted with it in all its aspects through dialogue and kind
persuasion is the first type of Jihad in Islam, in contrast to the imagined belief that Jihad is only of the
combative form. This is referred to in the Qur’an where Allah I says, “so obey not the disbelievers, but
strive against them (by preaching) with the utmost endeavor with it (the Qur’an)” [25:52]. Here the
word “strive”, <jaahidu>, is used to mean struggle by means of the tongue—preaching and exhortation
—and to persevere despite the obstinate resistance of some unbelievers to the beliefs and ideals of
Islam. 
Imam Nawawi in his book al-Minhaj, when defining Jihad and its different categories, said, “one of the
collective duties of the community as a whole (fard kifaya) is to lodge a valid protest, to solve problems
of religion, to have knowledge of Divine Law, to command what is right and forbid wrong conduct”.4 

Removing all misconceptions and stereotypes in clarifying the image of Islam held by non-Muslims,
building a trusting relationship and working with them in ways that accord with their way of thinking,
are all primary forms of Jihad. Similarly, establishing a strong community and nation which can fulfill all
physical needs of its people, thereby creating for them conditions in which the message will be heard,
rather than being lost in the strife and struggle of everyday life, are requirements and form a basic
building block of the Jihadic concept. These foundations fulfill the Qur’anic injunction, “Let there arise
out of you a band of people inviting to all that is good, enjoining what is right, and forbidding what is
wrong: and these it is that shall be successful.” [3:104] Until this is accomplished the conditions of Jihad
remain unfulfilled.

Jihad in History and Law

Let us now consider the nature of Jihad more fully as it appears in the history and law of Islam. Jihad in
Arabic means “to strive for some objective”. Thus, the common assumption, that Jihad is combat, is
incorrect. In fact Jihad, in its technical meaning, has several branches, among which are the combative
forms of Jihad. 

Ibn Rushd, in his Muqaddimaat, divides Jihad into four kinds: “Jihad by the heart; Jihad by the tongue;
Jihad by the hand and Jihad by the sword.”1 He defines “Jihad by the tongue” as “to commend good
conduct and forbid the wrong, like the type of Jihad Allah I ordered us to fulfill against the hypocrites in
His Words, “O Prophet! Strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites”. [9:73] So the Prophet
(saws) strove against the unbelievers by sword and against the hypocrites by tongue.” S. Ramadan Buti,
a contemporary Orthodox scholar from Syria in his seminal work on the subject Jihad in Islam2 writes,
“…even before he conducted Jihad by sword against the unbelievers, there is no doubt the Prophet
(saws) invited these unbelievers peacefully, lodged protests against their beliefs and strove to remove
their misgivings about Islam. When they refused any other solution, but rather declared a war against
him and his message and initiated the fight, there was no alternative except to fight back.”3 

One form of Jihad, usually overlooked in today’s pursuit of newsworthy headlines, is the Jihad of
presenting the message of Islam––da`wah. Thirteen years of the Prophet’s (saws) 23-year mission
consisted purely of this type of Jihad. Contrary to popular belief, the word Jihad and related forms of its
root word are mentioned in many Makkan verses in a non-combative context. 
Combative Jihad in the technical usage of Islamic law means “the declaration of war against belligerent
and aggressive non-Muslim powers or against fellow Muslim transgressors”. It is not a haphazard
decision to be taken by anyone. The principles of Islamic jurisprudence state that the actions of the
leader must be guided by the interests of the people and that the interests of the collectivity has, in
some cases, precedence over the interests of the individual.

What's the Real Difference? Islam and the West

 Something is rotten in the relationship between the Islamic and Western worlds;
there is a diffuse but pungent odor of fear and mistrust. The unease has primarily to
do with the issue of violence: violence that permeates the past and the present,
political conflicts assume the mantle of cultural clashes and vice versa.

Once upon a time, a clear distinction between "Islam" and "the West," may have
been possible. But no longer, the boundaries are blurring: Millions of Muslim men
and women live in the West and many are citizens of Western nations. They are
therefore now inextricably part of the West.

Tolerance to other religions:

For centuries Christians regarded Mohammed, the Prophet PBUH as a false prophet;
even today few Christians would probably consider him a true prophet. The Islamic
attitude toward Judaism and Christianity is quite different. Islam sees itself explicitly
as belonging to the same monotheist tradition as its two sister faiths embody. It
connects to them, relates to them, but at the same time considers itself superior.
Just as the New Testament succeeds the Old Testament for Christians, the revelation
of Islam concludes the chain of revelations for Muslims. The Torah and the Gospels
are respected, but it is the Quran alone that contains the true message. Moses is a
prophet, Jesus is a prophet, but Mohammed is the "Seal of the Prophets."
Pragmatic tolerance

In practical terms, the situation has been somewhat more straightforward. Jews and
Christians enjoyed the protection of the Muslim authorities. They were, after all,
recipients of a scripture of revelation, who, like Muslims, believed in the one and
only God - albeit, from an Islamic point of view, in a diluted form. Hence the
designation dhimmi ("protected person") applied to both Jews and Christians living
under Islamic rule. This exemptive status explicitly distinguished them from the non-
believers who were the Muslims' predefined enemy. In exchange for the payment of
special tributes, their independence was guaranteed and they were protected from
physical violence.

In the course of the Islamic conquests in southern and southeastern Asia, Hindus and
Buddhists were granted a comparable status, although these faiths were scarcely
monotheistic. Muslims were as capable as anyone else of differentiating between
religious and political necessity. Consequently - with Islamic conquests serving to
extend Islamic rule - they exercised a pragmatic tolerance.

Not unlike the West's former colonial powers, they prefer to cast themselves in an
altruistic role, with invasion and occupation as a mission civilisatrice (civilization). As
a rule, however, Muslim conquerors did not force subjects to convert to Islam, which
most scholars believe is explicitly prohibited in the Quran (Sura 2, Verse 256: "There
is no compulsion in religion.").

Comparison of Islam and Christianity with regard to tolerance:

If tolerance in the sense of toleration is the yardstick, the Islamic world cuts a far
better figure than historical Christendom. The Renaissance may have seen
outstanding cultural achievements in Europe, but it was in no sense harmonious -
not even in Islamic Spain, which is often retrospectively idealized as a "golden age" of
peaceful Muslim, Christian and Jewish coexistence.

Even under Islamic rule, some members of other faiths were persecuted, forced to
convert or subjected to pogroms. These, however, were the exception, not the
religiously sanctioned rule. In any comparison with Europe - whether during the
Christian-dominated Middle Ages, the Reformation or the era of totalitarianism
(which, we might remember, postdated the Enlightenment) - "Islam" emerges as the
clear moral victor.