Jihad only defensive?

The phenomenon of the idea that Jihad is only defensive is rapidly being spread amongst Muslim circles. It is without doubt a relatively new idea that seems to have appeared since the demise of the 'uthamani Khilafah and tends to come from the rhetoric of apologists and modernists who seem to have a problem with many key aspects of traditional Islamic 'Aqeedah and Islamic Law.

The ironic thing is, those who are calling for a reform to how we should approach the Shariah are also declarers of following 'Traditional Islam'. However, what seems to be more apparent is that they find no qualms in adhering to interpretations of traditional Islamic law in non controversial and non - 'ideological' matters, but when matters of contemporary issues arise, such as Jihad, apostasy, the Islamic penal code, interfaith relations etc, new interpretations are called for.

This is a serious problem we are facing and a short article will never be able to address this issue accordingly.

I felt compelled to write this short piece after reading the second appendix to Hamza Yusuf's translation of Tahawiyyah entitled: 'Understanding Jihad', which is his attempt to declare Jihad to be defensive at most. He has not brought about anything new with his appendix, but what did startle me was his 'quote' of Ibn Taymiyyah (p.92):

"Islamic warfare is always defensive, because the basis of relationships with the non-Muslims is peaceful co-existence (Musaalamah); if one reflects deeply on the causes of the Prophet's military expeditions, one will find that all of them were of this type."

I was shocked that I never came across this statement of Ibn Taymiyyah before since any regular reader of the works of Ibn Taymiyyah would be able to find this quote problematic since its meaning contradicts what he is known for believing in. Thus I was intrigued to find exactly where Yusuf got his quote from. He cites it from: Majmu', vol.28, sect .8 (see page 125 of translation).

I had a thorough check of his Majmu' and found no such quote therein. To me it seems as though it has been referenced incorrectly, especially since a bulk of the appendix was a translation of 'Abdullah Bin Bayyah's article on Jihad which has no references to his citations. His article may be found here (click on buhooth on the right and towards the bottom there is an article entitled: Mafhoom al Jihaad fil Islam.)

According to Bin Bayyah's article he seems to have taken the quote from Abu Zahrah's book; "Ibn Taymiyyah" which depends heavily on ascribing the book: 'Qaai'dah fi Qitaal al Kuffar' to Ibn Taymiyyah himself which in reality is very doubtful as many scholars have actually said it was not even written by Ibn Taymiyyah! See here for more details.

Nevertheless, even if we agree that the aforementioned book was written by Ibn Taymiyyah, how could one possibly ignore his hundreds of other statements regarding this issue? (see as-Siyaasah ash-Sharee'ah, as-Saarim al Maslool & his Fataawa.)

The problem with this belief (that Jihad is only defensive) is not simply restricted to the issue of Jihad only. In fact it will necessitate the changing of many of ther beliefs as well as laws. Therefore, this issue is of a paramount importance and needs to be elucidated by scholars who are well grounded in 'aqeedah & fiqh.

To end, I leave you with a translation of Ibn al Qayyim's al Furoosiyyah 187-189:

"It is known that a Mujahid could intend repelling the enemy if the mujahid was sought after/wanted (matloob) and the enemy was the seeker/pursuer (taalib). Or he could intend triumphing over the enemy from the very beginning if he was the seeker and the enemy was the matloob (sought after.). He could even intend both matters, thus the believer is commanded to fulfill these three categories.

Defensive Jihad is more difficult than Initiative Jihad (Jihaad at- Talab also known as offensive Jihad), since defensive Jihad resembles repelling an attacker. Thus it was permitted for the oppressed to defend himself as Allah (swt) says: "Permission to fight is given to those who are being fought because they have been wronged..."(al Hajj: 39).

The Prophet (saw) said: "Whoever was killed defending his wealth is a martyr, and whoever was killed defending himself is a martyr." (Abu Dawud & Ibn Majah). This is because repelling the aggressor against the religion is Jihad and a virtuous act that brings one closer to Allah....

As for the pure initiative/offensive Jihad (talab), then no one desires it except one of two men:

1. Either someone who has great imaan and fights to make the word of Allah the highest and the deen is solely for Allah.


2. Or somebody who desires the war booty and concubines.

The defensive Jihad is a matter that everyone intends and no one finds it undesirable except a person who is according to the law and intellect a lowly coward. And it is the masters of the believers who seek the pure offensive Jihad for the sake of Allah..."

And finally, I leave you a quote from Sufyaan Ibn 'Uyaynah:

"The Prophet (saw) was sent with four swords: A sword against the Arab polytheists until they believe, A sword against the rest of the polytheists until they enter into Islam or are taken as captives or held at ransom, a sword against the people of the book until they pay the Jizyah (tax) and a sword against Muslim rebels." (Quoted from: Al Hikam al Jadeerah bil 'idhaa'ah min qawl an-nabiyy 'bu'ithtu bis-sayf bayna yadayy as-saa'ah [from his Majmoo' ar-rasaa'il ibn Rajab al Hanbali 1/229])

May Allah show us the truth as it is and grant us the ability to act upon it, and show us falsehood as it is and grant us the ability to keep distant from it.

And Allah knows best,

Abu Qutaybah.