If we want to have a correct overall idea of what the actions and behavior of Muslims can signify, there are primarily three things that must be taken into consideration: the first of these are the Qur'an and the Sunna (that is, the sayings of our Prophet, his actions, and actions of which he approved) which provide the framework of legitimacy for all Muslim individuals.

Secondly, the traditional and cultural structures that Muslims have developed throughout their history; and thirdly, the ideas and views that an outsider may hold, which change according to the level of knowledge and the observation of the observer. Generally, the difference between these three basic factors is not taken into consideration, therefore making it difficult to determine what actually springs from the original nature of the religion, what is the result of the limited understanding of those who practice the religion and the impact of their historical situation, or lastly, what is caused by careless observation and insufficient knowledge that have led to the formulation of prejudices. In recent history, with wars of independence taking place against colonialism in 80% of the occupied Islamic world, the term jihad has activated a magnificent human energy which had formerly been dormant; Islamic scholars and leaders who were quick to grasp the possible consequences of this energy declared jihad as being something that can be employed against colonialism. In the Caucasus, in India, and in the colonized Middle East, as the struggle against the occupying forces gained ground, jihad was used as a defense mechanism and as a framework that established the legitimacy of war. Naturally, the jihad movement was directed against "Western forces," who were the "occupying power" whose negative definition in religious and political literature led to a figure of the "other"; a figure that had to be fought against. This, in turn, led to a strong prejudice in the West against jihad, where there was already a particular view of Muslims that had been created by historical relations.

As the first Islamist generations of the nineteenth century formulated the project of Islamism as an intellectual and political movement, they opened the way for ijtihad[1] by returning to the Qur'an and the original sources of the religion, and in so doing, they placed a special emphasis on jihad and the awakening of a spirit of jihad. But what was understood from jihad was redefined in a new conceptual frame as resistance against colonialism: the term jihad was to be used pragmatically for the procuring of the religious motivation which was needed for economic, scientific and technological progress. Yet another meaning of jihad occurred when placed within a new definition; the eradication of the sloth that had taken root in the society for a long time, and the start of a movement that was directed toward an intellectual, social, and material awakening. Just as water stagnates when still, so too does social life fall into lethargy when it stops moving. Jihad was taken as a spiritual source that called into action a spiritual energy, a transforming and propagating force for the new communal movement and the shaking off of the old colonialism; dynamic social projects were produced based on this energy.

Despite all their painstaking efforts, Western orientalists and researchers did not take this extremely important development, one that pertains to modern times and modernizes the concept of jihad, into consideration. They considered jihad to be religious dissemination that threatened civilization, something akin to the Christian concept of crusade, i.e., terror as a means of realizing a particular political aim or blind fanaticism spurred on by religious fervor (Peters, 1989).

Islam, which accepts other religious traditions, such as Judaism and Christianity, as being holy messages that have been revealed before its advent, has some "key terms" in its theological frame of existence, knowledge, and morals. These key terms, which also make up the basis of the Islamic faith, consist of Tawhid (belief in the absolute unity of God), Risala (God communicating with humanity through a messenger), Akhira (eternal life after death) and a few related terms. Even though jihad is not one of the pillars of faith, it is still one of the key terms which help us to understand the individual and social aspects of Islam. The military and political battles that Muslims fought with non-Muslims throughout history have led to some semantic differences in the concept of jihad, just as with some other concepts. Here, it is possible to say that historical movements and mode of government have played a crucial role. For example, the term sadaqa (alms) is in fact connected to the word tasadduq (giving alms), and therefore it can express the idea of "voluntary financial help" or "obligatory state tax" at one and the same time; in fact, its meaning has been transformed today into a mere pittance given to the poor and beggars on a voluntary basis.

Likewise, the term jihad has changed in meaning and has come to mean war that is waged for the sake of belief and the resulting military expansion and conquest of lands, diverging from the meaning employed in the primary texts of religion that are binding and from the way that the Muslims of the first period understood it. But in truth, jihad has a broader meaning, spanning other concepts and meanings, much in the same way as the term infaq (giving one's possessions away) does. Infaq, as a term, covers all of the following concepts: sadaqa (voluntary or obligatory financial help, i.e., alms), zakat (a tax and/or tasadduq that Muslims have to pay, due from possession of gold, silver and commercial goods, and livestock, minerals and the like), oshur, which falls within the scope of zakat (a tax of 1/10 - 1/20 the value of agricultural products), kharaj (tax taken from those who cultivate land belonging to the state), khumus (a tax of 1/5 the value of mined minerals and metals)—all of these and similar concepts which are concerned with state taxation fall under the greater umbrella of infaq and each has a special meaning pertaining to an economic, industrial, or commercial field of activity. Considering jihad from one aspect of its diverse meanings, we can see that it accommodates other concepts, such as qital (battle), muharaba (war in action), isyan (rebellion), jadal (strife). Moreover, Arabic semantics are rich enough to express each action and attitude with a different word. Qital means actual fighting while muharaba is a state of war between two groups. Had jihad been simply "killing" and "war," then there would have been no need for the use of words like qital and muharaba in the Qur'an.

If we try to define jihad with respect to the structure of its true meaning, we could say the following: "Jihad is the effort made to remove obstacles that stand between humanity and God."

In this definition, humanity, God, and obstacles are all key terms. In the final analysis, humanity denotes the individual. The individual is the product of his or her belief, history, and socio-cultural environment. But if one so desires, one can free oneself from being enslaved to false beliefs, history, and environment, liberating oneself from being blown around like a leaf in the winds of circumstance. Islam is the final religion to be revealed by God, and it was revealed through the prophethood of Muhammad, peace be upon him. Obstacles, on the other hand, exist over a very broad area that ranges from the inner passions of the individual to the restrictions imposed upon one's freedom of religion and conscience, to political oppression and social depravity.

Consequently, it is possible to speak of two basic dimensions of jihad, a word that derives from the root jahd, which means effort or struggle. The first of these is the spiritual and moral effort that must be exerted to alleviate the restrictions and obstacles that stem from the inner world of the individual and their essential nature; the second is the sum total of all activity that one has to engage in in order to make possible a physical and social environment where religious life can be freely communicated and practiced. In both cases, the individual has to put their utmost efforts into this struggle to liberate humanity in both the inner and the outer world.

"Islam," which is the goal of the religious life and the actions of the individual, means—beyond its concrete framework of theology and law—submission to God, peace, salvation, safety, and well-being. These concepts are the common denominators of almost all religions, and thus the Qur'an, referring to the prophet Abraham as the common ancestor of all three monotheistic religions, calls him a "Muslim." By calling him a "Muslim,"[2] what is meant is that he was a prophet who submitted to the will of God, who taught inner spiritual calm and peace in the outside world; he was a chosen prophet who showed the practical ways of instituting a social life where peace rules. Submission to God requires living in silm. Silm means living in peace with God, nature, other people, and with one's own self.

The Qur'an also reminds us that in truth religion is "unique and one" and that there are only differences in the secondary and tertiary rules in religious law; these differences have occurred in accordance with historical circumstances, within the unchanging basic principles of religion. This alludes to the fact that at the root of submission to God lies the unity of existence, humanity, and history. Thus, in the messages of all prophets and messengers, from the first to the last, one can see a continuous change concerning the secondary issues—but these changes never touch the core of the message and always remain secondary.

The fact that jihad is derived from the term jahd also indicates the relationship of this word to the word ijtihad, which is derived from the same root. The meaning of ijtihad is that a person who is intellectually and scientifically equipped exerts the utmost effort to derive judgments from passages in the Qur'an and the Sunna. The jahd which is carried out in this case with a particular asl (legitimate and trustworthy source, i.e. the Qur'an and the Sunna) and a particular usul (method) indicates scientific and intellectual effort. Mujahada, which is derived from the same root, relates more to the individual effort of a person for spiritual maturation and moral cleansing concerning the self (mujahada with the carnal self). If we accept ijtihad as being a dimension and methodology of scholarly effort, intellectual activity, and, in particular, law (Islamic jurisprudence or fiqh), we can also regard mujahada as being a method and way of Sufism as well.

The etymological richness of the word jihad demonstrates well the richness of human situations in which our life experiences manifest themselves. Undoubtedly, life is not composed solely of struggles and fights. Yet, we must always keep in mind that the forces of anger and desire contained within us can lead us astray in what seem to be legitimate circumstances; we must always be prepared for such an eventuality. What is essential is to keep these two forces under the control of the mind, which is illuminated by the divine light of the heart, i.e., the force of the intellect, in a way that will direct these forces towards legitimate and beneficial goals. This is the greatest struggle and the mujahada.

The basic dimension of jihad that concerns the inner life of the individual expresses the struggle against the will and desires of the nafs (carnal self); nafs is a basic concept found in Islamic literature, its ontological root meaning "thick darkness." What it signifies is a love for the material world and extreme dependence on the worldly nature of our essential being. Ambition, selfishness, sensuality, addiction to bodily desires, pursuit of material pleasures, adoration of the world, and exalting worldly values and desires so that they become like a fetish are the primary characteristics of the nafs.

Humanity has a concentric dual nature. The first part of this nature is the worldly nature and the other is the spiritual/soulful nature. The home of this second nature is the heart, and the home of the worldly nature is our bodily desires and passions (our nafs). The goal of the creation of humanity is, uniquely, to put the spiritual nature above the worldly nature. The freedom which is to be gained through jahd and mujahada is the attainment of the power to consciously regulate our worldly nature and to hold onto this power. God Himself created humankind with His "hands"[3] in the best form and nature; He has breathed into us of His Spirit, taught us the names (i.e., the knowledge of all that exists), and shown us the way, through His messengers. The aim of creation is that we are servants to God in the best possible way; the route to this perfection or the result of attaining this level is transformation into insan al-kamil, a perfect and mature human being, a person who possesses the highest degree of moral and spiritual maturity. The divine essence that is present in humanity calls us to God and Heaven; this is where people actually belong; worldly nature, which is the field of existence for nafs, on the other hand, calls humans to the Earth and the mud. Humanity is the fruit of the tree of existence, the most perfect creation; if we so desire, with the leave, help, and power of God, we can fight against the evil that the nafs encourages in us and we can realize the goal of creation. Another name for this struggle is mujahada, i.e., jihad.

According to Islam, this great spiritual effort is understood as the major jihad. According to what has been reported, the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, after returning from the Battle of Badr said to his victorious friends: "You have now returned from the minor jihad to the major one." When he was asked "What is the major jihad?" he replied: "It is jihad against the nafs."[4] He is also reported to have said, "Real mujahids are those who fight against their nafs."[5]

This inner dimension of jihad is vitally important. People who have not fought against the evil inherent in their nature, people who have failed to overcome the obstacles standing in the way of spiritual and moral maturation cannot be expected to make a fruitful, successful effort to lead others in the outside world toward the true path. In this frame of understanding, jihad means the maximum struggle that the individual engages in on route to spiritual cleansing; the control of the nafs and disciplining oneself with respect to moral virtues. Since this is the most difficult of all struggles, it is considered that "Jihad against the nafs is the greatest jihad."

As far as the surface meaning of jihad is concerned, there is a widespread view that Muslims sanctify war in order to compel people of other religions to "convert to Islam," or that jihad has been politicized, with violence and terror against others being employed for their own ends, with legitimacy taken from Islam. The Western media sometimes even shows violence and terror that are politically aimed as being so-called examples of modern "Islamic jihad."

Here, the best way to avoid confusion is to make a distinction between war, which is—as stated at the beginning of the article—a topic of international law that is currently on the agenda in international relations, (that is, say actual fighting) and jihad, with its much broader semantics. One of the aspects of jihad is undoubtedly war. When listing the four classical and natural functions of the state, the Hanafi jurists (Hanafi being one of the great Islamic schools of thought)—by consensus—include jihad. According to them, the four basic duties of a state are as follows: sovereignty and representation of sovereignty (the practice of public Friday prayer); the collection of taxes and the spending of the same on shared and indivisible services (fay), protection of domestic security and the independence of jurisdiction (the authority to sentence), and the defense of the country (the proclamation of jihad). Hanafi jurists consider defense to fall under the authority of the state under the title of "jihad." This does not mean continuous struggle, as in the Marxist system, or a Nazi-like view which adopts "struggle until the entire world accepts the superiority of a particular race"; on the contrary, this administrative authority demonstrates that all issues must be considered within the scope of law. The fact that this duty is imposed on the state emphasizes that the authority for declaring war against another country and thereby engaging in jihad can only rest in the hands of a legitimate public authority; individuals, civil groups, communities, or political groups cannot, on their own, declare war under the name of jihad.

Despite this clear fact that has been determined by law, Hans Kruse defines jihad as "a continuous war between the Islamic community and non-Muslims." It is not clear whether he has arrived at this conclusion by studying historical examples or whether he bases it on the fundamental sources of the religion. In truth, when reliable sources are consulted, no "continuous jihad" that has the meaning of qital or war can be found; it is not an obligatory (fard) duty that all Muslims must perform. The borders of an Islamic country are to be protected by armed forces, that is to say the official military of the country. The first jurists among the Companions of the Prophet, 'Abd 'Allah ibn 'Umar, 'Amr ibn Dinar and Sufyan al-Sawri were all of this conviction. According to these jurists and scholars, if the borders of the Islamic land are safe, war loses its necessity; it is no longer obligatory (Abu Suleiman, 1985, p. 24).

The connection of jihad with war can be found by focusing on fighting in a spiritual way for the maturation of the character, and expecting reward only from God. People who are struggling in this way will fight in wars of legitimate and just causes, giving their lives for the freedom and independence of people because this act is approved of by God as an exalted cause. A person who dies when defending their faith, wealth, honor, mental or physical health, or life is considered to be a "martyr." Jihad is not, as the orientalist Joseph Schact suggests, "a Holy War which expands the Dar al-Islam (lands of Islam) against the Dar al-Harb (non-Islamic lands) and which guarantees that this will go on until the whole world is converted to Islam and falls under Islamic sovereignty." (Schact 1997, p. 139) We should point out here that the concept of Holy War is completely a Western concept and, as with so many other issues, rather than treating jihad within its true meaning and place in Islam, some Western intellectuals have tried to place jihad within their own system of concepts and understanding, and thus have tended to translate jihad as meaning Holy War. Moreover, Schact evidently confuses "Holy War" with the military wars that result due to disputes between states. As stated just above, "Holy War" is a concept which is foreign to the political and military understanding of Muslims. War, undesirable as it may be, is a different form of politics. Jihad, in this particular sense, can only be carried out by the power of the state, i.e., the legitimate public authority. The aim of such a war would be to obtain a just and deserved result, and such a war must be executed within the limits of legitimacy. Rumi said, "War was made obligatory so that the swords are taken out of the hands of the oppressors." Moreover, Islamic law would never use the adjective "holy" for war; on the contrary, in the Qur'an it is stated that war always seems evil to humanity (Baqara 2:216) and therefore it is limited in Islam so that the end result may lead to better ways. There is no claim in Islam to make the entire world Muslim. The Qur'an clearly says that Not all people will believe (like Muslims) (Yusuf 12:106). An individual can only find the right path and attain salvation (hidaya) through the will of God (mashia) and through His guidance. Even though personal effort is very important and necessary, faith is a divine privilege. This being so, it is unthinkable that someone should be made to find hidaya or enter the faith by force. The Qur'an speaks to the Prophet, and thus to all believers, in the following manner. Remind them, for you are only a reminder. You are not a watcher over them (Ghashiya 88:21-22). The most basic principle is the following:

On the contrary, one of the legitimate causes of war is the institution of freedom of religion and conscience and the alleviation of the obstacles that lay between the conscience of the individual and God. If, as human beings, we have a responsibility on this front, then it is the responsibility to alleviate these obstacles. But, if a state has guaranteed freedom of religion and conscience under the laws and constitution within the supremacy of law, there then will be no pressure on the people to choose a certain religion. Oppressive regimes not only obstruct freedom of religion, conscience, and expression, but they also create a multitude of injustices and moral degeneration. To struggle for freedom and justice against such an oppressive regime is one of the moral goals of jihad. Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, said the following to make clear the legitimate aims of internal politics:

A guarantee of freedom of religion and conscience, possessing the right to live the way in which one desires, and the institution of justice in a way from which everyone can profit are norms from which not only Muslims are privileged to benefit, but also non-Muslims can benefit. As a principle, the existence of more than one religion, more than one belief, one way of thinking and living determines the general framework of pluralism. God does not wish all people to be exactly the same, as if they were produced from exactly the same mold. There are ontological differences, allowing us to see which community fares better than others. Undoubtedly, there will be theological and epistemological discussions between different religions. But these should not be made into grounds for war and battle. God will judge the issues upon which people and communities debate among themselves. In this world, what falls upon us is to compete amongst ourselves for the attainment of all that is true and beautiful.

But it is inevitable that humanity, which has, along with our virtues, a greedy, selfish, domineering and destructive nature, will not always abide by moral principles, will covet what we have no right to, will violate the rights of others. The cause of a legitimate and just war can only exist in such situations. Apart from wars of defense and offensive wars against those who have evil designs, it is also possible to declare war for the establishment of freedom of religion and conscience, and for the establishment of basic rights and liberties. A world free from arms and the threat of war is a world greatly desired; a wonderful ideal. But the facts of history and everyday life demonstrate that we are very far from that ideal. Consequently, we have to live with this continuous threat. If this is the case, then at least we have to base war on moral and just foundations. Islam has accepted the fact of war, not as a principle duty, but as a circumstantial and inescapable eventuality.

The institution of the freedom of religion and conscience, and the protection of places of worship has been addressed in the Qur'an as well:

The verb def', (repel) in this verse is derived from the root d-f-'a, one of the meanings of which is war. But it is not possible to limit the meaning of jihad in the sense of actual combat (muqatala). Since the verb principally means "to get rid of," there is a meaning of resistance against all sorts of political and ideological pressure. To engage in political and legal struggle to ensure the freedom of religion and conscience in a country, to strive for the alleviation of pressure imposed on people, to make an intellectual effort in this, to develop civil reaction, to form platforms to that end, to participate in such platforms and to be a member of such all fall under the meaning of the forms of def'.

How can a religion which calls for action (even at the risk of war) against the alleviation of pressure for even non-Muslims be seen to be the legitimate cause of forcefully making people convert to Islam or of violence and terror directed against innocent people?

In history, there are instances that demonstrate Islam's attention to the rights of non-Muslims. After the conclusion of a bloody war with the Mongolians, the Muslims laid down the condition that non-Muslim slaves were to be freed as well. This was so unusual a situation that the Mongolian commander, Kutlu Shah, asked Ibn Taymiya, the spokesman and negotiator for the Muslims: "What do you mean to say? That you will continue to fight if we do not set free the Christian and Jewish slaves?" Ibn Taymiya said "Yes, that is exactly what we mean." According to Ibn Taymiya, to ensure the freedom of non-Muslims with whom the Muslims have made pacts, Muslims must fight; this is jihad for the sake of God.[7]

This verse, as explained in the first four verses of the same chapter (Tawba), is talking about a condition when all possibilities of agreement and treaty have been exhausted, when all diplomatic relations have been sundered and when the eventuality of war is present. In the fourth verse it is stated:

In the sixth verse, it is ordered that the pagans who seek refuge or protection should be excluded from the fighting. In short, these verses apply only to an actual state of war.

Here we have to make clear on what grounds war is considered to be in existence, both with regards to theory of war and to religion. As stated at the beginning, war is a state of military combat that results from political differences and disputes; this has a "secular" nature. The Prussian General Clausewitz defined war as "the continuation of politics with different tools." War is a method that can be exploited in order to make people accept a political aim with the use of force.

According to the majority of Islamic jurists (jumhur), the causality principle (illat) of war in Islam is an enemy attack on Islam and the land of the Muslims.[8] The cause for war is defined in the following verse:

In other words the causality principle of war is not to make non-Muslims convert into Islam. If it were so, all non-Muslim people would have to be fought against and killed, without making distinctions between male-female, child-adult, clergy-civilian; but to do so would be "to exceed the limits," which is prohibited in the verse. But the fact is, even if there is a state of actual war with the enemy, Muslims cannot kill women, children, the elderly, the disabled, the clergy, or even civilian men who are taking no active part in the war.

Even if the enemy should not abide with the general moral norms and legal rules stated above, Islamic law does not, even then, permit the practice of an eye for an eye. That is to say, if Muslim women have been raped in the war, the Muslim soldiers must not retaliate by raping the women of the enemy (Abu Zahra 1976, 42). Therefore, in Islam, the rape of women has been a "war crime" since the Qur'an was first revealed in the seventh century. But in the modern world, this act has only been accepted as a war crime in 2001. In 1994, seven years after Serbian soldiers had raped some fifty thousand Muslim women and girls, three Serbian soldiers were found guilty and sentenced to prison at the tribunal set up in The Hague. Only after this tribunal, the international community accepted the rape of women by enemy soldiers as being a "war crime." These legal rules concerning war were set down clearly by the Prophet centuries ago, and Muslims have been instructed to abide by them up until the present time (For further reference, see Yaman 1998, p. 57).

Taking into consideration the basic decrees and binding legal rules concerning legitimate warfare as stated above, how can one then consider jihad and terror (which aims at the ending of the lives of innocent people and is, in the final analysis, a crime against humanity) as being the same thing?

When closely examined, according to the framework envisaged by Islam, the foundations of the relations between religions have to be established on mutual respect and the acceptance; the sacred space of each, with their particular way of belief, and the right to worship should be considered as being protected from all kinds of violation and attack. This principle of mutual respect will encourage religions to "compete (to try to achieve more) in khayr (good deeds)."

Khayr semantically is a broad concept. It contains basic values, such as beauty, morality, righteousness, and goodness. It calls for the institution of dialogue, cooperation, mutual help, tolerance, and concerted efforts to reach this goal. The situation at which we have arrived today makes it imperative that we underline not the disputes amongst religions, but rather the shared feeling of responsibility in the face of common problems and with equal cooperation.

Ali Bulaç, Columnist for Zaman newspaper; a sociologist and theologian with more than thirty books on Islam and Islamic world

[1] Ijtihad: (Literally, utmost effort). The exercise of reason in order to try to find an appropriate ruling on a matter not directly related upon in the Qur'an.

[2] "Muslim" derives from the same root with Islam, "s-l-m," which means submission and peace.

[3] O Iblis! What prevented you from prostrating yourself to one whom I have created with My Own Hands? (Sad 38:75). God is beyond any physical or human attributes. The Arabic word yad (hand) used in this verse and others in the Qur'an always assumes a meaning of exaltation when associated with God. According to many commentators, this verse underlines the significance of humankind in terms of its creation and position above other creatures.

[4] 'Ajluni, Kashf al-Khafa, 1/45.

[5] Tirmidhi, Fada'il al-Jihad, 2.

[6] Abu Dawud, Malahim, 17.

[7] Abu Zahra, Imam Ibn Taymiyya, Istanbul: Islamoglu Yayinlari.

[8] Sarahsi, al Mabsut, 10/5.