XLIV.—JIHA′D, OR RELIGIOUS WAR.
Jiha′d[1] (lit. "an effort") is a religious war against the infidels, as enjoined by Muhammad in the following passages in the Qurán:—
Súrat-un-Nisá (vi.).
"Fight, therefore, for the religion of God."
- * * * *
God hath indeed promised Paradise to every one,
But God hath preferred those who fight for the faith.”
Súrat-ul-Muhammad (xlvii.).
"Those who fight in defence of God's true religion,
God will not suffer their works to perish."
Those who engage in war against the infidels are called Gházís. The whole question of Jihád has been fully discussed by Dr. W. W. Hunter, of the Bengal Civil Service, in his work entitled, "Indian Musalmáns," which is the result of careful inquiry as to the necessary conditions of a Jihád, or Cresentade, instituted at the time of the excitement which existed in India in 1870–71, in consequence of a supposed Wahhábí conspiracy for the overthrow of Christian rule in that country. The whole matter, according to the Sunní Musulmáns, hinges upon the question whether India is Dár-ul-Harb, the land of enmity, or Dár-ul-Islám, the land of Islm.
The Muftís belonging to the Hanifia and Shafaʾía sects at Mecca decided that, "as long as even some of the peculiar observances of Islám prevail in a country, it is Dár-ul-Islám."
The decision of the Muftí of the Málikí sect was very similar, being to the following effect:—
"A country does not become Dár-ul-Harb as soon as it passes into the hands of the infidels, but when all or most of the injunctions of Islám disappear therefrom."
The law doctors of North India decided that, "the absence of protection and liberty to Musulmáns is essential in a Jihád, or religious war, and that there should be a probability of victory to the armies of Islám."
The Shíaʾh decision on the subject was as follows:—"A Jihád is lawful only when the armies of Islám are led by the rightful Imám, when arms and ammunitions of war and experienced warriors are ready, when it is against the enemies of God, when he who makes war is in possession of his reason, and when he has secured the permission of his parents, and has sufficient money to meet the expenses of his journey."
The Sunnís and Shíaʾhs alike believe in the eventual triumph of Islám, when the whole world shall become followers of the Prophet of Arabia; but whilst the Sunnís are, of course, ready to undertake the accomplishment of this great end, "whenever there is a probability of victory to the Musulmáns," the Shíaʾhs, true to the one great principle of their sect, must wait until the appearance of a rightful Imám.
Not very long ago a learned Muhammadan Qází (judge) was consulted by the writer of these notes with reference to this interesting question, namely, whether India is Dár-ul-Islám, or Dár-ul-Harb. At first he replied Dár-ul-Islám, and then, after a short pause, he said, "Well, sir, may I tell you the truth?" Upon being assured that the question was put merely as one of theological inquiry, and not for any political reasons, he replied, "It is Dár-ul-Harb." One of his reasons for arriving at this conclusion was the well-known doctrine of Islám that a Muslim cannot be a Zimmí, or one who pays tribute to an infidel power. We believe that the fact that Muhammadans under Christian rule are m an anomalous position, is a source of trouble to many a conscientious Muslim. Many Muslims believe that Hijrat, or flight, is incumbent upon every child of the Faith who is under Káfir (infidel) rule; but, as our friend the Qází put it, "Where are they to go to?" The Muslim who abandons his country under such circumstances is called a Muhájir, or refugee.
When an infidel's country is conquered by a Muslim ruler, its inhabitants are offered three alternatives:—
(1.) The reception of Islám, in which case the conquered become enfranchised citizens of the Muslim state.
(2.) The payment of a poll-tax (Jizíyah), by which unbelievers in Islám obtain protection, and become Zimmís.
(3.) Death by the sword.
In a state brought under Muslims, all those who do not embrace the faith are placed under certain disabilities. They can worship God according to their own customs, provided they are not idolaters; but it must be done without any ostentation, and, whilst churches and synagogues may be repaired, no new place of worship can be erected. Vide Hidáyah,[2] where we read:—"The construction of churches, or synagogues, in Muslim territory is unlawful, this being forbidden in the Traditions; but if places of worship belonging to Jews, or Christians, be destroyed, or fall into decay, they are at liberty to repair them, because buildings cannot endure for ever."
Idol temples must be destroyed, and idolatry suppressed by force in all countries ruled according to strict Muslim law.