JHD or HRB
November 1, 2006 § 6 Comments
The question is that although jihad has been attributed to the violent “terrorist” efforts shouldn’t someone explain the difference between jihad and hareb? I think so because if someone doesn’t we Muslims will lose the ability to refer to an aspect of Islam which we consider dignified, noble and a salatufisabillah. Well Khaled Abou El-Fadl has done just that recently in an interview where he declares,
“When I write an article speaking to extremists and convincing them that they are wrong theologically and morally and legally,” says Abu El Fadl, “I consider my self in a state of jihad. I expect to be rewarded by God.”
Professor Streusand goes on to explain,
“The term in Islamic law which best describes the activities of al Qaeda is hirabah, which originally meant brigandage, but has a more general meaning as sinful warfare, if our elected officials started saying ‘This is a war against hirabis,’ that would be more effective. It would certainly be better than using the term jihad or jihadis which is actively harmful.” (G. Raz, NPR)
In closing I must say that I agree, that using HRB as opposed to JHD would be the most effective strategy instead of inviting inflammatory language like Islamic-Fascists and things like that. However, this would only be a good idea if offending Muslims wasn’t a part of the overall agenda.