Open Daily: 10am - 10pm | Alley door pickup 10am - 7pm 3038 Hennepin Ave Minneapolis, MN
612-822-4611

  • Open Daily: 10am - 10pm
    Alley-side Pickup: 10am - 7pm

    3038 Hennepin Ave Minneapolis, MN
    612-822-4611

Open Daily: 10am - 10pm | Alley-side Pickup: 10am - 7pm
3038 Hennepin Ave Minneapolis, MN
612-822-4611
Jihad al-Talab in Islam: Exploring the Roots of Radicalism

Jihad al-Talab in Islam: Exploring the Roots of Radicalism

Terebessy, Leslie

Paperback

IslamGeneral EducationSocial Movements

ISBN13: 9798244576665
Publisher: Independently Published
Published: Jan 19 2026
Pages: 288
Weight: 0.77
Height: 0.72 Width: 6.00 Depth: 9.00
Language: English
Jurists that treat terrorism as martyrdom. This encourages extremists to perpetrate terror. We hear that Islam is not responsible for terrorism. But the acts of Islamists relay a different message. Terrorism engenders Islamophobia. The Islam of the Book of Allah not teach terrorism. But the Islamism of the jurists does. For Islamists reinterpreted Islam as a teaching of war. They did it by the politicization of the teaching of revelation. This was required to justify the empire-building aspirations of hawkish rulers to bring the world to Islam by word or sword. Recourse to exegesis and jurisprudence tainted by unwarranted perceptions, brought confusion. These encompass treating tradition as revelation, the repression of reason and recourse to abrogation. Treating tradition as revelation from God corrupted knowledge. Words of persons are treated as words of God. This is shirk. It tramples on tawhid. It corrupts legislation. It attributes an ethos of harshness to Islam. The Book of Allah permits fighting in self-defense or against persecution. It prohibits wars of aggression. Resorting to force in the propagation of Islam is unlawful in the Book of Allah. Persons that resort to force in Islam act in defiance of its teaching. They do not practice Islam; they practice totalitarianism. The verses relating to fighting are mis-rendered not just by non-Muslims but by Muslims, too. These verses are misrepresented as requiring Muslims to slay pagans wherever you find them (Quran, 9: 5). This reflects a politicized reading of revelation. Verse 9: 5, together with 9: 29, of the two verses of the sword, are misrepresented as expecting Muslims to fight non-Muslims in a clash of civilizations, the abode of peace vs the abode of war. But this is a misinterpretation, foisted upon the umma by Islamist jurists. These were engaged by rulers to furnish a justification for wars of aggression prohibited in revelation. They required a way of by-passing the prohibition of aggressive warfare in the Book of Allah. For the rulers wanted to fight under the auspices of Islam. The provision of the justification required a reinterpretation of the teaching of revelation. It required reinterpreting Islam as a teaching of war. The reinterpretation was enabled by the abrogation of all verses of reconciliation in the Book of Allah by the verses of the sword. There is no basis for the teaching of abrogation in the Book of Allah. The term naskh (2:106) means to transcribe, not to abrogate. Jurists furnished the required re-interpretation of revelation through the politicization of exegesis and jurisprudence. But furnishing the justification of territorial enlargement through wars of aggression required a corruption of knowledge. The transformation of Islam into a religion of war was buttressed by recourse to hawkish traditions. These encompass the tradition in which the prophet allegedly uttered that he was sent to fight people until they all say that there is no god but God. They also encompass the tradition according to which the prophet was sent with the sword as a mercy to the worlds. These traditions furnish justification for the perpetration of war crimes. The deterioration of jurisprudence culminated in the rulings of clerics that bombings are martyrdom operations, meriting rewards. The ruling that terrorist acts are martyrdom operations is rooted in the perception that the blood of the kafir is permitted for the believer, a part of the teaching on war. Jihad al-talab treats fighting non-Muslims as a religious requirement. It demands fighting non-Muslims because of their faith. Accordingly, responding to jihadism requires rejecting the teaching of jihad al-talab and its vision of the clash between the realm of peace and the realm of war. Reconciliation requires the rejection of the teaching of abrogation as well as all traditions that justify fighting non-Muslims just because of their faith.

Also from

Terebessy, Leslie

View All

Also in

Islam

View All