Are Muslims Obligated to Engage in Holy War

Beverly I. Moran, Rahimjon Abdugafurov
{"title":"Are Muslims Obligated to Engage in Holy War","authors":"Beverly I. Moran, Rahimjon Abdugafurov","doi":"10.25148/LAWREV.11.1.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the early twenty-first century, some—Muslims and non-Muslims alike—believe that Islam requires Muslims to engage in holy war or Jih d. This article concludes that this early twenty-first century notion that Muslims are obligated to wage holy war is based on a failure to appreciate that Jih d was never a universally agreed upon concept in Islam nor was there ever a universal obligation to participate in Jih d. In order to support the assertion that Muslims are not obligated to engage in holy war, this article looks to canonical texts from the anaf School of Islamic Law from the ninth through the fourteenth century CE. These texts are called Fatw collections because they compile legal opinions on a wide variety of matters. The first observation that the article presents is that some of these canonical Fatw collections do not even address the question of Jih d while other Fatw collections treat Jih d in at least three different ways. Thus the article demonstrates that the earliest Muslim legal scholars of the anaf School did not share a uniform understanding of what constitutes holy war nor did they agree on who is obligated to become a holy warrior. Indeed, the article concludes that early legal scholars especially disagreed on the obligation to engage in Jih d and on who qualifies to call for Jih d. Hence it is false to claim that Muslims are obligated now (or have ever been obligated) to engage in Jih d. * Professor of Law and Professor of Sociology, Vanderbilt University. ** Doctoral Candidate, Emory University. The authors would like to acknowledge Professor Devin Stewart for his valuable insights and comments on this article. 377fiu_11-1 S heet N o. 5 S de B 048/2016 1011:02 37792-fiu_11-1 Sheet No. 5 Side B 04/28/2016 10:11:02","PeriodicalId":300333,"journal":{"name":"FIU Law Review","volume":"79 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"FIU Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25148/LAWREV.11.1.5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In the early twenty-first century, some—Muslims and non-Muslims alike—believe that Islam requires Muslims to engage in holy war or Jih d. This article concludes that this early twenty-first century notion that Muslims are obligated to wage holy war is based on a failure to appreciate that Jih d was never a universally agreed upon concept in Islam nor was there ever a universal obligation to participate in Jih d. In order to support the assertion that Muslims are not obligated to engage in holy war, this article looks to canonical texts from the anaf School of Islamic Law from the ninth through the fourteenth century CE. These texts are called Fatw collections because they compile legal opinions on a wide variety of matters. The first observation that the article presents is that some of these canonical Fatw collections do not even address the question of Jih d while other Fatw collections treat Jih d in at least three different ways. Thus the article demonstrates that the earliest Muslim legal scholars of the anaf School did not share a uniform understanding of what constitutes holy war nor did they agree on who is obligated to become a holy warrior. Indeed, the article concludes that early legal scholars especially disagreed on the obligation to engage in Jih d and on who qualifies to call for Jih d. Hence it is false to claim that Muslims are obligated now (or have ever been obligated) to engage in Jih d. * Professor of Law and Professor of Sociology, Vanderbilt University. ** Doctoral Candidate, Emory University. The authors would like to acknowledge Professor Devin Stewart for his valuable insights and comments on this article. 377fiu_11-1 S heet N o. 5 S de B 048/2016 1011:02 37792-fiu_11-1 Sheet No. 5 Side B 04/28/2016 10:11:02
穆斯林有义务参加圣战吗
在21世纪初,一些人——穆斯林和非穆斯林都一样——相信伊斯兰教要求穆斯林参加圣战或圣战。本文的结论是,21世纪初穆斯林有义务发动圣战的观念是基于未能认识到圣战从来都不是伊斯兰教普遍认同的概念,也从来没有普遍参与圣战的义务。为了支持穆斯林没有义务参加圣战的主张,这篇文章着眼于从公元9世纪到14世纪的伊斯兰教法阿纳夫学派的经典文本。这些文本被称为法特集,因为它们汇编了对各种各样问题的法律意见。本文提出的第一个观察是,一些正典的Fatw文集甚至没有处理Jih d的问题,而其他Fatw文集至少以三种不同的方式处理Jih d。因此,这篇文章表明,最早的穆斯林法律学者的阿纳夫学派没有分享一个统一的理解什么是圣战,也没有同意谁有义务成为一个神圣的战士。事实上,这篇文章的结论是,早期的法律学者在参与Jih的义务和谁有资格呼吁Jih的问题上尤其存在分歧。因此,声称穆斯林现在有义务(或曾经有义务)参与Jih是错误的。**埃默里大学博士研究生。作者要感谢Devin Stewart教授对本文的宝贵见解和评论。377fiu_11-1 5号侧B 048/2016 1011:02 37792-fiu_11-1 5号侧B 04/28/2016 10:11:02
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信