Yesterday the New York (aka New Duranty) Times published a lengthy piece on young men trying to find love in the Kingdom of the Two Holy Places. Bottom line? It ain't easy.
But in the course of things, and without the Times reporter noticing, of course, the young men featured in the article treat us to their understanding of jihad, and let's just say that it's not something that's going to win them any friends in the Bush Administration. From "Young Saudis, Vexed and Entranced by Love’s Rules," by Michael Slackman for the New York Times, May 12 (thanks to all who sent this in):
To Nader and Enad, prayer is essential. In Enad’s view, jihad is, too, not the more moderate approach that emphasizes doing good deeds, but the idea of picking up a weapon and fighting in places like Iraq and Afghanistan.
“Jihad is not a crime; it is a duty,” Enad said in casual conversation.
“If someone comes into your house, will you stand there or will you fight them?” Enad said, leaning forward, his short, thick hands resting on his knees. “Arab or Muslim lands are like one house.”
This is entirely in line with orthodox Islamic law, which stipulates that jihad warfare is fard 'ayn, or obligatory on every individual believer, when a Muslim land is attacked. For example, the Hanbali jurist Ibn Qudama explained in Al-Mughni that jihad becomes fard 'ayn when battle begins between Muslim and non-Muslim forces, when unbelievers attack a Muslim land, and when the leader of the Muslims calls a jihad.
Would he go fight?
“I would need permission from my parents,” he said.
Here again, he is expressing conventional and orthodox understandings. Qatar's Sharia Court declared several years ago: "It is considered against Islam to travel to another country for Jihad without permission from one's parents."
Thanks Jihad Watch
No comments:
Post a Comment