Editing Jihad (section)

===Classical===
According to [[Al-Baqara 256]] "there is no compulsion in religion".<ref name="qref|2|256">{{qref|2|256|b=yl}}</ref> The primary aim of ''jihad'' as warfare is not the conversion of non-Muslims to Islam by force, but rather the expansion and defense of the [[Islamic state]].<ref name=EIO-djihad>{{cite encyclopedia |title=Djihād|encyclopedia=Encyclopedia of Islam Online|url={{google books|plainurl=y|id=lQpd0AEACAAJ}}}}</ref><ref name="Peters-1977-3">{{Cite book |last=Peters |first=Rudolph |url={{google books|plainurl=y|id=Lm4XnNtI_1wC\page=3}}|title=Jihad in Mediaeval and Modern Islam: The Chapter on Jihad from Averroes' Legal Handbook 'Bidåayat Al-mudjtahid' and the Treatise 'Koran and Fighting' by the Late Shaykh-al-Azhar, Maòhmåud Shaltåut |date=1977 |publisher=BRILL |isbn=978-90-04-04854-6 |language=en|page= 3}}</ref> There could be truces before this was achieved, but no permanent peace.<ref name=Lewis>{{Cite book |last=Lewis |first=Bernard |url={{google books|plainurl=y|id=br74_99YqSIC}}
|title=Islam and the West |date=1994-10-27 |publisher=Oxford University Press |isbn=978-0-19-802393-7 |language=en}}</ref>{{rp|9–10}} One who died "on the path of God" was a martyr (''[[shahid]]''), whose sins were remitted and who secured "immediate entry to paradise".<ref name="OCAP">{{cite book|editor1-last=Coates|editor1-first=David|title=The Oxford Companion to American Politics, Volume 2|date=2012|publisher=Oxford University Press |page=16 |url={{google books|plainurl=y|id=W_BMAgAAQBAJ|page=16}} |isbn=9780199764310}}</ref>

According with [[Bernard Lewis]], "from an early date Muslim law laid down" ''jihad'' in the military sense as "one of the principal obligations" of both "the head of the Muslim state", who declared ''jihad'', and the Muslim community.<ref name=Lewis/> According to legal historian Sadakat Kadri, Islamic jurists first developed classical doctrine of ''jihad'' "towards the end of the eighth century", using the doctrine of ''[[naskh (tafsir)|naskh]]'' (that God gradually improved His revelations over the course of Muhammed's mission). They subordinated Qur'anic verses emphasizing harmony to the more "confrontational" verses of Muhammad's later years and linked verses on exertion (''jihad'') to those of fighting (''qital'').<ref name=Kadri12/>{{rp|1501}} Muslims jurists of the eighth century divided the world into three divisions, ''dar al-Islam''/''dar al-‛adl''/''dar al-salam'' (house of Islam/house of justice/house of peace), ''dar al-harb''/''dar al-jawr'' (house of war/house of injustice, oppression), and ''dar al-sulh''/''dar al-‛ahd/dār al-muwada‛ah'' (house of peace/house of covenant/house of reconciliation).<ref>{{cite book |author=Ahmed Al- |title=The Islamic Law of War: Justifications and Regulations |url={{google books|plainurl=y|id=9XfFAAAAQBAJ|page=92}}
 |date=28 March 2011b |publisher=Springer |isbn=9780230118089|pages=92}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book|url=https://archive.org/details/isjihadjustwar00zawa/page/50|title=Isw+bm Jihād a Just War?: War, Peace, and Human Rights Under Islamic and Public International Law|last=Zawātī|first=Ḥilmī M|date=2001|publisher=E. Mellen Press|isbn=0773473041|series=Studies in religion and society|volume=53|location=Lewiston, N.Y.|pages=[https://archive.org/details/isjihadjustwar00zawa/page/50 50]|oclc=47283206}}</ref> The eighth century jurist [[Sufyan al-Thawri]] (d. 778) headed what [[Majid Khadduri|Khadduri]] called a pacifist school, which maintained that ''jihad'' was only a defensive war.<ref>{{Cite book|title=The Law of War and Peace in Islam: A Study in Muslim International Law|last=Khadduri|first=Majid|date=1940|url={{google books|plainurl=y|id=ejBHAAAAIAAJ}}|publisher=Luzac & Co|location=London|language=en|oclc=24254931}}</ref>{{rp|36ff}}<ref name=AD11/>{{rp|90}} He stated that the jurists who held this position, among whom he refers to [[Hanafi]] jurists [[Abd al-Rahman al-Awza'i|al-Awza‛i]] (d. 774) and [[Malik ibn Anas]] (d. 795), and other early jurists, "stressed that tolerance should be shown unbelievers, especially scripturaries and advised the Imam to prosecute war only when the inhabitants of the ''dar al-harb'' came into conflict with Islam."<ref name=AD11/>{{rp|80}}<ref>{{Cite book |last=Al-Shaybani |first=Muhammad Ibn al-H. |url=|title=The Islamic Law of Nations: Shaybani's Siyar. |date=1966 |publisher=Johns Hopkins Press |language=en|translator-first=[Majid |translator-last=Khadduri}}</ref>{{rp|58}} The duty of ''Jihad'' was a collective one (''[[fard al-kifaya]]''). It was to be directed only by the caliph who might delay it when convenient, negotiating truces for up to ten years at a time.<ref name=Kadri12/>{{rp|150–51}} Within classical [[fiqh|Islamic jurisprudence]], during the first few centuries after the prophet's death,<ref>[[Albrecht Noth]], "''Der Dschihad: sich mühen für Gott''. In: Gernot Rotter, ''Die Welten des Islam: neunundzwanzig Vorschläge, das Unvertraute zu verstehen''{{-"}} (Fischer Taschenbuch Verlag, 1993), p. 27</ref> ''jihad'' consisted of wars against unbelievers, [[Apostasy|apostated]], and was the only form of permissible warfare.<ref name="Khadduri"/>{{rp|74–80}} [[Bernard Lewis]] stated that fighting rebels and bandits was legitimate, though not a form of ''jihad'',<ref name="lewis-2004-31">{{cite book |last1=Lewis|first1=Bernard|title=The Crisis of Islam: Holy War and Unholy Terror |date=2004 |publisher=Random House Publishing Group|page=31|url={{google books|plainurl=y|id=kE9LmS6QvacC}} |quote=According to Islamic law, it is lawful to wage war against four types of enemies: infidels, apostates, rebels, and bandits. Although all four types of war are legitimate, only the first two count as ''jihad''. |isbn=978-0812967852}}</ref> and that while the classical perception and presentation of ''jihad'' was warfare in the field against a foreign enemy, internal ''jihad'' "against an infidel renegade, or otherwise illegitimate regime was not unknown."<ref name="lewis-237">{{cite book |last1=Lewis |first1=Bernard |title=The Middle East: A Brief History of the Last 2,000 Years |date=2000 |publisher=Simon and Schuster |pages=237–38 |url={{google books|plainurl=y|id=CjAABdA9z18C|page=237}} |access-date=30 September 2015 |isbn=9780684807126}}</ref>)

However, some argue martyrdom is never automatic, because it is God's province to judge who is worthy of that designation.<ref>According to [[Khaled Abou El Fadl]] martyrdom is within God's exclusive province; only God can assess the intentions of individuals and the justness of their cause, and ultimately, whether they deserve the status of being a martyr. The Qur'anic text does not recognize the idea of unlimited warfare, and it does not consider the simple fact that one of the belligerents is Muslim to be sufficient to establish the justness of a war. Moreover, according to the Qur'an, war might be necessary, and might even become binding and obligatory, but it is never a moral and ethical good. The Qur'an does not use the word ''jihad'' to refer to warfare or fighting; such acts are referred to as ''qital''. While the Qur'an's call to ''jihad'' is unconditional and unrestricted, such is not the case for qital. ''Jihad'' is a good in and of itself, while qital is not. Source: {{cite book|last1=Abou El Fadl |first1=Khaled |author-link=Khaled Abou El Fadl |title=The Great Theft: Wrestling Islam from the Extremists|date=23 January 2007|url={{google books|plainurl=y|id=ZcVOJYyT9aAC}}|publisher=HarperOne|isbn=978-0061189036}}</ref>{{rp|222–223}}

Classical manuals of Islamic jurisprudence often contained a section called ''Book of Jihad'', with [[Rules of war in Islam|rules governing the conduct of war]] covered at great length. Such rules include treatment of nonbelligerents, women, children (also cultivated or residential areas),<ref>{{Cite book |last=Hamidullah |first=Muhammad |url={{google books|plainurl=y|id=PHFvjl11z08C}}|title=The Muslim Conduct of State |date=2011 |publisher=The Other Press |isbn=978-967-5062-88-9 |language=en}}</ref>{{rp|205–08}}<ref name=Bonner/>{{rp|3}} and division of spoils.<ref name=Bonner/>{{rp|99}} Such rules offered protection for civilians.<ref name="onlinelibrary.wiley.com">{{Cite journal|title=Armed ''Jihad'' in the Islamic Legal Tradition|first=Ahmed|last=Al-Dawoody|url=https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/rec3.12071|date=27 August 2013|journal=Religion Compass|volume=7|issue=11|pages=476–484|doi=10.1111/rec3.12071|s2cid=143395594}}</ref> Spoils include ''[[Ghanimah]]'' (spoils obtained by actual fighting), and ''fai'' (obtained without fighting i.e. when the enemy surrenders or flees).<ref name="chaudhry-spoils">{{cite web|last1=Chaudhry|first1=Muhammad Sharif|title=Dynamics of Islamic ''Jihad'', Spoils of War|url=http://www.muslimtents.com/shaufi/b17/b176.htm|website=Muslim Tents|access-date=29 March 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160411053917/http://www.muslimtents.com/shaufi/b17/b176.htm|archive-date=11 April 2016|url-status=live}}</ref>

The first documentation of the law of ''jihad'' was written by 'Abd al-Rahman al-Awza'i and [[Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Shaybani]]. (It grew out of debates that surfaced following Muhammad's death.<ref name="Peters-jihad-OEIW"/>) Although some Islamic scholars have differed on the implementation of ''Jihad'', the consensus amongst them is that ''jihad'' always includes armed struggle against persecution and oppression.<ref name="jihad-ghamidi">{{cite book|last=Ghamidi|first=Javed|author-link=Javed Ahmed Ghamidi|title=Mizan|publisher=[[Al-Mawrid|Dar ul-Ishraq]]|chapter=The Islamic Law of ''Jihad''|chapter-url=http://www.javedahmadghamidi.com/renaissance/view/the-islamic-law-of-jihad-part-1-2|year=2001|oclc=52901690|title-link=Mizan}}</ref>

Both [[Ibn Taymiyya]] and [[Ibn Qayyim]] asserted that [[Muhammad]] never initiated hostilities and that all the wars he engaged in were primarily defensive. He never forced non-Muslims to Islam and upheld the truces with non-Muslims so long as they did not violate them. Ibn Taymiyya's views on ''Jihad'' are explained in his treatise titled ''Qāʿidah mukhtaṣarah fī qitāl al-kuffār wa muhādanatuhum wa taḥrīm qatlahum li mujarrad kufrihim''. (An abridged rule on fighting the unbelievers and making truces with them, and the prohibition of killing them merely because of their unbelief). According to Ibn Taymiyya, human blood is inviolable by default, except "by right of justice". Although Ibn Taymiyya authorised offensive ''Jihad'' ( ''Jihad al-Talab'') against enemies who threaten Muslims or obstruct their citizens from freely accepting Islam, unbelief (''[[Kufr]]'') by itself is not a justification for violence, whether against individuals or stated. According to Ibn Taymīyah, ''jihad'' is a legitimate reaction to military aggression by unbelievers and not merely due to religious differences. Ibn Taymiyya wrote:<blockquote>"As for the transgressor who does not fight, there are no texts in which Allah commands him to be fought. Rather, the unbelievers are only fought on the condition that they wage war, as is practiced by the majority of scholars and is evident in the Book and Sunnah."<ref name="yaqeeninstitute.org"/><ref name=mqz>{{Cite book|last=QASIM ZAMAN|first=MUHAMMAD |title=Modern Islamic Thought in a Radical Age|url={{google books|plainurl=y|id=Uf0fAwAAQBAJ}}
|publisher=Cambridge University Press|year=2012|isbn=978-1-107-09645-5| location=New York}}</ref>{{rp|265}}</blockquote>

As important as ''jihad'' was, it is not considered one of the "[[Five Pillars of Islam|pillars of Islam]]". According to one scholar ([[Majid Khadduri]], this is because the five pillars are individual obligations, but ''jihad'' is a "collective obligation" of the Muslim community meant to be carried out by the Islamic state. This was the belief of "all jurists, with almost no exception", but did not apply to ''defense'' of the Muslim community from a sudden attack, in which case ''jihad'' was an "individual obligation" of all believers, including women and children.<ref name="Khadduri-1955-60">{{harvnb|Khadduri |1955}} {{cite book|chapter-url=https://actforamericaeducation.com/downloads/All_Files_by_Type/khadduri.pdf |access-date=26 October 2015 |chapter=5. Doctrine of ''Jihad'' |title=War and Peace in the Law of Islam |quote=[Unlike the five pillars of Islam, ''jihad'' was to be enforced by the state.] ... 'unless the Muslim community is subjected to a sudden attack and therefore all believers, including women and children are under the obligation to fight—[jihad of the sword] is regarded by all jurists, with almost no exception, as a collective obligation of the whole Muslim community,' meaning that 'if the duty is fulfilled by a part of the community it ceases to be obligatory on others'.|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151128192525/http://www.actforamericaeducation.com/downloads/All_Files_by_Type/khadduri.pdf |archive-date=28 November 2015 |url-status=dead}}</ref>{{rp|60}}

Scholars had previously claimed it was the responsibility of a centralized government to organize ''jihad''. But this changed as the authority of the [[Abbasid caliph]] weakened.<ref name=OEIP_combat/> [[Al-Mawardi]] allowed local governors to wage ''jihad'' on the caliph's behalf. This decentralization of ''jihad'' became especially pressing after the Crusades. [[Ali ibn Tahir al-Sulami]] argued that all Muslims were responsible for waging wars of self-defense.<ref name=OEIP_combat/> Al-Sulami encouraged Muslim rulers from distant lands to assist Muslims who were under attack.<ref name=OEIP_combat>{{cite encyclopedia|url={{google books|plainurl=y|id=V7CUngEACAAJ}} |first1=James|last1=Broucek|title=Combat|encyclopedia=The Oxford Encyclopedia of Islam and Politics|location=[[Oxford]] |publisher=[[Oxford University Press]]|year=2014}}</ref>

Classical Shia doctrine maintained defensive ''jihad'' was always permissible, but offensive ''jihad'' required the presence of the Imam. An exception to this, during medieval times, was when the first Fatimid caliph [[Abdallah al-Mahdi Billah]] claimed to be the representative of the Imam and claimed the right to launch offensive ''jihad''.<ref name=Prism10/>{{rp|157}}

After the [[Mongol invasions]], Shia scholar [[Muhaqqiq al-Hilli]] claimed that defensive war was not just permissible but praiseworthy, even obligatory. If a Muslim could not take part in the defense then he should, at least, send material support. This remained the case even if the Muslims were ruled by an unjust ruler.<ref name=Prism10/>{{rp|153}}

====Early Muslim conquests====
{{main|Early Muslim conquests}}
[[File:Map of expansion of Caliphate.svg|350px|thumb|right|Age of the [[Caliph]]s {{legend|#a1584e|Expansion under [[Muhammad]], 622–632/A.H. 1–11}} {{legend|#ef9070|Expansion during the [[Rashidun Empire|Rashidun Caliphate]], 632–661/A.H. 11–40}} {{legend|#fad07d|Expansion during the [[Umayyad Caliphate]], 661–750/A.H. 40–129}}]]

In the early era that inspired classical Islam ([[Rashidun Empire|Rashidun Caliphate]]) and lasted less than a century, ''jihad'' spread the realm of Islam to include millions of subjects, and an area extending "from the borders of India and China to the Pyrenees and the Atlantic".<ref name=Lewis/>{{rp|4}} The role of religion in these early conquests is debated. Medieval Arabic authors claimed the conquests were commanded by God, and presented them as orderly and disciplined, under the command of the caliph.<ref name=Bonner/>{{rp|60-61}} Many modern historians question whether hunger and [[desertification]], rather than ''jihad'', was a motivating force in the conquests. Historian [[William Montgomery Watt]] argued, "Most of the participants in the [early Islamic] expeditions probably thought of nothing more than booty ... There was no thought of spreading the religion of Islam."<ref name=AD11/>{{rp|87}} Similarly, Edward J. Jurji argues that the motivations of the Arab conquests were certainly not "the propagation of Islam....Military advantage, economic desires, [and] the attempt to strengthen the hand of the state and enhance its sovereignty...are some of the determining factors."<ref name=AD11/>{{rp|76}} Some recent explanations cite both material and religious causes in the conquests.<ref name=Bonner/>{{rp|62-63}}