Getting it right about Islam today: Jihadists vs. peaceful Muslims
Of course there are violent Muslims and peaceful Muslims. However, a non-peaceful Muslim is not a 'Jihadist.' For starters, is a Muslim criminal who robs a bank a 'Jihadist'? Is a Muslim husband who beats his wife a 'Jihadist?' Of course not. I understand that what is meant by the term 'Jihadist' as used in the title for this article is a Muslim involved in violent acts of international terrorism. But that is not what the word 'Jihadist' means.
Jihad is a word like any other in Arabic and it means 'effort.' A 'jihadist' is someone who exerts an effort. When used in a religious context, to be a 'Jihadist' is to use your mind, to understand the principles of the religion and, above all, to adapt these principles to the evolving times. It can also refer to the spiritual struggle against evil, in your mind and your comportment. Until a few year ago, this was somewhat of an antiquated term.
They taught us all about it in primary school. The first Muslim 'Jihadists' were a handful of Muslims fighting in self-defense against those (non Muslim Arabs) who persecuted them for their beliefs. Later, the zealous Muslims who had just discovered God and the religion of Islam (sort of like Born Again Christians) decided to spread the 'true faith' to the four corners of the world (somewhat like the Crusaders). They wanted to bestow the gift of Islam to all the unfortunate people who were not Muslim (like the Missionaries in Africa, Asia etc.). So they rode off to spread the word of God - and it was an effort. It was an effort that most of them (there were a few rascals, scoundrels, thieves and murderers among there numbers of course) believed they were doing in the name of God. Convinced they were serving God and spreading his word, they believed they were 'Jihadists'.
Recently, as we all know, growing numbers of people who happen to be Muslim have elected to use this term to further their own ends. Because ignorance and poverty are, alas, rampant in many Muslim countries, and young men are hungry and above all, frustrated, these self-elected 'Islamist leaders' have managed to recruit armies of followers. Using money and false interpretations of Islam, it was easy to manipulated frustrations and feelings of injustice to persuaded these young people that the terrorist acts they were to commit would make them a new breed of Jihadists.
Has anyone stopped to wonder why these new-fangled, blood thirsty Jihadists have no quarrel to pick with the millions of non-Muslims in Asia or Africa? Those whom Islam does not include among the 'People of the Book' (people of Christian and Jewish faiths)? You'd think Muslims would have less in common with those people whose religious systems are so very different from Islam. Yet they are left in peace. Think about it. It plainly demonstrates that the quarrel of the modern day self proclaimed 'Jihadists' has nothing to do with religion - whatever the rank and file of the 'Jihadists' themselves may believe.
I don't mean to say these people are not Muslims. I don't even want to say that they have strayed from their religion, and that other Muslims should reject them (we don't excommunicate people in Islam). The vast majority of these young men and young women have been led to believe that the feelings and frustrations that already existed in their hearts are rightful, Muslim feelings and that their terrible acts are blessed by God.
'Jihad', a word that had fallen out of use centuries ago, relegated to the dusty halls and libraries of Islamic schools and universities, was brought out, re-interpreted and polished, held out before their eyes like a shiny Sheriff's badge.
It is not two kinds of Muslims we are speaking about. It is money and politics, hypocrisy and deceit on the part of Muslims and non-Muslims alike.