Jihad vs. Terrorism episode I

What is the exact meaning of Jihad? In post Ottoman Caliphate, Jihad carries many meaning. Some misinterprets it. Others are just being opportunistic.

War, according to the Quran, in anyway possible, is to be avoided. War in Islam is as a last resort.

..Each time they kindle the fire of war, Allah extinguishes it. They rush about the earth corrupting it. Allah does not love corrupters. (Surat al-Ma'ida: 64)

From here, we can see that Allah extinguishes the fire of war, which, in other words, He loathes war.

Rasulullah's (saw) said
"the greatest jihad is the one a person carries out against his lower soul"

Which essentially means that a jihad starts in a person, not against another person.

Now, basically, what the muslim world today is that Muslims cry for Jihad! against the western countries, those countries that portrays Islam in a bad light, labeling it "religion for terrorists" and other things I need not write here. The point is, why in the first place would they say such things? Let's examine this problem closer.

In the current world situation, a Dutch statesman cum politician had created a short movie Fitna which has created an uproar in the muslim world. Now, we cannot blame the statesman for advertising his opinions in the form of media. In the western countries, they have this idea called "freedom of speech" (the notion itself kind of explained everything) and he has no obligation whatsoever to filter /censor anything in the movie, because it did just what he wanted: telling the world of his opinion on Islam

Now, the global muslim reaction was, not surprising, was to call for the decapitation of his head from his body. But what they had forgot (the muslims) is that he has no obligation whatsoever to make Fitna less offending to the muslims. This the muslims should understand.

Secondly, when the secular western world sees the Islamic world's reaction to Fitna, one of the things that formed in their mind was, that Islam

1. Does not support freedom of speech
2. supports aggression in Islam's name
3. Islam does not leave room for any mediating
4. does not accept apology if insulted

This is the case as seen from the west. There is little wonder then, that they misquote the Quran's call for Jihad as support for aggression, and they interpret this aggression as terrorism, i.e Islam supports terrorism.

Current muslim leaders are also mum on this issue, except firebrands like Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his cadre of other Ayatollahs, calling for the Dutch's head on a platter. This, coming from a "Islamic Supreme Ruler" has at least an impact on the west, which means that Islam is extremely intolerant for any mediating between the west on the current issue.

The director for Fitna, Geert Wilders has so far not issued a formal apology on his opinion on Fitna, but many Dutch has.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=29419&only&rss
http://blog.wired.com/underwire/2008/03/dutch-respond-t.html
http://rjjago.wordpress.com/2008/03/24/dutch-preemptively-apologize-to-muslims-for-fitna/

But the current muslim trend shows that muslims are unwilling to accept these apologies and still wants his head (Wilders'). This form of intolerance even when many has apologized has not been recieved in a positive light by the westerners. Thus they blame it on Islamic teachings and doctrines.

These kinds of undue reaction by the Muslims has provoked westerners to label Islam in a very bad light. Muslims must understand that the level of understanding of how "offensive" some things are are not to be mistaken by ignorance. The westerners are liberal, thus "offending" is taken lightly. These are what muslims must understand, else the westerners will continue to label Islam as what they had.