Name:Zain Mohiuddin

Ahmed
Roll NO:Me-230
Year:Second year.
Batch:2013-14
Topic:Islam and
Extremism.

Preface
Islam is a religion of peace.It doesnot preach extremism
which is often heard in todays world and which is a genetal prespective
about Islam nowadays. Islamic extremism refers to two related and partially
overlapping but also distinct aspects of extremist interpretations and
pursuits of Islamic ideology.An extremely conservative view of Islam,[1] which
doesn't necessarily entail violence even though it may have an emphasis
on Jihad;[2] see Islamic fundamentalism, and.The use of extreme tactics such
as bombing and assassinations for achieving perceived Islamic goals.In this
book we will discuss the topics which are widely used and associayed with
Islam and it teaching and its wrong interpretation.

Acknowledgement
I wish to acknowledge the multitude of information, and information through
variety of websites, lectures and even some organization. The text has
become known for the large number of clear and helpful knowledge that
have graciously provided by a variety of sources. And through the great
effort of my teacher, it made quite helpful to prepare the topic information.

Index

ISLAM AND EXTREMISM

Introduction:
It is necessary to understand the basic concept or the
meaning of extremism before comment on extremism in Islam. Extremism is
an ideology (particularly in politics or religion), considered to be far outside
the mainstream attitudes of a society or to violate common moral standards.
Extremism can take many forms, including political, religious and economic.Islam is
a religion of peace .It is the champion of human rights and before the advent of
Islam people were living a barbaric life.Islam gave mankind a complete code of life
and its has taught its people on how to balance life.
Islamic extremism is driven by an interpretation of Islam that
believes that Islamic law, or sharia, is an all-encompassing religious-political
system. Since it is believed to be proscribed by Allah (Arabic for God) sharia must
be enforced in the public sphere by a global Islamic state. As such, Islamic
extremists consider it to be the only truly legitimate form of governance and reject
democracy and human rights values.
Thus, the ultimate objective of Islamic extremists is the merger of mosque and
state under sharia law. Those who favor such an approach are called Islamists.
Their ideology is called Islamism, or political Islam.
Jihad is another form of extremism often associated with
Islam. In a religious sense, as described by the Quran and teachings of the Prophet
Muhammad (s), "jihad" has many meanings. It can refer to internal as well as
external efforts to be a good Muslims or believer, as well as working to inform
people about the faith of Islam. If military jihad is required to protect the faith
against others, it can be performed using anything from legal, diplomatic and
economic to political means. If there is no peaceful alternative, Islam also allows the
use of force, but there are strict rules of engagement. Innocents - such as women,
children, or invalids - must never be harmed, and any peaceful overtures from the
enemy must be accepted.Military action is therefore only one means of jihad, and is
very rare. To highlight this point, the Prophet Mohammed told his followers returning

from a military campaign: "This day we have returned from the minor jihad to the
major jihad," which he said meant returning from armed battle to the peaceful
battle for self-control and betterment.
In case military action appears necessary, not everyone can declare jihad. The
religious military campaign has to be declared by a proper authority, advised by
scholars, who say the religion and people are under threat and violence is
imperative to defend them. The concept of "just war" is very important.
The concept of jihad has been hijacked by many political and religious groups over
the ages in a bid to justify various forms of violence.In this report we will be
discussing various forms of extremism in Islam.

Islam and Democracy: An Obscure

Relationship
Introduction:
Democracy is determined by many different elements:
culture, wealth, equalities, education, and some will say, religion. Religion as
a determinant of democratic development has been extensively studied and
many arguments have been presented supporting the claim that religion
hinders democracy, while others are less convinced.There has been an
increased focus on the relationship between Islam and democracy.It is
argued that the world order in the 20th century has shifted into a clash
between the West and the East, specifically between the West and Islam.

Islam and Democracy:

It is said by some that democracy has no place in the political system of
Islam. Islam is not only a religion, rather it is a complete code of life. All
aspects of Muslim society, individually or collectively, are covered by the
social structure of Islam.Hence a political system, an important aspect of
human society, also comes very much under the banner of the Islamic
hemisphere.
The important manifestation of a political system is vindicated through the
establishment of a state and the way of its governance. Our Holy Prophet
(PBUH) established a state at Madina, of a unique type, based on

consultation, justice, equality and accountability. After his passing his

righteous successors maintained the same system of governance. The Holy
Quran has mentioned the word shura for governance. They govern with
mutual consultation. The essence of a true democracy is also consultation.
The governing system of the Righteous Caliphs was the manifestation of this
democracy. Today there is much talk about western democracy, but the
aforesaid democracy presented by Islam is more accomplished. The basic
pillars of a true democracy, i.e. consultation, justice, equality and
accountability, are found in the governance of the Righteous Caliphs, Abu
Bakar, Umar, Usman and Ali.
Presently, the UK and the US are regarded as the pioneers of western
democracy. Are their rulers questioned so openly and bluntly by the common
men in public places as the aforesaid caliphs used to be? Nowadays in a
democratic system, the rulers are elected through votes and the candidates
offer themselves for their election, utilising all kinds of sources for winning
elections while none of the rightful caliphs offered himself for election. Each
was selected by a majority of the people, after the proposal of their names
by other people. Neither did they display any desire nor made an attempt to
win their elections.
Furthermore, their deeds verify the highest democratic values in governance
which are extinct today in the governance of so-called democratic rulers. The
day after his election as the caliph, Hazrat Abu Bakar came out with pieces of
cloth on his shoulder to sell, because before his caliphate, this had been his
source of income. Hazrat Umar met him on the way and asked, What are
you doing? He replied, I have to support my family.
The right of criticism and freedom of expression before the ruler, which are
important features of democracy, were evident in the governance of these
caliphs. Hazrat Salman Farsi, a respected companion of the Prophet (PBUH),
questioned Caliph Umar in a public gathering, asking why he had taken two
sheets while everyone else got a single sheet from the spoils. Hazrat Umar
instantly called his son Abdullah who clarified the position of his father by
replying that he had given his sheet to his father due to his tall height.
Hazrat Usman had to face very severe criticism by the people during his
caliphate, but he did not attempt to stop them by any means; rather, in reply
to their criticism he always clarified his position publicly. Hazrat Ali as the
caliph tolerated the extreme abuses of the Khawarij.

Once the caliph saw a Jew selling his lost chain armour in the market. Being
the ruler, he did not snatch his armour from that person but submitted his
complaint in the court of a judge. The judge asked for the evidence and
Hazrat Ali produced the evidence of his son, Hasan, but the judge did not
accept this evidence as the latter was the son of the caliph, and gave
judgment against the caliph. The Jew, observing this rare example of justice,
accepted Islam at Hazrat Alis hands.
Today, out of the aforesaid examples, can any ruler of a democratic state
present such an example? The leading pioneer of Indias independence,
Mahatma Gandhi, had once said that he wanted such a democratic state
whose ruler followed in the footsteps of Hazrat Umar. Famous jurist Armanus
Von Marie had confessed that Islam was the only religion among the
universal religions to have democracy for its system of governance.
It may be rightly said that the true democratic government established
during the early period of Islam had been that of the Righteous Caliphs.
However, it has been a sad aspect of Muslim history that such an ideal rule
concluded after the martyrdom of Hazrat Ali. It was succeeded by monarchy
and despotism with the exception of the three-year rule of Umar Bin Abdul
Aziz amongst the Umayyads, who wanted to revive the same justice, equality
and accountability as found in the rule of the Righteous Caliphs.
Thereafter the system of governance prevailed on the same track of the
preceding Umayyad rulers, subsequently succeeded by the Abbasids, and
then successive rulers in the Muslim world who were either absolute
monarchs or dictators, although a few of them individually established justice
and equity in their governance. Nevertheless, the system remained
undemocratic, which the Muslim world at large still has to contend with.

Chapter 2
Islam And Jihad
Introduction:
Jihad" is a loaded termand a concept that illustrates a deep gulf of
miscommunication between Islam and the West. There are those in each community who see jihad as a

clash of civilizationsand act on those beliefs. But jihad literally means "exerted effort" to most Islamic
scholars and Muslims, and represents a range of activities

The real meaning of Jihad

Jihad is an Arabic word from the root Jee Ha Da. It literally means to struggle
or strive. Jihad is struggling or striving in the way or sake ofAllah. Jihad takes
a very important status in the doctrine of Islam and isone of the basic duties
for every Muslim.Though, it has nothing whatsoever to do with the term Holy
War. Sucha term, or its equivalent doesnt exist in the Islamic doctrine. The
ChristianCrusaders in the mid-ages invented this ideology of Holy War.There
is nothing Holy about wars. Wars only involve killings and disasters!
Jihad has many forms,
Jihad of the heart/soul (jihad bin nafs/qalb)
Jihad by the tongue (jihad bil lisan)
Jihad by the pen/knowledge (jihad bil qalam/ilm)
Jihad by the hand (jihad bil yad)
Jihad by the sword (jihad bis saif)

Jihad of the Heart/Soul

Jihad of the heart/soul; in Arabic: jihad bin nafs/qalb. It is referred asthe greater
Jihad (al-jihad al-akbar).
It is ones inner struggle of good against evil; refraining oneself from the whispers of
Shaitan (Satan).
This process involves allowing Islam to transform ones soul to achieving internal
peace; and forgoing the hatred and anger.
Jihad is ordained for you (Muslims) though you dislike it, and it may
be that you dislike a thing which is good for you and that you like a
thing which is bad for you. Allah knows but you do not know.

{Quran, Surah 2: Al-Baqarah, Verse 216; Mohsin Translation}

Jihad by the tongue

Jihad by the tongue; in Arabic: jihad bil lisan.It is defending Islam and spreading
Islam by scholarly lectures, speechesand debates. It often overlaps with Daawah
(invitation to Islam, orspreading the message of Islam).
In The Last Sermon, Prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him) asked thelisteners
whether he has passed on the message to them; and theyconfirmed affirmatively.Then
the Messenger of Allah ordered all those present today to pass on the same message to
those who are not here today; and the last person to hear the message should
understand it better than the people here.

Jihad by the pen/knowledge

Jihad by the pen/knowledge; in Arabic: jihad bil qalam/ilm.This form of Jihad
involves scholarly research of Islam in aiding the spread and defence of Islam; and
publishing written articles in clearing misconceptions and correction lies against
Islam.Examples of such Jihad include the research and discovery of scientific
evidences, literature miracles and mathematical miracles from the Quran.Messenger
of Allah once stated that the ink of a scholar is holier than the blood of a martyr; and
one who is reading looks handsome in front of Allah.

Jihad by the hand

Jihad by the hand; in Arabic: jihad bil yad.This is a Jihad of action rather than words.
At certain areas, it overlaps with Zakart (charity) and Hajj (pilgrimage).Some of its
examples include giving charity to the poor and needy, performing Hajj or Ummrah,
helping those who need help, saving peoples lives, etc. These are more of physical
deeds instead of words.
A person whose feet become dust ridden because of [striving] in
the way of Allah will never be touched by the flames of Hell
{ Sahih Bukhari 2811}

The most beautiful of all Jihad is a perfect Hajj. It involves testing ofones patience
and piety to the apex. The whole period of Hajj, with just one intention and aim,
worshiping Allah!

Jihad by the sword

Jihad by the sword; in Arabic: jihad bis saif. In contrary to Jihad of the heart/soul; this
form of Jihad is referred as the lesser jihad (al-jihad alasghar).Sometimes it is
necessary to undertake Jihad by the sword. This would include usage of arsenals and
engaging in a combat. This could be simply a bunch of freedom fighters or an
organised campaign of army.Jihad by the sword is use of arms to engage into a
combat. It is not misuse of arms to create violence.There are only two situations were
Jihad by the sword is allowed to beundertaken.
1) For self-defence. When someone attacks you or when your nation has been
attacked. Engaging into combat due to self defence.
2) Fighting against evil and unjust. It is also a sin if a Muslim sees unjust been
done, capable of stopping it, yet not doing anything about it. This can include war on
drug, war on child labour as well as war on terror!The American administration today
seems to be launching a global war on terror, but are they the first to launch the war
on terror?
The Muslims already announced the war on terror fourteen centuries ago,
under the name of Jihad bis saif!
There are many rules and limitations when engaging in combat under the title of
Jihad. For example, civilians are not to be harmed; trees are not to be cut down;
asylum should be granted to surrendering enemy soldiers; etc.
And if anyone of the Mushrikun seeks your protection then grant
him protection, so that he may hear the Word of Allah, and then
escort him to where he can be secure, that is because they are men

who know not.

{Quran, Surah 9: At-Taubah, Verse 6; Mohsin Translation}

The above verse states that when an enemy soldier surrenders during a battle, the
Muslim soldiers must grant asylum and in addition, escort him to safety!The treatment
for prisoners of war is also clearly stated in the Quran.Prisoners of war under Muslim
prisons are to eat, drink and dress the same Muslim soldiers eat, drink and dress.And
even under the unfortunate event of shortage of food, it is the prisoners who are to eat
first before the Muslim soldiers guarding them!

A closer look at the Sword

Despite the fact that Jihad by the sword is the lesser Jihad, it is the only form of Jihad
that most of the people in the world perceive Jihad as.This is unfortunate, especially
for the Muslims. Many so-called teachers of Islam have been misusing this to
assemble their so-called holy army to fight their so-called holy war.But you cant
blame the religion for what a few of its people do. In every society, there is a black
sheep.
Self-Defence:

Since Jihad by the sword has been overwhelmingly magnified in the wrong
angle, lets take a closer look at it in the right angle. What iswrong with Jihad
by the sword if it is fighting for self-defence?

In the early years of revelation of Islam in Mecca, Muslims were not granted
permission from Allah to fight. So the Muslims suffered both moral and physical
humiliations from the non-Muslims in Mecca.The first verses regarding Jihad were
then revealed allowing Muslims to undertake self-defence.
And fight in the Way of Allah those who fight you, but transgress
not the limits. Truly, Allah likes not the transgressors.
{Quran, Surah 2: Al-Baqarah, Verse 190; Mohsin Translation}
Many of the Quranic verses are being quoted out of context to wrongly justify
terrorist actions. Yet, most of those verses are only referring to a particular

situation; such as Battle of Badr or Battle of Uhud. Intention and war against

Satan:
Those who believe, fight in the Cause of Allah, and those who
disbelieve, fight in the cause of Satan. So fight against the friends
of Satan. Ever feeble indeed is the plot of Satan.
{Quran, Surah 4: An-Nisa, Verse 76; Mohsin Translation}

Now the second question is, what is wrong in fighting against evil and liberating
people from sufferings?
Once a person came to the Prophet (sws) and said that some
people
fight for the spoils of war, some for fame and some to show of
their valour; he then asked the Prophet (sws): Which one of them
fights in the way of Allah. The Prophet (sws) replied: Only that
person fights in the way of Allah who sets foot in the battlefield to
raise high the name of Allah.
{ Sahih Bukhari 2810}

Chapter 4

Terrorsim in perspective
The problem with putting terrorism into perspective is that there is no
agreed-upon definition of what constitutes terrorism. Also, terrorism takes
many forms, as the following examples illustrate.
Robert Fisk, from The Independent, writes: Israel and Israels militia allies (on
16 September 1982) started their three-day orgy of rape, knifing and murder
in the Palestinian refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila that cost 1,800 lives. It
followed an Israeli invasion of Lebanon designed to drive the PLO (Palestine
Liberation Organisation) out of the country and given the green light [by the
United States] which cost the lives of 17,500 Lebanese and Palestinians,
almost all of them civilians.
According to Professor Noam Chomsky, Its uncontroversial that the United
States is a leading terrorist state. In fact, its the only state that was
condemned for international terrorism by the highest bodies: the
International Court of Justice in 1986.
Similarly, The horrific massacre of 8,000 Muslims - some unarmed - at
Srebrenica in 1995 never led to a stream of pieces about the violence and
repressive tendencies of Christianity. - William Dalrymple, The Independent
UK.
The carnage wrought by Western, ostensibly Christian, leaders over the last
six decades - including a world war and a cold war, a Holocaust, two atomic
bombs, repression of wars of independence, the fuelling of proxy wars,
nuclear brinksmanship, and the support of dictators and state and non-state
terrorists makes it spurious to view Islam as a more inherently violent
religion or civilisation. - Rama Mani (Geneva Centre for Security Policy)

There are many other examples of both Jewish and Christian terrorism,
however, we must never generalise and call all Christians and Jews terrorists.
Similarly, we should not put all Muslims on trial but only those that
committed the crime should be judged.

Islam Denounces Terrorism:

The act of inciting terror in the hearts of
defenceless civilians, the wholesale destruction of buildings and properties,
the bombing and maiming of innocent men, women and children are all
forbidden and detestable acts according to Islam and the Muslims. This is
regardless of any type of terrorism, including western state-sponsored
terrorism which has killed, injured and displaced infinitely more people than
all other types of terrorism.
If an individual Muslim were to commit an act of terrorism, this person would
be guilty of violating the laws of the very religion they claim to follow - Islam.
Would it be fair to condemn all Muslims as a result, when the religion itself is
against such acts? Muslims follow a religion of submission to God, peace,
mercy, and forgiveness. The vast majority have nothing to do with the
violent events some notably the media - have associated with Muslims. Islam
is not a religion of extremism.

Chapter 4
THE DEBATE OVER ISLAM BEING
INHERENTLY VIOLENT
It may be the case that moderates outnumber extremists in the Muslim
world, but the moderates are clearly serving as a recruiting pool for
extremists. Honest differences of opinion exist among Muslim leaders as to
"how much" militancy and extremism serve as a breeding ground for
terrorism. How much is "too much?" Toward the answer to this, two
hypotheses usually make good starting points -- (1) that Islam is inherently
violent - and (2) that Islam is susceptible to hijacking or distortion. These
hypotheses organize the literature fairly well, and are themes which organize
the discussion later. For now, a few more issues need discussed which don't
fit neatly into this organizational schema.
There are things in Islam which are foreign and incomprehensible from the
Western viewpoint and make the study of it difficult. Only the rare secular
mind can comprehend the depth of religious passion within Islam. Witness,
for example, the closed-mindedness behind passages like -- "O ye who
believe! Ask not questions about things which if made plain to you, may
cause you trouble" (Surah 5:101-102). To understand things like this, it
might be helpful to use the framework provided by Cooper (2004) which
draws upon the concepts of "political religion" (from the philosopher Eric
Voegelin) and "pneumopathology" (from the philosopher Friedrich Schelling).
The term "political religion" usually refers to an ideology where the goal is to
create a form of politics with the same power as religion. Totalitarianism and
theocracy are terms often associated with this, but are not absolutely
necessary conditions, as even democracies can develop things like "civil

religions" around events like SuperBowl Sunday. There is some debate

among scholars about the exact role of the cult of personality in political
religions, but Cooper (2004) and others (Post 2004) have said that there is
something deranged or disordered about such personalities who voluntarily
accept living under such conditions. The term "pneumopathology" captures
this well, referring to a disease of the spirit, an imaginative second reality
(deranged by one's beliefs) which sees the world in different terms than what
common sense provides. In short, it refers to a religious conviction so strong
and intoxicating that it blinds a person to common sense and makes it
impossible for anyone to reason with them. As Cooper (2004:40) puts it:
"there is an inherent friction between commonsense reality and the occult
reality within which extremists live imaginatively, an imaginary reality where
killing the innocent to impress others is seen as heroic, altruistic, and selfsacrificing." As a leader of Hezbollah once put it: "we are not fighting so that
the enemy recognizes us and offers us something. We are fighting to wipe
out and annihilate the enemy."
There is also the matter of Islamic teleology (the study of final ends or
purpose). Teleology is usually regarded as too metaphysical for science
except for the most dedicated sociologists who tend to assert there are
guiding principles of social change to be found. The customary way of
putting it is that Islam has always been an apocalyptic movement with a
strong messianic trend (Cook 2005). It is, in some larger sense, more
involved in a warfare of body, mind, and soul -- a spiritual war more than an
ideological war -- where the order of battle involves who has the strongest
belief system regarding the best set of interrelationships between all
sociological "worlds" (i.e., the spiritual, secular, religious, commercial worlds,
etc). Within the predominantly spiritual universe that is Islamic extremism,
believers genuinely think they are more heroic and successful than any
soldier or businessman could ever be. This hero fantasy consumes their
imagination. Extremists come closer to their god by defending their god.
Mind, body, and soul become one in an act of martyrdom. An act of
destruction engaged in (any destruction being a victory) brings value to the
cause and is a vivid proof of faith. These acts of terrorism ought to be
publicly condemned, but unfortunately, are probably secretly admired by
many Muslims, even moderates. Any terrorist acting in the name of Allah
(particularly within the strict Wahhabi view that the world ought to be
Muslim) is to be revered and admired. Cult-like hero worship is a powerful
force, running deep in Muslim thought, but it is probably best not to make
too much of it, although in one sense, it can be said terrorists are the Middle

East's longed-for superheros, with many seeking to be as great

as Saladin (the inspiration for anti-Zionism) or the next best thing to the
Mahdi or Twelfth Imam. The Twelfth Imam figure is either the Antichrist or
the Christ, depending upon how you look at it (Richardson 2006). Muslims
believe that the antichrist will come first, this antichrist being Christianity's
second-coming Christ. Many Muslim leaders have called upon god to hasten
the emergence of Al-Mahdi so that the final conflict (end days) can come and
Muslims can finally experience a world without America and Zionism. Such
beliefs inspire an extremism that is not deterred by weapons, for they know
that weapons will not destroy their cause. The terrorist longing for union
with god thru carnage is inseparable from the impulse toward annihilation.
Their goals and ambitions soar above logic. They have created a fantasy
world (a second reality) in their minds about an angry god who wants to pat
them on the back for slaughtering apostates or nonbelievers (shunning the
usual religious response to apostasy as not being good enough). America is
hated precisely because its power and the Western viewpoint threatens
much that is central in the promises of their faith.

Conclusion
In the end we come to the conclusion that Isdlam doesnot
represent extremism nor does it support it neither it preaches it.Islam isnot
only a religion but a complete code of life it has given mankind the rules by
which he can give a successful life in this world and in the world
hereafter.People has misued the name of Islam for exploiting extremism and

violence.Isdlam is a religion of peace and it has always preached its followers

to achieve moderateness in life.Our Prohet(SAAW) has preached to adapt
moderatness in every aspect of life.
A overdose of medicine turns it into poison just like that a
extreme use of anything doesnt make it good instead it backfires and
inhiliate the world with negativity.We should always adapt modernateness in
our lifes and try to eliminate extremism by following the steps ourholy
prophet(SAAW).