“those who resist Islam cause wars and are responsible for them”
In 1996, the Muslim Scholar Bassam Tibi wrote this:
At its core, Islam is a religious mission to all humanity. Muslims are religiously obliged to disseminate the Islamic faith throughout the world. If non-Muslims submit to conversion or subjugation, this call (da’wa) can be pursued peacefully. If they do not, Muslims are obliged to wage war against them. In Islam, peace requires that non-Muslims submit to the call of Islam, either by converting or by accepting the status of a religious minority (dhimmi) and paying the imposed poll tax, jizya. World peace, the final stage of the da’wa, is reached only with the conversion or submission of all mankind to Islam…Muslims believe that expansion through war is not aggression but a fulfillment of the Qur’anic command to spread Islam as a way to peace. The resort to force to disseminate Islam is not war (harb), a word that is used only to describe the use of force by non-Muslims. Islamic wars are not hurub (the plural of harb) but rather futuhat, acts of “opening” the world to Islam and expressing IslamicÂ Jihad. Relations between dar al-Islam, the home of peace, and dar al-harb, the world of unbelievers, nevertheless take place in a state of war, according to the Qur’an and to the authoritative commentaries of Islamic jurists. Unbelievers who stand in the way, creating obstacles for the da’wa, are blamed for this state of war, for the da’wa can be pursued peacefully if others submit to it. In other words, those who resist Islam cause wars and are responsible for them. Only when Muslim power is weak is ‘temporary truce’ (hudna) allowed (Islamic jurists differ on the definition of ‘temporary’).
So here we go again: if governments try to resist the Islamization of their societies, Muslims must wage war against them. Here again, an Islamic cleric — at the world’s leading Sunni institution — confirms what I have been saying about Islam and jihad for years. He must be some kind of Islamophobe. “IslamOnline.net: ‘Offensive Jihad Is Permissible to Secure Islam’s Borders, to Extend God’s Religion, and…to Remove Every Religion but Islam from the Arabian Peninsula,'” fromÂ Translating Jihad, January 11:
[…] Mufti: Dr. ‘Imad Mustafa, Professor of Fiqh and Its Origins, at the Universities of al-Azhar and Umm al-QaryIn the name of God, praise be to God, and prayers and peace be upon the prophet of God, etc.:
Fighting against non-Muslims is what is known in Islamic jurisprudence as Jihad in the path of God. Jihad is a prescribed duty in cases of aggression from the infidels against Muslims, for we must resist them, make jihad against them, and defend against them. This is according to the text of the Qur’an, for Almighty God has said: “Fight in the way of Allah those who fight you but do not transgress. Indeed. Allah does not like transgressors” (Qur’an 2:190). This type of jihad is known as defensive jihad, and it is a duty agreed to by all Islamic scholars and all who are wise, and is endorsed in our day by recognized international charters. However, the occupier and his associates have come to label this “terrorism.”
Then there is another type of fighting against the non-Muslims known as offensive jihad. Islamic scholars have differed on the issue of offensive jihad, which is to pursue the infidels into their own land without any aggression or assistance to him. Some scholars have gone as far to say that this jihad is illegitimate, while others have gone as far as to say that it is legitimate and even required.
However there can be no disagreement that offensive jihad is not totally prohibited, for two schools [of Islamic jurisprudence] have ruled that offensive jihad is permissible in order to secure Islam’s border, to extend God’s religion to people in cases where the governments do not allow it, such as the Pharaoh did with the children of Israel, and to remove every religion but Islam from the Arabian peninsula, and to save the captive and weak. […]