The Encyclopaedia Britannica (1961) entry for 'Jihad'
in it's entirety reads;
'(Arabic, Lit. striving, effort), the religious duty inculcated in the Koran (ii, 214 - 215; viii, 39-42; ix, 5-6, 29) on the followers of Mohammed to wage war upon those who do not accept the doctrines of Islam. Modern Moslem apologists maintain that Jihad in the Koran does not mean the waging of war, & explain it in terms of the spiritual life.'
Well at least we have an admission from the 1961 Encyclopaedia Britannica that their meaning of the term Jihad is in contradiction to that of Islam & we also know the term does not mean Holy War. Nowadays one has to pay a hefty fee to read a full article on the online Encyclopaedia Britannica which I'm not prepared to do, so here's the beginning of the entry for Jihad;
"Jihad, also spelled jehad, (“struggle,” or “battle”), a religious duty imposed on Muslims to spread Islam by waging war; jihad has come to denote any conflict waged for principle or belief & is often translated to mean “holy war.”.......This the Muslims deny, they say it refers to a spiritual striving/struggle towards God which occurs within the religious devotee themselves & DOES NOT mean a war
In a previous blog I noted that the 1961 Encyclopaedia Britannica entry for Palestine was written not by an historian but by a member of British Intelligence. Since then of course things have taken a substantial turn for the worst for Muslims the world over to the point now, where the term 'Muslim' itself translates as 'terrorist' in the minds of many if not most non-Muslims. So we're left with a choice of who to believe, Muslims who deny, & presumably have always denied that the term Jihad means Holy War on non-believers, & those non-Muslims
who say it does.
I checked the opening E B 1961 quotes/references in the Quran to glean a context for the term but strangely enough, the word Jihad was not mentioned. I googled further quotes for Jihad in the Quran with the same result.....they're not there, I cannot find Jihad within the pages of the book, which is the is the 2004, Oxford World Classics 'A New Translation' by Egyptian, M.A.S. Abdel Haleem, who also happens to be a Cambridge & London University professor.
Is it there in your Quran?
The language of the Quran is rhetorical, metaphorical, ambiguous & symbolic. Many writers/Bible scholars have attempted to prove that in in certain passages of the New Testament, Jesus was referring to future generations when he spoke to people when he was not, similarly, many of the passages in the Quran which depict battles & phrases of warnings, commands, threats & so on have been interpreted as meaning the nation of Islam is a war-mongering people, when in fact most of the passages inferred are only depicting events during the life of Muhammed & what the angel has told him to tell his people right there & then. The chapter 'The Prophets' is an excellent example of this, it is laying the Law down contemporaneously, so that the message of God/Allah could be understood by that generation, then passed on to future generations. This I've found to be the case in every instance where a quote from the Quran has been interpreted as being hostile to other 'nations', maybe I'm wrong as I haven't read the whole book yet but this is definitely the pattern I've found so far.
It is true also that many Muslims themselves have interpreted the Quran in a militant sense, as some Christians, Jews & Buddhists etc interpreted their Holy scriptures likewise, however there is no consensus on the translation of Islams Holy Book, people interpreting scripture in this way are either projecting their bias into the Scriptures or are actually members of the secret societies acting in this way to bring down the old ancient religions & substitute them with their own religion, Paganism. The word 'Jihad' has been used here as a case in point. Here's an example of the complexities of the context in which the Quran was written & subsequently understood;
'During its investigation, the committee found instances of terror recruitment videos for banned jihadi & neo-Nazi groups remaining accessible online even after MPs had complained about them.' (The Gaurdian). As I've documented in previous blogs, the term Nazi & now Jihadi actually mean something sacred & non violent in the religions of Judaism & Islam. The term 'Nazi' solidly has it's origins in Hebrew & is the root of the word 'devotee'; http://biblehub.com/topical/n/nazirite.htm.
Much the same as Jihad is used in Islam.
A Nasi is a High Priest or Prince in Judaism & has been for millennia.
'In the beginning was the Word' (John 1:1)........ My point is this, words can be used as weapons & are, what's really under attack is those religions, all done surreptitiously & with the ignorant acquiescence of the majority of mankind.
From Edward Burman's, 'The Assassins: Holy Killers Of Islam';
'The esoteric truths themselves, haqa'iq, were explained by a successor of each of the messenger Prophets known as wasi (Legates) or by the sami (Silent One) whose task was to explain the batin of the Scriptures & the Law. Each Legate was in turn followed by a series of 7 Imams, the 7th of whom became the 7th Messenger Prophet in the series. The last era would be marked by the Mahdi, who would make the inner doctrine public & would inaugurate an era of pure spiritual knowledge. Isma'ili theology was thus revelationary in character. The Haqa'iq transcended human reason & ultimately derived from gnostic doctrines, considering the principles of spiritual & physical worlds in Neoplatonic terms.'
I cannot find any information on Edward Burman apart from he's an English philosophy graduate & has written other books on the Inquisition & on the Knights Templar, such as;
'The Templars: Knights Of God'.
'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 of Allah. Jihad takes a very important status in the doctrine of Islam & is one of the basic duties for every Muslim.
Though, it has nothing whatsoever to do with the term Holy War. Such a term, or its equivalent doesn’t exist in the Islamic doctrine. The Christian Crusaders in the mid-ages invented this ideology of Holy War.
There is nothing “Holy” about wars. Wars only involve killings & disasters!' - http://www.justislam.co.uk
Whilst the point certainly cannot be proven against Islam for being a hostile 'nation' & is in fact not the case as many Muslim scholars have tried to make clear, there's no ambiguity in Islams
enemy's message of war;
'We will also stand united behind our President as he & his advisors plan the necessary actions to demonstrate America's resolve & commitment. Not only to seek out an exact punishment on the perpetrators, but to make very clear that not only those who harbor terrorists, but those who in any way aid or comfort them whatsoever will now face the wrath of our country. & I hope that that message has gotten through to everywhere it needs to be heard. You are either with America in our time of need or you are not. We also stand united behind our resolve -- as this resolution so clearly states -- to recover & rebuild in the aftermath of these tragic acts. You know, New York was not an accidental choice for these madmen, these terrorists, these instruments of evil.'
- Senator Hillary Clinton Addressing the US Senate
(September 12, 2001)
'This crusade, this war on terrorism is going to take a while.'
- George W Bush (16th Sept 2001)
(See Episode 10 from William Coopers Mystery Babylon series;
& his 'Fulcanelli & The Golden Dawn' broadcast)