Talk:jihad

Qu'ran Source
"After the Prophet and his authorized Companian, no individual or group or state has the right to wage war against any non-Muslim country for the propogation of Islam. Now Jihad, or Qital to be precise, can be done by an Islamic state only for the pupose of ending oppression." -4:75 Q'uran

I would recommend the definition be edited to reflect the fact that a Jihad is intended to end oppression. Now, maybe something should be added to make it reflect the fact that it doesn't always workout that nicely, but I beleive the current definition doesn't currently reflect the true meaning. --The Resistance 21:04, 24 September 2006


 * changed, good luck with all of the other online dictionaries (which is where I was getting my information). --Versageek 21:01, 24 September 2006 (UTC)


 * The "to end oppression" is inaccurate, I think, when it comes to defining the usage of this word in English, which is what we are doing. Jihad in English does imply a political or religious struggle, but not necessarily to end oppression. - TheDaveRoss 01:57, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Locking of Article
Shouldn't this thread be unlocked? Everything seems fine now to me at least. --The Resistance 01:41, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
 * It has been unprotected. - TheDaveRoss 01:54, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

Quran Quote
Since the quote from the Quran is presumptively an accurate translation, there are at least three words mis-spelled, which ought to be corrected.

Related words
I'm not sure how Wiktionary is supporting derivations, but there ought to be an entry for "Jihadist", at least to point to this entry. There are several other related Arabic words: "Qital" - "fighting the enemy" "Hirabah" (var: hirabis) - "brigand, pirate, or gang" Since Wiktionary is new to me, I'll leave it to others to add or modify these entries. --71.109.144.77 21:39, 26 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi. Wiktionary has three sections with slightly semantics.
 * Derived terms for terms formed by adding prefixes and/or suffixes and for phrases including the current word.
 * Related terms for terms with the same root but which are not derivations as per the above rules.
 * See also for terms which might be associated semantically but not lexically.
 * So "Jihadist" would fit under "derived" whereas the other words would go under "See also" if they are also in use as English words. If they have not been borrowed into English as seems to be the case then they don't belong in the English entry but would belong in the Arabic entry at جهاد. Hope this helps! &mdash; hippietrail 08:57, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

ERROR in meaning of jihad and translation from the Qur'an
Under the "Noun" section in "jihad" , the 2nd meaning given with Islam in braces, is an incorrect one. The real meaning of "jihad" is simply "to strive, to struggle". In fact the meaning under theology is exactly what Islam says. The arabic term for "holy war" is "harbum mukaddas" (if my spelling is correct), which interestingly is mentioned NOWHERE in the Qur'an.

Again under the "Noun" section in "jihad" , the verse taken from the Qur'an doesn't comply with the authentic translation of Abdullah Yusuf Ali, which I give from http://www.islam101.com/quran/yusufAli/QURAN/4.htm :

And why should ye not fight in the cause of Allah and of those who, being weak, are ill-treated (and oppressed)?- Men, women, and children, whose cry is: "Our Lord! Rescue us from this town, whose people are oppressors; and raise for us from thee one who will protect; and raise for us from thee one who will help!"


 * I agree. It was an interpretation of the Qur'an verse named, not an actual quote. I removed it because there's no source and it was presumably just written by whoever put it there in the first place.
 * The second definition, however, kind of seems to mix up the original Islamic meaning (i.e. a war against oppression) and the popular use of "holy war" - the combination in one definition seems kind of contradictory to me. Paul Willocx 00:29, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Unless citation is provided for the holy war definition, I propose to remove it entirely. It seems clear that the current definition suffers from mistranslation and enjoys no evidence, yet has been here since its inception, when it was the only definition:
 * A holy war undertaken by Muslims against unbelievers.
 * Should we remove this (revised) definition entirely? It appears to represent a mistranslation with no evidence.
 * Dmyersturnbull 02:33, 12 March 2009 (UTC)


 * The definitions were made by people who speak Arabic as well as English. If you have a good Arabic dictionary, such as Hans Wehr’s excellent Arabic-English dictionary, you can look it up yourself. There it says of jihad in black and white: fight, battle; holy war (against the infidels, as a religious duty). —Stephen 20:54, 12 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't contest the meaning; I contest its separation into two definitions on wiktionary. "Holy war" via jihād as-sayf does not deserve its own definition. Jihad is an internal battle against foes that are either internal or external. The second definition is merely a subset of the first.
 * Dmyersturnbull 04:26, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Kampf
why is Kampf under the see also section? Mallerd 22:00, 6 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Because put it there 21 August 2007 when he made his fourth and to date last edit in the main namespace. I don't see exactly how the German word for "fight" fits in the context of jihad. At least in manner that is not tendentious. -- Gauss 22:10, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

I guess in style of Adolf Hitler, but if we start reasoning like that, everyone has had a jihad. I'll remove it. Mallerd 12:01, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 * It should be placed back 'Kampf' does not mean 'fight', it quite literally means 'struggle', as does jihad. 'Ich Kampfe mit meinen Hausaufgaben', 'I struggle with my homework.'213.84.222.243 09:44, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
 * If English used the word "Kampf" as it does the arabic word "jihad" then it would belong in See also. But See also does not generally include words from languages other than the language of the entry word. As it is it seems that "kampf" and "jihad" are merely translations of each other in two different languages though both would be familiar to many or most English speakers. &mdash; hippietrail 08:26, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

RFD discussion: May–June 2021
Is there a need to specify this set of campaigns over the (many) other wars that have been called jihads?--Tibidibi (talk) 20:04, 24 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. If the term was attested in a capitalized form referring to that specific war/campaign/time period (parallel to how we have Crusade and crusade), then it might make sense to add it to Jihad, but that doesn't appear to be the case. Tcr25 (talk) 12:57, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
 * That would make sense in that case, but I couldn't find use of it that way, either. Delete. DAVilla 21:17, 1 June 2021 (UTC)


 * (ec) When used in this specific sense, I’d expect a capitalized use, Jihad, similar to Crusade. I also wonder, which of the three 12th-century crusades is “the” Crusade in the 12th century. The question is, really, is the term used in this specific sense, where it is not immediately clear from the context this is a campaign in response to a Crusade? One might consider the crusades a very belated response to the 7th-century (and in particular the ) on the Byzantine Empire, which was sold by the PR department of the  as a jihad.  --Lambiam 13:05, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete, not a lexicalised distinct sense. ←₰-→ Lingo Bingo Dingo (talk)  14:15, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete, agree with above. A WP topic and unlikely to be helpful here. Facts707 (talk) 18:04, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fay Freak (talk) 20:59, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Imetsia (talk) 19:29, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
 * RFD-deleted. Imetsia (talk) 19:29, 26 June 2021 (UTC)