Quote:
Originally Posted by Khalif
Teach them in English what real "jihad" is and then they won't use it as violence against peaceful non-Muslims.
As long as the ignorant ones keep telling the terrorists that they are "jihadists" fighting a "holy war", they will have the approval to carry on fighting that approved "holy war".
|
The important point about linguistic and meaning of the word is the
referent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Referent
The word is just the sign which is not that critical but what is critical is the referent.
The referent is that which the reference is referring to.
Example, the word 'apple' is a necessary sign, but what is most critical is the referent.
That 'referent' which is called apple in words or sound can be in many thousand words and sounds in different languages and dialect.
Therefore to get to the referent we must zoom into its specific qualities rather than messing around with the word.
The referent of 'apples' [or whatever name it is called] is that which is seen, smell, felt, heard [when tapped] and taste the same for all referent of the likes.
There is no absolute meaning for any word.
One good example is the word "gay" with its different referent.
What is critical is the intended referent on of a word in context.
So it is the same treatment for the word 'jihad' in the English language.
The question is what is the referent for the reference [word] 'jihad' in the English language.
Note the referent for 'jihad' in the English Language
[from mid 1800s] cannot be exactly the same as 'jihad' in the Quranic Language [710AD++].
So what is the referent for 'jihad' in the English Language that is different from the Quranic term 'jihad.'
The term "jihad" that was coined in the mid 1800s was related to holy wars by SOME Muslims.
The original Quranic meaning of "strive" was deviated to concentrate on the war aspect.
I believe [need citations] this deviation from the Quranic strive to focus on war was started from the
Ahadith which stressed on warfare.
It is because of those Muslims [not all] who used the term jihad in warring against infidels that the infidels used the term 'jihad' to refer to wars started or against Muslims. By this time the referent for jihad has shifted from merely 'striving' to 'holy war'.
So if the English dictionary define the referent of 'jihad' as 'holy war' then the intended referent is 'holy war' as the dictionary meaning [as agreed by consensus].
So at the present the referent of 'jihad' in the English Language mean 'holy war' as the main referent.
This referent can be linked only as far back to the Ahadith but not the Quran.
There is some indirect linkage but Allah did not
specifically link "jihad" [strive] to "holy war" in the Quran.
Just like the word "gay," any word in the dictionary can be assigned a new different referent as long as there is a consensus.
Thus if Muslims want to change the referent of "jihad" in the English dictionaries to be the same as 'jihad' in the Quranic Language they can start a process to do it.
But in the present the referent of "jihad" in the English Language is what is meant as stated in the dictionary in the OP and elsewhere.
Therefore it is absurd for any one to blame the use of the term 'jihad' to mean 'holy war' on jihad politicians and the media.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
