More Somali Jihad

[Hassan]

Unfortunatly the Somali pirates didn't get the memo that their pirating activities are for the purposes of Islamic Jihad (never mind the question of what precedent in traditional Islamic Law gives obscure Somali pirates the authority to declair Jihad) and they hijaked a Saudi Oil Tanker.

[url="http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=97124768"]http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.p...toryId=97124768[/url]

tricky devils must have pretended to hijack a Saudi oil tanker so we woulden't figure out that their activity is no mere pirating but part of the larger Jihad in the impending "Clash of Civilizations".

But seriously. I see this decried as Jihad when the hijack "western" ships, yet when it comes to other Muslims ships I see nothing.

whats up with that?

[Saint Therese]

I don't like Somali Jihad. I prefer ham and coagulated milk.

[Galloglasses' Alt]

From what I learn of Islam from my Religious Studies class, (I swear, we're learning more about Islam then we learn about Christianity in general, nevermind Catholicism), The intricacies of Islam dictate that only the Imam, or the Caliph, which the King of Suadi Arabia technically is for one of sects, and that black turbanned guy is for the other. (Incredibly sorry, the terms and names are lost to me, I've forgotten them, so forgive me for a few mix ups here. They're inevitable). But one thing is clear, individual muslims with no claim to being the Successer of the Prophet Muhammad, have no authority to claim Jihad within Islam.

[Hassan]

[quote name='Galloglasses' Alt' post='1727660' date='Dec 14 2008, 01:34 PM']From what I learn of Islam from my Religious Studies class, (I swear, we're learning more about Islam then we learn about Christianity in general, nevermind Catholicism), The intricacies of Islam dictate that only the Imam, or the Caliph, which the King of Suadi Arabia technically is for one of sects, and that black turbanned guy is for the other. (Incredibly sorry, the terms and names are lost to me, I've forgotten them, so forgive me for a few mix ups here. They're inevitable). But one thing is clear, individual muslims with no claim to being the Successer of the Prophet Muhammad, have no authority to claim Jihad within Islam.[/quote]

Ayatollah, that's the black turbanned. That's Shia Islam.

But yes, individual Musalims do not have the authority to call for Islam. Who actually can is complicated and differs from sect to sect, but usually it comes from some interaction between the head of state and a top religious scholar.

[Galloglasses' Alt]

[quote name='Hassan' post='1727698' date='Dec 14 2008, 02:29 PM']Ayatollah, that's the black turbanned. That's Shia Islam.

But yes, individual Musalims do not have the authority to call for Islam. Who actually can is complicated and differs from sect to sect, but usually it comes from some interaction between the head of state and a top religious scholar.[/quote]


Indeed, this is quite true, altough this alot more complicated then you've laid out here.

What was a tad of a let down to me is that the major schism within Islam is not a theological issue, but rather the psuedo-political issue of the 'method' of Caliph, 9succession) from the Prophet Muhammod. It would make Islam a whole lot stronger, (and from our perspective, that much more scary), if the Prophet had laid out his preferred method of Caliph before dieing.

[Hassan]

[quote name='Galloglasses' Alt' post='1727774' date='Dec 14 2008, 04:16 PM']Indeed, this is quite true, altough this alot more complicated then you've laid out here.

What was a tad of a let down to me is that the major schism within Islam is not a theological issue, but rather the psuedo-political issue of the 'method' of Caliph, 9succession) from the Prophet Muhammod. It would make Islam a whole lot stronger, (and from our perspective, that much more scary), if the Prophet had laid out his preferred method of Caliph before dieing.[/quote]

It is a theological schism. Most of it goes back to the troops who served under Ali, both the Shia and the Kharijites had their earliest expressions there. But saying that Islam's major split is political rather than theological is kind of like saying the current Protestant/Catholic split is really a dispute over indulgences and the sovereignity of Germanic princes. It may have started that way but that was really just the crack in a whole dam of issues that came spilling out. Also the split really didn't emerge after MUhammad. It really happened a bit later on.

But yeah, the process of Jihad is a lot more complicated. I think in Shia Islam only the Imam (in their more mystical sense or an infalible sucessor to Muhammad) can declair Jihad, but Sunni Islam is more mixed and the scholars disagree.

It's definitly not some obscure Somali pirates though.

[Formosus]

Whoever said the somali piracy is a result of jihad doesn't understand the political situation in that region well enough. Not that I pretend to be an expert on the subject. An acquantance of mine who is from Ethiopia explained that the Somali piracy is a result of the loss of a coast for Ethiopia due to european involvement, thus forcing them to disband their navy which was the most powerful of that region. Opening the seas for piracy.

[Hassan]

[quote name='Formosus' post='1728091' date='Dec 15 2008, 02:38 AM']Whoever said the somali piracy is a result of jihad doesn't understand the political situation in that region well enough. Not that I pretend to be an expert on the subject. An acquantance of mine who is from Ethiopia explained that the Somali piracy is a result of the loss of a coast for Ethiopia due to european involvement, thus forcing them to disband their navy which was the most powerful of that region. Opening the seas for piracy.[/quote]

No, they certainly do not. But some people cry Jihad when Somali street vendors egadge in public urination (dead serious).