Oh, sorry mate. First, I'm no true expert. I only studied islamic theologic thinking for 2 semesters. And although I have been dealing with medieval and modern islam ever since then for the last 11 years... proffessionally for some 8, I don't claim to be expert. I only opose people who speak their misinformed opinions and claim them as facts. What's your qualification for making such a bold statements, such as the one you made when you entered this thread? A statement for which you have no sources (and you can't have, because there is nothing what could prove itThanks, it feels great to be appreciated by true experts.
Well, maybe you can finally stop trying to hurl the burden of proof onto me. I go along with the current scholar consensus on the topic. You said even Ghazali/Taymiyya would disagree with me. Time for you to enlighten me on what exactly is your bold opinion based on.
Again, I have never claimed it "only" means fighting with sword. I maintain that the predominant meaning of jihad during the CK2 period (and during the classic islam period) was "armed struggle against unbelievers".
You claim that I try to hurl a burden of proof on you? No. I don't care. That's why I didn't ask you to prove your bold statement in the first place. Don't you remember? It was me who offered you the information about al-Ghazzali and Ibn Taymiyya, theologians I knew you can very easily quote to support your statement (although they were more complex than that). I gave them to you intentionally and waited for your reaction, which was as expected. Google and copy-paste the first quote you find on some random site. Just like amateur jihadists.
But quoting the most prominent jihadi quotes out of the whole work of the 2 most hardline theologians who wrote their works in specific contexts still does not prove that this interpretation of jihad was prevalent during medieval period. They specifically wrote those words you quoted because their contemporaries did not feel nor behave this way (al-Ghazzali lived in a time when shiites dominated the islamic heartlands and even were de-facto overlords of the caliph, Ibn Taymiyya - as already mentioned - reacted to Mongol conquest and rule over most of the Islamic east).
But knowledge isn't about making a bold opinion based statement and then searching for quote which supports it. Knowledge is knowing things in their propper meaning in context. I have read their (Ghazali's and Ibn Taymiyya's) works and really don't have time nor need to search, translate and rewrite their concepts here for you, I'm too busy with more important things.
But maybe if you give us some evidence to prove your orignial opinion-statement which I oposed, I might try when I have more time, alright?
Last edited: