Refuting Terrorist Ideology Through Classical Islamic Scholarship: West Africa’s Mali Attacks Expose the Anti-Islamic Nature of Radical Extremism
By Ghulam Ghaus Siddiqi, New Age Islam
9 May 2026
Main Points
· The article argues that attacks on civilians, including women and children, directly contradict the Qur’an and Prophetic teachings on warfare.
· Classical Islamic law forbids targeting civilians, destroying homes, burning property, and spreading terror among ordinary people.
· Groups like JNIM, Al-Qaeda, and ISIS are compared to the historical Khawarij because of their practice of declaring other Muslims apostates (takfir).
· The essay explains that armed jihad traditionally required legitimate authority, consultation, and ethical limits, not freelance insurgency.
· Islamic teachings emphasize peace agreements, restraint, and mercy over endless conflict.
· Jihadist groups manipulate poverty, instability, ethnic tensions, and political frustration to recruit followers and justify violence.
….
The recent attacks in central Mali, reportedly carried out by radical groups linked to JNIM, once again expose the tragic misuse of Islam in the service of violence, revenge, and political chaos. The killing of villagers, including teenagers and children, the burning of homes, and the deliberate spreading of fear cannot be justified through the teachings of Islam. Such acts stand in direct contradiction to the Qur’an, the Prophetic tradition, and the long-established principles of Islamic jurisprudence governing war, justice, and political authority.
The ideological foundation of modern jihadist movements is built upon a selective and distorted reading of Islamic texts. Groups such as JNIM, Al-Qaeda, ISIS, and similar organizations present themselves as defenders of Islam, yet their actions violate nearly every condition Muslim scholars laid down for legitimate jihad. Their violence is not a continuation of orthodox Islamic tradition; rather, it resembles the extremist tendencies of the Khawarij, a sect condemned by mainstream Muslim scholarship since the earliest period of Islam.
Classical Islamic thought never treated jihad as unrestricted violence. The Arabic word “jihad” fundamentally means struggle or striving, and armed jihad was only one limited category within a broader ethical and spiritual framework. Muslim jurists developed extensive rules governing warfare, emphasizing justice, restraint, proportionality, and protection of non-combatants. These principles were derived directly from the Qur’an and the teachings of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).
The Qur’an permits fighting only under conditions of aggression and oppression. It declares: “Fight in the way of God those who fight you, but do not transgress. Indeed, God does not love transgressors” (Qur’an 2:190). This verse established one of the most important principles in Islamic law: warfare is defensive and limited, not absolute or indiscriminate. Classical commentators such as Raazi, Aalusi, Ibn Kathir, and Al-Tabari explained that Muslims were forbidden from targeting those not participating in hostilities.
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) explicitly prohibited the killing of women, children, monks, labourers, and other civilians. In authentic narrations found in Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, he condemned the killing of non-combatants after seeing the body of a slain woman on a battlefield. He also instructed Muslim armies not to mutilate bodies, destroy crops, poison wells, or burn homes unnecessarily. The first caliph, Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him), reiterated these principles when advising Muslim soldiers: “Do not kill women or children or the elderly; do not destroy trees or inhabited places.” These teachings fundamentally contradict the methods of radical groups that bomb villages, massacre civilians, abduct communities, and spread terror among ordinary people.
The attacks in Mali especially reveal the moral bankruptcy of radical ideology because many of the victims were themselves Muslims. Classical Islamic scholarship considered the unlawful killing of Muslims among the gravest sins imaginable. The Qur’an warns: “Whoever kills a believer intentionally, his recompense is Hell” (Qur’an 4:93). Another verse states: “Whoever kills a soul unless for murder or corruption in the land, it is as if he has killed all humanity” (Qur’an 5:32). These verses were never interpreted by mainstream scholars as permitting vigilante violence or collective punishment.
Modern radical organizations often justify their attacks through the doctrine of takfir i.e. declaring other Muslims apostates. This ideology has deep similarities with the historical Khawarij, who emerged during the first Islamic civil wars and accused fellow Muslims of unbelief for political disagreements. Classical scholars strongly opposed this tendency. Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Malik, Imam Al-Shafi‘i, and Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal all warned against excommunicating Muslims over sins or political disputes. Mainstream Sunni theology maintained that sinful Muslims remain within Islam unless they openly deny essential beliefs.
Radical groups ignore these principles and instead adopt an absolutist worldview in which anyone who disagrees with them becomes a legitimate target. Governments, soldiers, journalists, aid workers, tribal elders, and even ordinary villagers are frequently branded apostates or collaborators. This reckless practice has enabled extremists to spill Muslim blood on a massive scale while falsely claiming religious legitimacy.
Another major distortion concerns the issue of political authority. Classical Islamic law did not permit individuals or freelance militias to declare war independently. Armed jihad traditionally required legitimate political authority and collective consultation. Scholars feared that unsanctioned violence would lead to anarchy and endless bloodshed. Medieval jurists repeatedly emphasized social order and the prevention of chaos (fitna). Even when rulers were unjust, classical scholars generally discouraged rebellion if it would produce greater violence and civil collapse.
Groups like JNIM reject this legal tradition entirely. They function as transnational insurgent movements accountable to no recognized scholarly consensus or legitimate public authority. Their operations thrive in unstable environments where state institutions are weak and ethnic tensions are high. In Mali, the conflict involves a complex mixture of political grievances, ethnic militias, separatist movements, foreign interventions, poverty, and historical mistrust. By presenting this chaos as a cosmic religious war, radicals manipulate vulnerable populations and turn local grievances into perpetual cycles of violence.
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) consistently sought reconciliation and peace whenever possible. The Treaty of Hudaybiyyah is one of the clearest examples. Though many companions initially considered its terms unfavourable, the Prophet (peace be upon him) accepted compromise to avoid bloodshed.
The Qur’an itself instructs Muslims: “If they incline toward peace, then incline toward it also” (Qur’an 8:61). Classical jurists therefore recognized diplomacy, treaties, and coexistence as legitimate and often preferable alternatives to war.
Radical ideology also misunderstands martyrdom. In Islamic tradition, martyrdom is not achieved by killing civilians or provoking chaos. Rather, martyrdom is associated with sincere sacrifice under just conditions and moral conduct. Suicide bombings, massacres, and indiscriminate attacks violate the sanctity of life emphasized throughout Islamic teaching.
The Qur’an explicitly commands: “Do not kill yourselves; indeed God is merciful to you” (Qur’an 4:29). Classical scholars regarded suicide as a grave sin, regardless of political motives.
Another important point is that radical groups often exploit genuine injustices to recruit followers. In Mali and across the Sahel, people suffer from poverty, corruption, weak governance, ethnic discrimination, and foreign military interference. Islam certainly commands Muslims to oppose injustice and defend the oppressed. However, classical scholars insisted that noble goals cannot justify unlawful means. Justice itself must be pursued justly. Massacring civilians, abducting communities, or terrorizing villages only deepens suffering and destroys the moral credibility of any cause.
Islamic civilization historically produced rich traditions of scholarship, law, spirituality, philosophy, and coexistence. Cities such as Timbuktu in Mali itself became famous centres of Islamic learning, preserving manuscripts and intellectual traditions that emphasized knowledge and moderation rather than extremism. The destruction of social order and intellectual life by radicals represents not the revival of Islam but the destruction of its civilizational heritage.
Contemporary Muslim scholars across ideological schools have repeatedly condemned organizations such as Al-Qaeda and ISIS. Major institutions including Al-Azhar University and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation have declared terrorism and takfirist violence incompatible with Islamic teachings. Even many conservative Salafi scholars have rejected the rebellion and indiscriminate violence of radical factions. This broad consensus demonstrates that extremist groups exist outside mainstream Islamic orthodoxy, despite their heavy use of religious language.
The tragedy unfolding in Mali should therefore be understood not as a clash between Islam and others, but as a struggle between lawful ethical religion and ideological extremism masquerading as faith. The murder of innocents, destruction of villages, and exploitation of political instability are acts condemned by classical Islamic principles. No invocation of jihad can erase the Qur’anic commands for justice, mercy, and restraint.
A genuine Islamic response to conflict prioritizes reconciliation, protection of civilian life, fair governance, and accountability. It recognizes that human dignity is sacred regardless of ethnicity or political affiliation. The Qur’an describes the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) as “a mercy to the worlds” (Qur’an 21:107), not as a source of indiscriminate terror. Any movement that turns religion into a justification for endless bloodshed betrays this prophetic mission.
The attacks in central Mali are therefore not examples of authentic Islamic jihad but manifestations of political extremism clothed in religious symbolism. From the standpoint of classical Islamic jurisprudence, the killing of civilians, unauthorized warfare, takfir of fellow Muslims, destruction of property, and deliberate spreading of terror constitute grave violations of Shariah itself. The path of Islam is not nihilistic violence but justice disciplined by mercy, moral responsibility, and reverence for human life.
……..
A regular Columnist with NewAgeIslam.com, Ghulam Ghaus Siddiqi Dehlvi is a Classical Islamic scholar with a Sufi background and English-Arabic-Urdu Translator.
New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism