Very interesting discussion to a very insightful question.

As a holly term, Jihad to the common Muslim without any intellectual affiliation is the process of achieving salvation as shown by  the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). Today most of the intellectuals among the Muslims denounce the terror attacks on Muslims and non-Muslims in the name of Jihad. The problem is while the Muslims refuse to call it Jihad, the Western media tag the world with only the terror attacks done by the Muslims. When the same sort of attacks are perpetrated by the non-Muslims, the media simply void using Jihad or any religious diction for it. In fact, in the Muslim world, understanding of Jihad is clear enough but the confusion is purportedly created by the media for the purpose of villainizing one-fourth population of the world- the Muslisms. It's sort of hate campaign. 

Thanks so much for your insight, Mohammad!

Coining "terrorism" with Jihad is utterly against the core objective of Islam that is to prevent all sort of hurt and damage to human beings. It is preferable to fully understand that there are pillars, that are unquestionable, I mean you cannot pretend being a Muslim without testimonies, praying, fasting alms giving and so forth. Jihad is not among these, as it is secondary. Secondary practices are meant to depict how devoted, how pleasant and most of all, how submissive to God's guidance you are. Thus, it doesn't mean that you are not a Muslim if you don't go to Jihad. Then, Jihad needs a number of circumstances. Muslims go for Jihad when being at risks, defending their land, defending their ideals in their lands. It is not an act of faith to force people to convert: this is far away from Islam. Please, mind that Islam is simple, that Islam focuses of day to day relations and not rituals. It is much more meaningful to say the truth, to be loyal, helpful and able to treat other with love and respect. There is no need to pray all day long, and you harm your colleague, you breach your promises, and the list is open. I hope I have been clear to give a hint about Jihad versus Islam.

Hello Kirk,

The term Jihad comes from the root word "Ja Ha Da" جهد, which means to exert oneself or exertion (Lisan Al-Arab, 3/133). The linguistic meaning of Jihad is to strive or struggle, whether it is a cure for an illness or studying for an examination.

The legislative (Islamic legislative) meaning of Jihad is of types: striving against evils, striving against one's own weaknesses and vices, and fighting for the sake of Allaah: which has two types: defense from attackers (whether it is a country invading one's homeland or a thief attacking one's home or family); and conquest.

There have been many books detailing the correct understanding of Jihad in Islam, such as Al-Jihad of Ibn Abi 'Aasim (d. 287H), Al-Jihad of Ibn al-Mubarak (d. 180H), and many others.

This is actually quite a lengthy topic because the misunderstanding and the deviant ideologies have spread far and wide regarding it. To answer your questions: Jihad is a spiritual issue in Islam and it begins with the Jihad against one's own desires and vices to improve oneself for the sake of Allah (referred to as Jihad an-Nafs - i.e. against one's self).

There is a military aspect to Jihad that can only be established under a ruler: that is 1) Defensive Jihad (جهاد الدفع), which means that the ruler of a country declares Jihad in defense when that country is being attacked by another- this is an obligation of that country when declared by its ruler (Fardh 'ayn فرض عين) . It can also be in the instance where an individual is defending himself against an attacker; and 2) Conquest and Da'wah (جهاد الطلب والدعوة), which means a ruler of a country declares war on another in order to conquer or for inviting them to Islam - and this is not an obligation on everyone, but on those who are appointed by the ruler (Fardh Kifayah فرض كفاية).

Note that in both military examples (defensive and conquest), there is a requirement: the ruler. Muslim theologians have stated explicitly that Jihad is strictly established under the ruler and does not occur without one. This statement can be found in creedal works, such as Kitab as-Sunnah of Ibn Abi 'Aasim, Usul as-Sunnah of Ahmad bin Hanbal, and many others. The extremists deny such a condition and believe that they can appoint any person to be the leader. This deviance spread from extremist ideologues who believe that their sinful acts are considered Jihad.

There are also conditions for both types according to Muslim Jurists:

1) It must be done only for the sake of Allah (so if one fights for land or for status, this is not Jihad in Islam).

2) There must be ability and power (so throwing stones against an army is not Jihad, it's Ihlaak an-Nafs (self-destruction)).

3) The permission of the Ruler (therefore without a ruler or without his permission, it is not Jihad- it is just sinful killing and transgression)

4) The permission of the parents (refer to Kitab Al-Jihad in Sahih Al-Bukhaari)

The above is derived from Dhawabit al-Jihad fi Kitab was Sunnah of Dr. Muhammad Bazmul, professor of Islamic studies at Umm Al Qura University.

The Jihad can only be declared by a state and not by the private militant groups.

Very interesting discussion to a very insightful question.