[Zayed Muhammad Yasin has Bangladesh roots as his father is from Bangladesh
originally]

Jihad: The Fight Over Meaning
Harvard student's commencement speech on jihad causes controversy
ABC News Nightline

June 4, 2002

CHRIS BURY: Joining me now, Dr. Maher Hathout is a senior adviser
to the Muslim Public Affairs Council, a civil rights organization for
American Muslims. A retired cardiologist, Dr. Hathout is the author
of a new book entitled "Jihad Versus Terrorism." He joins us from
Los Angeles. Daniel Pipes is the director of the Middle East Forum, a
think tank, and the author of "Militant Islam Reaches America," a
book being published later this summer. He joins us from Livingston, New
Jersey.

And Mr. Pipes, this young man at Harvard, is giving a speech in
which he says, look, the definition of "jihad" has been, essentially,
corrupted by militant Islamists, and that doesn't have much to do with
moderates like me. What's wrong with him saying that at Harvard?

Mr. DANIEL PIPES (Middle East Forum): What's wrong, Chris, is that
it's a fabrication. Jihad has historically meant, almost always one
thing-which is expanding the territories ruled by Muslims through
armed warfare. That's what it's meant. Now I'm happy to see a
development occur whereby it means something more spiritual. But we
have to start by acknowledging that that's the real meaning of the
word, the historic meaning of the word, the traditional meaning of
the word, and we can't ignore it. And this young man is ignoring
it.

BURY: Dr. Hathout, one of the criticisms that is being leveled at
this speech is that while it tries to install a new definition of
jihad, it fails to criticize the more violent strain of that word.

Dr. MAHER HATHOUT (Muslim Public Affairs Council): Yeah, let me
address a couple of basic things. I don't think that the definition
of Islam is up to Daniel Pipes or to anybody else, it is up to the
Muslims according to their text and according to the language of
their text to put their definitions. And it is unfair that every
time someone wants to broaden the definition to project the right
perspective-the broad perspective, jihad, somebody jumps and says, 'Don't
believe him. This is not what he means. He's lying, basically.' This is
wrong. The second thing is the issue of what that person is going to say or
not going to say. This is censorship in the greatest institution of
intellectuality, which I think is a very degrading situation.

BURY: Doctor, let me interrupt just there because, Harvard, as I
understand it, is letting this young man go ahead with his speech.
So I don't see how it's censorship.

Dr. HATHOUT: No, they changed his title. They forced him to change
the title. I don't think that they will do that with other talks
about other subjects. He should be free to speak, to title his talk
the way he likes. If we don't like what he said, we can open
civilized discourse about what he said and criticize him. But to
start from the very beginning that this guy is going to try to
deceive you because, guess what, Mr. Pipes said this is not the
meaning of the word, nobody has that right. We stymie with the
textual definition. There are texts that are sacred to us that we
go to them to find our own definitions and we have all the right to project
them.

BURY: Mr. Pipes...

Mr. PIPES: I'm sure that Dr. Hathout-I'm sure that Hathout-Dr.
Hathout is an excellent cardiologist, but he knows very little
about the history of Islam which is my subject. And by the way, I got my BA
and....

Dr. HATHOUT: It's my subject, too. It is my subject, too.

Mr. PIPES: ...degrees from Harvard-excuse me, I didn't interrupt
you. I got my BA and PhD from Harvard, so I say this with regret. But the
fact is, historically speaking-I speak as a historian, jihad has meant
expanding the realm of Islam through armed warfare. A cardiologist is not an
authority on that subject.

Dr. HATHOUT: No, I am authority on that because I study it...

Mr. PIPES: You're a....

Dr. HATHOUT: ...and I think your definition is wrong. And your reading it
wrong.

BURY: Mr. Pipes, without casting aspersions on the credentials of
anybody here tonight, what about the broader point that we heard in
Dave Marash's piece that this young man is interested in fostering
some kind of understanding, that he wants to be able to say, 'Look,
I believe in the Constitution and the Quran and you non-Muslims have
to understand that there are more of us than there are of the
terrorists.' What's wrong with him trying to start a dialogue like
that?

Mr. PIPES: I would be delighted if he started a dialogue based in
truth. But it's based on a deceit, and the deceit is the problem.
He's pretending that Islam-that a jihad is not what it is. He's
pretending that the attacks on Americans, notably in September, but
many, many other times, are not jihad. Osama bin Laden understands
what jihad is. Ayatollah Khomeini understands what jihad is. It's
attacking infidels to spread the territory of Islam.

BURY: Dr. Hathout, let me bring you in here. Is it a fair point to
suggest as this young university graduate-soon to be graduate-does
that jihad really is about a personal, spiritual quest. After all,
we have organizations with names like Islamic Jihad, that certainly mean
something else. Is this view a bit naive?

Dr. HATHOUT: I will never say that jihad is only a struggle for
self-purification. I say this is the peak form of jihad. This is the
full-range of jihad. And if Mr. Daniel Pipe reads the definitions in the
text, it talks about the measure of jihad, which is the self-struggle, it
talks about other forms of jihad, like intellectual jihad using the book. It
talks about financial jihad, using the wealth and the money and the
resources. And it talked about confrontation of jihad, against those who
fight against us to push us away from our religion or kick us out of our
homeland. This, we are not apologetic to say that jihad is just a spiritual
trip into self-purification. No. It is a full range of things. But once
someone tries to suppose the full range, somebody else jumps in and says,
'No, no, you are lying, you are using the word in deceit,' etc. This is what
we mean by jihad and we are saying it.

BURY: Mr. Pipes, so let me-let me bring you in here just a minute.
Beyond the content, which we've discussed tonight, and as you
mentioned you are an ...alumnus of Harvard, do you object to the very
idea of this speech being delivered in this setting-this commencement
setting?

Mr. PIPES: This is really what I'm upset about, Chris. It's not so
much about what one young man is saying, it's what Harvard, this
major American institution is doing. My analogy is if in 1943, a
German-American had wanted to give a commencement speech about "My
American Kampf," and the university had let him do it, it is
absolutely abhorrent. Harvard must decide on which side it is in
this war. Harvard does not allow ROTC to be present on its campus. Harvard
does allow fund-raising for radical Islamic groups. Harvard does encourage
this young man to give this speech, which is based on a fallacy, apologizing
for jihad. I think Harvard needs to look very
hard at its own soul and understand where it stands in the war on
terror.

BURY: Dr. Hathout, very quickly, just a few seconds left, is jihad
too loaded a topic for such a thing as a commencement address?

Dr. HATHOUT: Not at all. As a matter of fact, this is an
opportunity to let people be exposed to different meanings to a broader
perspective, and let someone speak out. This is his right. This is America,
people. This is not a totalitarian regime. Let the person speak. If we don't
like what he said, we can challenge him. But to try to...(unintelligible)...

BURY: All right Dr. Hathout, we are-we are out of time. I'm sorry.
Thank you very much for joining us, and Daniel Pipes as well.