The concept of individual jihad or lone wolf jihadism assumes the commission of terrorist attacks by people who aren't part of any organizations. Some security experts see it as the West’s greatest threat.
According to Fox News, a law enforcement bulletin obtained last month warned that Islamic State fighters have increased calls for "lone wolves" to attack U.S. soldiers in America.
"You could literally search for soldiers, find their town, photos of them, look for address in Yellow Book or something," a tweet attributed to Islamic State read. "Then show up and slaughter them.”
The recent rise of lone wolf jihadists in the West raises serious concerns. The ISIS threat has become a reality as we have witnessed, only in the last month, attacks by lone wolf jihadists in the U.S., U.K., Canada, and Australia.
Last December, for example, a U.K. court found two Nigerians, Michael Adebolajo, 28, and Michael Adebowale, 22, guilty of killing English soldier Lee Rigby in front of dozens of passersby in the southeast London district of Woolwich. The recent attack on the Canadian Prime Minster is another example.
Because the threat is a real one, it is imperative to understand how jihadists can justify it and convince others with such a concept.
Traditionally, the responsibility to declare war on the infidel rested with the Umma. This is the mainstream interpretation of Islamic law and all four Islamic schools of jurisprudence support this understanding.
In the last 50 years this interpretation has changed. By shifting the level of jihad to the individual, every Muslim became obliged to share in it and help re-establish the Islamic caliphate. According to this relatively new interpretation he should not, indeed must not, wait for collective bodies to give him the green light. This individualization of jihad was based on their interpretation of the following Koranic verse:
“Then fight in Allah’s cause. You are held responsible only for yourself — and rouse the believers (to fight).” {Koran 4:84}
The transfer of responsibility could not have been achieved without the backing of theological rigor. Since the late 1970s, after the beginning of the Islamic Revival, the issue of declaring jihad at individual level has become a topic of debate.
The core of this debate was whether Muslims should wait for the re-establishment of the caliphate to declare war on the Infidels as traditional Shariah Law teaches (up till now), or should personally undertake the battle at once. I witnessed these doctrinal disputes between various members and leaders of Jamaa Islamiya, as well as in numerous radical mosques.
Another theological basis that is used by the radicals is the Hadith of Prophet Muhammad in Al-Buchary (Second source for Sunni Islam after the Koran) that ordered individual Muslims to change what they consider as “unrighteous” (Munkar) by their hands, i.e. by using force. According to this hadith, if a Muslim cannot change it by his own hands he need to denounce it verbally, and if he cannot do so, he has to denounce it in his heart. The jihadists simply try to change what they see as Haram, un-Islamic, or unrighteous without waiting for the authorities to do so.
It may seem that a narrow doctrinal shift of this type could not be significant. In fact, it was critically important. It provided the theological justification that enabled small-group Islamic terrorism or individuals such as Major Nidal Hasan and other the lone wolf jihadists we have seen in recent years. Violent jihad at the nation level to subjugate non-Muslims to Islam, an already violent concept, was energized by a new, barbaric focus.
______________________________________
Dr. Tawfik Hamid is the author of "Inside Jihad: Understanding and Confronting Radical Islam." http://www.Newsmax.com/TawfikHamid/Lone-Wolf-Jihadism-Theological-Islamic/2014/10/27/id/603274/#ixzz3I2yQ68if