Introduction

The central moral challenge faced by is to pursue peace humanity in an unjust world. Although monotheistic religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) preach peace as a divine ideal, yet they didn’t ignored the harsh realities of prevailing injustice, violence and oppression. This creates an imperative tension as to how believers can seek peace in the face of injustice that may require resistance?

Defining the Conflict

The core conflict of the current study is sub-divided into two competing moral imperatives:

The call for peace promoting non-violence, harmony, reconciliation and forgiveness;

The demand for justice to stand against oppression, resisting evil and protecting the vulnerable.

For monotheistic religions, peace and justice are two sides opposing forces that must be attained which often requires struggle.

Theoretical Framework: Peace, Justice and Moral Tension

It is mandatory to identify the core conflict that is embedded at the heart of the current argument. Peace is conceptually understood as harmony devoid of any conflict and social cohesion; whereas, justice means moral responsibility to act fairly and accountability of wrong-doings. However, in the prevailing unjust world, these contrasting values combat against one another causing tension. This leads monotheistic traditions into an unavoidable dilemma where peace and justice seems inseparable. We live in a world where peace may have to tolerate injustice; and justice may require disrupting peace. All religious traditions are inclined towards the view that justice must prevail at all cost even if it shatters peace. Let’s discuss monotheistic traditions in separate sections to justify this claim.

2. Judaism: Shalom through Justice

In Judaism, the relationship between peace and justice is well-defined. The concept of Shalom (peace, communal well-being),¹ in Hebrew Bible (Tanakh), is rooted in righteousness.² The religion does not endorse the illusion of peace by ignoring prevailing injustice in the society. “Because they lead my people astray, saying, “Peace,” when there is no peace, and because, when a flimsy wall is built, they cover it with whitewash.”³ Likewise, prophet Jeremiah (650-570 BC) condemns leaders and corrupted elites who elude people with the sense of ‘false peace.’ “‘Peace, peace,’ they say, when there is no peace.”⁴ This critique became central and integral part of Jewish moral ethics that denotes that ‘peace that protects injustice is not peace__ it is moral failure.’⁵ In similar vein, various Hebrew prophets (like Amos [814-740 BC], Isaiah [8th century BC], Micah [740-670 BC])⁶ urges that in order to flourish true peace, one should confront corruption, extortion, exploitation and unequal distribution of wealth that destroys the harmonious balance of a society.

As opposed to deceptive peace, true peace cannot be maintained by mere calmness. Sometimes this interruption could be harsh or disruptive.⁷ Judaism doesn’t endorse violence, but they accept its inevitability in resisting oppression and defending the vulnerable. According to Exodus narrative (mentioned in 2nd book of Old Testament), sometimes struggle and combat against injustice remains the only viable solution to restore peace.⁸ Thus, attaining peace is an ideal, in Jewish tradition, which is possible by committing whole-heartedly to the pursuit of justice.⁹

Figure 1. Shalom through Justice in Jewish Tradition

If peace is a divine ideal then justice is divine imperative, hence in Jewish tradition both are inseparable. “Pursue justice, and justice alone, so that you may live, and you may possess the land that the Lord (your God) is giving you.”¹⁰ In another verse: “This is what the LORD says: “Maintain justice and do what is right, for My salvation is coming soon, and My righteousness will be revealed.”¹¹

In Hebrew Bible, ‘justice’ is considered as a pre-requisite to peace instead of a separable ideal. It is a covenant that command society to be fair and just to individuals: protecting strangers and ensuring the welfare of poor, widows and orphans. Judaism doesn’t glorify violence, but it acknowledges that:

Deliverance from oppression may require struggle (for e.g. Moses demolishes slavery in Egypt)¹²;

Defending society from aggression is morally justified under strict limits.

Prophets often confront kings creating socio-political tension (e.g. between Moses and Pharaoh)

This means that in Jewish tradition, peace requires justice; and justice may require confrontation. Additionally, Jewish ethics relating to war focus on issues like legitimation and conduct. “The Talmud classifies wars according to their source of legitimation. Biblically mandated wars are termed mandatory. Wars undertaken at the discretion of the Sanhedrin are termed discretionary.”¹³ Based on aforementioned boundaries, Jewish wars are divided into sub-categories__ including mandatory wars (commanded by God), discretionary wars, reactive defensive wars (including pre-emptive wars) and expansionary wars.¹⁴

However, the commands of Talmud on defensive wars (to wage war to defend people, feels threatened if some other nation is taking over its territory) are obscured.¹⁵ The scripture does not clarify what constitutes as infringement of land and leave it to the hands of those in power__ likely to end in abuse of power in the name of religion. Furthermore, Jewish perspective of war should be toned down according to contemporary moral standards. But in spite of having Israel Defense Force (IDF) Code, Israel violates them in Palestine and Lebanon.¹⁶ Probably, the conflict between Jewish perspectives of war is because Rabbinic and Hebrew Bible depends on theoretical speculation, codification and commentary.¹⁷ For instance Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki (also known as Rashi [1050-1105]), a commentator on rabbinic text, fused two different texts from (Psalm 111:6) and (Genesis 1) to justify wars of conquests, instead of starting from first verse of Exodus.¹⁸ He further limited categories of wars into mandatory and discretionary wars. In similar vein, Moses ben Maimon (1135–1204), (also known as Maimonides), rationalize the biblical text.¹⁹ Unfortunately, this obscurity and challenges to translating ancient text is beyond the scope of this paper.

3. Christianity: Between Radical Peace and Just Resistance

In Christianity, Jesus Christ preaches love, mercy, non-violence, reconciliation, and transformation.²⁰ The Sermons of the Mount urges to love your enemies to the extent that “If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.”²¹ Acting as peacemakers led to a certain form of radical pacifism in early Christianity where there is no place for violence and political revolt.²² Early believers of Christianity, prior to Constantine the Great (272-337 AD), were strict practitioners of pacifism and refused military services. The relationship with violence and war was altered under Constantine reign.²³

However, this pacifism led to practical challenges regarding non-violence policies when confronting exportation, tyranny and oppression. On the contrary, Realists approach to warfare is that there are no moral boundaries for wars. They argued that what can be legitimate about killing and massacre? They resist offering moral codes within war by arguing that it is factual that war is hell where laws are usually silent and everything is fair… Although born in different centuries and era__ Thucydides (459-402 BCE)²⁴, Niccolò Machiavelli (1469-1527)²⁵ and Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679)²⁶ and are all proponents of realists’ perspective of war. They argued that war is not only vicious and brutal, but also inevitable. So, the only practical thing is to do it swiftly and quickly to restore peace.²⁷ In response to systemic injustice in the world, Just War Theory provides a middle ground between pacifism and realism. The Just War theory is attributed to Cicero of Rome (106-43 BCE),²⁸ St. Ambrose of Milan (339-397 AD) and St. Augustine of Hippo (354-430 AD).²⁹“Augustine asserts that war is just when it is fought to punish sinners or return the world back to a state of peace. This peace is twofold: the harmony of the body and soul within man and the harmony between man and God.”³⁰

Figure 2. Peace-Justice Tension in Christian Tradition

The doctrine is divided into two sub-categories: Jus ad Bellum (the morally right cause s behind declaring war); and jus in Bello (the ethical code of conducting war).³¹ According to Just War Theory, violence is not likable but permissible under restricted guidelines to restore true peace, protecting innocents and in self-defense.³² The ethical guidelines of warfare like: distinction between combatants and non-combatants, proportionality, right intention and legitimate authority strongly affirms that force is a necessary evil that can be only used to ensure peace and justice fulfilling divine law. Conversely, wars for personal gain, ego and vendetta; or any other ill-intention transgressed the moral limits; and are impermissible. In fact, both parties should genuinely endeavor to seek a non-violent way to resolve conflict.³³ Right intention is the heart of the quest whether a certain war is just or sinful. Through this corrective form of war, Augustine made it harder for pacifists to condemn war.³⁴

Afterwards, St. Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) further developed this concept “De bello” in his Summa Theologica II, ii question 40, which is now being used in Modern Western moral thought.³⁵ However, other versions include ‘just peace’ by integrating ethical guidelines to just war theory after the horrors of WWII.³⁶

4. Islam: Peace through Justice and Moral Struggle

Like Jewish tradition, Islamic concept of peace is also tied to moral struggle to attain justice. Etymologically, the word ‘Islam’ is rooted from an Arabic diction ‘salam’ that means peace and ‘islam’ submission to Allah. Conversely, the religion Islam is known as the religion of peace where true peace is achieved via submitting to divine order ordained by Allah. Islam too conceptualizes peace as an active ideal (rather than passive) that brings harmony under Divine justice.³⁷

Figure 3. Peace through Justice in Qur’ānic Teachings

In addition, justice is not only an integral path to Peace, but also religious obligation as a Muslim. “Indeed, Allah commands you to return trusts to their rightful owners;1 and when you judge between people, judge with fairness. What a noble commandment from Allah to you! Surely Allah is All-Hearing, All-Seeing.”³⁸ In other verses of the Qur’ān, Allah’s commands Muslims to be just and righteous: “O believers! Stand firm for Allah and bear true testimony. Do not let the hatred of a people lead you to injustice. Be just! That is closer to righteousness. And be mindful of Allah. Surely Allah is All-Aware of what you do.”³⁹

Similarly, the following verse entails that justice is not merely important for political domain, but also important for establishing peace and equitable social order. “Indeed, Allah commands justice, grace, as well as generosity to close relatives. He forbids indecency, wickedness, and aggression. He instructs you so perhaps you will be mindful.”⁴⁰ Unlike Judaism, the commands in Qur’ān regarding war are quite distinct and clear as to how it ought to be conducted.⁴¹ For the first 12 years of preaching, the prophet Muhammad practiced pacifism and non-violence in spite of enduring atrocities and hardships by the people of Mecca.⁴² It was in Medina (622 AH), that Allah permitted Muslims to Jihād in self-defense.

Jihād__ the Moral Struggle of Peace-justice Conflict

The understanding of jihād is the peak comprehension into the moral struggle of Muslims in Islam. “O Prophet! Struggle (Jihād) against the disbelievers and the hypocrites, and be firm with them. Hell will be their home. What an evil destination!”⁴³ Jihād has multiple types in Islam, but main two divisions are the greater Jihād and the lesser Jihād:

The greater Jihād refers to spiritual struggle (inner) to seek inner peace against one’s own weaknesses, harmful desires and vices.

the lesser Jihād refers to strictly regulated physical struggle (outer) that is permitted under three circumstances, i.e., i) in defense of a community; ii) protecting the oppressed; and iii) resisting persecution.⁴⁴

The most crucial element in the study of Jihād is the comprehension of ethical guidelines for warfare. These guidelines include__ prohibit aggression and to avoid harming civilians (especially women, children and elderly); refrain from damaging and destroying property (or non-military resources); or waging war for territorial gain.⁴⁵ The Islamic ethics also guides to avoid harming or burning trees; and clergy men who have led their entire life in monastic services.⁴⁶ Allah proclaimed in the holy Qur’ān:

Fight in the cause of Allah ˹only˺ against those who wage war against you, but do not exceed the limits.1 Allah does not like transgressors. Kill them wherever you come upon them and drive them out of the places from which they have driven you out. For persecution is far worse than killing. And do not fight them at the Sacred Mosque unless they attack you there. If they do so, then fight them—that is the reward of the disbelievers. But if they cease, then surely Allah is All-Forgiving, Most Merciful. Fight against them ˹if they persecute you˺ until there is no more persecution, and ˹your˺ devotion will be to Allah ˹alone˺. If they stop ˹persecuting you˺, let there be no hostility except against the aggressors.⁴⁷

Understanding peace-justice conflict in this manner enable us to visualize that ‘peace’ comprised of both inner and outer moral struggle__ in spiritual sense it’s a personal struggle for moral purity; and in political sense it’s an outward social link to maintain justice.⁴⁸ Misunderstanding or misrepresenting the concept of Jihād has led to criticism from western lobbies and encouraged Islamophobia.⁴⁹ Oppression and tyranny is seen as disruption of divine moral order, so it must be confronted ethically to restore true peace. The foundation of Islam is built upon the concept of peace that is attained by cultivating inner moral discipline; resisting oppression through Jihād and establishing justice.⁵⁰ Additionally, this holistic bond between peace, submission to Allah and justice is ordained alongside strict ethical guidelines of warfare to regulate conduct. This entails that although restoring peace is the ultimate goal, but paving its path is only possible through maintaining justice.

5. Comparative Analysis: Shared Principles and Distinct Approaches

Let’s summarize the overlapping and shared principles in monotheistic tradition:

Figure 4. Shared theological themes in Monotheistic Religions relating to War

5.1. The Dilemma of pursing Peace in an unjust World across Monotheism

It should be noted that the perspective of war is mentioned in holy Scriptures of Judaism and Islam, but it is absent in prophetic teachings of Christianity. The view was later developed by Saints.⁵¹ On the other hand, the perspective of war dealt in Judaism is different than the perspective in Islam. This is because while Islamic perspective is strictly religious in nature, whereas, the Jewish perspective is more ethnic and born out of speculation by theologians and translators (as already discussed).⁵² Similarly, “the just war and the Jihād are analogues, in that they share certain moral concerns, in particular with respect to the presumption that war stands in need of justification and limitation - in effect, “governance.”⁵³”It was also put forth by Muhammad Legenhausen in his Islam and Just War Theory to articulate his concept of ‘Islamic just war pacifism.’⁵⁴

The following differences (in Fig. 5) depict how each religion navigates political authority, conflicts and social justice movements.

Figure 5. Differences to approach perspective of war in monotheistic Religions

5.2. Ethical Implications for the Modern World

The contemporary relevance of peace and justice in monotheistic religions includes:

Anti-colonialism and Liberation Movements in South Asia, Middle-East and Africa often emerged from religious principles entailing that justice precedes peace. Many religious leaders criticized that what the western world called ‘colonial peace’ was in fact oppression.

Modern human rights activism and resistance against oppression were mostly extracted from moral principles of Judaism, Christianity and Islam.⁵⁵ These includes: the anti-apartheid struggle, American civil right movements, contemporary advocacy for refugees, Hague and Geneva Convention.⁵⁶

Political abuse of religion can be resolved if given proper reading and comprehension to monotheistic scriptures and ethical regulations that rejects the misuse of religion to sanctify tyranny.⁵⁷ Unfortunately, there are religious fanatics, extremists and terrorists who try to justify their mandates of aggressive wars.⁵⁸ But they cannot substantiate their negative approach being backed by actual faith and Holy Scriptures.⁵⁹ As we have seen in previous sections that all monotheistic religions inclined towards peaceful co-existence; and tends to maintain ethical guidelines to conduct war if necessary.

Interreligious peace-building and humanitarian cooperation requires conflict resolution with the help of inter-faith dialogues relating peace.

6. Peace as an Eschatological Promise

Monotheistic religions, like all other religions, believe in peaceful co-existence of humanity. They nurture the principles of love, toleration, mercy and to refrain from killing unjustly. Hence, they provide a vision of peace that is rooted in justice, righteousness and moral responsibility. This moral responsibility towards justice rejects superficial calm__ conceptualizing that submission towards violence and oppression cannot settle peace. True peace requires courage to resist and struggle against evil and oppressive leaders. However, if believers of these religions strictly adhere to their outlined ethical principles to conduct war may help them to refrain from waging total war; and may help in reducing the severity of it.⁶⁰

The practical aspect of war shows that no nation state, country or religion can achieve absolute peace in this world. The imperfection in human society and prevailing systemic injustice entails that justice will always remain incomplete; and peace will always be fragile. However, the eschatological hope allows believers to pursue justice by assuming that they can attain ideal peace by following their religions respectively.⁶¹

Nonetheless, it is worth pondering that based on the current study; monotheistic religions are forming a conclusion that in order to pursue peace and serves justice, some sort of conflict, violence or war is permissible. But that would be appealing to relativism when the monotheistic religions clash one another. Consider the example of Jews violence against Muslims of Palestine:⁶² each will plea their own case as both would believe that what they are doing is morally right and an obligatory duty from the perspective of their own religion. In such scenarios, how tyranny could be differentiated from maintaining divine order and restoring peace__ remains a much debated and yet inconclusive quest of all times. Consequently, despite all the ethical guidelines of warfare, whenever war occurs, all religions transgressed and break boundaries set by their religious scriptures (be it Jews, Christians or Muslims). In addition to this, more often apparent religious conflicts have hidden political and personal agendas that have less to do with religion than propagated.⁶³ Hence, political abuse of religion is not only difficult to discern but also almost impossible to resolve (as we have seen in monotheistic religions). But attributing terrorism and fundamentalism to a particular religion alone is not only sheer biasedness but also propagation of mind-set for future generations. An endeavor, I leave for my future writings. Meanwhile, I encouraged readers to unbiasedly read every religion before tagging them with negativity; and rigorously indulge in inter-religious talks for peace.