Skip to main content

Religious Terrorism

By Amy Zalman, Ph.D.

The world's great religions all have both peaceful and violent messages from which believers can choose. Religious terrorists and violent extremists share the decision to interpret religion to justify violence, whether they are Buddhist, Christian, Hindu, Jewish, Muslim, or Sikh.

Buddhism and Terrorism

Buddhism is a religion or approach to an enlightened life based on the teachings of the Buddha Siddhartha Gautama twenty five centuries ago in northern India. The edict not to kill or inflict pain on others is integral to Buddhist thought. Periodically, however, Buddist monks have encouraged violence or initiated it. The primary example in the 20th and 21st century is in Sri Lanka, where Sinhala Buddhist groups have committed and encouraged violence against local Christians and Tamils. The leader of Aum Shinrikyo, a Japanese cult that committed a lethal sarin gas attack in the mid-1990s, drew on Buddhist as well as Hindu ideas to justify his beliefs.

Christianity and Terrorism

Christianity is a monotheistic religion centered on the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, whose resurrection, as understood by Christians, provided salvation for all mankind. Christianity's teachings, like those of other religions, contain messages of love and peace, and those that can be used to justify violence. The fifteenth century Spanish inquisition is sometimes considered an early form of state terrorism. These Church-sanctioned tribunals aimed to root out Jews and Muslims who had not converted to Catholicism, often through severe torture. Today in the United States, reconstruction theology and the Christian Identity movement have provided justification for attacks on abortion providers.

Hinduism and Terrorism

Hinduism, the world's third largest religion after Christianity and Islam, and the oldest, takes many forms in practice among its adherents. Hinduism valorizes non-violence as a virtue, but advocates war when it is necessary in the face of injustice. A fellow Hindu assassinated Mohandas Ghandi, whose non-violent resistance helped bring about Indian independence, in 1948. Violence between Hindus and Muslims in India has been endemic since then. However, the role of nationalism is inextricable from Hindu violence in this context.

Islam and Terrorism

Adherents of Islam describe themselves as believing in the same Abrahamic God as Jews and Christians, whose instructions to humankind were perfected when delivered to the last prophet, Muhammad. Like those of Judaisim and Christianity, Islam's texts offer both peaceful and warring messages. Many consider the 11th century "hashishiyin," to be Islam's first terrorists. These members of a Shiite sect assassinated their Saljuq enemies. In the late 20th century, groups motivated by religious and nationalist goals committed attacks, such as the assassination of Egyptian president Anwar Sadat, and suicide bombings in Israel. In the early 21st century, al-Qaeda "internationalized" jihad to attack targets in Europe and the Uniteed States.

Judaism and Terrorism

Judaism began around 2000 BCE when, according to Jews, God established a special covenant with Abraham. The monotheistic religion focuses on the importance of action as an expression of belief. Judaism's central tenets involve a respect for life's sanctity, but like other religions, its texts can be used to justify violence. Some consider the Sicarii, who used murder by dagger to protest Roman rule in first century Judea, to be the first Jewish terrorists. In the 1940s, Zionist militants such as Lehi (known also as the Stern Gang) carried out terrorist attacks against the British in Palestine. In the late 20th century, militant messianic Zionists use religious claims to the historical land of Israel to justify acts of violence.
Source: http://terrorism.about.com/od/politicalislamterrorism/tp/Religious-terrorism.htm

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Smart Security, Free Society: Malaysia’s Data Dilemma

In today’s digitally driven world, national security is no longer confined to borders or traditional threats. Cyberattacks, disinformation campaigns, and asymmetric warfare have become the new frontiers of conflict. Malaysia, strategically located in Southeast Asia and increasingly exposed to regional tensions and internal vulnerabilities, must strengthen its security apparatus. However, doing so must not come at the cost of civil liberties. Malaysia can enhance its security strategy by leveraging insights from advanced data platforms like those pioneered by Palantir Technologies, while maintaining strong democratic oversight to safeguard the fundamental freedoms protected by the Federal Constitution. Palantir Technologies, a U.S.-based company, gained prominence in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks. Its core software, Gotham, was designed to integrate fragmented intelligence and provide real-time, actionable insights to military and intelligence agencies. Over the years,...

Syringe Attacks in Malaysia and France: Random Violence or Terrorism? - Part 3

The syringe attack on the 12-year-old son of Pandan MP and former Economy Minister, Datuk Seri Rafizi Ramli, has shaken Malaysia. What initially appeared as a rare and bizarre incident now echoes a disturbing pattern witnessed abroad, notably in France. In June 2025, during the Fête de la Musique festival, over 145 people across France reported being pricked with syringes in crowded public areas. In both cases, the weapon of fear was not a gun or bomb but a syringe. When viewed together, the Rafizi incident and the mass needle attacks in France reveal an alarming global trend of unconventional, psychological violence that leaves behind not just physical uncertainty but emotional trauma. The question we must now ask is: are these acts simply random criminality, or should they be treated with the gravity of terrorist attacks? A Pattern Beyond Borders In France, the attacks spanned multiple cities, with 13 confirmed cases in Paris alone. Victims included women, men, and even min...

Constitution of Malaysia: An Introduction Part 5

7 (1) No person shall be punished for an act or omission which was not punishable by law when it was done or made, and no person shall suffer greater punishment for an offence than was prescribed by law at the time it was committed. (2) A person who has been acquitted or convicted of an offence shall not be tried again for the same offence except where the conviction or acquittal has been quashed and a retrial ordered by a court superior to that by which he was acquitted or convicted.