Divinity Atlas

Sacred Correspondences
Sources

Wikipedia, "Jihad"

Wikipedia, accessed 2026

Citation Formats

General Reference

APA Style

BibTeX

A community-maintained tertiary reference on jihad, directly examined. Its strength is citing named classical jurists (Ibn Hazm, Ibn Taymiyyah) and named modern historians of Islamic law (Rudolph Peters, Bernard Lewis, Ahmed al-Dawoody) with specific claims attributable to each; its limit is a Wikipedia community article rather than a specialist monograph, which is why it sits at reliability tier three.

Facts
Assessment
Reliability Tier
3
Wikipedia's article on jihad, consulted 2026-08-13. Useful here for the Arabic root and Quranic verse count (Ahmed al-Dawoody's analysis), Ibn Hazm's fourfold typology, and Rudolph Peters's and Bernard Lewis's analysis of the shift from classical to modern usage, distinct from the facts already recorded here on the contested greater/lesser jihad hadith.
Notes
Wikipedia's article on jihad, consulted 2026-08-13. Useful here for the Arabic root and Quranic verse count (Ahmed al-Dawoody's analysis), Ibn Hazm's fourfold typology, and Rudolph Peters's and Bernard Lewis's analysis of the shift from classical to modern usage, distinct from the existing facts on the contested greater/lesser jihad hadith.
Citation
Author
Wikipedia contributors
Publisher
Wikipedia
Publication Year
2026
URL
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jihad
Source Type
reference
Cross-Tradition Connections

Associated With

Ibn Taymiyya, Figures

This source names Ibn Taymiyyah directly: "Its strength is citing named classical jurists (Ibn Hazm, Ibn Taymiyyah) and named modern historians of Islamic law (Rudolph Peters, Bernard Lewis, Ahmed al-Dawoody) with specific claims..."

Source Wikipedia, "Jihad"Wikipedia contributors
Claims Backed By This Source (149 claims)

This source backs 149 claims across the atlas. As facts: 145 well-attested. As cited relationships: 1 holds. Plus 3 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.

Disposition By Topic

  • Doctrines, 140 claims: 137 well-attested, 3 general references.
  • Sources, 9 claims: 8 well-attested, 1 holds.

Well-attested

145

Doctrines

Holds

1

General References

3

Doctrines

Comments (0)
No comments yet. Be the first to share a thought.
Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.

View At A Past Year

The atlas records no dated fact of its own for this entry, so there is no other year to choose.