Specifically, an Islamic
totalitarian society: "
Dhimmitude laws for you - Economic and Political aspects
Remember dhimmis are conquered people and dhimmitude is the culture of degradation forced onto them/evolved under Islamic rule. (See Dhimmitude: What is it?)
Some background: (based on accepting Islamic history as Islam alone tells it)
The first ‘pact’-Khaibar and Mohammad: The Jews of Khaibar awoke and headed to their fields but were viciously attacked by Mohammad and his followers. Many Khaibar Jews were slaughtered and enslaved. But, Mohammad introduced a new practise to maximise his profit from the fertile land that he realised he couldn’t farm. Some Jews were left alive BUT in exchange for their life they had to surrender 50% of their produce, and their land was owned by Muslims. Mohammad’s first biography -Sirat Rasul’allah (p511-526) tells of the violence, extortion and booty including Mohammad taking lovely Safiya while sharing out other women to the Muslim men for use once the women were ‘clean’.
Hence the extortion of others in exchange for their lives, legalised as the jizya, kharaj and other taxes began.
While they continued to pay they could remain Jewish and were ‘protected’ from further jihad as long as they didn’t break any Islamic laws or dare to be free (Sirat Rasul’allah p525-Umar expelled the Khaibar Jews)
Mohammad instructed his commanders to make holy war and give people choices
- either convert to Islam or face
death (this is the only option for certain groups) OR grovel and pay the jizya (people of the book) OR continue fighting (if caught you become a slave and Islamic slave trading continues to this day) (eg*Muslim Book 19, Number 4294: repeated in 4295, 4296)
Mohammad not only demanded this of local tribes but sent letters to ‘Negus’, ‘Caesar’ and ‘Khosroes’ demanding conversion, tribute or else. Following Mohammad’s example, Osama bin Laden calls on America to convert or else.
Islamic law today reiterates these demands eg Reliance of the Traveller law o 9.8 p 602 and o9.9 p603.
Only Muslims are safe. Other laws are attributed to Umar b. al-Khattab (634-44).
***Koran 9:123 O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty.
***Bukhari Volume 1, Book 8, Number 387: Narrated Anas bin Malik:
Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.' And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah."... (ie convert and be safe! Repeated in *Abu Dawud Book 14, Number 2635: and elsewhere. )
The Koran, hadith and sira are full of threats to others, violence, enslavement and the reward of booty for the Muslim fighter.
The claim that Islam regards all people as equal is a baldfaced lie as even the vaguest reading of Islamic text, laws and Mohammad’s example clearly shows. Kafirs cannot be regarded in any way as equal to believers. Muslim theologians and jurists defined the laws applying to dhimmis based on Islamic text although initially under the Umayyads (661-750) Islamic legislation was not a homogeneous and definitive corpus (Bat Ye’or p 52). The founders of the laws lived in the 8th/9th century long after Mohammad and supposedly consensus was reached in the 10th century (Sookhdeo P 53-58). Laws supposedly came from Islamic text (or did the text come later?) though tribal laws, Byzantine laws and other influences are evident (discussed later).
Such laws come from Islam’s supremacist attitudes to others and pathological hatred of kuffars/kafirs. In a discussion in the Shafi’i law book ‘Reliance of the Traveller’, law W59.2 p 1014-1015, examines the fact that since allah decrees all things including acts of disobedience then surely hating acts of disobedience implies hating a decree of allah ......
“And so to disobedience has 2 aspects, one regarding allah most high since it is his effect, choice, and will in which respect one accepts it out of deference to the sovereign and his sovereignty, assenting to his disposal of the matter; and another aspect regarding the perpetrator, since it is his acquisition and attribute, the sign of his being detested and odious to allah, who has afflicted him with the causes of remoteness and hatred, in respect to which he is condemnable and blameworthy. And this clarifies the koranic verses and hadiths about hatred for the sake of allah and love for the sake of allah, being unyielding towards the unbelievers, hard against them, and detesting them, while accepting the destiny of allah most high insofar as it is the decree of allah mighty and majestic.” In short this says allah pre your birth decides he hates you and afflicts you with unbelief so, while Muslims accept this as allah’s will, they must also hate what allah hates!
Remember, allah says all power to Islam-both ideologically, politically, economically and culturally.
***Koran 4.141.... Allah will not give the disbelievers triumph over the believers.
***Koran 63.8 ..... Force and power belong to god and to his prophet and to believers...
What do these laws mean for you, the dhimmi?
We have the ideal of equality before the law, Islam does not. Dhimmis are not ‘citizens’ because they don’t belong to the ‘ideological’ Islamic state ( Quote, Bostom p 34). The general conditions of dhimmitude, prescribed in sharia, transmitted over centuries, locked dhimmis into inferior, almost inescapable situations. Their degradation was “conveyed by thousands of minute details of daily life.” (Ye’or p 104). Communities shared a collective fear.
“This situation, determined by a corpus of precise legislation and social behaviour patterns based on prejudice and religious traditions, induced the same type of mentality in all dhimmi groups.- -vulnerability, humiliation, gratitude, alienation.” (Ye’Or p 104)
Robert Spencer notes:
“the extraordinary unanimity of Islamic law on these points - not only from different schools but across the centuries and in all areas of the Islamic world.” (p 57)
There was ijma or consensus that the rules were right.
Dhimmi status is allowed only to certain groups - eg Jews, Christians, Sabians, possibly Zoroastrians (Reliance law o11.0 p607) All others including new religions that developed after Islam/Mohammad (the final instalment) eg Sikhs, Bahais, Mormons..have the choice of death or Islam as they cannot enter into dhimmitude or ‘protection’ (Reliance laws o11.2 p607 and o9.9 p603). Some Hindus and Buddhists were also subjected to dhimmi laws and abuses (Bostom p 31) even though several law schools determined they must choose Islam or death.
The dhimma pact (pact of liability or protection) is only valid when dhimmis follow the rules of Islam and pay the poll tax (Reliance of the Traveller- Shafii law o11.3 p607). Failure to do so removes your protection and you can be killed by the Muslims.
Dhimmi degradation confirmed Islamic superiority.
1) Jizya and kharaj tax: unending punishment of non-Muslims who won’t convert, used to benefit Muslims.
Kharaj tax is levied on people who have lost their land by conquer or treaty but are left on the land to farm it (As people fled or converted, it may have been charged on Muslims.)
Jizya is a poll tax paid by every non-Muslim adult male (though in some cases it was levied on women, children, the blind and even the dead! (Bat Ye’or p68, 69; Bostom p 30). Their lives and possessions are spared only by paying the tax-ie it’s extortion to buy your life for a set period. Dhimmis have no inherent ‘right to life.’ Hanifites and Malikites may accept jizya from all infidels while others restrict dhimmi status and jizya payment to certain groups but abu Hanifa (legal founder) gave pagan Arabs the choice of Islam or death (Spencer p61). No-one can be spared from payment or given a partial reduction (Bat Ye’or p56, P 81by order of the caliph).
Failure to pay the jizya resulted in jail, (forced) conversion, slav¬ ry, the abduction of dhimmi children, or death (Ye’or lecture 2002).
This tax exceeded the taxes paid by Muslims and caused a transfer of wealth from non-Muslim communities to Muslims resulting in poverty, ruin and vulnerability for dhimmis.
This is NOT equivalent to western income tax which is levied based on income without regard for race and religion and is not payment for the right to live. It is not endless punishment for failing to convert to a specific religion. Mohammad demanded whole tribes pay him tribute or be attacked.
*Koran 9.29 “Fight against those who have been given the scripture as believe not in allah nor the last day and forbid not that which allah has forbidden by his messenger, and follow not the religion of truth, until they pay the tribute (jizya) readily being humiliated.
Ibn Kathir’s (14th century) comment on sura 9.29 (see tafsir.com) notes that dhimmis are miserable, humiliated, degradated and disgraced and cannot be honoured or elevated, and that Mohammad demanded that Jews and Christians be forced into the narrowest ally if met on the road.
Reliance of the Traveller, law o9.8 p602, 603 requires certain non-Muslims to be asked to enter Islam or pay the poll tax (jizya) while being humbled. It states the requirement to pay this tax continues UNTIL JESUS RETURNS TO EARTH and abolishes all religions except Islam!
Many Muslim sages have described the way to extract the jizya with much humiliation and blows to remind the non-Muslims of the Muslim generosity and tolerance in not beheading them.
Eg al-Ghazali (11th C some consider the greatest Muslim after Mohammad) describes the ritual decapitation ...
"on offering up the jizya, the dhimmi must hang his head while the official takes hold of his beard and hits (the dhimmi) on the protruberant bone beneath his ear.” (Kitabal-Wagiz fi Fiqh Madhab al-Imam al-safii)
Or strike him on both cheeks (Shafi’ite jurist Bostom p29) or give 2 blows in the back of the neck (Bostom p 31)
The Hedaya (Hanafi manual of Islamic law) notes that the jizya (capitation tax) is inflicted upon infidels for their obstinacy in infidelity and must be extracted from the infidel himself in a mortifying and humiliating manner including seizing the infidel by the throat and shaking him. It is imposed in lieu of destruction. This temporal punishment for infidelity is remitted (nolonger enforced) if the person converts to Islam or dies (The Jizyah Tax:Equality And Dignity Under Islamic Law?
Walter Short - notes This article is repeated in Spencer, The Myth of Islamic tolerance, Ch3 p73-89-capitation laws p87, 88, 89)
Taxpayers had to feed and lodge the taxcollectors, soldiers and others and taxes were extracted using punishments and torture (Bostom p 30).
Failure to pay or pay enough had devastating results eg branding dhimmis on their hands and forehead, mutilation , amputation of limbs , put out eyes, slaughter, impaling, flagellation, hanging, being crushed under presses or thrown into freezing lakes...etc (Bat Ye’or p 66, 67, 68, 71, Bostom p 30). The degree of sadism varied but the poll tax had to be paid or people were forced to flee or were expelled for failing to convert or faced death.
A large number of Coptic, Armenian, Syriac, Jewish, and Serbian letters and chronicles describe the expropriation of the conquered. ( Ye’or p69, Bostom p 24-36). The practice extended into Europe including the Balkans and into India. A long report of Sir Jadunath Sarkar (preeminent historian of Mughal India) wrote in 1920 of the multiple abuses and depressed state of the Hindus. The Qazi Mughis-ud-din declared regarding Hindus....when paying the jizya “If the officer throws dirt into their mouths, they must without reluctance open their mouths wide to receive it “
and suggested such humiliation was demanded by allah/Mohammad, glorified Islam and that Hindus were lucky under Hanifa law because other law schools demanded death or Islam! (Bostom p 34). Spitting into the mouth is also recorded (Bostom note 50 p111).
Dhimmis had to carry proof they had paid the tax if they ‘travelled’ as they were stopped in the street (they had distinctive clothing) and the receipt demanded.
Failure to produce it resulted in imprisonment. (Bat Ye’or p 69)
Reports from travellers detail the extraction of Jizya into the 20th century eg from Jews in Morocco, including a personal experience by an Italian-protected subject who received several hard blows (Bostom p 31). Also noted is the oppression and contempt shown by Muslims to others (Ye’or P 70-71). The Ottomans collected taxes directly from community leaders.
Colonialism stopped the extortion of minorities under Islam though in reality the attitudes and practices continue.
**The lives of those ineligible to pay jizya are at constant risk - no punishment for their killers.
The Baha'i religion is not protected even today in Iran. In 1994 two Muslims kidnapped and killed a Baha'i. The Islamic court held that as the Baha'is were "unprotected infidels... the issue of retribution is null and void". 10 This means that an infidel has no human rights, unless he is protected by Islamic law. (Ye’or lecture 2002 )
2) Other taxes:
Jizya tax is NOT the equivalent of zakat on Muslims but is multiple times that amount and many other taxes were included eg.
“taxes on orchards, livestock, pasturage rights, fishing, tolls and certain commoditites. Ruinous requisitions and corvees reduced the peasants to poverty” (Ye’or p 65).
Taxes on trade and transport were generally doubled for dhimmis. In Palestine extra taxes levied on the ancient Jewish population included charges to enter Jerusalem or pray at the mount of olives etc.as well as excessive charges to strip the community of its property. Jewish leaders were tortured and ransomed (paid by European Jews) even in the 19th century (likewise for Christians) (Bat Ye’or p 72, 73).
Problems paying the jizya were compounded by degradation under other repressive, sadistic laws and practices. The fact that a tiny, dwindling number of others continue in some parts of the Islamic world is a testament to the fact that some people can adhere to their faith no matter how viciously oppressed or that they have been so brainwashed and beaten into this state of dhimmitude that they cannot imagine anything else and even support their Muslim controllers. In many areas of course all other religions, culture and history have been obliterated (Saudi Arabia, Maldives, etc).
Inferiority in legal proceedings:
3) Dhimmis cannot bear witness against a Muslim or act as witnesses: Reliance of the traveller law o 24.2 (e) p 635 states that legal testimony is only acceptable from a witness who is religious ie Muslim ...and unbelief is the vilest form of corruption. The Koran 65.2 says to take witnesses from among you (Muslims) and establish the testimony for allah..
The Hedaya Vol 11 (Hanafi law) allows Jews and Christians to testify concerning each other. But infidels and dhimmis cannot testify against a Muslim:
“a Zimmee has no power over the person of a Muslim. Besides, a Zimmee may be suspected of inventing falsehoods against a Muslim, from the hatred he bears to him on account of the superiority of the Muslims over him.”(source)
* witnesses must be Muslim Hedaya Vol 1 (ibid).
This principle operated throughout the Islamic world pre colonialism. If a Muslim accuses a dhimmi of a capital offence eg trying to convert a Muslim then the dhimmi’s testimony in their defense is not valid. Non-Muslim versions of events are unreliable.
Text says a non-Muslim cannot have the upper hand over a Muslim (Koran 4.141, 63.8).
Even in the 19th century a traveller noted that a woman’s evidence, a Christian’s evidence or that of a traveller was not accepted in cases against Muslim in Muslim occupied Armenia.(Bat Ye’or p 76).
Jews could be witnesses under pre-Islamic Byzantine law (Bat Ye’or p 113)
*dhimmis were specifically summoned to appear on their holy days under Islam. But, under Byzantine law, Jews were not required to appear on their Sabbath or festival days (Ye’or p 113).
*Conversion erases the poor credibility of a dhimmi “By embracing Islam he has gained a new credibility which would enable him to witness”
Geert says it as it is
*If a Muslim kills a dhimmi he cannot be put to death.
Hadiths state Muslims cannot be killed for killing infidels eg Bukhari Vol 1 book 3 No.111, Vol 4 book 52 No. 283, Vol 9 book 83 No.40 and No. 50, Abu Dawud book 39 No. 4491 etc! And Reliance of the Traveller o1.2 (2) p 584 Shafi law but Hanifites may not agree.
*If a dhimmi kills another dhimmi, then converts to Islam he avoids a potential death sentence.
Dhimmis are supposedly under protection and shouldn’t be killed, but a Muslim can’t be killed for killing a dhimmi (infidel).
*If a dhimmi converts, his conversion acquits him of his faults including blasphemy or rape
(Quote in Bostom p 57)
* A dhimmi’s life is worth less than a Muslim’s.
Shafi law (Reliance of the Traveller o4.9 p590) states that the indemnity paid for a Jew or Christian is one-third of the indemnity paid for a Muslim. The indemnity paid for a Zoroastrian is one-fifteenth of that of a Muslim. The indemnity for a woman is one-half the indemnity paid for a man.
At best compensation may reach half that of a Muslim (see AL-RISALA, Maliki Manual 37.04 ref. 1
- notes or Spencer P80)
* In Yemen up to the 20th century, Jews were in fact slaves, owned and ‘protected’ by their tribal overlords.
If one tribe killed a Jew held by another tribe, that tribe could kill a Jew owned by the first tribe –this satisfies Islamic laws of retribution—a Jew for a Jew!
(Bat Ye’or P 79)
Islam allowed Dhimmi courts to rule on civil and religious matters within the dhimmi community (similar to Byzantine practice for other religions but Bat Ye’or notes under Islam, specific factors worsened P 113). Islamic law took precedence over Dhimmi law. As Dhimmis couldn’t bear witness against a Muslim or have their evidence admitted, they were at the mercy of Muslims with no legal protection at all. Dhimmis couldn’t defend themselves against false accusations, theft, violence, abduction of women and children, rape....resulting in great fear and servility. To avoid possible violence Dhimmis kept away from Muslims which suited Islam as text demands Muslims not be friends with non-Muslims.
*Dhimmis were/are sentenced to death for any form of criticism of Islam.
The obvious result of this is that no matter what violence was done to a Dhimmi, they dared not complain for fear of being accused of blasphemy and executed. Blasphemy charges are rife in Pakistan today-a weapon against Christians. Collective attacks against Jews on the basis of ‘blasphemy’ have occurred into the 20th century ( Ye’or p 76).
4) Stealing from Dhimmis:
*3915 AL-HEDAYA Vol. II (Hanafi Manual)
[or a crucifix or chess board]
Amputation is not incurred by stealing a crucifix, although it be of gold, - nor by stealing a chess-board or chess pieces of gold, as it is in the thief's power to excuse himself, by saying "I took them with a view to break and destroy them, as things prohibited." It is otherwise with respect to coin bearing the impression of an idol, by the theft of which amputation is incurred; because the money is not the object of worship, so as to allow of it destruction, and thus leave it in the thief's power to excuse himself. It is recorded, as an opinion of Abu Yusuf, that if a crucifix be stolen out of a Christian place of worship, amputation
Muslims looting Armenian property in Siva (1894-95)
is not incurred; but if it be taken from a house, the hand of the thief is to be struck off, for in such a situation it is lawful property, and the object of custody. (Notes or Spencer P83-84)
(Yes, chess is ‘offensive’ in Islamic law- Reliance of the Traveller w52.1 (423-25) p 989 just before the banning of playing or listening to string or reed instruments or banging a long drum!! –also ‘enormities!’)
Shafi’i law states there is no compensation for the destruction of infidel property
eg wine, pigs, while Hanafis think compensation may be required (ibid Spencer p82) Since dhimmis cannot witness against a Muslim it is difficult to see how any theft or destruction could be claimed particularly when Muslim violence against the dhimmi population was highly likely!
5) Dispossession of land and possessions:
* All land belongs to Islam and is under Islamic law for the benefit of Muslims (areas can be handed out as fiefs).
The possessions of others can be divided up amongst the Muslims (Reliance of the Traveller, Shafi laws o 10.1, 10.2, 10.3 p606, Law 25.8 (8) p647).
This is merely allah restoring to Muslims what is rightfully theirs as those who don’t worship allah have no right to anything! Allah allows the infidels property only to become booty for Muslims (Bat Ye’or p 59, Bostom p 58 quote from Andulasian Islamic jurist).
Bat Ye’or notes the demographic shift as Arabs and Turks move in, others are moved out, enslaved or forced to convert.
Muslims looting in the ethnic Chinese district of Jakarta, Indonesia, in May 1998.
*Non-Muslims cannot own land.
In the Maldives today, the NEW constitution demands all citizens be Muslim and only they can own land. Several thousand non-Muslim Maldivians lost citizenship and property rights.
Jews could own landed property (just not church property) under Byzantine law pre-Islam (Ye’or p 113). Colonialism and western influence has only recently allowed others to own land eg Christian Serbs, Jews and Christians in ‘Palestine’.
6) Public office:
*Dhimmis cannot hold public office or exercise authority over Muslims.
In Granada, Spain, the Jewish viziers Samuel Ibn Naghrela and his son, Joseph, who protected the Jewish community, were both assassinated between 1056-1066. The 1066 assassination was followed by the annihilation of the Jewish population by local Muslims --about 5000 were slaughtered by rioting Muslims because the Jews had ‘overstepped’ their station! (Bostom p 58-59)
In 1880 in Morocco an elderly Jewish couple employed a poor Muslim woman –t he 65 year old Jewish man was nailed to the ground, beaten to death, his corpse dragged through the streets and his mule and livestock taken and a ransom paid for his body (Bat Ye’or p 77).
B at Ye’or (p73) notes the history of humiliating dismissals of Christians from the first caliphs despite some Jewish/Christian leaders who were susceptible to bribes, stopped community rebellion against Muslims, and acted as interpreters and ambassadors, serving Islam and Islamization (gee isn’t it good we don’t have any like them today!!).
Once Islam takes hold of a land even the dhimmis (so called protected people) will eventually perish forever
7) Service to the Islamic state:
*Dhimmis must house and feed Muslim soldiers (and travellers) and their horses as required in the best homes, churches or synagogues
(Bat Ye’or p 58). Every legal treatise on dhimmis stressed this obligation.
In the 19th c. British and French consuls and travelers mentioned this obligation in Bulgaria, Bosnia, Greece, Armenia, Syria and the Holy Land” (Ye’or lecture 2002)
*Corvees - labour supplied as an obligation for little or no renumeration. Remember, dhimmis are booty, there to serve the interests of Islam. Copts were raided for galley slaves. Dhimmis cleaned latrines, sewers, removed refuse and rubbish and were at the mercy of rulers. In some cases dhimmis were made to mutilate thieves or hang people. In Yemen, until Jews left for Israel (1950), an edict required them to remove the carcasses of dead animals and clean public toilets.
“In Yemen and Morocco, Jews had to remove the brains from the decapitated heads of the sultans enemies, salt them, and exhibit them on the walls of the town” (Ye’or p 102).
Even today you will find non-Muslims forced into the lowest occupations in the Islamic world.
Under earlier Byzantine law, Jews were exempt from corvees (Ye’or p 113)
8) Denied self protection:
*Dhimmis cannot own or carry arms. This continued in some Islamic states into the 20th century (Bat Ye’or P 56, 57).
It left dhimmis prey to random violence, pillage and massacre.
Jews and Christians in Palestine, Syria, Egypt, Armenia, the Maghreb, Persia, Anatolia and the European Islamized provinces including Macedonia were all denied arms , some into the 19th or 20th century. In Yemen, Jews were forbidden to carry arms until their departure to Israel in 1949-50 (Ye’or lecture 2002)..
‘In Kosovo in 1860 the disarming of Serbs was still compulsory.’ (Bat Ye’or p 57). Serbian Christians were reduced to the lowest level.
The prohibition on bearing arms didn’t exist in Roman, Byzantine, or Sassian empires but was an Islamic innovation based on religious dogma (Bat Ye’or p 57, p 113).
Bat Ye’or notes many differences between Byzantine law and the much harsher and more extensive Islamic law, including fundamental differences underpinning such laws because Christianity has no conceptual framework of jihad or fay, the collective human tribute, paid to secure your life (p113).
1) Al-Misri, Ahmad ibn Naqib; Reliance of the Traveler: A classic manual of Islamic sacred law. In Arabic with facing English Text, commentary and appendices edited and translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller amana publications Maryland USA 1994
2) Bostom, Andrew (edit) The legacy of Jihad. Islamic holy war and the fate of the Non-Muslims.’ Prometheus
books New York. 2005
3) Short, WalterThe Jizyah Tax:Equality And Dignity Under Islamic Law? -notes This article is repeated in Spencer, The Myth of Islamic tolerance, Ch3 p73-89-capitation laws p87, 88, 89
4) Sookdheo, Patrick. ‘Global jihad: The future in the face of militant Islam.’ Isaac Publishing USA. 2007
5) Spencer, Robert (edit) ‘The Myth of Islamic Tolerance: How Islamic Law treats non-Muslims.’
6) Ye’or, Bat. ‘Islam and dhimmitude: Where civilisations collide.’ Madison. Teaneck fairleigh Dickinson University Press. 2002. Third Printing 2005.
7) Ye’or, Bat. Lecture 10 October 2002 Brown University. Dhimmitude Past and Present : An Invented or Real History?