|
CHAPTER II Little research appears to have been attempted on the role of Jizyah in the spread of Islam or even on Jizyah in general. We are aware of only one monograph on it, by Daniel C. Denett.1 An article, 'Al-Jizyah', in Urdu from the pen of Shibli Nu'mani (d. 1916) was hailed by Abu 'I-Kalam Azad as a major breakthrough of the modem age in Islamic studies. Shibli, Denett, and others are inclined to trace the origin of the term and concept of Jizyah to Aramaic 'gizît'/'gizyat' (Shibli)2 or 'gzîthâ' known to have been in vogue from before the time of Khusrau AnûshîrwâN (531-579 A.D.). It was a kind of capitation tax or poll tax, payment of which amounted to a badge of degradation and a mark of social inferiority. Therefore, privileged classes, such as ruling, military, priestly and educated aristocracy were exempt from it.3 For Jizyah, the Byzantine Empire had its own counterpart, tributum capitis, from before circa 290 A.D. Constantine (274-337 A.D.) is reported to have exempted the urban pleb from it. By and by 'the poll tax became, after fourth century, a burden uniquely assessed on the colonus and identified with this class of society, and that to this tax a stigma, "injuria", was attached, as in the phrase "a plebeiae capitationis injuria".4 We shall see that payment of Jizyah as prescribed by the Qur'ân also carries a stigma with it. The Qur'ân prescribes Jizyah in a Jihâdic verse, revealed about 631 A.D., i.e. about a year after the capture of Mecca by the Prophet in 630 A.D., envisaging compounding of refusal to embrace Islam by paying Jizyah. We quote the verse in full, in original; 'Qâtilu 'I-ladhîna lâ yu'mûna bi 'llâhi, wa lâ bi 'l-yawmi 'l-âkhiri, wa lâ yuHarrimûna mâ Harrama 'Ilâhu wa rasûlu-hû, wa lâ yadinûna dîna 'I-Haqqî mina 'I-ladhîna ûtu 'I-kitâba, hattâ yu'Tu 'I-jizyata 'añ yyadiN wwa hum Sâghirûna.5 Mohomed Marmaduke Pickthall translates it thus: 'Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the religion of truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.' This represents the common run of translations of the verse by Muslims and non-Muslims alike. The verse so translated leaves the course of paying Jizyah, as alternative to conversion and death, open to the scripturaries, people of the book, only. And the Qur'ân recognizes only two communities (Tâ'ifatayn), viz. Jews and Christians, as scripturaries.6 Imâm Shâfi'î, one of the four great jurists of Islam, includes the Magians (Zoroastrians) among the scripturaries, on the basis of a precedent set by the Prophet in accepting Jizyah from the Magians of BaHrîn, Hajar, QaTâr, Qatîf, and 'Ummân. 'Umar, the second Caliph, accorded this status to the Magians of Persia and Sabaeans of Mesopotamia, 'Uthmân to Berbers of Tunisia, Algeria, and Morocco (all in North Africa), and Muhammad bin Qâsim under the Governor Hajjâj bin Yûsuf and the Caliph Walîd bin 'Abd al-Malik to the Hindus and Buddhists of Sindh. According to Imam Malik, another of the four great jurists, the verse of Jizyah is applicable to all non-Muslims excepting apostates (murtadd-s). Imâm Abû Hanîfah, a third great jurist out of the four, applies it to all excepting the idolaters of Arabia. All non-Jizyah-paying infidels deserve death as a rule. Our interpretation of the Jizyah verse is entirely different. We are inclined to believe that the doors of paying Jizyah are open to scripturaries and non-scripturaries alike. Let us examine the verse closely. The verse in question prescribes Jihâd against non-Muslims of the following two categories:
The people referred to under the first category cannot be scripturaries, for the simple reason that all scripturaries believe in God, the Last Day, and the taboo-non-taboo distinction. Hence only non-scripturaries come under that category. This is why we maintain that the verse applies to non-Muslims of both the categories. We would, accordingly, propose retranslation of the verse thus: 'Fight against those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and taboo not what Allâh and His apostle have tabooed, and against such of those who have been given the scripture as follow not the religion of truth, until they pay Jizyah with their own hand, being brought low.'7 It is significant that this verse belongs to Sûrah at-Tawbah/al-Barâ'ah (Sûrah 9) revealed on the eve of and for the Great Hajj (Hajj al-Akbar) as the Qur'ân calls it,8 which concerned the idolaters much more than others,9 for from then on the rule of Jâhiliyyah (paganism) yielded place to Islam. It is also to be noted, incidentally, that in the Meccan treaty, concluded in circa 623 A.D., i.e. about eight years before revelation of the verse under consideration, between the Aws and the Khazraj tribes, to which the Jews were allowed to adhere, no Jizyah nor any other disability was imposed, save the stipulation that, if they took part in a war fought by the Muslims against the Kâfirs, they must share the expenses in the joint action. Well, the thrust of the Jizyah-verse and its implications as worked out and codified in course of time boil down to the following significant points:
To put things straight, we may highlight the following principal motives for imposition of Jizyah:
'Ilaj-I nîst dâgh-î bandagî
râ
We cannot resist the temptation of quoting Mujaddid-i Alf-i Thânî, the second-millennium reviver/rejuvenator of Islam during JahâNgîr's reign, on the purpose of imposition of Jizyah: 'The real purpose of imposing Jizyah on them (the Kâfirs) is their humiliation. And the humiliation goes to the extent that for fear of Jizyah they may not put on good dress and live with dignity/in prosperity and they may always live in fear trembling.' (Wa maqSûd-i aSlî az jizyah giriftan az îshâN khârî-i ishân ast. Wa în khârî ba-Hadd-î 'st ki az tars-i jizyah jâmah-i khûb na mî-tawânand poshîd, wa ba-tajammul na mî-tawânand bûd, wa hamîshah tarsâN wa larzâN mi-bâshand).12 Indeed, levy of Jizyah is a long-term exercise in controlled compulsion for conversion. This is theory. Let us look into history, How did Jizyah come to be introduced? It was Najrân, a district of Yaman and the greatest centre of civilization and Christianity in the Arabian peninsula. Long before the pretensions of the Quraysh of Mecca whose nobility came to be recognized only after their Islamization and mainly because of their kinship with the Prophet, the Najrânites were esteemed as the wealthiest and noblest of the Arabs by all, including poets. Having emerged as the biggest power in Arabia, the Prophet began to send squads of missionaries far and wide to spread Islam. When one such squad reached Na.jr5n, in 629 A.D., the Christians there began to question the validity and authenticity of the Qur'ân, which the illiterate missionaries of Islam had not visualized. The Christians drew their attention to the blunder in the Qur'ânic description13 of Mary, Jesus's mother, as the sister of Moses and Aaron. Mughîrah bin Shu'bah, the leader of the mission, failed to reply and reported the matter to the Prophet. The Prophet called the Christians. Their delegation started in horror, with the following verses on their lips: 'We are appearing before you in such a way that even the embryo in our camel's womb is feeling restless. His religion is opposed to that of the Christians.'14 When they drew near the Prophet, he turned his face from them and did not talk to them. Next morning he invited them to embrace Islam, which they rejected. There was a virtual debate between him and the Christians. The Prophet criticised their doctrine of the Christ's Sonship of God. Upon this, the Christians asked him who in his opinion was the father of Jesus. The Prophet could not reply. After some time, however, a revelation came to him to the effect that the birth of Jesus was akin to that of Adam.15 As regards the Christians' question about Mary, the Prophet said nothing beyond the statement that the Israelites sometimes named their members after the names of their forbears.16 When the Prophet failed to satisfy them, however, he challenged them to settle the dispute by the old Arab method sanctioned by the Qur'an, of reciprocal curses (mubâhalah).17 The Christians disapproved of it and withdrew, as the New Testament forbids cursing. Then the Prophet dictated his terms, asked them to embrace Islam, and, upon their refusal, to accept his suzerainty and pay Jizyah. They were made subjects of the Prophet and had Jizyah imposed upon them perforce. The treaty concluded by the Prophet with the Najrânites served as a model for future treaties with scripturaries. According to it, the Najrânites were to enjoy protection of life, property, and religion, 'till God ordained otherwise, in return for the payment of an annual Jizyah of two thousand garments (Hullah-s) of a specified value plus one ûqiyyah (40 dirham-s/ one pound, more or less) of silver, with each garment, together with the provision of board and lodging to the Prophet's envoys for upto a month. It was also incumbent upon the Najrânites to lend thirty coats of mail, thirty horses, and thirty camels in the event of a war with al-Yaman and refrain from usury.18 The first Caliph, Abû Bakr, honoured the agreement, but 'Umar, the second Caliph. took advantage of the clause to the effect that the agreement was valid till God ordained otherwise and the Prophet's will that there should be no non-Muslims in Arabia, and banished the Najrânites after buying up their property. He also gave them a writ to the effect that they must be provided with land for residence and cultivation in Syria and Iraq. Thereafter, they had to disperse and seek asylum in Syria and Kûfah. In Kûfah, they founded a town named An-Nairâniyyah. When 'Uthmân, the third Caliph, came into power, it was represented to him that 'Umar's writ served to deprive the original land-holders of their land. He, therefore, decreased their Jizyah by two hundred garments. The Najrânites' untold suffering constrained them to represent to 'Alî, the fourth Caliph, to let them revert to Najrân in terms of their agreement with the Prophet reduced to writing by 'Alî himself. But to no effect. They in due course approached the fifth and sixth Caliphs, who decreased their Jizyah further by two hundred garments. Later, Hajjâj bin Yûasuf, governor of Irâq, tyrannized over them and enhanced their Jizyah beyond endurable limits. When 'Umar bin 'Abd al-'Azîz became Caliph, they complained to him that they were virtually ruined and that they remained only one tenth of their population. The Caliph reduced their Jizyah to two hundred garments.19 This in short is the tale of the finest civilization of the Arabian peninsula uprooted and thrown out of history for good, by what is flaunted as the religion of peace. Jizyah remained an instrument of motivation towards conversion throughout the history of Islam. Besides, believe it or not, it sometimes operated as a stumbling block in the path of conversion. It became an instrument of exploitation at the hands of greedy rulers, so much so that it came sometimes to be levied on neo-Muslims as well, outside Arabia. This became the order of the day during the Umayyad regime. It was 'Umar bin 'Abd al-'Azîz, (d.720 A.D.), one of the Umayyad Caliphs themselves, who abolished it altogether. There appears, however, to have been a relapse of the malaise during the regime of Hishâm bin 'Abd al-Malik soon after. One of his governors did exempt the neo-Muslims from the liability to pay Jizyah, but it came to be reimposed when its abolition began to affect the exchequer adversely. 'Umar, the second Caliph, had earlier practised the anomaly of imposing double Zakât on the Christians of Bane Taghlib, even though Zakât is due from the Muslims only, according to the Qur'âdn. This led to complications, religious as well as political. The Caliph did propose to impose Jizyah on them, but they considered it beneath their dignity to be rendered liable to pay Jizyah, and threatened exodus from the Dâr al-Islâm. Upon this, 'Umar was advised not to antagonize that extremely warlike Arab tribe and he levied Zakât on them instead of Jizyah. The tribe preferred it to Jizyah.20 Jizyah continued to be used with varying degrees of emphasis for compelling conversion. Twenty-four thousand Christians embraced Islam, when Al-HafS bin al-Walîd, the deposed governor of Egypt, took advantage of the Umayyad family revolution to regain his office and proclaimed (in 744 A.D.) that converts to Islam would be exempted from Jizyah. The same thing happened in 751 A.D., when the Abbâsid governor of Egypt held out the same promise.21 Sometimes, the Jizyah gun misfired. We have seen how the Christians of Banû Taghlib accepted liability for double Zakât and rejected levy of Jizyah as humiliating. A Christian named Jabalah offered to pay Zakât but not Jizyah. 'Umar did not agree. Then he left the Dâr al-Islâm for some territory under the Roman empire along with thirty thousand people. 'Umar relented and requested them to return and pay whatever they had offered to. But they did not accede to his request and the Caliph was deprived of an important source of revenue.22 Unlike the other Umayyads who were interested more in Jizyah than in the spead of Islam, 'Umar bin 'Abd al-'Azîz was all for the latter. His governor of Egypt, Hayyân, wrote to him: 'O Commander of the Faithful! If things continue as they are now in Egypt, all the "Protected Peoples" will soon become Muslims and then we shall cease to get money (taxes) from them.' Whereupon 'Umar sent him a messenger saying: 'Go down to Egypt and give Hayyân thirty stripes with a whip upon his head as a punishment for that which he has written and tell him as follows: "Take care, O Hayyan! whosoever has become a Muslim, do not ask poll-tax from him. I only wish that the whole bunch of them would become converted. Verily! Allâh has sent MuHammad as a preacher, not as a tax-gatherer.''' (al-Wâsitî, alive 1292). 'Umar bin 'Abd al-'Azîz's governors and Jizyah-collectors tried, however, to circumvent his dispensation. The governor of Khurâsân planned to keep the number of Jizyah assessees as high as possible by laying down conditions of circumcision to be certified by a staff appointed for the purpose, of memorizing at least one chapter of the Qur'ân, of proving by word and deed loyalty to the Muslims, and so forth, with the result that the great majority of neo-Muslims had to keep bearing the burden of Jizyah. Thus, though Jizyah has played enormous role in the spread of Islam, it sometimes helped retard it as well. When a tribe found that acceptance of Islam failed to save it from Jizyah and other humiliations accompanying it, it saw no point in continuing in Islam or embracing it. Sometimes, they had to revert to their ancestral religion. Thus, the Sughdî-s of the trans-Âmû region had become Muslims for exemption from Jizyah but had later to revert to their native religion in thousands on finding themselves still under the yoke of the same disabilities and indignities as ordained for non-Muslims. Sometimes, again, even exodus took place for fear of Jizyah. During the regime of 'Umar bin 'Abd al-'Azîz himself, when Asharas, the governor of Khurâsân, reimposed Jizyah on neo-Muslims, seven thousand of them left Samarqand in search of a Jizyah-free abode. In fact, not only Jizyah but also booty (nafal/ghanimah) in war with non-Muslims was responsible for retarding the process of conversion to Islam. A couple of the Qur'ânic verses prescribe plunder or booty as an integral part of Jihâd and legitimate source of income.23 And plunder is of three kinds:
Booty in war with non-Muslims proved so gainful to the Muslims even during the Prophet's time that, when a Companion of the Prophet planned to attack a non-Muslim tribe and the tribe not only surrendered but also, on a promise being held out by him to save their life and property on embracing Islam, did embrace Islam, his comrades took him to task for thus depriving the Muslims of booty.24 'Umar, the second Caliph, wrote to Sa'd when he conquered Irâq: 'Anyone who obeys you and accepted Islam prior to the battle is one of the Muslim, owning what they own and having a share in Islam. But he who obeyed you after the battle and the defeat, is (also) one of the Muslims; however, his property goes to the people of Islam because they acquired it before the conversion to Islam. The people of any town subjugated by force who embrace Islam prior to the division of spoils are considered free people, but their properties go to the Muslims.'25 This is itself a licence to loot neo-Muslims. Sometimes, however, temptation of direct plunder is found to have been resisted with an eye to more substantial gains expected to accrue otherwise. So, when 'Umar conquered as-Sawâd (south Irâq), he proceeded to take a census with a view to dividing its land-holdings among the Muslims. But 'Alî dissuaded him from confiscating these as booty, on the plea that the non-Muslim cultivators would prove a better source of income as Jizyah- and Kharâj-payers.26 What was the rate of Jizyah? The Qur'ân gives no guidance in this behalf. The Prophet levied Jizyah usually at the rate of one dînâr (five rupees) and one jarîb (about 20 kilograms) of wheat per major male and female. In al-BaHrîn, however, he made a compromise on half the quantity of dates and coms.27 'Umar, the second Caliph, established three grades of Jizyah:
He exempted children, women, old persons, and monks from Jizyah. In addition to Jizyah, cultivators of the countryside had to pay Kharâj (land-tax) also, and inhabitants of uncolonised suburbs of cities had to make provisions of ration, olive oil, honey and vinegar for Muslim armies stationed there. His Egyptian governor, 'Amar bin al-'ÂS added clothing to the list and increased the rate of Jizyah from six rupees to ten rupees, extorting ration etc. at a higher rate into the bargain. Later, under 'Umar's own dispensation, the rate of Jizyah for Syria, Irâq, and Egypt was increased to twenty rupees plus a lot of provisions in kind at a highly enhanced rate and hosting of Muslim wayfarers and armies for three days.28 It was also made incumbent upon the Jizyah-payers of Irâq to guard the paths and bridges and repair these at their own cost. The loss sustained by these Dhimmî-s consequent upon movement of Muslim armies was never compensated for.29 During 'Umar's time, a trade and commerce tax called 'Ushur was also levied on the Dhimmî-s.30 Till the time of the fourth Caliph, 'Alî, eight sources of revenue to the state exchequer had come into vogue:
The Umayyads added certain minor sources of revenue to the list. Out of these, Muslims came ultimately to bear the burden of only the following:
Abû Yûsuf prescribes Kharâj on Dhimmî-s at double the rate thereof on Muslims.32 As regards Zakât, which is flaunted as a liability upon Muslims juxtaposed to Jizyah, it is noteworthy that, though Muslims were expected to pay 40% of their total income of a whole year as Zakât, yet it ceased to be irksome inasmuch as
Thus, Jizyah implies and involves a lot more than the so-called paltry sum of a few rupees yearly per taxable head. It opens the door to unlimited exploitation, and addition of insult to injury, into the bargain. It kept Dhimmî-s exposed to victimization when the state stood in need of money. On the towns surrendering by peaceful treaties, such as Hirâ, Ullays, 'Ayn at-Tamr, and Banîqiyah in south Iraq (as-Sawâd), and Damascus, Bala'bakk, HimS, and Jerusalem in Syria, imposition of collective Jizyah became the order of the day, so much so that, while those who died or became Muslims were freed of Jizyah, the sum total of Jizyah on each town remained constant, the remaining Dhimmî-s bearing the burden of the Jizyah paid earlier by the deceased while alive and the converts to Islam before their conversion. For instance, by death or conversion the population of Najrâniyyah, founded in Irâq by the Christians of Najrân on being driven out of their homeland by the Arabs, dwindled, but neither Mu'âwiyyah nor others would easily reduce the quantum of Jizyah. YaHyâ bin Âdam (757-818) rules: 'All of them are charged with whatever was peaceably agreed upon, taking into consideration their ability to pay from their properties and lands, but nothing will be deducted following death or conversion to Islam of any of them, as the whole should be collected from the rest in accordance with their ability to pay and to be charged.'33 'Umar bin 'Abd al-'Azîz had the conscience to abolish the cruel system and enforced a uniform rule that each Dhimmî had to pay Jizyah on his own head.34 On the other side, when the burden of the ever-increasing liability for the others' Jizyah on the Dhimmî-s became intolerable, Hajjâj bin Yusûf, the governor of Iraq, reimposed Jizyah on the converts. Sometimes, assessees of Jizyah found themselves under the painful necessity of selling their women and children to be able to pay Jizyah. Accordingly, 'Amar bin al-'ÂS levied collective Jizyah of thirteen thousand dînârs on the residents of Barqah near Alexandria and gave them the option of raising money by selling their women and children for payment of Jizyah.35 The classical jurist-theologians give us the Covenant of 'Umar, preserved in the form of a letter submitted by the Christians of Syria as Dhimmî-s to Abû 'Ubaydah, which 'Umar ratified. The letter contains the following terms, ostensibly on behalf of the Christians:
All the four leaders of Muslim law agree that no new construction of places of worship by Dhimmî-s is permissible in cities and big towns of Dâr al-Islâm. Those other than Imâm Abû Hanîfah do not permit such construction anywhere else as well. Imâm Abû Hanîfah permits it to scripturaries at a distance at least of one mile from the fortifications of a town. Imâms other than Imâm AHmad ibn Hanbal permit repairs of churches and synagogues in case their site had been gifted to the Dhimmî-s. Ibn Hanbal appears generally to be opposed to repairs of all kinds, though he sometimes opines otherwise also. The Dhimmî suffered from legal disabilities as well, in matters of testimony, criminal law, marriage, inheritance, etc. He could not inherit from a Muslim. In the event of his wife's conversion, he was required to be converted or to divorce her. If he was employed in the army, he could get allowances but no legal share in the spoils (ghanîmah).37 Besides, there were certain extra-constitutional disabilities and indignities to which the Dhimmî-s were subjected without scruples. Muslims used to gather fruits from the former's orchards and gardens, pastured their cattle on their fields, took begâr from them. Zayd bin Sa'sa'ah told the governor of BaSrah (36-40 A.H.) that Muslims knocked at the doors of Dhimmî-s, and, if the doors were not opened, broke them open, took out the coats therein, and slaughtered them for food at will.38 Indeed, non-Muslims found Jizyah as the most degrading of the disabilities and indignities under the Muslim rule. That is why many non-Muslim rulers and tribes were prepared to open the doors of their treasuries to the Muslim armies but shuddered to think of paying Jizyah. The offer of the Byzantine governor to the Muslims referred to above is an instance in point. Indeed, in history the dread of Jizyah on the part of the non-Muslims consisted in not only the quantum of the tax and of all other discriminatory fiscal liabilities that it implies but also and more so in its being a symbol of utter servility and abject surrender and subjection demonstrated by the procedure, written and unwritten, laid down for paying Jizyah and thereby becoming a Dhimmî.39 We have seen that sometimes liability to pay Jizyah did not cease even after conversion. A strange phenomenon indeed. But a stranger phenomenon is the plight of neo-Muslims even if not assessed to Jizyah. Even after conversion to Islam, a non-Arab continued to suffer a number of humiliations and disabilities. Under the Umayyads, no non-Arab convert to Islam could marry an Arab girl. Under Hajjâj bin Yûsuf's dispensation, no such convert could lead the prayer assembly in a mosque in al-Kûfah, nor could he be appointed as a judge (qâDî). In many matters he was ill-treated like a Dhimmî. Non-Arab converts to Islam were called Mawâlî (singular Mawlâ), like manumitted slaves, who, too, were called Mawâlî. We cannot go into details here. Suffice it to add that, in his Murawwaj adh-Dhahab, Mas'ûdî quotes a verse to the effect that 'Whoever wants to see degradation, infamy, and disgrace cumulatively at one place would do well to see a Mawlâ.' Till the conquest of Mecca by the Prophet in 8 A.H., there had been no concept of non-Muslim subjects. There were only treaties with non-Muslims on specific terms and conditions. The idea of their subject-hood came to the fore thereafter, with Jizyah. Non-Muslims could become part of the protectorate under Muslims and save their life and property to a given extent and their religion, too, to some extent by paying Jizyah. The non-Muslims so protected, called Dhimmî-s, were not citizens - yes, neither first-class citizens nor second-class citizens - but miserable subjects of the Muslim state, with no political rights, or even fundamental rights worth the name. Maududi writes: 'During the times of the Prophet and the 'legitimate' Caliphs, no example is available of a Dhimmî having been appointed as a member of the Advisory Council (majlis-i shûrâ), a governor of some region, a judge of some place, a minister or administrator of some department, or a commander of some army, or of a Dhimmî having been given an opportunity to take part in the selection of a Caliph; although Dhimmî-s did exist during the age of the Prophet, and during the times of the legitimate caliphs their population ran into crores.'40 Indeed, Dhimmî-s were just a tolerated mass managing their own affairs according to a schedule imposed upon them against their will. There is, however, a silver lining in the dark cloud. Sometimes, Jizyah was refunded in the event of the Muslims leaving the Dhimmî-s to fend for and defend themselves against the onslaught of a superior power. When, for example, Abû 'Ubaydah gave way to Heraclius in HimS (Syria), he is said to have refunded the Jizyah collected by him from the Dhimmî-s of the city, on the ground that he was no longer in a position to protect them from their enemies, even though the Dhimmî-s protested that they preferred the Muslims' to the Greeks' rule.41 C. H. Beeker and L. Caetani reject this story, however, on the ground that the Arabs at that period had not the intelligence to make the connection between tribute and protection. Caetani thinks it unlikely that the Arabs could have collected Jizyah during the period of the Greek occupation.42 But Denett refers to ,an anonymous Syrian chronicle, which tells us that during the period before the battle of Yarmûk the tribute of Damascus as well was refunded.'43 It is also noteworthy that the Christian tribe of al-Jarâjimah in the neighbourhood of Antioch were exempted from Jizyah and required to take part in Jihâd.44 It must, however, be borne in mind that, such exceptions apart, Dhimmî-s could hardly consider it morally imperative to cooperate with the Muslims in the latter's bid to exterminate the former's own religions and communities. The war fought by the Muslims was far from being an ordinary war; it was a war often against what the Dhimmî-s held dear. In such a war no non-Muslim would like to side with the Muslims, unless he chooses to turn a traitor to his own religion. And, if the Muslims do find such a one, they would naturally welcome him. Exemption from Jizyah is nothing compared with the stakes involved. And the fact that the Muslims did succeed in finding such Dhimmî-s on occasion serves to betray the amount of torture the latter must have been subjected to, turning them practically against themselves to enable them to heave just a sigh of relief. Let us wind up the discussion
with a quotation from a contemporary writer on the Islamic law of war
and peace: 'The question has been raised as to whether it is not inconsistent
with Islam's objective, seeking ultimate supremacy of the true religion,
to accept payment in money for persistence in unbelief. Sarkhasî45
held that the object is not pecuniary consideration, but the invitation
of unbelievers to Islam in the most gentle manner. By being allowed to
live among Muslims, the dhimmî-s will be attracted by the beauties
of the Muslim faith, and they may willingly accept it.'46
|
||||||||