Qaradawi on Dhimmis – II
2/9/2012
Qaradawi on Dhimmis – II
Ibn Kammuna
My discussion in this article relies on Qaradawi’s book “Non-Muslims in Muslim Society” (Arabic edition – Risala Foundation, 2nd edition, 1983). Page numbers used rely on this edition.
Dhimmis have to pay a special protection tax to the Muslim State; Jizya. It is a tax paid by able adults. Dhimmis also have to pay an Estate tax called “Kharaj”. The also pay a commercial/business tax (half a percent for dhimmis compared to a quarter of a percent to Muslims! Muslims will try to find explanation to say that such a procedure is Okay and no discrimination is intended) . (page 31)
Believe it or not, the originator of the Jizya tax is an evil Qur’anic verse:
Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. (Tauba 9:29)
I call this verse evil, because it is evil. One has to call things by their names. Why should one fight others because they have a different religion or belief? And who says that Islam is the religion of Truth except a Muslim? Others believe different, so Islam is not a relgion of Truth as far as they are concerned.. Worst is the last part of the verse. It talks about Non-Muslims having to pay a Protection tax called Jizya “with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued”. Is there a deeper humiliation, done on purpose, by Muslims, against those who happen to believe different? I read comments of Muslims sometimes saying he/she is proud to be a Muslim. The fact is a Muslim should feel ashamed from Qur’anic verses such as the above. Such a verse is intended to humiliate other people who do not believe in Islam or Muhammad. People should be free to believe what they want. This is not a reason to fight them, force them to pay protection money, or humiliate them.
According to Qaradawi, the Islamic state is a “creed” state. It is ideological (Islamic). Those who fight for it are to be Muslims. Jihad duty is for Muslims. Non-Muslims do not need to be in the Islamic military because Jihad is a duty for Mulsims only. Non-Muslims can contribute through their Jizya money. So Jizya is an expression of submission to the Islamic state by non-Muslims. In addition, it is a financial alternative to “Military Service” that is a must for Muslims. (page 33)
What Qaradawi says here reduces non-Muslims to having no power in the affairs of the state. Here, we have a group of citizens, non-Muslims, who are not given their full rights as equal citizens of the state. Why should a Muslim be allowed to join the military, while a non-Muslim can’t? This, in my view, is “institutionalized discrimination” by the state against some of its citizens.
Dhimmis also have to be considerate of Muslims feelings in such a Muslim state. They should not talk negative about Muhammad or Islam. They should not eat or drink in public during Ramadan (page 41)
People should be free to criticize anyone. Yes, that includes Muhammad and Islam. Also, it seems to me that fasting is a private matter, even if all Muslims are fasting. Their fasting should not invade my individual choice of not fasting or going to a public restaurant and having something to eat. I have no problem with a Muslim fasting. I do have a problem with a Muslim’s fasting forcing me to suffer hunger or thirst just because I am in a public environment.
According to Qaradawi, Islam was a greatly forgiving and accommodating religion throughout its history. Islam did not ask from dhimmis except making them wear a special dress color to distinguish them during certain periods of history, and making them pay a “small” special tax, Jizya. They also were not allowed to serve in the army. Their testimonies were not accepted in Islamic courts. But they were able to self-govern and had their own courts. (page 52)
What Qaradawi is saying here is clear discrimination against Non-Muslims. In addition, Imagine you had to be a witness to a crime where Muslim parties were involved. But you are a Non-Muslims. According to Qaradawi, your testimony is not accepted in a Muslim court. Is this fair to the conflicting parties? You can be the most outstanding and honest citizen of the land, but, even so, your word is not good enough for a Muslim court.
Also, what is this non-sense about making people wear a special color of clothes just because they are not Muslims. Qaradawi, does not even have the balls to say that such a policy during certain periods of the Islamic rule in history was a bad and discriminatory policy. To his credit, Qaradawi understands that there is a problem in asking Non-Muslims to wear special colors to distinguish them from Muslims ( such color codes were enforced in specific areas during the times of Khalifs, Omar Ibn Al Khattab – ruled after Abu Bakr’s death., and also during the rule of Omar Bin Abdel-Aziz). However, Qaradawi tries to make this matter a non-issue because such color codes for humans help identify people because, back then, they had no identification cards system as we do nowadays. (page 60)
Qaradawis’ explanation is unsatisfactory at best. Let us say there was no ID systems back then, Is that a good enough reason to “color code” people? Off course Not.
With this, I end this article
Posted by Ibn Kammuna
on February 10 2012. Filed under Op-Ed.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
There is a special dress item to identify people like Qaradawi: A dunce cap.
the only religion from devil -Islam , Allah wants to see the people starving, poverty ,wasting times in praying .
Allah is like a crime mafia don who tortures the people like anything in hell fire for disobeying
Yes, it is an evil verse. No matter how much muslims try to make excuses and pretend it doesn't say what it says.
They are great at explaining why everything doesn't say what it obviously says. This is why they love their "scholars" so much. Oh, my, they love and respect their scholars! They are the ones who are paid to dream up "explanations" for the butchery of their scriptures. They find outlandish, complicated ways to explain it away for non-muslim consumption. That's why they are all such a bunch of wind bags, and take twenty pages to "explain" why one verse does not say what it obviously does so say. It's not easy to make up all of these intricate, far-stretching, pretzel-logic "explanations."
Sorry. It says what it says. It's barbaric.
Blaze, what you have to remember that Islam exists to confuse both its followers,( to keep them in line) and its enemies. If you've ever seen an "eminent" imam being interviewed by a non-Muslim who obviously knows exactly what Islam is, and they ask the question about abrogation of Koranic verses, the so-called "expert" will answer that both concepts are true. Once you realise that Islam is a dualistic cult that allows its followers to do anything they like, as long as it is in the service of Jihad, then you're more than halfway towards realising how dangerous, duplicitous and downright evil Islam is.
"Allah is the best deceiver"
That verse says that Muslims should "fight every other religion until you kill them or humiliate them, and make them bow to Islam, until Islam dominates the entire world, and the whole world bows on hands and knees before Allah."
That's bad.
No doubt some skolerz will be along soon to put our fears to rest. Even though that one verse describes the whole history of Islam since its beginning up until this very day.
One big development to be celeberated is that the so called muslim "scholars" are increasingly put to task, day by day, trying to explain the unexplainable, trying to justify the unjustifiable. They now avoid simple former muslims such as Wafa Sultan. This is great guys.
The "skolerz" are working overtime!
Hopefully they will start blowing gaskets or losing their temper in public.
Yes, it is an evil verse. No matter how much muslims try to make excuses and pretend it doesn't say what it says.