al-firaushah

The Jizya or Poll Tax

Here is another excerpt from Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl’s writings, this being on the topic of the jizya or poll tax. In 9:29, the Qur’an says:

“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.”

This is one verse hostile non-Muslims like to point out, whining that we Muslims would inflict upon them the jizya if we were able. (Hey, everyone’s gotta pay their taxes, ya know? )

On page 27, Dr. Khaled addressed this topic in his article, The Place of Tolerance in Islam.” (To read the entire article, click on the Inabah button at the top of Masjid Khadijah’s website, then click on the Issue 21 icon. The article, in PDF format, is on pp. 21-27 (pp. 19-25 on Adobe Reader). This excerpt is another good reason why everyone (Muslims and non-Muslims) need to understand the historical context underlying the revelation of the Qur’an.

The other major issue on the point of tolerance in Islam is that of the poll tax (jizyah) imposed on the People of the Book (Christians and Jews) who live in Muslim territory. When the Qur’an was revealed it was common inside and outside of Arabia to levy poll taxes against alien groups. Building upon the historical practice, classical Muslim jurists argued that the poll tax is money collected by the Islamic polity from non-Muslims in return for the protection of the Muslim state. If the Muslim state was incapable of extending such protection to non-Muslims, it was not supposed to levy a poll tax. In fact, ‘Umar, the second Rightly Guided Caliph and close companion of the Prophet, returned the poll tax to an Arab Christian tribe that he was incapable of protecting from Byzantine aggression.

Aside from the juristic theory justifying the poll tax, the Qur’an does not, however, pronounce an absolute and unwavering rule in favor of such an institution. Once more, attention to historical circumstance is essential. The Qur’an endorsed a poll tax as a response to particular groups in Arabia who were persistently hostile to the early Muslims. Importantly, the Prophet did not collect a poll tax from every non-Muslim tribe that submitted to Muslim sovereignty, and in fact, in the case of a large number of non-Muslim but non-hostile tribes, he paid them a periodic sum of money or goods. These tribes were known as “those whose hearts have been reconciled.” Furthermore, ‘Umar entered into a peace settlement with Arab Christian tribes pursuant to which these tribes were obligated to pay the Islamic annual tax known as the zakah and not the poll tax. Reportedly, although they refused to convert to Islam the Christian tribes contended that paying the jizyah (poll tax) was degrading and, instead, asked to pay the zakah, and ‘Umar accomodated their request.

In short, there are various indicators that the poll tax is not a theologically mandated practice but a functional solution that was adopted in response to a specific set of historical circumstances. Only an entirely ahistorical reading of the text could conclude that it is an essential element in a Divinely-sanctioned program of subordinating the non-believer.

Jihad versus Violence

The following excerpt comes from Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl’s article, “Peaceful Jihad.” Dr. Khaled is a Professor of Law at the UCLA School of Law. He was recently in Singapore, and Inabah magazine, a publication of Masjid Khadijah, was given permission to publish a number of his articles. (To read the entire article, click on the Inabah button at the top of Masjid Khadijah’s website, then click on the Issue 21 icon. The article, in PDF format, is on pp. 18-20.)

I’ve chosen this particular excerpt because I think Dr. Khaled provides a very good distinction between the concepts of jihad and qital. The concept of jihad is often confused by non-Muslims with what we Muslims call qital, or fighting. Jihad and qital, as Dr. Khaled shows, are quite distinct concepts from each other and jihad, which is a positive value, should not be confused with qital.

I’ve also included two additional paragraphs to this excerpt because it helps to illustrate some of the limitations that are placed on qital that we Muslims are to follow:

“Jihad is a core principle in Islamic theology; it means to strive, to apply oneself: to struggle, and persevere. In many ways, jihad connotes a strong spiritual and material work ethic in Islam. Piety, knowledge, health, beauty, truth, and justice are not possible without jihad - without sustained and diligent hard work. Therefore, cleansing oneself from vanity and pettiness, pursuing knowledge, curing the ill, feeding the poor, and standing up for truth and justice even at great personal risk are all forms of jihad.

“The Qur’an uses the term jihad to refer to the act of striving to serve the purposes of God on this Earth, which include all the acts mentioned above. Importantly, the Qur’an does not use the word jihad to refer to warfare or fighting; such acts are referred to as qital. While the Qur’an’s call to jihad is unconditional and unrestricted, such is not the case for qital. Jihad is a good in and of itself while qital is not. Every reference in the Qur’an to qital is therefore restricted and limited by particular conditions, but exhortations to jihad, like the references to justice or truth, are absolute and unconditional. Consequently, the early Muslims were not allowed to engage in qital until God gave them specific permission to do so. The Qur’an is careful to note that Muslims were given permission to fight because they had become the victims of aggression. Furthermore, the Qur’an instructs Muslims to fight only those who fight them and not to transgress, for God does not approve of aggression.

“In addition, the Qur’an goes on to specify that if the enemy ceases hostilities and seeks peace, Muslims should seek peace as well. Failure to seek peace without just cause is considered arrogant and sinful. In fact, the Qur’an reminds Muslims not to pick fights and not to create enemies, indicating that it is a Divine blessing when one chooses to make peace. God has the power to inspire in the hearts of non-Muslims a desire for peace, and Muslims must treat such a blessing with gratitude and appreciation, not defiance and arrogance.

“In light of this Qur’anic discourse, Muslim jurists debated what would consitute a sufficient and just cause for fighting non-Muslims. Are non-Muslims fought because of their act of disbelief or only becase they pose a physical threat to Muslims? Most jurists concluded that the justification for fighting non-Muslims is directly proportional to the physical threat they pose to Muslims. In other words, if they do not threaten or seek to harm Muslims, then there is no justification for acts of belligerence or warfare. Similarly, relying on precedents set by the Prophet, classical Muslim jurists held that non-combatants - children, women, people of advanced age, monks, hermits, priests, or anyone else who does not seek to or cannot fight Muslims are inviolable and may not be targeted.”

The 9/11 Terrorists and Shirk

The following is a comment I’ve made on Lost Budgie’s blog. I felt that this topic (shirk) was an important one to discuss, both for the education of non-Muslims and to warn any forgetful Muslims not to engage in that most foolish of behavior, one that they would ultimately regret.

Lost Budgie wrote: “So, how about it? In as unequivocal a manner as possible, and with no weasel words, please clearly state that those Muslims who crashed the airplanes on 9/11 were NOT martyrs to Islam and that they are burning in hell.”

I had been asked to respond to certain of your comments on this thread and, originally, I was going to do that; however, I then decided not to because I felt your post and comments were just too silly and islamophobic to argue with. Plus, it’s Ramadhan and I would rather keep to the theme of the month; namely, practicing self-restraint. Still, this last comment of yours deserves a response, if only to educate you and other non-Muslims on an important point of Islam.

What you’ve asked us to do, in the above quotation, is - quite simply - extremely sinful behavior. In Arabic, the sin is known as shirk, or the association of others with Allah (swt). This is the one sin Allah (swt) has told us that he will never forgive. The fact of the matter is that we cannot say one way or another whether *anyone* (let alone the 19 highjackers of 9/11) is or will be in heaven or hell. We cannot even say whether a person is in or out of Islam. These decisions are Allah’s (swt) alone; we do not have the prerogative, authority nor ability to make such pronouncements. To think that we can is to think that we have some of the powers of Allah (swt), and that is shirk, because we are setting ourselves up as Allah’s (swt) equal - and that, of course, can never be. After all, no human being is a god. Astagfirullah!

The problem isn’t Islam, it’s the extremist Muslims

Excerpts from a good article, touching on some of the topics that Lost Budgie and I were discussing earlier in the week. By Nancy El-Gindy.

“Why is it that Islam is always brought into question when a small minority of Muslims actually commits crimes of aggression? Why is it assumed that Islam itself is actually driving these murderers to such levels of hatred and ignorance? Islamic terrorism has no roots in the religion itself; rather it grows out of individuals’ own interpretation of it, personal intolerance and hate, and in some cases, perhaps even insanity.”

…

“If enough people read the teachings of Islam they would understand that it promotes tolerance, patience, kindness and understanding toward both Muslims and non-Muslims. The killing of innocents has been and always will be a major sin, as in any other religion or belief system. Some religious leaders, however, take liberties in interpreting certain verses of the Koran or sayings of the Prophet Mohammad, taking them out of context to suit their own political agendas, and sometimes managing to brainwash others with false promises of paradise in the afterlife. Islam itself does not sponsor or condone the terrorist acts of Muslims, and thus should not be held responsible for them.

“Islam is not uncivilized, outdated or intolerant; it is people who promote radical, unconventional beliefs and practices of Islam. Reforming Islam itself is not going to solve the problem of terrorism perpetrated by extremists, because no matter how much theology and doctrine change, people themselves probably will not. Reinterpreting holy texts would fail, first because of the widespread and strong opposition it would receive, and second because extremists will always manage to find something in the texts of Islam that they can twist to fit their agendas.

“Unfortunately, it seems that in all societies there exists a minority of narrow-minded fanatics. For example, Christianity is widely seen as a moderate religion which promotes peace, and is what it is today because of many periods of reformation, schism, and soul-searching. However, there are still groups of people all over the world who promote extreme views in its name, for instance the once powerful Ku Klux Klan, a self-proclaimed Christian organization. What changed was not the religion, nor interpretations of core religious texts; rather, popular support for the organization eroded as the hearts and minds of the population at large turned against bigotry and discrimination of all kinds, thanks in large part to the civil rights movement in the United States.

“Mindsets are the problem, not what is written in Islam’s holy texts. Altering this state of mind should be the focus of intellectual efforts to end terrorism, not modifying or reforming Islam.

“What gives rise then, to this unfortunate and misplaced perception? Simple lack of knowledge about Islam. There is a vital need to raise the awareness in Western countries on some simple facts about Islam. The states of the Middle East and the Muslim world should do much more in terms of public diplomacy. Their current utter lack of the most basic public relations skills is one of the biggest reasons the teachings of Islam are hardly known, much less properly understood, in the West. Western journalists and analysts often know no more than their audiences, making it difficult, if not impossible, for them to put events in the Middle East and acts of terrorism in their proper context.

“Credible intellectual and religious figures should also make more efforts to reach out to national and local media in the West. Scholars, sheikhs and other religious figures should swallow their pride and pay special attention to more conservative media outlets such as the Fox News Network, often criticized for its bias, to reach those sectors of the American population that tend to be unthinkingly anti-Islam. They will need to have a strong grounding in Western history and politics so they can help define for Western audiences the difference between Islamic principles on the one hand, and the actions of a few on the other, in terms they will understand. And they should not let Westerners forget that dangerous, extremist movements claiming to draw on religion have existed in the West as well.”

Does Islam require 4 witnesses for rape victims?

MENJ has a nice, concise refutation of the assertion that Muslim women who were raped require four witnesses. Check it out.

Response to Steve regarding Sania Mirza

This is a response I made to “Steve” regarding my Sania Mirza post on my main blog. I’ve decided to post my response here, in addition to the main blog, as I thought my comments might be helpful for those who are interested in learning about Islam.

Steve wrote: “I think a reasonable person can debate what kind of clothing is acceptable under Islam. I know dozens of Muslims who ruitinely wear shorts and skirts, and at the same time affirm most of the basic principles of Islam.”

Those shorts-and-skirts Muslims must be young. Yeah, I’ve heard of cases up in Malaysia where a young woman might go out in public wearing something skimpy but also wearing a hijab. Go figure. Still, there are clearly defined dress codes for both Muslim men and women. Those women who wear the shorts and skirts are not following the dress code. While they may “affirm most of the basic principles of Islam,” Islam is not a “pick and choose,” cafeteria-style religion. Muslims should (ideally) follow all aspects of Islam as much of the time as possible. As my wife would say, “We strive to be better Muslims.”

“That being said, whats at issue is whether or not the actions of this tennis player is worthy of a ‘fatwa.’”

A fatwa in and of itself is merely an opinion, and does not necessarily have to be obeyed. Most people who ask for a fatwa normally ask for themselves (i.e., they have a particular situation they would like resolved, and they are looking for guidance in the form of a fatwa). That someone asks, “What about the type of clothing a female tennis player wears in public, like Sania Mirza?” seems a little odd, but is still not out of the realm of the ordinary. In that regard, Ms. Sania is worthy of a fatwa, as is any other Muslim in the world.

“I completely agree that an Islamic council should be more worried about things like Wahhabism or the Mujahadeen than tennis attire.”

In all honesty, the vast majority of fatawa that are issued deal with very mundane, daily life issues. There’s nothing wrong with an Islamic council dealing with the bigger issues (many Muslims wish they would), but most of their work deals with very small issues.

“However, it is the position of some Islamic scholars that if the purpose of rules and regulations regarding attire is to not attract attention to ones self, then covering up in conditions such as western society and or tennis courts might actually defeat the intended purpose of such modesty…”

Possibly, but… The purpose of the dress code, of course, is for modesty; it’s not necessarily to not attract attention to one’s self. While a pro female tennis player might attract attention initially by, say, wearing a sweat suit instead of a skirt and blouse, don’t you think the fuss might die down fairly quickly (within a year’s time at the most)? Is women’s beach volleyball popular because we value the women as athletes…or because they wear bikinis? Was Anna Kournikova as popular as she was because of her tennis skills (her having never won a Grand Slam tournament) or because of her looks?

Some more comments regarding apostasy…

This is more of a conversation I have had regarding the topic of apostasy. The Non-Muslim Lost Budgie appears to be the type of Christian who assumes that Muslims would convert in droves to Christianity if only they didn’t fear being executed by other Muslims for apostasy. In fact, I believe Ann’s comments (mentioned and linked at the very end of this post) are quite true.

Lost Budgie wrote: “Unfortunately, many Islamic scholars do not share your interpretation of Islamic scriptures and laws.”

And many do. Read my last post [referring to what I have posted in my last entry on this blog].

“Whether apostates are killed by countries or individuals, the killings perfectly illustrate that this interpretation of Islam is held by many of the faith.”

Many people of all faiths will have different interpretations regarding their religions. Some interpretations are held in ignorance; others are held as a result of correct study. Christians and Jews all supposedly follow the Ten Commandments, but that doesn’t mean that they obey them (particularly the sixth).

“(For a tiny sample of what can be found on the web, click here for the photos and names of ten Iranian women who were all hung together for apostasy in 1983. Many since that time, of course. This was just a busy day.)”

Personally, I don’t agree that these women were apostates; I believe they were murdered for following a different religion (their murders I condemn). If you want to argue that Baha’i’s are Muslims (and thus apostates), then you’re following a Shi’a perspective, which I don’t think many people around the world (including Sunni Muslims) would agree with.

“References? Well, let’s start with Abul Ala Mawdudi and his book “The Punishment of the Apostate according to Islamic Law”. An English translation can be found here.

“Mr. Mawdudi was, of course, a founding father of Pakistan and has been described as ‘the most widely read Muslim author of the 20th Century, contributing immensely to the contemporary resurgence of Islamic ideas, feelings and activity all over the world.’”

This is one person’s view on the topic and, as such, doesn’t carry much weight within the Islamic community. Even if Mawdudi’s work is accepted within one of the madhab, that doesn’t necessarily mean that any of the other madhab would also accept it.

“Mr. Mawdudi also provided the introduction to A. Yusuf Ali’s ‘The Holy Qur’an, Translation and Commentary’.”

Not in any of the three volumes my wife and I have of Yusuf Ali’s translation (including original version and revised). Not that, even if Mawdudi’s introduction appears in some limited edition printings of Yusuf Ali’s translation, would his work make a speck of difference.

“On the web today, you can find many Islamic websites that agree with the position that apostates should be killed. Try here or here to start.”

You do know that you can’t always trust what you read on the Internet, right? Why are you bringing up non-scholarly works?

“So JD…. you disagree with Mr. Mawdudi and others who hold the position that both the Koran and Hadith command (ie: COMMAND, not “recommend”) the execution of Muslim apostates.”

You obviously didn’t read my earlier post or the article I linked to. The Qur’an forbids the execution of apostates. The one hadith that supposedly forms the basis for the execution of apostates is, in fact, ignored for the imposition of a death penalty for apostates. As the article I linked to pointed out, “The Shari’ah has not fixed any punishment for apostasy.” Just because other people may think differently doesn’t mean that they’re correct or that their thoughts supercede the Qur’an.

“Respectfully, I point out that the disagreement on this issue between Muslims of good faith well illustrates the problem confronting modern-moderate Muslims as they try to reconcile the foundations of Islam with contemporary living.”

You crack me up. If you think that Muslims are struggling with some sort of “reconciliation” between Islam and contemporary life, then you obviously don’t know Muslims very well. We live within the contemporary world very well, thank you very much.

In the meantime, this entire conversation about Muslim apostasy is largely moot for the most part. It rarely happens. As another Muslim on another blog recently wrote on this topic: “To be honest, this [contemporary apostasy] is not something that really comes up often. The missionaries would have you believe that this is because converts would be killed, as if masses of Muslims are yearning to be Christian, but they’re afraid. In fact, they have a very hard time converting Muslims, and when they occasionally do, it’s Muslims who are not very knowledgeable about Islam in the first place.” (Source)

Apostasy

Safiyyah’s got another comment from a non-Muslim visitor (the so-called “insta-expert,” who thinks they understand Islam after reading what are undoubtedly anti-Muslim propoganda). Anyhoo… Today’s comment was, “For instance… The Koran says that Muslims who convert to another religion must be killed. A modern-moderate Muslim has difficulty arguing against this, for to deny this is to deny the correctness of the Koran, or to admit that passages have, what, expired?”

The problem with this person’s comment, of course, is that nowhere in the Qur’an is it said that apostates are to be killed. In fact, it’s just the opposite. Allah (swt) tells us that we humans are to leave apostates alone, that not only shall Allah (swt) “punish them with a grievous penalty in this life and in the Hereafter” (9:74), but that Allah (swt) alone will punish them.

“And leave Me (alone to deal with) those in possession of the good things of life, who (yet) deny the Truth; and bear with them for a little while. With Us are Fetters (to bind them), and a Fire (to burn them), And a Food that chokes, and a Penalty Grievous.” (73:11-3)

Muslims have no problem in arguing against the false notion that apostates must be killed. A number of Muslim scholars have argued thus:

“A number of Islamic scholars from past centuries, Ibrahim al-Naka’I, Sufyan al-Thawri, Shams al-Din al-Sarakhsi, Abul Walid al-Baji and Ibn Taymiyyah, have all held that apostasy is a serious sin, but not one that requires the death penalty. In modern times, Mahmud Shaltut, Sheikh of al-Azhar, and Dr Mohammed Sayed Tantawi have concurred.” (Source)

Muslim Inventions

In the past couple weeks, I had made the occasional comment on Yusuf Smith’s Indigo Jo Blogs; however, yesterday, I noticed that one of my recent comments had been deleted. Why, I don’t know. In my opinion, the comment was rather innocuous; however, I respect Brother Yusuf’s right to censor comments made on his blog. I, of course, also reserve that right, which I’ve exercised several times in the past on my own blogs. Regardless, I’ve decided to post my comments to his blog here on my own blogs, where he cannot censor me for what appears to be arbitrary reasons.

The comment that was deleted was in response to the following question: “What have Muslims invented in the last 500 years?” The writer in question asserts that Muslims have done absolutely nothing inventive in the past 500 years, which, of course, is a rather stupid and easily refutable assertion. For example, I had posted in my deleted comment a link to the Granted Patents webpage at the General Directorate of Patents - King Abdulaziz City for Science & Technology website. The page is in Arabic, however. Today, while “googling” for the KACST website, I also came across a US government webpage that categorizes by technology class all of the patents made in Saudi Arabia between 1999 and 2003.

My point in choosing Saudi Arabia for this refutation was merely to show one Muslim country’s efforts in creating intellectual capital (in this case, in the form of patents). Obviously, this one country is not the entire Muslim world, but it is sufficient enough to disprove the writer’s original assertion.

Overcoming the Islamic Fear Factor

The following article comes from the Wichita Eagle. I had originally thought about posting it to my regular blog, Dunner’s, but I decided instead to post it here because I think it makes for a good Learn About Islam-type piece.

There is one paragraph that I have personally modified. The author made the suggestion that to contact a certain person at the Islamic Society of Wichita for more information on classes about Islam. However, in the interest of a wider audience, I have rewritten that paragraph. It begins with “Contact your local mosque…” and is in italics, so you shouldn’t be able to miss it.

All it the fear factor: Muslims and terrorists. The two go together in many people’s minds, and little if any distinction is made between fanaticism and faith.

Before you give in to fear, ask yourself: How much do I know about the religion of Islam? When I hear the word Muslim, do I immediately think only of terrorists?

Regardless of your preconceptions — or misconceptions — are you willing to learn more about the religion of more than 1 billion people?

First, take this six-question quiz to give yourself a baseline for learning:

1. True or false: Most Muslims are Arabs.

2. True or false: The ultimate meaning of worship for Muslims is observing the five pillars of Islam: profession of faith in Allah, performance of prayers five times a day, fasting, giving to charity and pilgrimage to Mecca.

3. Jihad means:
A. Struggle to live a perfect life
B. Struggle to defend Islam
C. Struggle to convey the message of Islam
D. All of the above

4. Only a government, through its Islamic leaders (caliph or imam), can call for a holy war. Which of the following rules for waging such a war does NOT apply:
A. Do not kill children or women.
B. If a fighter turns his back, do not kill him.
C. Take action against an enemy before he attacks.
D. Fight on behalf of religious freedom.

5. True or false: Marriage in Islam is a social contract that requires the consent of both parties.

6. True or false: Islam, Judaism and Christianity all believe in the coming of a Messiah.

Here are the answers, according to several authoritative sources:

1. Most Muslims are Arabs. False. Of the 1.2 billion Muslims in the world, about 20 percent are Arabs.

2. False. Worship is everything that a person does to submit to Allah. The five pillars are part of that broader and all-inclusive understanding of worship.

3. Jihad means: D. All of the meanings of struggle, including to live a perfect life, to defend Islam and to convey the message of Islam.

4. The following rule for waging a holy war does NOT apply: C. Take action against an enemy before he attacks. The Quran enjoins Muslims: “Fight for the sake of Allah those that fight against you, but do not attack them first. Allah does not love aggressors” (2:190).

5. True. Neither bride nor groom can be forced into a marriage.

6. True. Beliefs differ, but all three religions teach about a Messiah (or Mahdi in Islam).

If you got all six correct, you’ve made a good start in learning about Islam. But there’s more to do.

Centuries of fear and suspicion — between Jews, Christians and Muslims — make the task daunting. And a post-9/11 world has only intensified those fears.

Moreover, it doesn’t help that our interlocking histories (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) have spawned intolerance and suspicion of one another. No religion is guiltless.

Fueling the greater angst among non-Muslims today is a belief that Islam is only a religion of violence. That’s why it’s important to learn about the religion. Here are some ways to begin:

• Read such books as What Everyone Needs to Know About Islam by John Esposito (Oxford University Press); Silent No More: Confronting America’s False Images of Islam by Paul Findley (Amana Books); Terror and Suicide Attacks: An Islamic Perspective edited by Ergun Capan (Light Inc.).

• Attend classes that provide an overview of Islam. Contact your local mosque for more information. Many mosques frequently have classes about Islam for new converts and non-Muslims who are interested in the religion and the Muslim way of life. Look in your local Yellow Pages for the telephone number of the mosque nearest you.

• Raise the hard questions you have about Islam with Muslim leaders. All of us are challenged to explain, as best we can, the seeming inconsistencies, contradictions and mysteries of our faith. Don’t be afraid to ask.

“Truth and love are one and the same,” wrote then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger. “This affirmation — if we grasp its full import — is the greatest guarantee of tolerance, of a relationship with the truth, whose only weapon is itself and thus is love.”

Although differences will always remain among people who don’t share the same faith, learning from one another can break down walls that separate.

And in the end, that can go a long way in reducing the fear factor and increasing mutual understanding and respect.

Reach Tom Schaefer at 268-6586 or by e-mail at tschaefer@wichitaeagle.com