Islamic Jizya: ‘Protection’ from Whom?

Jizya

Is jizya—the money non-Muslims historically paid their Muslim conquerors—meant to buy them “protection,” including from outside enemies, as modern Western academics maintain?  Or was it simply extortion money meant to buy non-Muslims their lives, as Islam’s scriptures mandate?

The word jizya appears in Koran 9:29: “Fight those among the People of the Book [Christians and Jews] who do not believe in Allah nor the Last Day, nor forbid what Allah and his Messenger have forbidden, nor embrace the religion of truth, until they pay the jizya with willing submission and feel themselves subdued (emphasis added).”

In the hadith, the Messenger of Allah, Muhammad, regularly calls on Muslims to demand jizya of non-Muslims:  “If they refuse to accept Islam,” said the Islamic prophet, “demand from them the jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they refuse to pay jizya, seek Allah’s help and fight them.”

Keeping the above in mind, consider the following July 18 report from Reuters:

Islamist insurgents have issued an ultimatum to northern Iraq’s dwindling Christian population to either convert to Islam, pay a religious levy or face death, according to a statement distributed in the militant-controlled city of Mosul….

It said Christians who wanted to remain in the “caliphate” that the Islamic State declared this month in parts of Iraq and Syria must agree to abide by terms of a “dhimma” contract—a historic practice under which non-Muslims were protected in Muslim lands in return for a special levy known as “jizya.”

“We offer them three choices: Islam; the dhimma contract – involving payment of jizya; if they refuse this they will have nothing but the sword,” the announcement said.

“After this date [July 19], there is nothing between us and them but the sword,” it said.

The Nineveh decree echoes one that the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant, the former name for the Islamic State, issued in the Syrian city of Raqqa in February, demanding that Christians pay the jizya levy in gold and curb displays of their faith in return for protection.

Note how straightforward the Islamic State’s words are—jizya, conversion, or death—compared to the language of Reuters, which twice invokes the concept of “protection” without explaining from whom:  1) “a historic practice under which non-Muslims were protected in Muslim lands in return for a special levy known as “jizya”; 2) “demanding that Christians pay the jizya levy in gold and curb displays of their faith in return for protection.”

Reuters doesn’t bother to clarify this notion of “protection,” but rather leaves it vague, implying that the protection Christians receive is against some random elements.

The reason for this obfuscation is that Mideast academics in the West have been whitewashing the meaning of jizya for decades.  After all, the concept of jizya is one of the most ironclad proofs that Islam is innately intolerant of non-Muslims.

A very typical Western definition for jizya can be found in the Encyclopaedia Britannica: “The Muslim rulers tolerated the dhimmis [conquered non-Muslims] and allowed them to practice their religion. In return for protection [from whom?] and as a mark of their submission, the dhimmis were required to pay a special poll tax known as the jizya.”

Other academics have gone so far as to claim that non-Muslims paid jizya to buy Muslim protection against outside forces.  Consider the following excerpt from John Esposito, director of the Prince Alwaleed Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University.  It essentially makes the idea of being subjugated to Islamic overlords and paying them tribute appear as an enviable position for non-Muslim minorities:

In many ways, local populations [Christians, Jews, and others] found Muslim rule more flexible and tolerant than that of Byzantium and Persia. Religious communities were free to practice their faith to worship and be governed by their religious leaders and laws in such areas as marriage, divorce, and inheritance. In exchange, they were required to pay tribute, a poll tax (jizya) that entitled them to Muslim protection from outside aggression and exempted them from military service. Thus, they were called the “protected ones” (dhimmi). In effect, this often meant lower taxes, greater local autonomy (emphasis added) …

The idea that jizya was extracted in order to buy “Muslim protection from outside aggression” is an outright lie—one that, as the equivocal tone of the aforementioned Reuters report indicates, has taken root in the West.

Equally false is Esposito’s assertion that jizya was paid to “exempt them from military service”—as if conquering Muslims would even want or allow their despised “infidel” subjects to fight alongside them in the name of jihad without first converting to Islam.

The root meaning of the Arabic word “jizya” is simply to “repay” or “recompense,” basically to “compensate” for something.  According to the Hans Wehr Dictionary, the standard Arabic-English dictionary, jizya is something that “takes the place” of something else, or “serves instead.”

Simply put, conquered non-Muslims were to purchase their lives, which were otherwise forfeit to their Muslim conquerors, with money. Instead of taking their lives, they took their money.  As one medieval jurist succinctly puts it, “their lives and their possessions are only protected by reason of payment of jizya” (Crucified Again, p. 22).

So jizya was, and is indeed, protection money—though protection, not from outsiders, as Esposito and others claim, but from surrounding Muslims themselves.  Whether it’s the first caliphate from over a millennium ago or whether it’s the newest caliphate, the Islamic State, Muslim overlords continue to deem the lives of their non-Muslim subjects forfeit unless they purchase it, ransom it with money.

There is nothing humane, reasonable, or admirable about demands for jizya from conquered non-Muslim minorities, as the academics claim. Jizya is simply extortion money. Its purpose has always been to provide non-Muslims with protection from Muslims: pay up, or else become one of us and convert to Islam, or else die.

And it is commanded in both the Koran and Hadith, the twin pillars of Islam.

In short, jizya is an ugly fact of Islam—one that, distort as they may, the academics can’t whitewash away, even as the world stands idly by watching its resumption in the twenty-first century.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.  

Subscribe to Frontpage’s TV show, The Glazov Gang, and LIKE it on Facebook.

  • Well Done

    The academic world is very much part of the problem. The problem has been obvious since the days of Stalin, at least. Those who pranced off to fight in the Spanish Civil war, pretending to fight Fascism, were in fact fighting for the establishment of a Spanish Soviet Republic. They were academics, their student dupes, and the hard-line union backroom boys along with their true believers. Nowadays, they side with Islam. The left have a history of choosing the wrong side… they opposed the WW2 war effort until Hitler invaded Russia!

    • catherine_gold

      Hot New Releases in Electronics Accessories & Supplies.

      http://j.mp/TXEahk

      • DogmaelJones1

        STOP putting your ads on FrontPage!!!!!!!

    • Drakken

      Thank God Franco won!

      • IslamDownpressesHumanity

        I’ve read he protected Spain’s Jews from Hitler’s insanity and refused to deport them. I’d imagine the muslimes wouldn’t be having much fun (or free welfare) living in Franco’s Spain though.
        Then again what about Guernica?

        • Drakken

          My Grandfather who fought on the German side was an advisor to Franco and helped keep him out of the war. Yes Franco absolutely refused to ship Jews to the camps, it is a rarely understood part of history.

  • Guest

    Utilities free of charge for Gaza residents while Israelis have to pay for the service because otherwise it would be cut off is a way of extracting the jizya non-muslim tax perhaps. Why the funders of the Gaza administration – UN, EU, Turkey, Qatar, Iran – do not pay for the service is beyond comprehension unless they regard it as jizya. This week the electric company said they did not understand the instruction from the government not to collect the huge debt.

    • IslamDownpressesHumanity

      That would be an interesting tactic. Israel could forgive Gaza’s electric bill as paid jizya. Maybe they could appeal to ISIS to attack Hamas on those grounds.

    • mj

      Your worried about utilities. If i come and kick you out of your house
      and claim its my house i would be happy to pay your utilities.

      • kafir4life

        allahu’s snackbar! We get our ramadamadingdong snacks at the allahu snackbar! The pulled pork is mohamadeeeeeeeelicious!

  • liamjq

    without googling it hands up who knows what a “ZUNAR” is and why would you never find one mention of it in Esposito, Bernard Lewis and certainly not Armstrong…and why you never you never knew?

  • mj

    Your worried about utilities. If i come and kick you out of your house and claim its my house i would be happy to pay your utilities.

    • DogmaelJones1

      WILL you stop putting your dumb ads on FrontPage???????

    • Wolfthatknowsall

      If you came and tried to kick me out of my house, I would blast you out of this world. Do you even read your comments?

      • mj

        Ok. so you understand how the Palestinians feel?

        • Wolfthatknowsall

          If I help to elect H!tler, he makes war on the world, then I should expect the world not to like me, very much …

          Palestinians? What are they?

        • IslamDownpressesHumanity

          What about the Jews who used to live in Gaza? How do they feel?

          • mj

            Are you serious? I hope to god one day someone kicks you out of your house. The Jews time is running out, they know that. Its just a matter of time. They cant even sleep and they are facing no resistance. Its a matter of time before someone strikes them and they will run and forget they were ever there..

    • IslamDownpressesHumanity

      Like muslimes have never done that before. When muslims ethnically cleansed the Jews of Syria, Egypt, Iraq and Yemen do you think the homes and properties of those expelled was just left vacant? Ditto for the Christians of Syria and Iraq today. Ditto or the Hindus, Sikhs and Buddhists of Pakistan and Bangladesh.
      I notice your avatar doesn’t feature that most beloved assault rifle in the
      islamic world.

      • mj

        As far as i know Jews still live in syria and have throughout islamic history so as egypt, irag and yemen.

        By the time of the Muslim conquests of the 7th century, ancient Jewish communities had existed in many parts of the Middle East and North Africa since Antiquity. Jews under Islamic rule were given the status of dhimmi, along with certain other pre-Islamic religious groups.[1] As such, these groups were accorded certain rights as “people of the book”.

        During waves of persecution in Medieval Europe, many Jews found refuge in Muslim lands.[2] For instance, Jews expelled from the Iberian Peninsula were invited to settle in various parts of the Ottoman Empire, where they would often form a prosperous model minority of merchants acting as intermediaries for their Muslim rulers.

        Today, Jews residing in Muslim countries have been reduced to a small fraction of their former sizes, with Iran and Turkey being home to the largest remaining Jewish populations.

  • Greg Hamilton

    The ugly fact of dhimmitude demands our best efforts to expose it. It points to the heart of Islamic doctrine: the conquest of infidels. I’m running a campaign to get the information into the public mind through button badges that point to a web page. We have to do more than just read about these things; we have to find ways to confront the ignorant and wake them up.

    http://enjoytheconditionsofomar.blogspot.co.uk/

    Enjoy The Conditions Of Omar

    • http://batman-news.com chuckie2u

      Well you best not wait on your Congress to tell Americans the truth. As I see it Islam is the perfect answer to controlling willing idiots without exterminating half the population.

    • mj

      Another famous story is the story of a Coptic christian and Amr Ibn Al-’As, the
      ruler of Egypt. The ruler’s son, proud of his parentage, hit the Copt’s
      son with a whip. The Copt complained to Omar Ibn Al-Khattab, who then
      summoned Amr and his son to Madinah. Umar gave the whip to the Copt’s
      son and said, “Now whip this son of noble parents” After he had done so,
      Umar said, “Now whip the bald head of Amr, because his son beat you on
      account of his father’s authority.” The Copt repaid, “I have already
      whipped the person who whipped me.” Then ‘Umar turned his face to Amr
      and uttered his everlasting words, “O Amr, since when do you treat as
      slaves those who were born as free men?”

      What is most remarkable about this incident is the fact that people
      ruled by Islamic officials were so aware of their humanity and honor
      that even a slap was totally inadmissible. On the other hand, in Roman
      and other times, many similar and even worse injustices went unpunished,
      for the injured party could at make any protest or complaint. In the
      Islamic state, however, a citizen could take advantage of his rights and
      self respect, even if he had to travel from Egypt to Madinah to do so.
      Such a journey would not be in vain, for he could be sure that his case
      would be given due consideration and that his complaint would be dealt
      with justly.

      • IslamDownpressesHumanity

        What a load of steaming taqiyya, as if this one unverified anecdote is somehow representative of how muslimes treat the najjis kaffir. All we have to do is look at how the najjis kaffir are treated in any muslim state today (and even some non-muslim states) to pay truth to your lie.

  • mj

    Also another thing does everyone here know that the Jizya the Non muslims have to pay in an islamic state is less then the muslim tax that the muslims have to pay. I havent seen that in any article or media.

    • Adolphus

      Having said all of that, do you know whether the Muslim terrorists imposing their version of jizya are following that which you expounded here or merely according to their taste, which will be far more unsavoury?

      • mj

        I am not sure. I do not know. If they are that is good and well. If they are not then i oppose that action of theirs. Thank you for a civilized reply unlike most posters. By the way i dont get offended when you swear at me and my religion rather i feel sorry for you. Best Regards. MJ

        • IslamDownpressesHumanity

          I’m certain you wouldn’t be feeling “sorry” for us if we were unfortunate enough to be residing in whatever islamic hellhole you come from, in fact, I’m pretty sure you would be calling for our deaths for daring to defame islam, blaspheme your prophet etc.

    • seewithyourowneyes

      Completely untrue. Jizya is intended to make the conquered Infidels feel subdued and subjugated. That goal can hardly be achieved by allowing them the privilege of lower taxes!
      Perhaps you are lumping voluntary Muslim charity in with the taxes? The Koran does prescribe charitable giving. But it specifically states that some of that charity should go towards waging jihad, and also specifically states that NONE of that charity should go to non-Muslims. So extremely different from a tax for the benefit of the whole country. (An exception is granted, though, for using charity to induce non-Muslims to convert.)

      • mj

        Nabil Luqa Babwi, an orthodox Coptic Egyptian writer and scholar, wrote
        that, “Jizyah was a small amount of money. Over seventy percent of
        people of other beliefs rather than Islam were exempted: the old, women,
        children, and monks. It was not a punishment for not being a Muslim but
        rather a tax against the use of public facilities by non-Muslims and a
        defense tax against any external attack. This means that Islam did not
        spread by sword as stated by some Orientalists.” Payment of jizyah
        exempted non-Muslims from two obligations of Muslims: defending the
        country and payment of Zakat.

        http://www.ummah.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-250769.html

        Please give references for your remarks.

        • seewithyourowneyes

          Egyptian Copts are subjected to horrible persecution by the Muslim majority and seldom speak out publicly against Islam until after they and their family have found sanctuary in Infidel lands. So I don’t give much credence to your Nabil Babwi.
          While the severity of dhimmitude varied over time according to the needs of the Muslim rulers, there can be no doubt that the goal was “to make the dhimmi feel subjugated” as clearly stated in the Koran. The very ummah.com site from which you quote also contains, in the comments section, this quote from Ahmad Sirhindi from his book on Muslim Revivalist Movements”: “…the honor of Islam lies in insulting the Kufr and Kafirs… the real purpose in levying Jizya is to humiliate them… It is intended to hold them in contempt and to uphold the honor and might of Islam.” – Another is from al-Ghazali (1058-1111) “on offering the jizya, the dhimmi must hang his head while the official takes hold of his beard and hits the dhimmi on the bone beneath his ear.” – Yet another is by Malik ibn Anas, Muwatta Imam Malik 17.24.46: Zakat is imposed on Muslims to purity them and to be given back the Muslim poor… jizya is imposed on the people of the book in order to humble them.”
          Your claim that Muslims paid more in zakat than dhimmies paid in jizya is extremely dubious. For one thing, dhimmies were required to pay kharaj, a land tax, as well as jizya. a poll tax. For another, the zakat paid by Muslims went to the benefit of Muslims alone, while the jizya paid by dhimmies went to the entire Muslim-dominated state. – The first example of the kharaj land tax was Mohammed’s invasion of Khaybar. Bukhari, vol 5, 59:550 tells us that those Jews who survived the battle, escaped execution, and agreed to live in a state of subjugated dhimmitude were thenceforth allowed to keep only 50% of the grains and fruits their lands produced. That’s a steep tax! – See also the History of Iran by Pigulevskaya and Yakubouski: They found that the Persian Sassinids taxed crop fields at a rate of one dirham per field. but under the Muslim Caliphate those same fields, when owned by non-Muslims, were taxed at a rate of 4 dirhams for wheat and 2 dirhams for barley. Indeed, during the later stages of the Umayyad Caliphate, the non-Muslim Persians paid 1/4 to 1/3 of their crop yields to their Arab rulers, in addition to paying them the jizya poll tax.
          Muslim rulers were often put in a bit of a quandary when their dhimmies began converting to Islam. Theoretically they should have celebrated, but in actuality these conversions put a huge dent in their tax revenue. When Christians and Zoroastrians began to convert en masse in order to escape the oppression of dhimmitude, the Umayyad Caliph Umar II faced a financial crisis. He would lose the kharaj tax when landowners converted! So he specified that any lands then subject to kharaj would always be subject to kharaj.

          • IslamDownpressesHumanity

            Thanks for revealing that ugliness about the Arab muslimes conquest of Persia.
            I seem to remember Timurlane/Tamerlane, the great genocidal muslim hero and slaver, attacking other muslims because they were not shirking their duty in forcibly converting non-muslims to islam.

          • IslamDownpressesHumanity

            Should read “…were shirking their duty…”

          • mj

            Are you serious? If the muslims are so bad do you think copts would exist?

          • mj

            Also regarding muslim leaders i simply do not know and if they did the wrong thing i dont defend them. Muslims can do wrong and they do sometimes.

          • mj

            The
            good intent behind the term ‘dhimmi’ can be seen in the letter written
            by the Caliph Abu Bakr as-Siddiq to the non-Muslims of Najran:

            ‘In
            the Name of God, the Beneficent, the Merciful. This is the written
            statement of God’s slave Abu Bakr, the successor of Muhammad, the
            Prophet and Messenger of God. He affirms for you the rights of a
            protected neighbor, in yourselves, your lands, your religious community,
            your wealth, retainers, and servants, those of you who are present or
            abroad, your bishops and monks, and monasteries, and all that you own,
            be it great or small. You shall not be deprived of any of it, and shall
            have full control over it.’ (Abu Yusuf, Kitab al-Kharaj, p. 79)

            If
            they pay the Jizyah the Imam of the Muslims has to ensure that the
            Dhimmis are protected from both Muslims and the enemies of the Islamic
            state. (Ibn Qudamah, Al Mughni, Volume 12, p. 828) and all scholars of jurisprudence have formed a consensus on this issue. (Wahba Al Zuhayli, Al Fiqh Al Islami wa adilatuhu, p. 5884)

          • mj

            http://www.call-to-monotheism.com/the_status_of_non_muslims_in_the_islamic_state

            Thank you for your long reply i have replied in posts above all information you need is above or in the link i provided. Thank you.

      • mj

        The
        non Muslims and Muslims have equal rights in this connection; the Imam
        (ruler of the Muslims), by virtue of the executive and military power
        granted to him by the Islamic Sharia should provide protection for all
        of them. It is stated in the Hanbali book of Fiqh, Matalib Ula An-Nuha:

        “The
        ruler of the Muslim community is bound to protect the non-Muslims and
        to save them from aggression. Should they fall into captivity, the Imam
        must martial all the resources to secure their release and punish the
        transgressors against their lives and properties even if they were the
        sole non-Muslims living in a remote village.” (Ibn Al Najaar Al Hanbali, Matalib Ula An-Nuha, Volume 2, p. 602-603)

      • mj

        Once,
        during the reign of ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab, a Jizyah collector offered
        the taxes collected from the people to ‘Umar, who was upset by the large
        amount and asked him if he had burdened the people. He replied, “No,
        not at all! We took only the surplus and lawful taxes.” ‘Umar asked, “Without any pressure or persecution?” The man replied, “Yes.” ‘Umar then said to him, “Praise be to Almighty Allah that the non-Muslim citizens have not been oppressed during my rule. (Ibn Salam, Imam Abu ‘Ubayd al-Qasim, Al-Amwal, p. 43. Also see Ibn Qudamah, Al Mughni, Volume 9, p. 290 & Ibnul Qayyim, Ahkam Ahlul Dhimma, Volume 1, p.139)

    • Drakken

      Us non muslims will pay you goat f**kers when H*ll freezes over. God Bless the Crusades. Deo Volente!

    • Gee

      Wrong answer – Non-Muslims have to pay the same taxes plus the Jizya. Try lying to ignorant people

      • mj

        In asking non-Muslims living in an Islamic country to pay jizyah Islam
        treats them in such a fair manner that is hard to be found throughout
        history. Islam is the religion of mercy and justice. It was reported
        that Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) said about the people of zimmah: “whoever
        treats a covenanted citizen unjustly or takes away a part of his rights
        or overburdens him or forces something away from him, I will be his
        enemy on the Day of Judgment.” The Prophet’s (PBUH) Companions and
        followers followed in his footsteps. Omar Ibnul-Khattab (may Allah be
        pleased with him) told his leaders: “Who is not able to pay jizyah,
        reduce it for him and who cannot pay, help him.” When he saw an old
        Dhimmi man begging people he said:”Omar said to him, “Old man! We have
        not done justice to you. In your youth we realized Jizyah from you and
        have left you to fend for yourself in your old age”. He then ordered his
        leaders not to take jizyah from the old. Moreover, in that case the
        Muslim state was obliged to allocate a pension for its needy non-Muslim
        citizen. Caliph Omar Ibn Abdul-Aziz (may Allah be pleased with him)
        wrote to his Basra governor that, “consider the Dhimmi people in Basra.
        For the old and the weak give them an allocation from the public
        treasury.”

        • Gee

          Islam is a fascist supremist cult that robs, rapes, enslaves and murders anybody that is any way different.

          They make the Nazis look like nice people, and should be treated as the Nazis were treated

      • mj

        The
        historian Adam Mitz is of the view that because of Islamic tolerance
        toward non-Muslims and by virtue of the protection granted to them, they
        paid the Jizyah in accordance with their financial capacities. This Jizyah was
        like the present-day national defense tax. Only persons who could
        perform military service were obliged to pay it. So Monks and ascetics
        were exempted, except for those who could afford to pay. (Islamic Civilization, Volume 1, p. 96)

  • mj

    How much is the Jizyah:

    It has no fixed limit and is left for the discretion of the Imam to decide how much each one should pay.

    The Kharaj too is decided by the Imam. He should fix a ration of the
    land’s yield, such as one third or one fourth, or to fix a specific
    quantity in weight or measure according to its agricultural yield

    The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, when he sent his deputy to Yemen he told him to take one dinar from every adult.

    Umar Ibn ElKhattab fixed it at 48 dirhams for the wealthy, 24 dirhams
    for the middle class and 12 dirhams for craftsmen and manual laborers.

    Caliph Uthman, the third of the righteous Caliph’s, may Allah be pleased
    with them fixed it equivalent to one shilling (12p) per month for the
    rich, 6p for the middle class and 3p for the ordinary people.

    Imam Al-Shafii suggests one Dinar per year (about 40p sterling) but adds
    that it would differ according to the time of ease or difficulty and
    the capacity of those whom it is imposed. (Al-Shaffi, Al-Umm, vol. 4
    p.122)

    Can anyone be exempted from the Jizyah:

    Jizyah is levied only on males capable of performing military services.
    Any one who is not fit for military services is exempted from it.
    Consequently the following are exempted from paying Jizyah:

    Women

    Minors

    The aged people

    Those who were out of work or were chronically sick or crippled.

    Lunatics

    Monks

    Any disabled person whether he has mental or physical disability.

    Financially incapable persons

    If a non-Muslim rendered an important service to the country,
    he is exempted from paying the Jizyah for the life time. During the
    caliphate of Umar Ibn El-Khattab, the second righteous caliph, may Allah
    be pleased with him, a non-Muslim Egyptian laid before the Islamic
    government the project of cleaning and re-digging the ancient canal
    named, Nahr Amir al-Muminin, from Cairo down to the red sea which would
    facilitate the transportation of food stuff from Egypt to Medina, the
    capital. Umar, may Allah be leased with him, exempted the man from
    paying the Jizyah throughout his life.

    Why must male adult non Muslims pay the Jizyah:

    The reasons behind the Jizyah are:

    1- It is a financial substitute for military service and it is levied
    only on every non Muslim fit for combat. A non-Muslim is never asked to
    fight with the Islamic army against his will so he pays the Jizyah as a
    compensation for not performing the military service. It is also a
    contribution to the expenses of the state defense and protection similar
    to the now called defense tax.

    The clearest incidence in history to prove this was when Abu Ubaidah,
    May Allah be pleased with him, knew that the Romans were gathering
    troops to regain Syria from the Muslims, he returned the Jizyah money
    and announced that: “We have returned your money back to you because we
    have been informed of the gathering of enemy troops. You people,
    according to the conditions stipulated in the contract, have obliged us
    to protect you. Since we are now unable to fulfill these conditions, we
    are returning your money to you. We will abide by the conditions as
    agreed upon if we overcome the enemy.” (Related by Abu Yusufin
    Al-Kharaj)

    2- A payment in return for the public services in the state (like
    today’s tax that we pay the government but only much less than what we
    pay now…) in which the non Muslim is living like courts, roads…etc.
    Muslims too contribute in these public services by their paying of Zakat
    and other alms that are obligatory on the Muslim.

    3- Jizyah, from this point of view, is not only a symbol of loyalty but
    it is also a contributory compensation for exemption from military, and
    that is why it is imposed only on males capable of military service.

    What if a non Muslim is ready to join the Islamic Army?
    The obligation of paying the Jizyah is cancelled if the non Muslim joins
    the Islamic army and participates with the Muslims in defending the
    Islamic state.

    This verdict was applied more than once in the Islamic history one
    example is the treaty between Muslims and the Christians of Jarjima
    where it was stated that they would support Muslims against their
    enemies and they would not have to pay the Jizyah.

    Rules of Collecting the Jizyah in Islam:

    It was collected once every lunar year.

    It can be paid in cash or in goods except carrion and swine.

    It must be collected as easy as possible

    1. Umar Ibn Elkhattab told his Jizyah collectors: “Accept whatever is
    possible from those who are unable to pay the jizyah and help those who
    have become incapable , since we don’t want it from them for a year or
    two.”

    2. The Islamic state, as reported by Abu Ubaid, would often postpone the
    Jizyah collection until the harvesting season so that non Muslims would
    be able to pay it without being inconvenienced in any way.

    3. The fourth of the righteous Caliphs, Ali Ibn Abi Talib, may Allah be
    pleased with him, wrote to the collectors of the Kharaj:
    “When you come to them, do not sell their garments preserved for winter
    or summer, or the food they eat, or the animals they need. Don’t whip
    any of them for a Dirham, and do not oblige them to stand on one leg for
    a dirham. Do not sell any of their household goods for the payment of
    Kharaj, because we accept from them what they have. If you do not comply
    with my orders, Allah will punish you in my absence. And if I receive
    any complaint against you in this concern, your service will be
    terminated.

    • Nagesha
      • mj

        I am not sure what that video is as a reply. if you are refering to taqiya i do agree with you. This is a SHIA concept. Its true you are right. Also the swords and hitting themselves that is the SHIA and i agree that is also wrong.

        • IslamDownpressesHumanity

          There is an analogous concept in Sunni mythology as mendacity was a virtue of your holey prophet.

          • mj

            no idea what your talking about please elaborate?

    • Webb

      Does it go to pay for the 72 virgin he-goats Allahole is supposed to give you guys when you suicide? Old Allahole’s gotta be pretty busy out rounding them up so they’re waiting for you in Paradise, eh? Or do you have to catch them yourselves? I bet they don’t want to be caught very bad after they see what you do to their buddies, eh? You probably have to wear a Mohammed mask and act like you’re bringing feed out to them.

      • Paul of Alexandria

        This sort of response solves nothing.

    • Drakken

      I thought I got your Islamic azz not too long ago, it is so hard to tell with all you inbred goat fuckers wearing masks all the time, hopefully your in the area where I am at, I promise you I won’t miss. Oh almost forgot, pizz on your goat f**king pedophine devils profit, may he rot in h*ll where your heading hopefully soon with our compliments. Just look for the flash and smile.

  • SoCalMike

    Too many academics are intellectually lazy parasites.
    Many professors I knew during the Cold War openly asserted the moral and material equivalence of the USA and the USSR.
    The same people today are white washing and down playing the nature and identity of the threat we face.

  • http://batman-news.com chuckie2u

    One could bet the bank the OIL companies are paying through the nose for “protection” as well as companies doing business in Muslim lands. As I recall the Chicago Mob uses this same technique in their protection services .

    • Drakken

      Oil, gas, pipeline and shipping companies are now paying contractors to make sure their product flows because the extortion was too much a price to do business, it is cheaper to pay us to get the job done than to pay for your own destruction and confiscation of your property.

  • Waiting

    After the part of the article discussing the dictionary term explained (Hans Wehr Dictionary…something that “takes the place” of something else, or “serves instead.), the word “ransom” seemed to apply. And then, Mr. Ibrahim used that very word to further explain the extortion racket muslims have going.

    And the word “ransom” is the term used by Christians, and found in the Bible (Matt.20:28; Mark 10:45) to explain the price Jesus Christ paid to save those who would put faith in his words, commands and sacrifice and in His Heavenly Father. He “gave his life, a ransom in exchange for many”.

    The extortion…ransom…that muslims demand is just another tactic of satan to try to undo what Christ did by his sacrifice. Jesus paid it for all, and once for all time, but the devil wants Christians to pay again and again and again.

    • mj

      The Quran states.

      He [Jesus] said: ‘I am indeed a servant of God. He has given me
      revelation and made me a prophet; He has made me blessed wheresoever I
      be; and He has enjoined on me prayer and charity as long as I live. He
      has made me kind to my mother, and not overbearing or miserable. So
      peace is on me the day I was born, the day that I die, and the day that I
      shall be raised up to life (again)!’ Such was Jesus the son of Mary. It
      is a statement of truth, about which they (vainly) dispute. It is not
      befitting to (the majesty of) God that He should beget a son. Glory be
      to Him! When He determines a matter, He only says to it, ‘Be,’ and it
      is” (19:30-35).

      He Was a Humble Servant of God

      “And behold! God will say [i.e. on the Day of Judgment]: ‘Oh Jesus, the
      son of Mary! Did you say unto men, worship me and my mother as gods in
      derogation of God?’ He will say: ‘Glory to Thee! Never could I say what I
      had no right (to say). Had I said such a thing, You would indeed have
      known it. You know what is in my heart, though I know not what is in
      Yours. For You know in full all that is hidden. Never did I say to them
      anything except what You commanded me to say: ‘Worship God, my Lord and
      your Lord.’ And I was a witness over them while I lived among them. When
      You took me up, You were the Watcher over them, and You are a witness
      to all things’” (5:116-117).

      • Waiting

        Jesus said, “If you have seen me, you have seen the Father (John 14:9). Peter said to Jesus, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God (Matt. 16:16).
        Your book is not inspired by God, The Father, Creator of all, and neither is your ‘prophet’ a true prophet. So there is only one reply that I will make to your statement to me:
        “The Lord Jehovah will rebuke you (Jude 1:9).”

        • mj

          Ok, Who is Matt? and also who is John. And also did they write the gospel. Please tell me who wrote it?

  • Wolfthatknowsall

    The so-called “jizyah” is nothing more than protection money. As the mob collects protection from people living in their area … pay up, or else … muslims collect their protection money, or the non-muslims dies. It’s really as simple as that.

    Islam is no better, and very likely worse, than the mob …

    • Drakken

      Where do you think the dagos of Sicily came up with the idea? Remember the muslims ran Sicily and raped their great great grandmothers a couple of centuries ago and the mentality remains the same.

      • Wolfthatknowsall

        Exactly, Drak. I happen to know a number of mobsters from the Cerone Family of Elmwood Park, Illinois. One “made man” admitted the same to me. With a big smile on his face, he said, “The muzzies have a few good ideas, after all.”

        This is part of their history, and they have a long memory.

      • mj

        The local population conquered by the Muslims were Romanized Catholic
        Sicilians in Western Sicily and partially Greek speaking Christians,
        mainly in the eastern half of the island, but there were also a
        significant number of Jews. [15] These conquered people were afforded a limited freedom of religion under the Muslims as dhimmi, but were subject to some restrictions. The dhimmi were also required to pay the jizya, or poll tax, and the kharaj or land tax, but were exempt from the tax that Muslims had to pay (Zakaat).
        Under Arab rule there were different categories of Jizya payers, but
        their common denominator was the payment of the Jizya as a mark of
        subjection to Muslim rule in exchange for protection against foreign and
        internal aggression. The conquered population could avoid this
        subservient status simply by converting to Islam. Whether by honest
        religious conviction or societal compulsion large numbers of native
        Sicilians converted to Islam. However, even after 100 years of Islamic
        rule, numerous Greek speaking Christian communities prospered,
        especially in north-eastern Sicily, as dhimmi. This was largely a result
        of the Jizya system which allowed co-existence. This co-existence with
        the conquered population fell apart after the reconquest of Sicily,
        particularly following the death of King William II of Sicily in 1189.

    • mj

      In the reign of Omar Ibnul-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him)
      collecting jizyah was mercifully done. One of the leaders brought a lot
      of jizyah money to Omar who then told him, “It seems you squeezed
      people.” But the people told him that “No, we took only the right of the
      state voluntarily and without coercion.” Omar said, “Thank Allah that
      He has not made such matters in may reign.” When Omar was dying he did
      not forget to tell Muslims to take care of Dhimmi people, “I demand the
      caliph after me to treat Dhimmi people fairly, fulfill their covenant,
      defend them and do not overburden them.”

      • Wolfthatknowsall

        And if people refused to pay the Jizyah … be God be pleased with them … what happened to them? After all, this was not a “covenant” the non-Muslims wished to enter into to, was it?

        The jizyah is all about coercion, and death … if the the coercion doesn’t work. Same as the mob …

        • mj

          Gustave Lebon says:

          From
          the said verses of the Qur’an we can see that Muhammad’s tolerance
          towards Jews and Christians was truly very great. None of the founders
          of the religions which appeared before his time, especially Judaism and
          Christianity, has spoken or acted in this manner. Then we saw how his caliphs followed
          his traditions. This tolerance has been recognized by some European
          scholars who have deeply contemplated Arab history. The following
          quotation, which I have taken from their numerous books prove that these
          are not exclusively our opinions. Robertson says in his book The History of Charles V that
          Muslims are the only people who possess a zeal for their faith as well
          as a spirit of tolerance toward the followers of other religions.
          Although they fight for the sake of Islam and its dissemination, they
          leave those who do not know their religion free to adhere to their own
          religious teachings. (Gustave Lebon, Arab Civilisation (trans. ‘Adil, Za’aytar), p. 128)

          Patriarch Ghaytho wrote:

          The
          Arabs, to whom the Lord has given control over the world, treat us as
          you know; they are not the enemies of Christians. Indeed, they praise
          our community, and treat our priests and saints with dignity, and offer
          aid to churches and monasteries. (Arthur Stanley Tritton, The People Of The Covenant In Islam, p. 158)

          Gustav Lebon writes:

          “The
          Arabs could have easily been blinded by their first conquests, and
          committed the injustices that are usually committed by conquerors. They
          could have mistreated their defeated opponents or forced them to
          embrace their religion, which they wished to spread all over the world.
          But the Arabs avoided that. The
          early caliphs, who had a political genius that was rare in proponents
          of new religion, realized that religions and systems are not imposed by
          force. So they treated the people of Syria, Egypt, Spain, and every country they took over with great kindness, as we have seen.
          They left their laws, regulations, and beliefs intact and only imposed
          on them the jizya, which was paltry when compared to what they had been
          paying in taxes previously, in exchange for maintaining their security.
          The truth is that nations had never known conquerors more tolerant
          than the Muslims, or a religion more tolerant than Islam.” (Lebon, G, The Civilization Of The Arabs, p. 605)

          American historian Will Durant wrote:

          At
          the time of the Umayyad caliphate, the people of the covenant,
          Christians, Zoroastrians, Jews, and Sabians, all enjoyed degree of
          tolerance that we do not find even today in Christian countries. They
          were free to practice the rituals of their religion and their churches
          and temples were preserved. They enjoyed autonomy in that they were
          subject to the religious laws of the scholars and judges. (Will Durant, The Story Of Civilization, Volume 13. p. 131-132)

          Muslims
          protected Christian churches in the lands they occupied from being
          harmed. In a letter to Simeon, the Archbishop of Rifardashir and leader
          of all the bishops of Persia, the Nestorian Patriarch Geoff III wrote:

          ‘The
          Arabs, to whom God has given power over the whole world, know how
          wealthy you are, for they live among you. In spite of this, they do not
          assail the Christian creed. To the contrary, they have sympathy with
          our religion, and venerate our priests and saints of our Lord, and they
          graciously donate to our churches and monasteries.’ (Sir Thomas Arnold, Invitation To Islam, p. 102)

          One of the Muslims caliphs, Abdul-Malik, took the Church of John
          from the Christians and made it part of a mosque. When Umar bin
          Abdulaziz succeeded him as the new Caliph, the Christians complained to
          him about what his predecessor had done to their church. Umar wrote to
          the governor that the portion of the mosque that was rightfully theirs
          be returned to them if they were unable to agree with the governor on a
          monetary settlement that would satisfy them. (Yusuf Qaradawi, ‘Ghayr al-Muslimeen fil-Mujtama’ al-Islami,’ p. 32)

          The Wailing Wall in Jerusalem
          is known to historians to be the one of the holiest places of worship
          in Judaism. Some time ago, it was completely buried under rubble and
          heaps of debris. When the Ottoman caliph Sultan Sulayman came to know
          of this, he ordered his governor in Jerusalem to remove all the rubble
          and debris, clean the area, restore the Wailing Wall, and make it
          accessible for Jews to visit. (Abdul-Latif Hussayn, ‘Tasamuh al-Gharb Ma’l-Muslimeen,’ p. 67)

          Lebon writes:

          ‘The
          tolerance of Muhammad towards the Jews and Christians was truly grand;
          the founders of other religions that appeared before him, Judaism and
          Christianity in particular, did not prescribe such goodwill. His
          caliphs followed the same policy, and his tolerance has been
          acknowledged by skeptics and believers alike when they study the history
          of the Arabs in depth.’ (Gustave Lebon, Arab Civilization, p. 128)

          Robertson wrote:

          ‘The
          Muslims alone were able to integrate their zeal for their own religion
          with tolerance for followers of other religions. Even when they bore
          swords into battle for freedom for their religion to spread, they left
          those who did not desire it free to adhere to their own religious
          teachings.’ (Quoted in Saleh Hussain Aayed, Huquq Ghayr al-Muslimeen fi Bilad il-Islam, p. 26)

          Sir Thomas Arnold wrote:

          ‘We
          never heard of a report of any planned attempt to compel non-Muslim
          minorities to accept Islam, or any organized persecution aimed at
          uprooting the Christian religion. If any of the caliphs had chosen any
          of these policies, they would have overwhelmed Christianity with the
          same ease with which Ferdinand and Isabella exiled Islam from Spain, or with which Louis XIV made following Protestantism a punishable crime in France, or with which the Jews were exiled from England
          for 350 years. A that time Eastern churches were completely isolated
          from the rest of the Christian world. They had no supporters in the
          world as they were considered heretical sects of Christianity. Their
          very existence to this day is the strongest evidence of the policy of
          Islamic government’s tolerance towards them.’ (Sir Thomas Arnold, Invitation To Islam, p. 98-99)

          The American author, Lothrop Stoddard wrote,

          ‘The
          caliph Umar took the utmost care to tend to the sanctity of the
          Christian holy places, and those who became caliph after him followed
          his footsteps. They did not harass the many denominations of pilgrims
          who came annually from every corner of the Christian world to visit Jerusalem.’ (Lothrop Stoddard, The Islamic World At Present, Volume 1, p. 13-14)

          The
          reality is that non-Muslims were treated with more tolerance among the
          Muslims than anything they experienced with other sects of their own
          religion. Richard Stebbins spoke of the Christian experience under the
          rule of the Turks:

          ‘They
          (the Turks) allowed all of them, Roman Catholics and Greek Orthodox, to
          preserve their religion and follow their consciences as they chose:
          they allowed them their churches to perform their sacred rituals in Constantinople and many other places. This is in contrast to what I can testify to from living in Spain
          for twelve years; not only were we forced to attend their Papist
          celebrations, but our lives and the lives of our grandchildren were in
          danger also.’ (Yusuf Qaradawi, al-Aqaliyyat ad-Diniyya wa-Hal al-Islami, p. 56-57)

          Thomas Arnold mentions in his ‘Invitation to Islam’ that there were many people in Italy
          at that time who longed for Ottoman rule. They wished they could be
          granted the same freedom and tolerance that the Ottomans gave to their
          Christian subjects, for they had despaired of achieving it under any
          Christian government. He also mentions that a great many Jews fled
          persecution in Spain at the end of the 15th century and took refuge in Ottoman Turkey. (p. 183)

          In 638, the Islamic empire extended its dominion to Jerusalem. The
          Rashidun army were engaged by a Byzantine army composed of Imperial
          troops as well as local levies. The Roman Emperor Heraclius had fallen
          ill and was unable to lead his armies to resist the Arab conquests of Syria and Palestine in 634. Rashidun Caliphate forces conquered Damascus in 634 A.D under the command of Khalid ibn Walid. (“Syria.” Encyclopædia Britannica) Monophysites and Jews throughout Syria
          welcomed the Arab conquerors, as they were discontented with Byzantine
          persecution and taxation, and receptive to the lower taxes offered under
          the new regime. (“Ghassan.” Encyclopedia Britannica) The
          Arabian tribes also had significant economic, cultural and familial
          ties with predominantly Arab citizens of the fertile crescent. When
          Heraclius massed his troops against the Moslems and the Moslems heard
          that they were coming to meet them at al-Yarmuk, the Moslems refunded to
          the inhabitants of Hims the karaj
          [tribute] they had taken from them saying, “We are too busy to support
          and protect you. Take care of yourselves.” But the people of Hims
          replied, “We like your rule and justice far better than the state of
          oppression and tyranny in which we were. The army of Heraclius we shall
          indeed, with your ‘amil’s’ help, repulse from the city.” The Jews rose
          and said, “We swear by the Torah, no governor of Heraclius shall enter
          the city of Hims
          unless we are first vanquished and exhausted!” Saying this, they closed
          the gates of the city and guarded them. The inhabitants of the other
          cities – Christian and Jew – that had capitulated to the Moslems, did
          the same, saying, “If Heraclius and his followers win over the Moslems
          we would return to our previous condition, otherwise we shall retain our
          present state so long as numbers are with the Moslems.” When by Allah’s
          help the “unbelievers” were defeated and the Moslems won, they opened
          the gates of their cities, went out with the singers and music players
          who began to play, and paid the kharaj.” (P. K. Hitti and F. C. Murgotten, Studies in History, Economics and Public Law p. 207-211)

          It
          is worthwhile to reemphasize the following point. The existence of
          non-Muslims for centuries across the Muslim world, from Moorish Spain
          and Sub-Saharan Africa to Egypt, Syria, India, and Indonesia
          are clear evidence of the religious tolerance extended by Islam to
          people of other faiths. This tolerance even led to the elimination of
          Muslims, such as in Spain, where the remaining Christians took advantage of Muslim weakness, attacked them, and wiped them out from Spain by either killing them, forcing them to convert, or expulsion.

          Etienne Denier wrote,

          ‘The Muslims are the opposite of what many people believe. They never used force outside of the Hejaz.
          The presence of Christians was evidence of this fact. They retained
          their religion in complete security during the eight centuries that the
          Muslims ruled their lands. Some of them held high posts in the palace
          in Cordoba, but when the same Christians obtained power over the country, suddenly their first concern was to exterminate Muslims.’ (Etienne Denier, Muhammad The Messenger Of God, p. 332)

          In Muslim Spain,

          “Thousands of Jews and Christians lived in peace and harmony with their Muslim overlords.” (James Burke, The Day The Universe Changed, p. 38)

          Of course, this was until the Christians came and massacred the Muslims. Please visit this link and read more about Muslim tolerance to non-Muslims in Spain, which unfortunately lead to their own slaughter.

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            I will not speak for the Jews, since I am a Christian. But Jesus never … NEVER … ordered His followers to conquer and subjugate other people, killing thousands in HIs Name. Not once.

            But the “Prophet” … dammed (purposely misspelled) be his name … took a special pleasure in conquest, subjugation, and killing. Aren’t we told that he personally killed by beheading 600-900 people? And this was one incident, alone. He marries a six-year old girl, and this is alright because he just “spills his seed” on her leg until she is nine?

            In these stories alone, he shows two serious psychological issues … sociopathy and pedophilia. I seriously believe that he was a paranoid schizophrenic.

            In the Founders of major religions, we see reasons why we should or should not become a member of that religion. Mohammed’s life … just like Joseph Smith and Charles Taze Russell … tells me that no one should respect him, much less follow him.

          • mj

            Well 1400 years ago it was not weird to marry a girl so young as it is today. It was not out of the ordinary at all, another point is the girl was accepting at the time and throughout her whole life so it is not pedophilia. Another point is at the time the enemys of Islam did not even mention it as something bad. It is just now that if you compare with todays society it does seem wrong. The issue for you is you do not accept him as the prophet of god. If you research his life story with an open mind you will see the truth. Not to mention that Jesus prophesied the coming of Muhammad in your own books.

            Also if you are a christian and i am assuming you are, what do you think about the bible talking about the prophet who got his daughters drunk and slept with them? Sorry cant remember names or give references i am sure you know.

            I suggest you honestly have a look at the Prophet Muhammad’s life story completely and objectively.

            Lastly i am not a blind follower and i have researched all major religions and still do. If you tell me something i research it and learn because i want the truth and dont want to waste my life believing something that is not true. I hope you do the same. Cheers MJ

          • Wolfthatknowsall

            “I suggest you honestly have a look at the Prophet Muhammad’s life story completely and objectively.”

            I have. That’s why my opinion of him, and any religion he founded, is so low …

  • wileyvet

    Not only was the Jizya paid as Dhimmis, the Muslims collecting made sure to humiliate the payer by grabbing their beard when in a bowed position and giving them a good cuff about the head. The Jizya is only one item, on the long list of conditions applied to Dhimmis, under the Pact of Umar, which include; no church bells, no singing or mashing of cymbols that annoy Muslims, no building or repairing churches, no crosses on their churches, no riding horses, no owning weapons, no building a house taller than a Muslim’s, moving aside for Muslim passersby, giving up a seat to a Muslim, never striking back against a Muslim, wearing of special clothing to identify themselves as Dhimmis which also included a Zunar, long yellow sash, and sometimes Christians were forced to shave a big chunk of hair from in front on their forehead. Every aspect of the Dhimmis life was orchestrated to always make them feel subdued and inferior, because to a Muslim that is exactly what they are. That is Islamic tolerance.

    Mr. Ibrahim details all of this in his excellent book, Crucified Again. For those who haven’t purchased it or read it, I highly recommend you do so.

    • Guest

      The black and white image is from the “flowers of the orient” web site; it is depicting a Jewish subject bowing in accordance with dhimmitude to one of the Islamist rulers who used to follow the practice of
      promoting them to positions such as court physician, vizier, finance or foreign minister and then mutilate or behead them – something like that happened him too.

    • mj

      That is not true i would love to see where your proof is.

      For more clarification and for refuting each allegation and accusation I
      would like to mention what the noted historian Sir Thomas W. Arnold in
      his Call to Islam, states:

      This tax was not imposed on the Christians, as some would have us think,
      as a penalty for their refusal to accept the Muslim faith, but was paid
      by them in common with the other Dhimmis or non-Muslim subjects of the
      states whose religion precluded them from serving in the army, in return
      for the protection secured for them by the arms of the Musalmans. When
      the people of Hirah contributed the sum agreed upon, they expressly
      mentioned that they paid this Jizyah on condition that ‘the Muslims and
      their leader protect us from those who would oppress us, whether they be
      Muslims or others.’ …the jizyah was levied on the able-bodied males, in
      lieu of the military service they would have been called upon to
      perform had they been Muslim men; and it is very noticeable that when
      any Christian people served in the Muslim army, they were exempted from
      the payment of this tax. Such was the case with the tribe of
      Al-Jurajimah, a Christian tribe in the neighborhood of Antioch, who made
      peace with the Muslims, promising them to be their allies and fight on
      their side in battle. In his covenant with the people of certain cities
      near Al-Haira, Khalid ibn Al-Walid recorded “If we are able to protect
      you, we deserve the collection of jizyah.”

      The seriousness with which the Muslims took their covenants with the
      non-Muslims is well illustrated by the following incident. During the
      reign of the second caliph, `Umar Ibn Al-Khattab, the Roman emperor
      Heraclius raised a huge army to repel the Muslim forces. It was thus
      incumbent upon the Muslims to concentrate their efforts on the battle.
      When the commander of Muslims, Abu `Ubaydah heard this news, he wrote to
      his officials in all conquered cities in Syria and ordered them to
      return the jizyah which had been levied in those cities. He also
      addressed the public saying, “We are returning your money because we
      know that the enemy has gathered troops. By the terms stipulated in the
      covenant, you have obliged us to protect you. However, since we are now
      unable to fulfill these conditions, we have returned to you what you
      paid to us. We shall abide by the terms agreed upon in the covenant, if
      Allah helps us to rout the enemy.

      Thus, a huge amount was taken from the state treasury and returned to
      the Christians, making them very happy. They prayed for and blessed the
      Muslim commanders. They exclaimed, “May Allah help you to overcome your
      enemies and return you to us safely. If the enemy were in your place,
      they would never have returned anything to us, but rather they would
      have taken all our remaining property.

      The jizyah was also imposed on Muslim men who could afford to buy their
      way out of military service. If a Christian group elected to serve in
      the state’s military forces, it was exempted from the jizyah. Historical
      examples of this abound. Al-Jurajimah, a Christian tribe living near
      Antioch (now in Turkey), by undertaking to support Muslims and to fight
      on the battle front, did not have to pay the jizyah and were entitled to
      a share of the captured booty.

      When the Islamic conquests reached northern Persia in AH 22, a similar
      covenant was established with a tribe living on the boundaries of those
      territories. They were consequently exempted from jizyah in view of
      their military services.

      Other examples are to be found during the history of the Ottoman Empire.
      The Migaris, a group of Albanian Christians, were exempted from the
      jizyah for undertaking to watch and guard the mountain ranges of
      Cithaeron and Geraned (which stretch to the Gulf of Corinth). Christians
      who served as the vanguard of the Turkish army for road repairs, bridge
      construction, and so on, were exempted from the kharaj (land tax). As a
      reward, they were also provided with some lands, free of all taxes.

      The Christians of Hydra were exempted when they agreed to supply a group
      of 250 strong men for the Muslim naval fleet. The Armatolis, Christians
      from southern Romania, were also exempted from the tax, for they
      constituted a vital element in the Turkish armed forces during the 16th
      and 17th centuries. The Mirdites, an Albanian Catholic clan who lived in
      the mountains of northern Scutari, were exempted on the condition that
      they would offer an armored battalion in wartime. The jizyah was also
      not imposed on the Greek Christians who had supervised the building of
      viaducts that carried water to Constantinople, nor on those who guarded
      the ammunition in that city, as just compensation for their services to
      the state. However, Egyptian Muslim peasants exempted from military
      service were still required to pay the jizyah.

      • Paul of Alexandria

        Read. The. Book.

        • mj

          Read history.. Did you know that the muslims ruled spain for over 800 years. jews christians and muslims lived peacefully. That was untill the inquisition. Read about that lets see how tolerant the christians were…

          • wileyvet

            No they did not live peacefully. They existed under brutal Muslim rule, which they did not want. It was imposed on them, and they were second class citizens, not equal to Muslims. Islam does not treat non-Muslims as equals, only granting them inferior status. The only reason Christians and Jews would have been given any positions of worth in an Islamic court was because the Muslims were to ignorant on how to run things that they used existing people to maintain rules and regulations of an already existing system. The history of Islam is 1300 years of conquest, murder, subjugation, persecution and oppression. The Muslim slave trade for example is estimated to have killed 112 million African blacks, with death rates approaching 80%. The brutality of Turcomen against Syriac Christians is well documented and resulted in wholesale slaughter. Greeks and Armenians were ethnically cleansed from Turkey in the early 20th century. The fate of Hindus in India is even bloodier, with the death of 80 million, and the destruction of 2000 temples and replaced with mosques. As for the Inquisition, over a period of 350 years, approximately 30,000 people succumbed to it. A far cry from the thousands that could be slaughtered in one day by Muslims as happened in Spain, Syria or Palestine. Islam has never meant peace, but rather submission, as in blindly adhering slaves to Allah. Islam does not accept any other beliefs from anyone. If you are not Muslim you are Kafr, dirty and vile and deserving of all of Allah’s punishments.

          • mj

            The Spanish Inquisition can be seen as an answer to the multi-religious nature of Spanish society following the reconquest of the Iberian Peninsula from the Muslim Moors.
            After invading in 711, large areas of the Iberian Peninsula were ruled
            by Muslims until 1250, when they were restricted to Granada, which fell
            in 1492. However, the Reconquista did not result in the total expulsion
            of Muslims from Spain, since they, along with Jews, were tolerated by
            the ruling Christian elite. Large cities, especially Seville, Valladolid and Barcelona, had significant Jewish populations centered in Juderia,
            but in the coming years the Muslims were increasingly subjugated by
            alienation and torture. The Jews, who had previously thrived under
            Muslim rule, now suffered similar maltreatment.

            Post-reconquest medieval Spain has been characterized by Americo Castro
            and some other Iberianists as a society of “convivencia”, that is
            relatively peaceful co-existence, albeit punctuated by occasional
            conflict among the ruling Catholics and the Jews and Muslims. However,
            as Henry Kamen notes, “so-called convivencia was always a relationship
            between unequals.”[1]
            Despite their legal inequality, there was a long tradition of Jewish
            service to the crown of Aragon and Jews occupied many important posts,
            both religious and political. Castile itself had an unofficial rabbi. Ferdinand’s father John II named the Jewish Abiathar Crescas to be Court Astronomer.

            Nevertheless, in some parts of Spain towards the end of the 14th century, there was a wave of violent anti-Judaism, encouraged by the preaching of Ferrand Martinez, Archdeacon of Ecija. In the pogroms of June 1391 in Seville, hundreds of Jews were killed, and the synagogue was completely destroyed. The number of people killed was also high in other cities, such as Córdoba, Valencia and Barcelona.[2]

          • Paul of Alexandria

            The Inquisition was aimed at Christian heretics (not to excuse it, BTW) and had little to do with Muslims.

            And perhaps they did live peacefully – so long as the Muslims were in charge. How peacefully do Muslims live when somebody else in in charge? Not very, actually.

            Where is Charles Martel when you need him?

          • mj

            After the end of the Islamic control of Spain, Muslims and Jews were expelled from Spain in 1492 and from Portugal in 1497.[5] After the Reconquista, so called “New Christians” were those inhabitants (Sephardic Jews or Mudéjar
            Muslims) during the Middle Ages and the Early Modern Era who were
            baptized under coercion and in the face of murder, becoming forced
            converts from Islam (Moriscos, Conversos and secret Moors) and forced converts from Judaism (Conversos, Crypto-Jews and Marranos). Then the Spanish Inquisition
            targeted primarily forced converts from Judaism who came under
            suspicion of either continuing to adhere to their old religion or of
            having fallen back into it. Jewish conversos still resided in Spain and
            often hiddenly (cryptically) practiced Judaism and were suspected by the
            “Old Christians” of being Crypto-Jews.
            The Spanish Inquisition generated much wealth and income for the church
            and individual inquisitors by confiscating the property of the
            persecutees or selling them into slavery. The end of the Al-Andalus and the expulsion of the Sephardic Jews
            from the Iberian Peninsula went hand in hand with the increase of
            Spanish-Portugal influence in the world, as exemplified in the Christian
            conquest of the Americas and their aboriginal Indian population. The
            Ottoman empire, the Netherlands, and the New World absorbed much of the
            Jewish refugees.

        • mj

          I am not sure where David Spencer got that from he should have references in his book i would like to see them since you have the book.

      • Paul of Alexandria

        What you say here and below may be true for particular times and places, depending very largely upon the largess and wisdom of the particular Muslim ruler involved. However, it cannot be said generally of all Muslim rulers, nor of Islam itself; ISIS, the Muslim Brotherhood, and the other terrorists can cite the Koran and Hadiths as well as you, and they find themselves fully justified in their atrocities.

        • mj

          Well the first generation of Muslims is our example today and all Muslims should take them as an example and follow in their footsteps.

      • Paul of Alexandria

        Upon further thought:
        How do you respond to the atrocities committed by ISIS against the Christians and Jews in Syria, Iraq, and other countries in the middle East? ISIS claims the caliphate, and all that they do they justify by the Koran. Please show me how they may be proven wrong.

        • mj

          Well i am not sure what ISIS is doing. I agree with somethings they are doing. At the same time i disagree. There is a lot of misinformation going around so i like to stay away from making decisions on them..

          • IslamDownpressesHumanity

            Back pedaling and evasion.

  • Paul of Alexandria

    See also Robert Spencer’s Jihad Watch, Islam 101, 2) e.
    On the day of payment {of the jizya} they {the dhimmi} shall be
    assembled in a public place like the suq {place of commerce}. They
    should be standing there waiting in the lowest and dirtiest place. The
    acting officials representing the Law shall be placed above them and
    shall adopt a threatening attitude so that it seems to them, as well as
    to others, that our object is to degrade them by pretending to take
    their possessions. They will realize that we are doing them a favor in
    accepting from them the jizya and letting them go free. (Al-Maghili,
    quoted in Bat Ye’or, The Decline of Eastern Christianity under Islam, 361.)

    http://www.jihadwatch.org/islam-101

    • mj

      ok who said that? please provide islamic references not david spencer.

      • Paul of Alexandria

        Why not? He knows whereof he speaks.

        • IslamDownpressesHumanity

          mj has no interest in the truth about islam, he already knows that, he’s interested in concealing that truth.

          • mj

            Thank you for your analysis.

          • Paul of Alexandria

            I’m getting that idea, yes.

    • mj

      In America if someone does not pay their taxes they can go to jail. Does that make America unjust? In China they kill tax evaders (A New York Times article describes the context and details of one businessman who was executed in China for tax evasion (11 Mar. 2001). at http://www.irb-cisr.gc.ca/en/research/ndp/ref/?action=view&doc=chn41156e).
      You have to understand that these are God’s laws. It is probably
      difficult for a non-Muslim to understand this but from the Muslim
      perspective it is completely justifiable. For God sake people get
      executed or punished for crimes against man made laws, what do you
      expect to happen to people that break God’s laws?

      Sir Thomas Arnold wrote,

      ‘The
      jizya was so light that it did not constitute a burden on them,
      especially when we observe that it exempted them from compulsory
      military service that was an obligation for their fellow citizens, the
      Muslims.’ (Sir Thomas Arnold, Invitation to Islam, p. 77)

      • Paul of Alexandria

        Taxes are laid evenly in the Western world, regardless of religion – and this has pretty much been the practice since the Roman Empire (more or less).

        You miss the point. Sometimes the Jizya was light, sometimes it was heavy and intended to oppress and shame the non-Muslim. It all depended on the mood of the ruler at the time. The Koran and Hadiths, however, is rather clear on the subject: it is meant to be oppressive. Ask the Christians in Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Lebanon, how merciful the Muslims are these days.

        BTW, I note that you miss one rather important point: the jizya is allowed only for Christians and Jews. Go and ask the Zoroastrians what they think of Muslim mercy! Or anyone else who was not a Christian or a Jew. “Was” being the operative word.

        • IslamDownpressesHumanity

          Saladin jacked up the jizya on his oppressed najjis kaffir to finance his wars against the recalcitrant, free, najjis kaffir.

    • mj

      Saheeh Bukhari

      Volume 2, Book 23, Number 475:

      Narrated ‘Amr bin Maimun Al-Audi:

      I
      recommend him to abide by the rules and regulations concerning the
      Dhimmis (protectees) of Allah and His Apostle, to fulfill their
      contracts completely and fight for them and not to tax (overburden) them beyond their capabilities.”

      So not only do Muslims have to pay a higher rate of tax than the dhimmis (Muslims usually pay higher rates). Not only are they obliged to pay it on their property, food, etc unlike the dhimmis. Not only are BOTH MEN AND WOMEN from the Muslims obliged to pay Zakah, unlike how the women from the dhimmis are
      not obliged to pay, but after all this it is still the Muslims who are
      obliged to defend the country and protect the non-Muslims!

      Any
      objective observer would probably reach the conclusion that these rules
      and regulations are unfair to the Muslims, not to the non-Muslims.

    • mj

      Imam Nawawi, commenting on those who would impose a humiliation along with the paying of the Jizyah, said,

      “As for this aforementioned practice (hay’ah), I know of no sound support for it in this respect, and it is only mentioned by the scholars of Khurasan. The majority (jumhur) of scholars say that the Jizyah is to be taken with gentleness, as one would receive a debt (dayn).
      The reliably correct opinion is that this practice is invalid and those
      who devised it should be refuted. It is not related that the Prophet or
      any of the rightly-guided caliphs did any such thing when collecting
      the Jizyah.” (Rawdat al-Talibin, Volume 10, p.315-16)

      Ibn
      Qudama also said that the Prophet (peace be upon him) and the four
      caliphs said that taking the Jizyah should be done with gentleness and
      respect. (Al-Mughni, Volume 4, p.250)

  • Paul of Alexandria

    Also, http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/ is a pretty good site.

    • mj

      If you think that is a pretty good site it shows who you are as a person. Thats quite sad really and also that site is lame and poorly managed. If you dont like islam fine. I really dont care. Please dont post silly things it makes you look silly which im sure you are not.

  • FedUpWithWelfareStates

    Bow before no one but God & give unto Caesar what is Caesar’s (congressional approved taxes)…everyone else can standby for a day of reckoning…