Product Code Database
( , , collectively أهل الذمة / "the people of the covenant") or (معاهد) is a historical term for Kafir living in an Islamic state with legal protection. The word literally means "protected person", referring to the state's obligation under sharia to protect the individual's life, property, as well as freedom of religion, in exchange for loyalty to the state and payment of the jizya tax, in contrast to the zakat , or obligatory alms, paid by the Muslim subjects. Dhimmi were exempt from military service and other duties assigned specifically to Muslims if they paid the poll tax (jizya ) but were otherwise equal under the laws of property, contract, and obligation.H. Patrick Glenn, Legal Traditions of the World . Oxford University Press, 2007, p. 219.The French scholar Gustave Le Bon (the author of La civilisation des Arabes ) writes "that despite the fact that the incidence of taxation fell more heavily on a Muslim than a non-Muslim, the non-Muslim was free to enjoy equally well with every Muslim all the privileges afforded to the citizens of the state. The only privilege that was reserved for the Muslims was the seat of the caliphate, and this, because of certain religious functions attached to it, which could not naturally be discharged by a non-Muslim." Mun'im Sirry (2014), Scriptural Polemics: The Qur'an and Other Religions , p. 179. Oxford University Press. . Dhimmis were subject to specific restrictions as well, which were codified in agreements like the Pact of ʿUmar''. These included prohibitions on building new places of worship, repairing existing ones in areas where Muslims lived, teaching children the Qurʾān, and preventing relatives from converting to Islam. (2025). 9782503565712, Brepols Publishers. ISBN 9782503565712 They were also required to wear distinctive clothing, refrain from carrying weapons, and avoid riding on saddles.
Historically, dhimmi status was originally applied to Jews, Christians, and Sabians, who are considered "People of the Book" in Islamic theology. Later, this status was also applied to Zoroastrianism, Sikhism, Hinduism, Jainism, and Buddhism.
Jews, Christians and others were required to pay the jizyah, and forced conversions were forbidden.Waines (2003) "An Introduction to Islam" Cambridge University Press. p. 53Winter, T. J., & Williams, J. A. (2002). Understanding Islam and the Muslims: The Muslim Family Islam and World Peace. Louisville, Kentucky: Fons Vitae. p. 82. . Quote: The laws of Muslim warfare forbid any forced conversions, and regard them as invalid if they occur.
During the rule of al-Mutawakkil, the tenth Abbasid Caliph, numerous restrictions reinforced the second-class citizen status of dhimmīs and forced their communities into ghettos. For instance, they were required to distinguish themselves from their Muslim neighbors by their dress.The Torah itself set forth rules for dress that set Jews apart from the communities in which they lived.Eric Silverman, A Cultural History of Jewish Dress, A&C Black, 2013 pp. 47, xv, 24:'At 2 Maccabees 4:12 it is recorded that the Maccabees slaughtered Jewish youths guilty of Hellenization in wearing caps typical of Greek youths. The first of the other Abrahamic religions to impose a distinctive mode of dress on Jews was Islam, beginning with decrees set forth by the Abbasid caliph Al-Mutawakkil obliging non-Muslims (dhimmis) to wear distinctive marks, – buttons on their caps, patches on their sleeves, and generally honey-coloured garbs, – on their clothing in order to mark them off from members of the Muslim communities.'; ‘a twelfth century Christian synod decreed the first of many edicts which required Jews to don peculiar garb. These outfits marked Jews as Otherly-to be shunned, despised, …and sometimes murdered… . But Jews also dressed differently in premodern Europe because their rabbis understood any emulation of non-Jews as a violation of the divine law as revealed by God to Moses atop Mount Sinai. The Five Books of Moses, after all, together called the Torah, clearly specify that Jews must adhere to a particular dress code-modesty, for example, and fringes. The very structure of the cosmos demanded nothing less. Clothing, too, served as a "fence" that protected Jews from the profanities and pollutions of the non-Jewish societies in which they dwelled. From this angle, Jews dressed distinctively as God's elect.' They were not permitted to build new churches or synagogues or repair old churches without Muslim consent according to the Pact of Umar.
Under Sharia, the dhimmi communities were usually governed by their own laws in place of some of the laws applicable to the Ummah. For example, the Jewish community of Medina was allowed to have its own Beit din, and the Ottoman Empire millet system allowed its various dhimmi communities to rule themselves under Ottoman law. These courts did not cover cases that involved religious groups outside of their own communities, or capital offences. Dhimmi communities were also allowed to engage in certain practices that were usually forbidden for the Muslim community, such as the consumption of alcohol and pork.Al-Misri, Reliance of the Traveler (edited and translated by Nuh Ha Mim Keller), p. 608. Amana Publications, 1994.Al-Misri, Reliance of the Traveler (ed. and trans. Nuh Ha Mim Keller), pp. 977, 986. Amana Publications, 1994.
Some Muslims reject the dhimma system by arguing that it is a system which is inappropriate in the age of nation-states and democracies."… the overwhelming majority of moderate Muslims reject the dhimma system as ahistorical, in the sense that it is inappropriate for the age of nation-states and democracies." (2025). 9780061189036, HarperOne. ISBN 9780061189036 There is a range of opinions among 20th-century and contemporary Islamic theologians about whether the notion of dhimma is appropriate for modern times, and, if so, what form it should take in an Islamic state.
There are differences among the Islamic regarding which non-Muslims can pay jizya and have dhimmi status. The Hanafi and Maliki Madhabs generally allow non-Muslims to have dhimmi status. In contrast, the Shafi'i and Hanbali Madhabs only allow Christians, Unitarians, Jews, Sabeans and Zoroastrians to have dhimmi status, and they maintain that all other non-Muslims must either convert to Islam or be fought.
In Yemenite Jewish sources, a treaty was drafted between Muhammad and his Jewish subjects, known as kitāb ḏimmat al-nabi, written in the 17th year of the Hijri year (638 CE), which gave express liberty to the Jews living in Arabia to observe the Sabbath and to grow-out their side-locks, but required them to pay the jizya (poll-tax) annually for their protection.Shelomo Dov Goitein, The Yemenites – History, Communal Organization, Spiritual Life (Selected Studies), editor: Menahem Ben-Sasson, Jerusalem 1983, pp. 288–299. Muslim governments in the Indus basin readily extended the dhimmi status to the Hindus and Buddhists of India.Marshall Hodgson, The Venture of Islam Conscience and History in a World Civilization Vol 2. University of Chicago, 1958, p. 278. Eventually, the largest Madhhab of Fiqh applied this term to all Non-Muslims living in Muslim lands outside the Hejaz surrounding Mecca, Arabia.al-Misri, Ahmad ibn Naqib (edited and translated from Arabic (with commentary) by Nuh Ha Mim Keller) (1994 revised ed.), p. 603.
In medieval Islamic societies, the qadi (Islamic judge) usually could not interfere in the matters of non-Muslims unless the parties voluntarily chose to be judged according to Islamic law, thus the dhimmi communities living in Islamic states usually had their own laws independent from the sharia law, as with the Jews who would have their own Beit din. These courts did not cover cases that involved other religious groups, or capital offences or threats to public order. By the 18th century, however, dhimmi frequently attended the Ottoman Muslim courts, where cases were taken against them by Muslims, or they took cases against Muslims or other dhimmi. Oaths sworn by dhimmi in these courts were tailored to their beliefs. Non-Muslims were allowed to engage in certain practices (such as the consumption of alcohol and pork) that were usually forbidden by Islamic law, in point of fact, any Muslim who pours away their wine or forcibly appropriates it is liable to pay compensation. Some Islamic theologians held that Zoroastrian "Xwedodah", considered incestuous under sharia, should also be tolerated. Ibn Qayyim Al-Jawziyya (1292–1350) opined that most scholars of the Hanbali school held that non-Muslims were entitled to such practices, as long as they were not presented to sharia courts and the religious minorities in question held them to be permissible. This ruling was based on the precedent that there were no records of the Islamic prophet Muhammad forbidding such self-marriages among Zoroastrians, despite coming into contact with Zoroastrians and knowing about this practice.Jackson, Sherman A. (2005). p. 144 (via Google Books). Retrieved 19 September 2011. Religious minorities were also free to do as they wished in their own homes, provided they did not publicly engage in illicit sexual activity in ways that could threaten public morals.Jackson, Sherman A. (2005). p. 145 (via Google Books). Retrieved 19 September 2011.
There are parallels for this in Roman law and Halakha.Glenn, H. Patrick (2007). Legal Traditions of the World: Sustainable Diversity in Law (3rd edition). New York City; Oxford: Oxford University Press. . pp. 217–219. According to law professor H. Patrick Glenn of McGill University, "today it is said that the dhimmi are 'excluded from the specifically Muslim privileges, but on the other hand they are excluded from the specifically Muslim duties' while (and here there are clear parallels with western public and private law treatment of aliens—Fremdenrecht, la condition de estrangers), 'for the rest, the Muslim and the dhimmi are equal in practically the whole of the law of property and of contracts and obligations'."Glenn, H. Patrick (2007). Legal Traditions of the World&: Sustainable Diversity in Law (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford: Oxford University Press. . p. 219. Quoting the Qur'anic statement, "Let Christians judge according to what We have revealed in the Gospel", Muhammad Hamidullah writes that Islam decentralized and "communalized" law and justice. However, the classical dhimma contract is no longer enforced. Western culture over the Muslim world has been instrumental in eliminating the restrictions and protections of the dhimma contract.
Muslim states, sects, schools of thought and individuals differ as to exactly what sharia law entails.Otto, Jan Michiel. Sharia and National Law in Muslim Countries: Tensions and Opportunities for Dutch and EU Foreign Policy . Amsterdam University Press, 2008, p. 7. In addition, Muslim states today utilize a spectrum of legal systems. Most states have a mixed system that implements certain aspects of sharia while acknowledging the supremacy of a constitution. A few, such as Turkey, have declared themselves secular.Otto, Sharia and National Law in Muslim Countries, 2008, pp. 8–9. Local and customary laws may take precedence in certain matters, as well.Otto, Sharia and National Law in Muslim Countries, 2008, p. 29. Islamic law is therefore polynormative,Otto, Sharia and National Law in Muslim Countries, 2008, p. 10. and despite several cases of regression in recent years, the trend is towards liberalization.Otto, Sharia and National Law in Muslim Countries, 2008, p. 18. Questions of human rights and the status of minorities cannot be generalized with regards to the Muslim world. They must instead be examined on a case-by-case basis, within specific political and cultural contexts, using perspectives drawn from the historical framework.Otto, Sharia and National Law in Muslim Countries, 2008, pp. 37–39.
On 18 February 1856, the Ottoman Reform Edict of 1856 () was issued, building upon the 1839 edict. It came about partly as a result of pressure from and the efforts of the ambassadors of France, Austrian Empire and the United Kingdom, whose respective countries were needed as allies in the Crimean War. It again proclaimed the principle of equality between Muslims and non-Muslims, and produced many specific reforms to this end. For example, the jizya tax was abolished and non-Muslims were allowed to join the army.Lapidus (1988), p. 599Lapidus (2002), p. 495
According to some scholars, discrimination against dhimmis did not end with the Edict of 1856, and they remained second-class citizens at least until the end of World War I. H.E.W. Young, the British Council in Mosul, wrote in 1909, "The attitude of the Muslims toward the Christians and the Jews is that of a master towards slaves, whom he treats with a certain lordly tolerance so long as they keep their place. Any sign of pretension to equality is promptly repressed."
However, dhimmis faced social and symbolic restrictions,Lewis (1984), p. 26 and a pattern of stricter, then more lax, enforcement developed over time.Lewis (1984) pp. 49–51. Marshall Hodgson, a historian of Islam, writes that during the era of the High Caliphate (7th–13th Centuries), zealous Shariah-minded Muslims gladly elaborated their code of symbolic restrictions on the dhimmis.
From an Islamic legal perspective, the pledge of protection granted dhimmis the freedom to practice their religion and spared them forced conversions. The dhimmis also served a variety of useful purposes, mostly economic, which was another point of concern to jurists.Lewis (1984) Religious minorities were free to do whatever they wished in their own homes, but could not "publicly engage in illicit sex in ways that threaten public morals". In some cases, religious practices that Muslims found repugnant were allowed. One example was the Zoroastrian practice of "self-marriage" where a man could marry his mother, sister or daughter. According to the medieval Islamic legal scholar Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya, non-Muslims had the right to engage in such religious practices even if it offended Muslims, under the conditions that such cases not be presented to Islamic Sharia courts and that these religious minorities believed that the practice in question is permissible according to their religion. This ruling was based on the precedent that Muhammad did not forbid such self-marriages among Zoroastrians despite coming in contact with them and having knowledge of their practices.Jackson, p. 144
The Arabs generally established garrisons outside towns in the conquered territories, and had little interaction with the local dhimmi populations for purposes other than the collection of taxes. The conquered Christian, Jewish, Mazdean and Buddhist communities were otherwise left to lead their lives as before.Hodgson, The Venture of Islam Vol 1, 1958, pp. 227–229.
However, Christians living under Islamic rule have suffered certain legal disadvantages and at times persecution. In the Ottoman Empire, in accordance with the dhimmi system implemented in Islam countries, they, like all other Christians and also Jews, were accorded certain freedoms. The dhimmi system in the Ottoman Empire was largely based upon the Pact of Umar. The client status established the rights of the non-Muslims to property, livelihood and freedom of worship but they were in essence treated as second-class citizens in the empire and referred to in Turkish as Giaour, a pejorative word meaning "infidel" or "unbeliever". The clause of the Pact of Umar which prohibited non-Muslims from building new places of worship was historically imposed on some communities of the Ottoman Empire and ignored in other cases, at discretion of the local authorities. Although there were no laws mandating religious ghettos, this led to non-Muslim communities being clustered around existing houses of worship.
In addition to other legal limitations, dhimmis, including the Christians among them, were not considered equals to Muslims and several prohibitions were placed on them. Their testimony against Muslims was inadmissible in courts of law wherein a Muslim could be punished; this meant that their testimony could only be considered in commercial cases. They were forbidden to carry weapons or ride atop horses and camels. Their houses could not overlook those of Muslims; and their religious practices were severely circumscribed (e.g., the ringing of church bells was strictly forbidden).
María Rosa Menocal, argues that the Jewish dhimmis living under the caliphate, while allowed fewer rights than Muslims, were still better off than in the Christian parts of Europe. Jews from other parts of Europe made their way to al-Andalus, where in parallel to Christian sects regarded as heretical by Catholic Europe, they were not just tolerated, but where opportunities to practice faith and trade were open without restriction save for the prohibitions on proselytization.
Bernard Lewis states:
Professor of Jewish medieval history at Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Hayim Hillel Ben-Sasson, notes:
According to the French historian Claude Cahen, Islam has "shown more toleration than Europe towards the Jews who remained in Muslim lands."
Comparing the treatment of Jews in the medieval Islamic world and Middle Ages, Mark R. Cohen notes that, in contrast to Jews in Christian Europe, the "Jews in Islam were well integrated into the economic life of the larger society", and that they were allowed to practice their religion more freely than they could do in Christian Europe.
According to the scholar Mordechai Zaken, (also known as aghas) in tribal Muslim societies such as the Kurdish society in Kurdistan would tax their Jewish subjects. The Jews were in fact civilians protected by their chieftains in and around their communities; in return they paid part of their harvest as dues, and contributed their skills and services to their patron chieftain.Mordechai Zaken, Jewish Subjects and their tribal chieftains in Kurdistan: A Study in Survival, Brill: Leiden and Boston, 2007.
Although dhimmis were allowed to perform their religious rituals, they were obliged to do so in a manner not conspicuous to Muslims. Loud prayers were forbidden, as were the ringing of church bells and the blowing of the shofar.Karsh 29. They were also not allowed to build or repair churches and synagogues without Muslim consent. Moreover, dhimmis were not allowed to seek converts among Muslims. In the Mamluk Egypt, where non-Mamluk Muslims were not allowed to ride horses and camels, dhimmis were prohibited even from riding donkeys inside cities.Stillman (1979), p. 471 Sometimes, Muslim rulers issued regulations requiring dhimmis to attach distinctive signs to their houses.Al-Tabari, Ta'rikh al-Rusul wa 'l-Muluk, translated in Stillman (1979), p. 167.
Most of the restrictions were social and symbolic in nature, and a pattern of stricter, then more lax, enforcement developed over time. The major financial disabilities of the dhimmi were the jizya poll tax and the fact dhimmis and Muslims could not inherit from each other. That would create an incentive to convert if someone from the family had already converted. Ira M. Lapidus states that the "payment of the poll tax seems to have been regular, but other obligations were inconsistently enforced and did not prevent many non-Muslims from being important political, business, and scholarly figures. In the late ninth and early tenth centuries, Jewish bankers and financiers were important at the 'Abbasid court." The jurists and scholars of Islamic sharia law called for humane treatment of the dhimmis.Lewis (1984), p. 16.
A Muslim man may marry a Jewish or Christian dhimmī woman, who may keep her own religion (though her children were automatically considered Muslims and had to be raised as such), but a Muslim woman cannot marry a dhimmī man unless he converts to Islam. Dhimmīs are prohibited from converting Muslims under severe penalties, while Muslims are encouraged to convert dhimmīs.
Lewis states there are varying opinions among scholars as to how much of a burden jizya was. According to Norman Stillman: " jizya and kharaj were a "crushing burden for the non-Muslim peasantry who eked out a bare living in a subsistence economy."Stillman (1979), p. 28 Both agree that ultimately, the additional taxation on non-Muslims was a critical factor that drove many dhimmis to leave their religion and accept Islam.Lewis (1984), pp. 17–18; Stillman (1979), p. 18 However, in some regions the jizya on populations was significantly lower than the zakat, meaning dhimmi populations maintained an economic advantage.Klorman (2007), p. 94 According to Cohen, taxation, from the perspective of dhimmis who came under Muslim rule, was "a concrete continuation of the taxes paid to earlier regimes". Bernard Lewis observes that the change from Byzantine to Arab rule was welcomed by many among the dhimmis who found the new yoke far lighter than the old, both in taxation and in other matters, and that some, even among the Christians of Syria and Egypt, preferred the rule of Islam to that of Byzantines.Lewis (2002) p. 57 Montgomery Watt states, "the Christians were probably better off as dhimmis under Muslim-Arab rulers than they had been under the Byzantine Greeks."William Montgomery Watt, Islamic Political Thought: The Basic Concepts, p. 51. Quote: "The Christians were probably better off as dhimmis under Muslim-Arab rulers than they had been under the Byzantine Greeks." In some places, for example Egypt, the jizya was a tax incentive for Christians to convert to Islam.
Some scholars have tried compute the relative taxation on Muslims vs non-Muslims in the early Abbasid period. According to one estimate, Muslims had an average tax rate of 17–20 dirhams per person, which rose to 30 dirhams per person when in kind levies are included. Non-Muslims paid either 12, 24 or 48 dirhams per person, depending on their taxation category, though most probably paid 12.
The importance of dhimmis as a source of revenue for the Rashidun Caliphate is illustrated in a letter ascribed to Umar I and cited by Abu Yusuf: "if we take dhimmis and share them out, what will be left for the Muslims who come after us? By God, Muslims would not find a man to talk to and profit from his labors."Lewis (1984), pp. 30–31.
The early Islamic scholars took a relatively humane and practical attitude towards the collection of jizya, compared to the 11th century commentators writing when Islam was under threat both at home and abroad.Lewis (1984), p. 15.
The jurist Abu Yusuf, the chief judge of the caliph Harun al-Rashid, rules as follows regarding the manner of collecting the jizya
In the border provinces, dhimmis were sometimes recruited for military operations. In such cases, they were exempted from jizya for the year of service."Djizya (i)", Encyclopaedia of Islam Online
Dhimmis were allowed to operate their own courts following their own legal systems. However, dhimmis frequently attended the Muslim courts in order to record property and business transactions within their own communities. Cases were taken out against Muslims, against other dhimmis and even against members of the dhimmi's own family. Dhimmis often took cases relating to marriage, divorce or inheritance to the Muslim courts so these cases would be decided under sharia law. Oaths sworn by dhimmis in the Muslim courts were sometimes the same as the oaths taken by Muslims, sometimes tailored to the dhimmis' beliefs.al-Qattan (1999)
Muslim men could generally marry dhimmi women who are considered People of the Book, however Islamic jurists rejected the possibility any non-Muslim man might marry a Muslim woman.Al-Mawardi (2000), p. 161; Friedmann (2003), p. 161; Lewis (1984), p. 27. Bernard Lewis notes that "similar position existed under the laws of Byzantine Empire, according to which a Christian could marry a Jewish woman, but a Jew could not marry a Christian woman under pain of death".
A similar hadith in regard to the status of the dhimmis: "Whoever wrongs one with whom a compact (treaty) has been made i.e., and lays on him a burden beyond his strength, I will be his accuser."Majid Khadduri: War and Peace in the Law of Islam, p. 175 Quote: «» Translation:
Muslims and Jews were sometimes partners in trade, with the Muslim taking days off on Fridays and Jews taking off on Saturdays.Marshall Hodgson, The Venture of Islam Conscience and History in a World Civilization Vol. 1. The University of Chicago, 1961, p. 302.
Andrew Wheatcroft describes how some social customs such as different conceptions of dirt and cleanliness made it difficult for the religious communities to live close to each other, either under Muslim or under Christian rule.Wheatcroft (2003) p. 73.
In 2009 it was claimed that the Taliban imposed the jizya on Pakistan minority Sikh community after occupying some of their homes and kidnapping a Sikh leader.
In 2013, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt occupied the town of Dalga immediately following the overthrow of Mohammed Morsi on 3 July, and reportedly imposed jizya on the 15,000 Christian Copts living there. However, in autumn of that same year Egyptian authorities were able to retake control of the town following two prior failed attempts.
In February 2014, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) announced that it intended to extract jizya from Christians in the city of Raqqa, Syria, which it controlled at the time. Christians who refused to accept the dhimma contract and pay the tax were to have to either convert to Islam, leave or be executed. Wealthy Christians would have to pay half an ounce of gold, the equivalent of $664 twice a year; middle-class Christians were to have to pay half that amount and poorer ones were to be charged one-fourth that amount. In June 2014 the Institute for the Study of War reported that ISIL claims to have collected jizya and fay. On 18 July 2014 ISIL ordered the Christians in Mosul to accept the dhimma contract and pay the jizya or convert to Islam. If they refused to accept either of the options they would be killed.
Administration of law
Religious pluralism existed in medieval Islamic law and Islamic ethics. The religious laws and courts of other religions, including Christianity, Judaism and Hinduism, were usually accommodated within the Islamic legal framework, as exemplified in the Caliphate, Al-Andalus, Ottoman Empire and Indian subcontinent.Abdulaziz Abdulhussein Sachedina (2025). 9780195139914, Oxford University Press. . ISBN 9780195139914 In medieval Islamic societies, the qadi (Islamic judge) usually could not interfere in the matters of non-Muslims unless the parties voluntarily chose to be judged according to Islamic law. The dhimmi communities living in Islamic states usually had their own laws independent from the Sharia law, such as the Jews who had their own Halakha courts.
Relevant texts
Quranic verses as a basis for Islamic policies toward dhimmis
Lewis states
Hadith
A hadith by Muhammad, "Whoever killed a (a person who is granted the pledge of protection by the Muslims) shall not smell the fragrance of Paradise though its fragrance can be smelt at a distance of forty years (of traveling).", is cited as a foundation for the right of non-Muslim citizens to live peacefully and undisturbed in an Islamic state. (2025). 9780955188893 ISBN 9780955188893 Anwar Shah Kashmiri writes in his commentary on Sahih al-Bukhari Fayd al-Bari on this hadith: "You know the gravity of sin for killing a Muslim, for its odiousness has reached the point of disbelief, and it necessitates that the forever. As for killing a non-Muslim citizen , it is similarly no small matter, for the one who does it will not smell the fragrance of Paradise."
Constitution of Medina
The Constitution of Medina, a formal agreement between Muhammad and all the significant tribes and families of Medina (including Muslims, Jews and pagans), declared that non-Muslims in the Ummah had the following rights:Ahmed (1979), pp. 46–47.
Khaybar agreement
A precedent for the dhimma contract was established with the agreement between Muhammad and the Jews after the Battle of Khaybar, an oasis near Medina. Khaybar was the first territory attacked and conquered by Muslims. When the Jews of Khaybar surrendered to Muhammad after a siege, Muhammad allowed them to remain in Khaybar in return for handing over to the Muslims one half their annual produce.Lewis (1984), pp. 10–11
Pact of Umar
The Pact of Umar, traditionally believed to be between caliph Umar and the conquered Jerusalem Christians in the seventh century, was another source of regulations pertaining to dhimmis. However, Western orientalism doubt the authenticity of the pact, arguing it is usually the victors and not the vanquished who impose rather than propose, the terms of peace, and that it is highly unlikely that the people who spoke no Arabic and knew nothing of Islam could draft such a document. Academic historians believe the Pact of Umar in the form it is known today was a product of later jurists who attributed it to Umar in order to lend greater authority to their own opinions. The similarities between the Pact of Umar and the Theodosian and Justinian Codes of the Byzantine Empire suggest that perhaps much of the Pact of Umar was borrowed from these earlier codes by later Islamic jurists. At least some of the clauses of the pact mirror the measures first introduced by the Umayyad caliph Umar II or by the early Abbasid caliphs.Lewis (1984), pp. 24–25.
Cultural interactions and cultural differences
During the Middle Ages, local associations known as futuwwa clubs developed across the Islamic lands. There were usually several futuwwah in each town. These clubs catered to varying interests, primarily sports, and might involve distinctive manners of dress and custom. They were known for their hospitality, idealism and loyalty to the group. They often had a militaristic aspect, purportedly for the mutual protection of the membership. These clubs commonly crossed social strata, including among their membership local notables, dhimmi and slaves – to the exclusion of those associated with the local ruler, or Emir.Marshall Hodgson, The Venture of Islam Conscience and History in a World Civilization Vol 2. The University of Chicago, 1961, pp. 126–127.
In modern times
The dhimma and the jizya poll tax are no longer imposed in Muslim majority countries. In the 21st century, jizya is widely regarded as being at odds with contemporary secular conceptions of citizens' civil rights and equality before the law, although there have been occasional reports of religious minorities in conflict zones and areas subject to political instability being forced to pay jizya.
See also
Notes
(1995). 9781860642852, I.B. Tauris Publishers. ISBN 9781860642852
(2025). 9780231107969, Columbia University Press. ISBN 9780231107969
Further reading
External links
|
|
