What's new

islamic war laws violated by isis / isil

"Don't enforce Islam"

Are you freaking serious? LMFAO!

Jizya or jizyah (Arabic: جزية‎ ǧizyah IPA: [dʒizja]) is a religiously required per capita tax levied by a Muslim state on non-Muslim subjects permanently residing in Muslim lands under Islamic law.
Jizya is a tax. Muslims pay zakat. Nobody can escape tax. But jizya is Supposed to be lower than tax. If u pay jizya you, your family and your property are protected by the army and u don't have to join the army. By not enforcing Islam means not to convert someone forcibly. Btw Isis has probably destroyed churches and Synagouges which is strictly forbidden in the Quran. It says to protect them. In past Islamic societies we had to judge minority people's crimes based on what THEIR religion says as punishment not what Islam says.
 
.
Jizya is a tax. Muslims pay zakat. Nobody can escape tax. But jizya is supposed to be lower than tax. If u pay jizya you and your property are protected by the army and u don't have to join the army. By not enforcing Islam means not to convert someone forcibly. Btw Isis has probably destroyed churches and Synagouges which is strictly forbidden in the Quran. It says to protect them.


Muslim=non Muslim in a Muslim state ? i mean rights and all....
 
. .
I don't under stand what ur trying to say.


If non Muslims have the same rights as Muslims In an officially Muslim state ? As in in the justice system,right to have political offices,etc

Ofcourse,this is a rhetorical question,i allready know they don't.
 
.
If non Muslims have the same rights as Muslims In an officially Muslim state ? As in in the justice system,right to have political offices,etc

Ofcourse,this is a rhetorical question,i allready know they don't.
In Islamic societies minorities had their own courts which they ran. For example the Jews had their own Halakha courts. There wasn't much interaction with the Muslims and the minorities. We basically just let them to their own thing as a long as they recognized Muslim rule. We even let Minorities do what offended Muslims like incest, with the Zoroastrians
 
Last edited:
.
In Islamic societies minorities had their own courts which they ran. For example the Jews had their own Halakha courts. There wasn't much interaction with the Muslims and the minorities. We basically just let them to their own thing as a long as they recognized Muslim rule. We even let Minorities do what offended Muslims like incest, with the Zoroastrians


That really doesn't answer my question.Are minorities equal....can a tree worshipper be a caliph ?How do minorities stand in a court of law vs a muslim ...on equal terms ?
 
.
That really doesn't answer my question.Are minorities equal....can a tree worshipper be a caliph ?How do minorities stand in a court of law vs a muslim ...on equal terms ?
No only a Muslim can be the Khalifa. If non Muslim would be the Khalifa it would defeat the purpose. In a way you could say that no one was really equal. However u could say that the Muslims had a slight advantage because of the Khalifa part. But regular day to day no one was superior and no one was seen as inferior either. None Muslim enjoyed certain privileges and Muslims enjoyed there privileges. If it's a Muslim vs. non Muslim then whoever is guilty then their religions law will dictate their punishment. But then again Muslims and non Muslims didn't have much interaction. This probably would have been rare.
 
.
If non Muslims have the same rights as Muslims In an officially Muslim state ? As in in the justice system,right to have political offices,etc

Ofcourse,this is a rhetorical question,i allready know they don't.
I am not an expert on Islamic fiqh but we had a Supreme Court Chief Justice who was Hindu in Pakistan
There are restrictions on non muslims and personally i am against the contitutional exclusion of Non Muslims from seat of PM,CM,President and COAS(not sure about it though)

The guy who is my DP was the man behind Pakistan missile program and he was Christian so i have no reason to doubt their patriotism
 
.
No only a Muslim can be the Khalifa. If non Muslim would be the Khalifa it would defeat the purpose. In a way you could say that no one was really equal. However u could say that the Muslims had a slight advantage because of the Khalifa part. But regular day to day no one was superior and no one was seen as inferior either. None Muslim enjoyed certain privileges and Muslims enjoyed there privileges. If it's a Muslim vs. non Muslim then whoever is guilty then their religions law will dictate their punishment. But then again Muslims and non Muslims didn't have much interaction. This probably would have been rare.


But what if i fell in love with muslim girl ?
 
. .
I am not an expert on Islamic fiqh but we had a Supreme Court Chief Justice who was Hindu in Pakistan
There are restrictions on non muslims and personally i am against the contitutional exclusion of Non Muslims from seat of PM,CM,President and COAS(not sure about it though)

The guy who is my DP was the man behind Pakistan missile program and he was Christian so i have no reason to doubt their patriotism


You sound like one of those rational guys,country first kind of guys.Btw,honestly,this is how is supposed to be,in WW1 we had battalions with Turks/Tatars fighting for us.The only thing was that we didn't serve pork for them in cantines but they've served their country.
 
.
But what if i fell in love with muslim girl ?
As long as she is of legal age and her marriage was not forced i dont give a flying,swimming,intergalactic or microscopic f@@@

You sound like one of those rational guys,country first kind of guys.Btw,honestly,this is how is supposed to be,in WW1 we had battalions with Turks/Tatars fighting for us.The only thing was that we didn't serve pork for them in cantines but they've served their country.
58235108.jpg


Mairey tareefain :dance3:
@Shamain
 
.
Non Muslims do not pay mandatory Zakat. Hence an area under Muslim rule is made an Oath of protection(Dhimmah) that people in that land will govern themselves according to their laws, run there affairs, have own courts in return they will pay 'Jizya'.

They will however abrogate the right to have weapons form an army or recruited into the army.

Jizya is a tax. Muslims pay zakat. Nobody can escape tax. But jizya is Supposed to be lower than tax. If u pay jizya you, your family and your property are protected by the army and u don't have to join the army. By not enforcing Islam means not to convert someone forcibly. Btw Isis has probably destroyed churches and Synagouges which is strictly forbidden in the Quran. It says to protect them. In past Islamic societies we had to judge minority people's crimes based on what THEIR religion says as punishment not what Islam says.

Muslim=non Muslim in a Muslim state ? i mean rights and all....


 
.

We are talking about "Islamic peace" As prescribed by the creator. It inherently means that Muslims(believers) by default must be the holders of the Law as prescribed by the creator. That being said the chart you shared has some inconsistencies mainly being Dhimma is mainly done with a tribe or people that run their affairs and Zakat is a more individual thing.
Here is an excerpt;

"The treaty of protection made by Khalid ibn Al-Walid with the Christians of Al-Hira in Iraq states:


Any aged non-Muslim who is unable to earn his livelihood, or is struck by disaster, or who becomes destitute and is helped by the charity of his fellow men will be exempted from the capitation tax and will be supplied with sustenance by the bait al-mal (the government treasury). (Abu Yusuf, Al-Kharaj, p. 144)

The obligation of paying this tax is also cancelled when non-Muslims participate with Muslims in defending the Islamic state against its enemies. Such conditions were clearly stated in contracts and other documents signed by Muslims and non-Muslims during the reign of Umar ibn Al Khattab. (See Zeidan, 'Abdul Karim, Ahkam-Dhimmiyin Wa Al-Musti'minin Fi Dar Al-Islam, p. 155 ff, and Al-Baladhuri, Futuh Al-Buldan, p. 217, where it is stated that the emissary of Abu 'Ubaida made a compromise with a party of the Christian Jarajima: if they would support the Muslims and keep an eye on their enemies, they would not have to pay the Jizyah)

Should the Islamic state become unable to abide by the contract, it may not collect the Jizyah. This rule was followed by Abu 'Ubaidah when he learned of the situation in several Syrian cities. Syria had fallen into the hands of the Muslims, but as the Romans were gathering troops to regain it, he decided not to undertake the protection of the non-Muslims. The Jizyah was, therefore, returned with the announcement:


We have returned your money to you because we have been informed of the gathering of the 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 Yusuf in Al-Kharaj)


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. (Imam Tabari, Tarikh At-Tabari, Volume 1, p. 2050)


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: the Jarajima, a Christian tribe living near Antioch (now in Turkey), by undertaking to support the 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. (Al-Baladhuri, p. 159) When the Islamic conquests reached northern Persia in 22 A.H., 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. (Ibid.)"
 
.
Those who are excused of Jizya.

- Women and children are excused absolutely
- Handicapped, blind and old men, even if they are rich
- Needy and mad-men
- Day laborers, servants or wageworkers
- A chronically ill-man even if he is rich
- Religious people who keep themselves free for praying and worshipping, i.e. men of churches, cloisters and oratories
- If a non-Muslim voluntarily participates in military service for protecting the country.
- If the Islamic state becomes unable to protect non-Muslims, then they are legally exonerated from paying the tax. (See Ibnul Qayyim, Ahkam Ahlul Dhimma, Volume1, pp.8, 15 and al-Shafi', al-Umm¸ pp. 172-1)
 
.
Back
Top Bottom