Non-Muslims, Side Feature, The Khilafah

Can an Islamic State established on religion provide assurance to non-Muslims of a peaceful life?

On 15th March 2015, there was a bomb explosion at the gate of a church in the Christian locality of Youhanabad in which at least 15 people were killed and many injured. A group called Al-Ahrar claimed the responsibility. In the aftermath of this attack, a series of violent incidents by Christians occurred in which two Muslims were burned to death. Buses, cars, shops were vandalized and in all these incidents many more people were killed and hundreds were injured. This incident of Youhanabad in some respects is usual and in other respects quite exceptional.

As usual, the group which media reported to have claimed responsibility created an impression of it being an Islamic group. As usual, this attack did not happen at a place where the interests of America might be directly affected. Rather, innocent people were targeted who had no links with the network of imperialist states. Thus we see that in these attacks, Blackwater offices, American embassies, American spies, personnel and agents stay protected but mosques and markets are targeted. Target killing of Ulema occurs whereas those who attack the very basis of Islam day and night remain secure. This is proof that the planners of these activities are actually imperialist Kuffar. Behind them is the Raymond Davis network which was created in the stretches of Pakistan with the blessings of our rulers after the beginning of the war in this region by America.

As usual also, the government remained complacent during this whole episode and did not come to rescue those who were being vandalized and the Muslims who were being burned alive. The rangers were called when it became clear that enough damage was done, which is what the imperialist Kuffar want to achieve in Pakistan from such incidents. Whereas the same government, in the name of establishing the writ of the state is seen indiscriminately bombing the Muslims of tribal areas using military jets.

During the past few years, thousands of civilians and soldiers have lost their lives in the name of restoration of the writ. However, after the incident of Youhanabad when Christians challenged the writ of state, the position of the government to become a silent spectator clearly indicates that the priority of the state is not to maintain the writ of the state rather it is to protect the interests of America in the region. To achieve this aim the state is willing to even capture and handover her own citizens to America or for the national economy to bear the loss of over $100 billion. This is the reason why Pakistani rulers cannot see the violation of the writ of the state when America drones the tribal areas or attacks Salala checkpost targeting Pakistani soldiers.

As far as the unusual aspect of this incident is concerned, never before has the reaction of the Christians been so disciplined and forceful. They captured and harassed the policemen. There was a feeling of fear in Youhanabad after the violent activities of the Christians. Shops were closed and traffic was minimal on Ferozpur Road. There were simultaneous protests from Christians in dozens of cities. Protests were staged outside the Press Club by different Christian organizations. Lawyers under the umbrella of Christian Lawyers Forum protested at GPO Chowk. It was a full show of force from the Christian organizations.

Another unusual aspect was that the hatred between Muslims and Christians was made apparent as a result of this incident. It was clearly visible on Facebook and social media. Although, this is unlike the situation between Muslims and Christians in Pakistan and the common Christians living in Pakistan do not fear Muslims. The meetings and normal dealings of Muslims and Christians in offices, streets, and bazars is a common sight.

As far as the objectives behind the incidents like Youhanabad are concerned, we can witness that through these incidents the people of Pakistan are being further divided. On one side the people are being instigated to fight on the basis of their sects, for which, through careful planning masajids, imambargahs, and religious processions are being targeted. On the other side the Pakistani system and rulers are complacent about ethnic divisions and now the differences are being created between Christians and Muslims.

This division is directly in the interest of the Kuffar. America diverts the attention of the Muslims of Pakistan from her presence in the region by maintaining the environment of chaos and mischief. This chaos is also beneficial to keep Pakistan occupied internally while America can assist her ally India under the leadership of Narainder Modi in expanding her influence in the region without any obstruction from Pakistan. The focus of Pakistan Army stays on internal issues and India can be more relaxed on the western front.

The incidents like Youhanabad also reinforce the idea that so-called terrorism is Pakistan’s real internal issue, not the arrival of Americans in the region, presence of American army in Afghanistan, or the ongoing war against Islam. The narrative is that there are some people who are ‘Islamic extremists’ and they kill people in the name of Islam. They need to be dealt with Iron fist and even if the military force need to be used against them then it is justified. Therefore, incidents like these provide justification to the government to conduct military operations, whereas in reality the targets of the military operation are people who are actually doing Jihad against American occupation in Afghanistan.

Since last few years through the continuation of incidents like Youhanabad and resulting reactions, the non-Muslim population in Pakistan is being organized and their weight is being increased. This effort is going on with continuity since past few years. Pakistan’s educational institutions have been once again handed over to missionaries. Although it was these missionaries of the past who had played a pivotal role in creating disunity amongst the Muslims and made them fight each other. We will present some details of this in further down.

The marketing banners and billboards of the non-Muslims have now become more visible. On the other side, the non-Muslim leaders are being provided airtime on the media to openly discuss the very foundations of the state, method of ruling, reality of systems, and to spread their corrupt ideas. Whereas according to Islam they have a right to talk about the implementation of Islam upon them and their rights, and if any injustice is being done upon them. In these matters then they can raise voice without any restrictions. However, Islam does not allow non-Muslims to give their opinions on the subject such as on which foundations the Islamic State should rests on, instead, they boldly say that the foundation of the state should be ‘secular’.

Incidents like Youhanabad also strengthen the viewpoint that so-called Muslim extremism is a danger to non-Muslims and their rights. In this regard, the example of Daaish (ISIS) is quoted that Daaish in Iraq is slaughtering non-Muslims. The western media is providing a lot of airtime to the irrational activities of Daaish and in the end the buck stops at that the state cannot be run on religious laws. The liberals who are beneficiaries of the west cite such examples. The question is raised: how can you enforce the laws of your religion on the people who follow a different religion? It is argued that if the reins of power are taken by people who want to implement Islam at state level then they will make the lives of non-Muslims miserable. Therefore, today in the modern and enlightened era of twentieth century the state that is built on secular basis is the only viable option. In these times, the state which is established on the basis of religion cannot provide a satisfied and contented life to the groups and people with varied opinions in the society. This is the narrative people are fed.

Let us remind the readers here about the sufferings experienced by the people living in the Muslim lands even until today as a result of the unrest, affliction and distress caused by the imperialist Kuffar. The first ‘humanitarian’ intervention in modern history was done under the false premise of preventing killings of Christians in Muslim lands. We will present the context and details here so that the readers can realize the seriousness of the schemes hatched by Kuffar.

We all are aware of the name of Lebanon, which is a small country located adjacent to Syria, which in reality is part of the same blessed Islamic land of Syria about which numerous hadith of Prophet ﷺ are recorded. The political setup of Lebanon is now such that within the constitution it is agreed upon that the president of Lebanon would be a Christian whereas the prime minister would be a Muslim and there would be equal representation of Christians and Muslims in the parliament. The selection of Muslim Prime Minister is performed by the Christian President in consultation with the parliament. The roots of this political setup in Lebanon are entrenched in the violent clashes that occurred between Muslims and Christians at the times of Ottoman Caliphate. We will need to look at the background of crusades in order to understand how the fire of these violent clashes was ignited.

During the crusades, when Christians faced Muslims, the Christians were relying upon two matters based on which they believed that they will exterminate Islam and Muslims forever. Their first belief was that there were a large number of Christians living in the Islamic lands, especially in Syria, who were firm on their religion. Europe believed that the Christians living in Islamic lands are their brothers, therefore, they will revolt against the Muslim rulers and they will also spy against them because the Europeans were fighting with Muslims by igniting religious sentiments amongst their people.

The second matter on which they were relying was their military numbers and strength whereas the Muslims where declined and divided. On this basis, the Christians developed hope that if they defeat the Muslims in this expedition then Muslims will never be able to fight back and it will become easier to control Muslims and Islam.

However, the dreams of the crusaders did not come true. They were amazed to see the Christians were fighting right side by side with the Muslims against them and they were not affected by the call of the Crusaders. The reason for this situation was that these Christians were living alongside the Muslims in Dar ul-Islam and the laws that were enforced upon them were the same that were enforced upon Muslims. The rights and obligations of these Christians living in the Islamic State were also same as of Muslims. Muslims used to eat with them, marry with Christian women. The Muslims and Christians were together in all walks of life because Islam has ensured protection of all rights of non-Muslims and the Muslim Rulers always practiced it and Islamic State guaranteed it.

On the other side, against their hopes, even the second matter did not materialize, namely, that if Muslims are defeated in one battle then they will never be able to fight back and it will become easier to control them. Initially, Christian crusaders gave heavy blows to the Muslims and captured Syria after which they committed grave atrocities on the Muslims. However, the Muslims devoted themselves to take out the enemies from their lands. Therefore, although the crusaders were able to rule Syria for more than a century and they had established their state and provinces, the Muslims in the end were able to fight back and get rid of them and defeat the crusaders.

When the Kuffar were defeated in the crusades, they started researching about the source of strength of the Muslims. They came to the conclusion that it is because of the implementation of rules of Islam and their firm belief on the doctrine of Islam. It is the just system of Islam which had chained together the Muslims and non-Muslims populations. Therefore, the imperialist Kuffar pondered upon the strategy to attack the Muslim world and concluded that there are two things which needs to be done. Firstly, create doubts amongst the Muslims about the practicality of the implementation of the Islamic laws and unsettle their faith on the Islamic doctrine. Secondly, break the relationship between Muslim and non-Muslim population and create differences amongst them.

Therefore, they started sending missionaries to the Muslims lands. These missionaries created different organizations and bodies who started recruiting both Muslims and non-Muslims. Under the veil of propagation of science and technology, these missionaries started spreading non-Islamic ideas such as human rights, freedom of speech, equality between man and woman etc. and started putting allegations against Islam so that the deep faith of the Muslims on the ideas and rules of Islam can be shaken, and this strategy is still continuing.

On other side, these missionaries sowed the seeds of nationalism amongst Muslims. They gave slogans of being Turk to Turks to give air to their nationalistic sentiments as well as created impression amongst Arabs that they are under the domination of Turks, and that they can achieve higher status only by seeking independence from them, and that Caliphate is the right of Arabs which Turks have embezzled from them. Along with this, they created a gulf between the sects residing in different parts of the Muslim lands and for that they used the population of Syria and Lebanon.

At that time, there were two groups settled in the land of Syria apart from Muslims, Maronites and Druze. They were living together on that land for centuries and they had no resentment against each other. However, the missionaries instigated these people in the name of freedom of religion and propagated those rituals that were in accordance with the beliefs of Muslims, Christians and Druze. At that time, Syria was ruled by the Egyptian ruler Ibrahim Pasha, and Egypt and the Ottoman Caliphate were at odds with each other. In 1840, when Egypt had to accept defeat in Syria at the hands of the Ottoman Caliphate then the situation of Syria become unsettled which greatly benefitted the foreigner representatives especially the missionaries. Because the influence of Ottoman Caliphate in Syria had weakened, the imperialist forces exploited this opportunity and ignited the fire of chaos and misery and by 1841 this fire had spread so much that violent clashes started happening between Christians and Druze.

In 1845, riots started to erupt again which resulted in great destruction, in which even churches and monasteries were not spared. People were killed, properties were destroyed and wealth and resources were looted. The Ottoman Caliphate had to send her special representatives with absolute powers but she could not do much more than reduce the severity of the problem.

Here the activities of the missionaries also kept increasing and in 1857 the Mormon Christians raised their voice for rebellion and armed struggle. The priests from the Mormon sect of Christians instigated the Mormon farmers against the landlords. In northern Lebanon the landlords were cruelly attacked and a state of rebellion was created there, which also spread to southern Lebanon where the Christian farmers stood against the Druze landlords. It spread to the extent that all of Lebanon started to burn in the fire of mischief. The Druze killed the Christian popes and commoners without any discrimination. The riots were so violent that thousands of Christians became homeless and many were killed. Consequently all of Bilad As Shaam was taken in the fold of these riots and the situation between the Muslims and the Christians became severely strained. The Muslims led a very bloody attack on the Christian areas and people were killed on a very large scale. Alongside this, events of sabotage and looting also occurred to the extent that the state had to use armed force to stop this bloodshed.

Then the western countries used this as an excuse to enter Syria. Therefore they sent their war ships to the Syrian coast. In 1860 the ambassadors of France, Britain, Russia, Austria and Prussia gathered in Paris and made an agreement to stop the bloodshed in Lebanon they would send 1200 soldiers out of which half would be provided by France. The agreement mentioned,

“Their Majesties the Emperor of Austria, the Emperor of France the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, His Royal Highness the Prince Regent of Prussia and His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russia promise to maintain sufficient Naval forces to contribute to the success of the joint efforts to restore peace on the coast of Syria.”

And The Times on the 9th August 1860 through its writers reported the words of the French king which he said while dispatching his soldiers:

“Soldiers – you leave for Syria. France hails joy, an expedition, the sole aim of which is to cause the rights of justice and humanity to triumph. You do not make war to go against any foreign power but to assist the Sultan in bringing back the obedience of his subjects, who are blinded by the fanaticism of a former century. In the distant land rich in great reminiscences, fulfill your duty, show yourself the worthy children of those who once gloriously carried into that country the banner of Christ. You do not leave in great numbers, but your courage and prestige will supply the deficiency, because wherever the French flag is seen to pass, nations know that a great cause precedes it and great people follow it.”

The statement of the king of France 150 years ago shows how the colonial powers hide their intentions behind the beautiful words of humanity and justice. The American president George Bush for instance from whose mouth the words of the Crusades fell out before the attack on Iraq, just like the king of France could not forget, the land of Syria is that land where the flag of Christ used to hoist after the Crusades.

In this way western states instigated mischief in the Ottoman Caliphate so it that it could be a way to enter Syria. They entered into Syria and forced the Ottoman Caliphate to enforce a system other than Shariah in Syria and divide it into two separate provinces.

In this way Lebanon was given special benefits and Lebanon became a separate independent state of all the parts of Syria. It had its own local ruling system which was under a Christian ruler. A council for the implementation of the laws set by this ruler was also established to help him. Since then western countries are controlling what happens in Lebanon and have made it a center for their activities. In this way the western countries used Lebanon as a gateway to enter the Ottoman Caliphate and the hearts of the Islamic lands.

Any Muslim who is aware of the illegal methods, evil ways and the schemes of the colonial powers from the past, the event of Yohannabad is enough to alert him. The disunity in Pakistan is much worse than it was in the past. As in the past the Caliphs of the Islamic State were sincere with their people, but now the leaders of Pakistan are seen to be standing with the Kuffar against the Muslim. They are helping America directly to create a state of disunity and anarchy in Pakistan.

Now we come to the question, ‘Can an Islamic State, which is built on the basis of religion, guarantee a peaceful life to non-Muslims?’

The history of Islam is a witness to the fact that non-Muslims lived in peace and security for centuries in Islamic lands. The example of the Subcontinent itself is in front of us, where the Muslims were a minority and non-Muslims were a majority. The non-Muslims of the Subcontinent were not massacred after the Muslims conquered it, unlike the massacre of the people of Bilad Ash- Sham by the crusaders, neither was the non-Muslim majority turned into a minority through ethnic cleansing the way Russia did in Central Asia, nor were they forced to become Muslims the way Christians did in 1492 when they occupied Spain.

During the Islamic rule, there were different revolts against the rulers but none of them were on the basis of religion. Non-Muslims did not stand against the rulers as a result of the rulers oppressing them in the name of religion. For centuries Muslims and non-Muslims lived together under the Islamic law implemented by Muslim leadership until the British rule. It was Britain that gave these non-Muslims the “Hindu nationalistic” identity to make them stand against the Muslims in the Sub-continent. Otherwise, before this, these pagans used to worship different idols and did not use to think of themselves as a nation.

The same was the case of the lands under direct jurisdiction of the Caliphate. When the Christians occupied Spain, they exiled the Jews along with the Muslims; it was the Islamic State that gave them shelter. The doors of business, industry and trade were opened for these Jews under the Caliphate. Jewish doctors were hired by the Sultan and the ministers. In different areas, the industries of glass making and metal making were in their hands and in industrial production they were equivalent to the tradesmen of Venice (The House of Nasi: Dona Gracia by Cecil Roth). Karen Armstrong writes in her book History of Jerusalem, “The Muslims had established a system that enabled Jews, Christians and Muslims to live in Jerusalem together for the first time.”

In relation to the treatment of non-Muslims, the past of the Muslims is very bright. It is so bright that it cannot be questioned, instead the Kuffar should be questioned who seem unable to provide peace and protection to their citizens.

America, who represents itself as a champion of rights and freedoms, has embedded fear into the hearts of the Muslims living there through bills like the Patriot Act according to which the American government has the authority to arrest any citizen on the slightest suspicion of ‘terrorism’ and this person does not even have the right to hire a lawyer in his defense. This act gives the government agencies the authority to spy on phone and internet data of its citizens and they can search any house at any time.

It is possible to implement such laws in democratic countries if man himself is the law maker. Therefore, these majority representatives can use this democratic power any time to take away the rights of the people. Whereas it is not possible in the Islamic state because Shari’ah laws cannot be changed. Neither the Caliph nor the Majlis al-Ummah has the authority to use a situation as an excuse to implement such laws through which the people of the state can be oppressed, whether they be Muslims or non-Muslims. Therefore, only in an Islamic State a person can be certain that his rights will not be usurped.

Further, Islam decrees that the Muslims must not undermine the lives, wealth and honor of the non-Muslims. Rasool Allah ﷺ said,

«أَلا مَنْ قَتَلَ نَفْسًا مُعَاهِدًا لَهُ ذِمَّةُ اللَّهِ وَذِمَّةُ رَسُولِهِ فَقَدْ أَخْفَرَ بِذِمَّةِ اللَّهِ، فَلا يُرَحْ رَائِحَةَ الْجَنَّةِ، وَإِنَّ رِيحَهَا لَيُوجَدُ مِنْ مَسِيرَةِ سَبْعِينَ خَرِيفًا»

“Whoever kills a Mua’hid who was given protection by Allah and his Rasool , he broke Allah’s covenant, he will not even be able to smell the perfume of Jannah, although the perfume of Jannah could be smelled at the distance of 70 years.” (Tirmithi) and Bukhari narrated it in these words:

«مَنْ قَتَلَ مُعَاهَدًا لَمْ يَرِحْ رَائِحَةَ الْجَنَّةِ وَإِنَّ رِيحَهَا تُوجَدُ مِنْ مَسِيرَةِ أَرْبَعِينَ عَامًا»

”Whoever killed a Mua’hid (Dhimmi i.e. a non-Muslim citizen of the Islamic state) he will not even be able to smell the perfume of Jannah, although the perfume of Jannah could be smelled at the distance of 40 years.”

Rasool Allah ﷺ used to visit sick non-Muslims. Bukhari has related,

«كَانَ غُلاَمٌ يَهُودِيٌّ يَخْدُمُ النَّبِيَّ، فَمَرِضَ، فَأَتَاهُ النَّبِيُّ يَعُودُهُ، فَقَعَدَ عِنْدَ رَأْسِهِ فَقَالَ لَهُ: أَسْلِمْ، فَنَظَرَ إِلَى أَبِيهِ وَهُوَ عِنْدَهُ، فَقَالَ لَهُ: أَطِعْ أَبَا الْقَاسِمِ، فَأَسْلَمَ، فَخَرَجَ النَّبِيُّ وَهُوَ يَقُولُ: الْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ الَّذِي أَنْقَذَهُ مِنْ النَّار»

“There was a Jewish boy who used to serve Rasool Allah . One day he fell ill so Rasool Allah went to visit him. He sat next to him and said, ‘Accept Islam.’ The boy started to look at his father said who said, ‘Obey Abul Qasim.’ On hearing this, the boy accepted Islam. Rasool Allah left that place saying, ‘Praise be to Allah who saved him from hell fire.’”

This is proof that to visit their sick, sitting will them and doing recreational activities is allowed.

Bukhari reported from Amr bin Maimoon that in the will of Umar Bin Khattab from his death bed, “I advise my next caliph that he upholds and does not break the commitment (Dhimma) of Allah and His Messenger ﷺ, fights for them (Dhimmi) and does not ask from them what they cannot fulfill.”

People of Dhimma i.e. the non-Muslims of the Islamic state also have the right to have their places of worship protected and they are allowed to practice their religious acts of worship.

Hazrat Ibn e Abbas narrated that Rasool Allah ﷺ made peace with people of Najran. Abu Dawood has mentioned its details in his Sunan like this,

«عَلَى أَنْ لاَ تُهْدَمَ لَهُمْ بَيْعَةٌ، وَلاَ يُخْرَجَ لَهُمْ قَسٌّ، وَلاَ يُفْتَنُوا عَنْ دِينِهِمْ مَا لَمْ يُحْدِثُوا حَدَثًا أَوْ يَأْكُلُوا الرِّبَا»

“On this condition that none of their places of worship will be demolished, their religious scholars will not be exiled and they will not be seduced from their deen, so long as they do not commit a crime or deal in interest (riba).”

Rasool Allah ﷺ wrote to the people of Yemen that

«مَنْ كَانَ عَلَى يَهُودِيَّتِهِ أَوْ نَصْرَانِيَّتِهِ فَإِنَّهُ لاَ يُفْتَنُ عَنْهَا، وَعَلَيْهِ الجِزْيَةَ»

“Whoever wants to remain a Jew or a Christian he will not be tested in his deen, instead he will just have to pay Jizya.” This has been reported by Abu Ubaid through Arwa in “Al Amwal”.

Moreover the custom tax that is not enforced on Muslims is also not taken from the people of Dhimma. Abu Ubaid narrated from Abdur Rehman bin Ma’qal that he mentioned in “Al Amwal”: I inquired from Ziad bin Hadeer that from whom did you charge custom tax. He said that we neither charged it neither from any Muslim nor from the people of Dhimma. Then I asked that from whom did he use to charge it, he said that he used to charge the same tax from the tradesmen of the Dar ul Harb as they use to charge from the Muslims.”

In this way, Dhimmis are equal to all the other citizens of the state, they are guaranteed all the rights of a citizen, the right of protection, the right to live an honorable life, and are to be dealt with goodness and kindness. They can join the Islamic army and fight alongside them though it is not obligatory on them to do so, they will not be charged any tax other than Jizya or the taxes which are obligatory on Muslims, like the emergency tax needed for Jihad or other emergency circumstances.

In the court room and in front of the Qadi or while taking care of their affairs or in punishments, they are seen equivalent to the Muslims. As for the evidences mentioned in the text regarding government and rule, Allah سبحانه وتعالى says,

وَاِذَا حَكَمْتُمْ بَيْنَ النَّاسِ اَنْ تَحْكُمُوْا بِالْعَدْلِ

“…and when you judge between people to judge with justice.”

(An Nisa: 58)

It is the same for all of us, Muslim or Non-Muslim.

Rasool Allah ﷺ said,

«البَيِّنَةُ عَلَى الـمُـدَّعِي، وَالْيَمِينُ عَلَى مَنْ أَنْكَرَ»

“Providing evidence is upon the prosecutor, and taking oath is on the defendant.” (Baihaqi)

This command is also for both Muslims and non-Muslims.

Abdullah bin Zubair narrated:

«قضى رَسُولُ اللَّهِ أَنَّ الْخَصْمَيْنِ يَقْعُدَانِ بَيْنَ يَدَيِ الْحَكَم»

 “Rasool Allah judged that both parties will sit in front of the Qadhi (judge).” (Abu Dawud, Hakim)

This command is also general regardless the party is Muslim or non-Muslim, it will be applied on both. Rasool Allah said,

«الإِمَامُ رَاعٍ وَمَسْئُولٌ عَنْ رَعِيَّتِهِ»

“The Imam is the guardian and is responsible for his subjects.” (Agreed upon)

The word ‘subject’ is general and both Muslims and non-Muslims are included.

According to all these evidences it is not allowed to discriminate between Muslims or non-Muslims, Arabs or non-Arabs, blacks or whites. In fact, there is no difference between the citizens living in the Islamic state, everyone is equal in the eyes of the state. It is obligatory on the state to take care of their rights, to protect their lives, wealth and honour and the Qadhi is bound to give verdicts on the basis of justice and equality. The Dhimmi has all the rights like a Muslim and s/he has to fulfill all the obligations under the contract of Dhimma and in obedience to the state.

The non-Muslim citizens of the Islamic state have freedom in their beliefs and in the commandments related to their beliefs, and also in those commands which they think to be from their beliefs, or in those commandments which the Prophet did not change for them, or in those commandments in which Islam exempted them with clear text.

لاَ اکْرَاهَ فِیْ الدِّیْنِ

“There is no compulsion in deen”

(Al Baqara: 256)

 Rasool Allah said,

«اِنَّهُ مَنْ کَانَ عَلَی یَهُودِیَّتِهِ أَوْ نَصْرَانِیَّتِهِ فَاِنَّهُ لَا یُفْتَنُ عَنْهَا، وَعَلَیه الجِزْیَة»

 “Whoever wants to remain a Jew or a Christian he will not be tested in his deen, instead he will just have to pay Jizya.” (Abu Ubaid, Kitaab Al Amwal)

Thus any action which is from beliefs for them, even if it is not from the beliefs for us, Islamic state does not touch it.

Similarly the actions in which Rasool Allah ﷺ left them, they are not questioned in them, like drinking of alcohol or their matters related to marriage, as long as they generally stay in the limits of the system.

However, it is decided that on a community level they are bound by the Islamic laws like Muslims. Therefore a non-Muslim can drink alcohol at home privately but not outside his house, like in market place. He neither can buy or sell alcohol nor deal in usury. Dress code for non-Muslim women is same as a Muslim woman in public place. In this circle the ruler implements the same state laws on non-Muslims as are implemented on Muslims. These laws are Islamic laws. The evidence for this is that Allah سبحانه وتعالى says about the People of the Book,

فَاحْكُمْ بَيْنَهُمْ بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ وَلاَ تَتَّبِعْ أَهْوَاءَهُمْ

“Judge between them according to what Allah has revealed”

(Al-Ma’ida: 49)

And He سبحانه وتعالى said,

إِنَّا أَنزَلْنَا إِلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَ بِالْحَقِّ لِتَحْكُمَ بَيْنَ النَّاسِ بِمَا أَرَاكَ اللَّـهُ

“Indeed, we have revealed to you the Book in Truth so that you judge between people by what Allah has shown you.”

(An-Nisa: 105)

This command is general, both Muslims and non-Muslims are included in it, as it speaks of judging between ‘people’, not Muslims alone.

Rasool Allah implemented the hudud on both Muslims and non-Muslims in a similar manner. As it is mentioned in Bukhari, through Anas bin Malik, on the basis of Qisas, Rasool Allah killed a Jew who had killed a woman,

«خَرَجَتْ جَارِيَةٌ عَلَيْهَا أَوْضَاحٌ بِالْمَدِينَةِ قَالَ فَرَمَاهَا يَهُودِيٌّ بِحَجَرٍ قَالَ فَجِيءَ بِهَا إِلَى النَّبِيِّ وَبِهَا رَمَقٌ فَقَالَ لَهَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ فُلاَنٌ قَتَلَكِ فَرَفَعَتْ رَأْسَهَا فَأَعَادَ عَلَيْهَا قَالَ فُلاَنٌ قَتَلَكِ فَرَفَعَتْ رَأْسَهَا فَقَالَ لَهَا فِي الثَّالِثَةِ فُلاَنٌ قَتَلَكِ فَخَفَضَتْ رَأْسَهَا فَدَعَا بِهِ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ فَقَتَلَهُ بَيْنَ الْحَجَرَيْن»

“A girl wearing ornaments, went out at Medina. Somebody struck her with a stone. She was brought to the Prophet while she was still alive. Allah’s Messenger asked her, “Did such-and-such a person strike you?” She raised her head, denying that. He asked her a second time, saying, “Did so-and-so strike you?” She raised her head, denying that. He said for the third time, “Did so-and-so strike you?” She lowered her head, agreeing. Allah’s Messenger then sent for the killer and killed him between two stones.”

Similarly, once a Jewish man and woman were brought to Rasool Allah ﷺ, who had committed adultery. Rasool Allah ﷺ stoned them both to death. Ibn Umar (ra) narrates in Bukhari,

«أُتِيَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ بِيَهُودِيٍّ وَيَهُودِيَّةٍ قَدْ أَحْدَثَا جَمِيعًا فَقَالَ لَهُمْ مَا تَجِدُونَ فِي كِتَابِكُمْ قَالُوا إِنَّ أَحْبَارَنَا أَحْدَثُوا تَحْمِيمَ الْوَجْهِ وَالتَّجْبِيهَ قَالَ عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ سَلاَمٍ ادْعُهُمْ يَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ بِالتَّوْرَاةِ فَأُتِيَ بِهَا فَوَضَعَ أَحَدُهُمْ يَدَهُ عَلَى آيَةِ الرَّجْمِ وَجَعَلَ يَقْرَأُ مَا قَبْلَهَا وَمَا بَعْدَهَا فَقَالَ لَهُ ابْنُ سَلاَمٍ ارْفَعْ يَدَكَ فَإِذَا آيَةُ الرَّجْمِ تَحْتَ يَدِهِ فَأَمَرَ بِهِمَا رَسُولُ اللَّهِ  فَرُجِمَا»

“A Jewish man and woman were brought to Rasool Allah , they had committed adultery. Rasool Allah asked them what was written in their book about it, they said their faces were to be blackened and tajbiya. Abdullah bin Salam told Rasool Allah to ask them to bring their Torah. When Torah was brought, one of them covered the ayah of stoning with his hand and started to read the ayahs before and after it. Abdullah Bin Salam told him to move his hand; the ayah regarding stoning was under it. Rasool Allah ordered to stone them both, thus they were both stoned.”

Apart from this Islam has been sent for all people. Allah سبحانه وتعالى says,

وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَاكَ إِلاَّ كَافَّةً لِلنَّاسِ بَشِيرًا وَنَذِيرًا وَلَكِنَّ أَكْثَرَ النَّاسِ لاَ يَعْلَمُون

“We have sent you to the mankind as a warner and to but people know not.”

(Saba: 28)

As a non-Muslim has been asked to accept Islamic Aqeedah (belief), similarly he is also asked to act upon Shari’i commands. For them to adopt Islamic Aqeedah is very clear in the Quranic text, while regarding adopting Sharia commands, Allah سبحانه وتعالى has openly commanded them to fulfil these. For example, the ayat related to Ibadat. Allah سبحانه وتعالى says,

يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ اعْبُدُوا رَبَّكُمْ الَّذِي خَلَقَكُمْ وَالَّذِينَ مِنْ قَبْلِكُمْ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَتَّقُونَ

“O mankind! Worship your Lord who created you and those who came before you, so that you may guard yourself against evil.”

(Al Baqara: 21)

And said,

وَلِلَّهِ عَلَى النَّاسِ حِجُّ الْبَيْتِ مَنْ اسْتَطَاعَ إِلَيْهِ سَبِيلاً

“Performance of Hajj to this house is a duty to Allah for all who can afford the journey to it.”

(Al-i-Imran: 97)

If Allah سبحانه وتعالى had not made the Kuffar responsible to act upon shari’a commands, they would not have been warned by Allah to act upon them, whereas Allah سبحانه وتعالى has warned them severely for abandoning these. As He has said,

وَوَيْلٌ لِلْمُشْرِكِين الَّذِينَ لاَ يُؤْتُونَ الزَّكَاةَ

“Woe to the Mushrikeen! Those who do not pay Zakat.”

(Fussilat: 7)

And said,

مَا سَلَكَكُمْ فِي سَقَرَ * قَالُوا لَمْ نَكُ مِنَ الْمُصَلِّينَ

“What brought you into Hell? They will answer: We did not use to offer the Salah.”

(Al-Muddathir: 42-3)

This proves that the non-Muslims are made responsible to act upon all Do’s and Don’ts, because all these ayat are general. There is no evidence for them to be specific for Muslims only and are general for both Muslims and non-Muslims. Similarly the saying of Allah سبحانه وتعالى:

وَأَحَلَّ اللَّهُ الْبَيْعَ وَحَرَّمَ الرِّبَا

“Allah has permitted trade and forbidden riba.”

(Al Baqarah; 275)

Or the saying of Allah سبحانه وتعالى:

فَإِنْ أَرْضَعْنَ لَكُمْ فَآتُوهُنَّ أُجُورَهُنَّ

“If they then breastfeed for you, then give them their wages.”

(Talaq: 6)

And the saying of Rasool Allah ﷺ,

«مَنْ أَحْيَا أَرْضًا مَيِّتَةً فَهِيَ لَهُ»

“Whoever cultivated a dead land, it belongs to him.” (Ahmed, Tirmidhi)

All of these are general. These are clear evidences that non-Muslims are responsible to act upon Sharia commands. Although for some Sharia commands are not allowed for them because Islam is a condition for them. Unless this requirement is fulfilled, these commands such as Salah (prayers), Sawm (fasting) won’t be correct.


Dr. Iftikhar, Pakistan