Islamic Jerusalem And Its Christians: A History of Tolerance and Tensions 9780755694365, 9781780764795
Islamic Jerusalem has a special place in the hearts of the three monotheistic religions. Throughout its history it has b...
https://dokumen.pub/dokumenpub/assets/img/apple-icon-57x57.png
dokumen.pub
Citation preview

To my beloved wife Alla

LIST OF TABLES Table 1

Narrator Chains in Ibn ‘Asakir’s Five Versions

66

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 The Region of Islamicjerusalem

6

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Responsibility for this book rests with me, but I wish to express my deep appreciation to those who have helped me along the way. My deepest and sincere gratitude to His Highness Shaikh Hamdan Bin Rashid Al-Maktoum, the Deputy Ruler of Dubai and Minster of Finance and Industry of United Arab Emirates and to the Islamic Research Academy (ISRA) – UK for their support throughout the duration of this research. I owe an immense debt of gratitude to Professor Abd al-Fattah El-Awaisi, founder of the new field of Islamicjerusalem studies, for inspiring me with his passion for the subject and for his scholarly insight and support. I am also greatly indebted to Dr Mahdi Zahraa for his invaluable guidance and constructive criticism which made this book possible. In addition, I would like to thank Professor Malory Nye for his suggestions and encouragement and for being available whenever I needed his advice, and Dr Alhagi Manta Drammeh for his encouragement and support. I wish to thank the staff of the al-Maktoum Institute, who were invariably helpful and knowledgeable. Thanks are also due to my students and colleagues at the institute, who have been a source both of friendship and inspiration, and I would like to acknowledge the assistance of Dr Khalid El-Awaisi in helping me to produce a camera-ready version of this book. Above all, I am eternally grateful to my parents, Younes AbuMunshar and Khairiyya al-Dwaik, for their unending love, encouragement, patience and prayers during my research, and

x

ISLAMIC JERUSALEM AND ITS CHRISTIANS

for the values they instilled in me and the love they gave me. I am also deeply grateful to my brothers, sisters and family-in-law for being a constant source of inspiration, support and encouragement, especially my mother-in-law, Aisha. Last but not least, I wish to thank my wonderful wife Alla, whose indescribable patience, support and encouragement have helped me at all stages of this project. She spent many evenings with me hovering over the computer screen. Her help has been invaluable. I wish to express my love to my two-year-old son Salahudin, for making this endeavour a breeze by his smiles and giggles and for eagerly waiting for me at home many evenings and weekends hoping that I would finish my work early and come home to play with him. I hope I can now make up to him the lost time. Finally, I wish to express my appreciation to other individuals and libraries too numerous to mention, for their invaluable assistance. Maher Abu-Munshar Dundee

INTRODUCTION

Islamic Jerusalem (Bayt al-Maqdis) is no ordinary place: its significance reaches far beyond its physical stones. During its turbulent history, the followers of all three monotheistic religions made strenuous efforts to conquer the city by any means and at any cost. The era of Muslim rule in Islamic Jerusalem is long compared to some other periods in the city’s history. It embraces two distinct phases, the first and principal one being the Muslim conquest under the leadership of Caliph ‘Umar Ibn al-Khattab (d. 24 AH1/ 644 CE). The second Muslim conquest of Islamic Jerusalem was led by Sultan Salah al-Din (d. 589 AH/ 1193 CE). These two periods witnessed a history of both tolerance and tension towards non-Muslims, and especially Christians. Caliph ‘Umar liberated the Christians from the domination and persecution of Byzantine rule, and allowed Jews to return to the city after being expelled for nearly five hundred years. The second conquest freed Muslims, Eastern Orthodox Christians and Jews from the domination of the Latin Crusaders. The main aim of this book is to discuss the Muslim treatment of Christians in Islamic Jerusalem and the surrounding Muslim state, focussing on the attitudes and policies of ‘Umar and Salah al-Din. These two rulers created a model atmosphere of tolerance and peaceful coexistence among the followers of different religions, and enabled Christians and Jews to live side by side peacefully after centuries of tension. The book’s objective has been achieved, first, by identifying the Muslim

2

ISLAMIC JERUSALEM AND ITS CHRISTIANS

conquerors’ unique vision of Islamic Jerusalem towards nonMuslims, based on information from Islamic primary sources. Second, by a detailed study of the reigns of ‘Umar and Salah alDin, and providing a better understanding of certain historical events in regard to Christians. Third, by conducting a comparative study of these two periods, presenting new data and contributing to the academic debate on the subject. Together these three methods set out principles by which Muslims should deal with Christians. Those that do take an academic approach discuss only This book comes under the umbrella of Islamicjerusalem studies, a new and intellectually stimulating field of inquiry that attempts to deal with the region of Islamicjerusalem using interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary approaches. Islamicjerusalem is the name given to a region of about fifteen thousand square kilometres that encompassed not only the walled city of Aelia Capitolina (the Roman name for Jerusalem), but also the towns of Jenin in the north, Jericho in the east, Karak (in modern Jordan) and Zoar in the south and Jaffa in the west including the areas in between (see Fig. 1).2 This specialized field of study developed when Professor Abd al-Fattah El-Awaisi,3 from his work in the United Kingdom, became painfully aware of the lack of serious academic research on Jerusalem from an Arab and Muslim point of view, since most research has been undertaken by orientalist, western or Israeli writers. Hence, the history of the region under Muslim rule has been subject to much alteration and distortion.4 Although there is a vast literature by Arab and Muslim writers dealing with the issue of Palestine in general and Jerusalem in particular, the majority of these studies are of poor quality, as they address the subject either emotionally or politically. Those that do take an academic approach discuss only contemporary Jerusalem, as a city with east and west parts.5 As indicated, a central difference between Islamicjerusalem studies and Jerusalem studies is that the former does not confine itself to Jerusalem as a city, but considers it as a region, as El-Awaisi explains:

INTRODUCTION

3

Islamicjerusalem studies can be fairly eventually characterized and defined as a new branch of human knowledge based on interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary approaches. It aims to investigate all matters related to the Islamicjerusalem region, explore and examine its various aspects, and to provide a critical analytic understanding of the new frame of reference; in order to identify the nature of Islamicjerusalem and to understand the uniqueness of this region and its effects on the rest of the world in both historical and contemporary context.6 This new field is developing rapidly. I was one of the first students to complete a Ph.D in Islamicjerusalem studies, and became the first teaching fellow and later lecturer in this subject at the Al-Maktoum Institute for Arabic and Islamic Studies in Dundee, Scotland. The concept of Islamicjerusalem has been further defined by El-Awaisi as: A new terminology for a new concept, which may be translated into the Arabic language as Bayt al-Maqdis. It can be fairly and eventually characterized and defined as a unique region laden with a rich historical background, religious significances, cultural attachments, competing political and religious claims, international interests and various aspects that affect the rest of the world in both historical and contemporary contexts. It has a central frame of reference and a vital nature with three principal intertwined elements: its geographical location (land and boundaries), its people (population), and its unique and creative inclusive vision, to administrate that land and its people, as a model for multiculturalism.7 This vision of Islamicjerusalem is inclusive and accepts diversity. It is therefore of crucial significance to investigate the Muslim treatment of Christians in Islamicjerusalem in previous periods of Muslim rule.

4

ISLAMIC JERUSALEM AND ITS CHRISTIANS

At first the research for this book seemed straightforward, as the sources are abundant and readily available. However, progress was hampered in several ways. The shortcomings of the classical juristic and historical literature are that they tend to report historical events without critical analysis, and do not focus on the Muslim treatment of Christians during and after the first and second Muslim conquests of Islamic Jerusalem. In addition, differing versions of the key document, ‘Umar’s Assurance of Safety to the People of Aelia, have been reported by early historians, who, like others, have paid little attention to its importance. Early Muslim historians and jurists are also not in agreement about the origins of other significant documents, in particular the Pact of ‘Umar and the peace treaty with the Christian Banu Taghlib tribe. Later, at the time of Salah al-Din, Muslim historians once again reported events merely in descriptive form, while in most cases non-Muslim historians have discussed the Crusader period rather than Muslim relations with Christians. In general, the difficulties of studying the Muslim treatment of Christians are, first, that one has to refer to both juristic and historical literature. Second, most of the literature – especially the juristic books and those covering the first Muslim conquest – is in Arabic, with some sources in Italian and French. Third, the historical information, particularly from the period of ‘Umar, was documented long after the actual events. The narratives do not agree, and the different versions of important documents and historical facts add to the problem of assessing their authenticity. Fourth, the task was made more complex because of diverse opinions between followers of the schools of fiqh (Muslim jurisprudence). Among early Muslim jurists and scholars these differences were mainly on issues of how Muslims should treat non-Muslims, on the rights and obligations of dhimmis (nonMuslim citizens) and on aspects of the jizyah tax paid by dhimmis These were a natural consequence of divergent opinions on the interpretation of Qur’anic verses dealing with non-Muslims, which reflected the particular school of thought of the jurist or

INTRODUCTION

5

scholar as well as the method of reasoning used. For example, the Hanafi and Maliki schools were quite lenient in their treatment of non-Muslims, while the Shafi‘i and Hanbali schools were more restrictive. For the purposes of this book, I have selected a number of juristic and Qur’anic interpretations and have avoided details of their disagreements except where absolutely necessary. Among western historians, the history of Islamic Jerusalem during the two periods under discussion has suffered from falsification, and has been strongly attacked by a number of authors who consider that Muslim policies contained much oppression and aggression towards non-Muslims. Some of these writers, for example Abraham and Haddad, went further, asserting that the Muslim system classified non-Muslims as second- or even third-class citizens.8 However, an analysis of their work shows that their conclusion was based not on scholarly investigation, but on arbitrarily selected information from a wide range of sources. The best way to deal with such contradictory data is to examine the juristic principles involved, as is done in chapter one. This chapter reviews the evidence of the Qur’an and the Sunnah,9 a careful reading of which sheds fresh light on the events under discussion. In particular, the tolerance and freedom of religion expressed in the Qur’an are made explicit, as well as the concept of human brotherhood. The purpose and meaning of the dhimma pact in Islam, of the jizyah tax and the reasons for imposing it, and the obligations and rights of the dhimmi are also explained. A brief overview of the concept of jihad is given, and its role in relation to non-Muslims. However, it is not only a question of the framework that Muslim leaders followed, but of their personal attitudes, and a brief study is made of the backgrounds of ‘Umar Ibn al-Khattab and Salah al-Din. The second and fourth chapters focus on the treatment of Christians by these two leaders outside Islamic Jerusalem. When events in the years before and after the conquests are examined from the perspective of the two rulers, a clearer picture of their intentions and policies emerges.

6

ISLAMIC JERUSALEM AND ITS CHRISTIANS

The need to examine and re-examine sources also looms large when the treatment of Christians in Islamic Jerusalem is discussed in chapters three and five. Their treatment under the first Muslim conquest is investigated with special reference to ‘Umar’s Assurance of Safety to the People of Aelia, and under the second conquest it is assessed in light of Salah al-Din’s liberation of Islamic Jerusalem. The conclusion summarizes these findings, with some critical remarks and recommendations. Figure 1: The Region of Islamicjerusalem

© Khalid El-Awaisi

Source: El-Awaisi, K. 2006.

1 ISLAMIC SOURCES AND THE TREATMENT OF NON-MUSLIMS

The attitude of Caliph ‘Umar Ibn al-Khattab and Sultan Salah alDin towards non-Muslims did not arise out of a vacuum, but was inspired by religious injunctions and principles. Unfortunately, because Islam is based on a divine revelation, there is a misconception that it can neither live with, tolerate nor cooperate with the followers of other religions such as Judaism and Christianity. This view has caused prejudice against Islam as a religion that promotes violence, and against Muslims as inherently militant and irrational people. The intention of this chapter is not to tackle differences of belief between Muslims and non-Muslims, or to discuss the history of non-Muslims in Muslim states, except where particularly relevant. Its aim is to explain, from the point of view of the Qur’an and Sunnah point, the behaviour that should characterize Muslim dealings with non-Muslims in daily life and the rules that are applicable to non-Muslims. There is no doubt that this subject has held a distinctive position in Muslim jurisprudence and historical literature. This can be seen in the Qur’an, in prophetic traditions, in fatwas and in the practical applications of caliphs and Muslim jurists.1 The degree of concern expressed in Muslim law indicates the perceived role of Islam in building solid relations between Muslims and non-Muslims in a Muslim state. Its importance is

8

ISLAMIC JERUSALEM AND ITS CHRISTIANS

evident in the debates among Muslim jurists that have taken place in the past, and are taking place in the present. During Muslim history, certain leaders – particularly the Fatamids2 – have deviated from Islamic guidelines and committed Islamically unacceptable acts against non-Muslims. This was the result of their perversion and violation of Islamic precepts. In discussing Muslim treatment of non-Muslims, many authors have selected examples that are not derived from Islamic guidelines. In most cases, the conclusions they reached were that Muslims treated non-Muslims badly compared with the teachings of the Qur’an and the Sunnah. The Muslim view of tolerance and freedom of religion, and the concept of human brotherhood in the Qur’an and in prophetic traditions are discussed below. The dhimma pact in Islam and the jizyah tax are also examined, along with a brief overview of jihad and its relation to non-Muslims. Muslim Jurisprudence and Non-Muslims Muslim jurisprudence is based on four sources: first and foremost the Qur’an, followed by the Sunnah.3 Islamic rules concerning belief, legislation (shari‘ah) and morality are all based on these two sources. If the Qur’an and Sunnah texts are limited, their general principles can be used as criteria for similar and parallel situations. This helps to provide rules and principles for human behaviour until the Day of Judgement. Generations of learned Muslim scholars have elaborated on both these primary sources. They recognized the general principles and objectives of the rules, and followed the spirit of them in their judgements and fatwas for new situations. This led to the establishment of consensus (ijma‘)4 and analogy (qiyas).5 The important point to remember is that only the Qur’an and Sunnah are considered as primary sources; the rest are secondary. When the Prophet Muhammad and his companions migrated from Makkah to Madinah, the first Muslim state was established there under the Prophet’s leadership. From the beginning, rules and regulations were required to govern relations between

ISLAMIC SOURCES AND THE TREATMENT OF NON-MUSLIMS

9

Muslims and non-Muslims, both those who lived outside the state and those under Muslim rule. No Muslim state has ever been without non-Muslims, so such regulations were essential. Nor was the Muslim state ever perceived as a monopoly of Muslims, and it was intended that members of other religions should enjoy living in it. In some cases, for example after the first Muslim conquest of Islamic Jerusalem, the number of nonMuslims even exceeded that of Muslims.6 Appropriate rules had to be created to cover their rights and obligations, as they were also citizens, so that they could live in peace and participate in public life. The regulations were intended to bring public prosperity and mutual understanding between the different religions, in place of conflict and hatred. In general, the basis for the treatment of non-Muslims under Muslim rule was sought in the Qur’an and in the Prophet Muhammad’s dealings with certain non-Muslim communities, and in the policies of his immediate successors in light of that guidance. The Qur’an and the People of the Book The Qur’an divides non-Muslims into two main categories: the People of the Book and the idolaters. The title People of the Book (ahl al-kitab) is given to Jews and Christians. In Arabic, alkitab means the book; and in Islamic terminology ‘the Book’ refers to Scripture. The People of the Book have a special position in the Qur’an, since their religions were originally based on revealed books such as the Torah and the Bible.7 Compared to other religions, Jews and Christians are closer to Muslims than those who are unbelievers or atheists. The beliefs and values that are common to Muslims and the People of the Book can be summarized in four basic principles.8 First, Judaism, Christianity and Islam all believe in one Creator, who has created the entire universe and is omnipotent. Second, they believe in prophethood, that the Creator has sent messengers or prophets throughout history to guide humanity, to reconcile them to their Creator and to lead them into the path

10

ISLAMIC JERUSALEM AND ITS CHRISTIANS

of truth. Third, all three faiths believe in divine revelation, as shown in the Scriptures (holy books) that have been revealed to the prophets in order to guide humanity. There may be strongly felt differences as to which Scriptures are relatively more authentic and have not been changed. But the central concept of belief in Scripture is found in all three religions. Fourth, all of them believe in the law of divine punishment and in the hereafter, and that people in the hereafter will be rewarded or punished according to their beliefs and their compliance with the moral code expounded by the prophets throughout history. In that sense, regardless of the differences, the areas described above provide ground for commonality between Muslims on the one hand and Jews and Christians on the other. As a religion of peace, Islam sets out the following injunctions for Muslims to observe in their treatment of Jews and Christians (ahl al-kitab): Do not argue with the People of the Book unless in the best manner, save with those of them who do wrong: and say: We believe in what has been sent down to us and in what has been sent down to you.9 According to this verse, common ground should be found. AlQaradawi, a well-known Egyptian scholar, argues that Muslims are required to deal with ahl al-Kitab not only in a good way but in the best way.10 He believes that the Qur’an granted them a special position by referring to them several times as ahl al-kitab rather than as Jews and Christians. The Qur’an signals friendship when it tells Muslims that they are allowed to eat the food of Christians and Jews, while forbidding them to eat the food of other groups such as Magians (Majus) and Sabians: This day are [all] things good and pure made lawful unto you. The food of the people of the Book is lawful unto you and yours is lawful unto them. [Lawful unto you in marriage] chaste women who are believers, but also chaste women among the People of the Book, revealed before your time.11

ISLAMIC SOURCES AND THE TREATMENT OF NON-MUSLIMS

11

Consistent with the above, marriage is permitted with the People of the Book on the same terms that a Muslim man would marry a Muslim woman. This is not, however, applicable to others, such as pagans, Hindus, etc. In Islam, marriage is considered as a divine covenant, and mercy, respect and love should be outstanding characteristics of the husband/wife relationship. Even after marriage, the Qur’an permits a non-Muslim woman to observe her faith and celebrate her religious festivals without hindrance from the husband.12 This shows the level of tolerance in Islam towards a woman from the People of the Book who will be the Muslim’s partner throughout life, the mother of his children and the one with whom he shares his inmost thoughts. As the Qur’an says They are your garments and ye are their garments.13 And: Among His Signs is this that He created for you mates from among yourselves, that ye may dwell in tranquillity with them, and He has put love and mercy between your [hearts]. Verily in these are Signs for those who reflect.14 The significance of the People of the Book in Islam was clearly portrayed at the beginning of Muslim history when Muslims were a minority in Makkah. At that time there was a prolonged armed conflict between the two powerful northern neighbours of the Arabian peninsula, the Byzantine and Persian empires.15 In 614 CE Parwez, a Persian leader, occupied Aelia and proclaimed victory over the Roman Empire. Muslims might have been expected to welcome this, as they are nearer geographically to Persia than to Rome. However, Persians were Zoroastrians, while Romans were People of the Book. The Makkans – who were pagan unbelievers – identified themselves with the Persians and were elated by Parwaz’s victory, while the Muslims, who numbered only a few hundred at the time, sympathized with the Christians in Aelia. This was because the

ISLAMIC JERUSALEM AND ITS CHRISTIANS

12

Prophet had recognized Jesus as a true Prophet of God, the Bible as originally based on divine revelation and Aelia (Islamic Jerusalem) as a holy city. The Makkans insulted the Muslims because they were on the losing side. The Qur’an reacted to this and prophesied that the Christian defeat at the hands of the Persians and the pagan jubilation at those defeats would both be short-lived: The Romans [Byzantines] have been defeated in the land close by: but they, [even] after [this] defeat, will soon be victorious. Within a few years, To God will be the Command in the Past and in the Future: On that day with the help of God, shall the believers rejoice. He gives victory to whom He will, and He is exalted in Might, Most Merciful.16 There are a large number of verses in the Qur’an pertaining to Muslim treatment of non-Muslims, whether in or outside the Muslim state. The four main Qur’anic injunctions focus on: • • • •

Human brotherhood Religious tolerance Justice and fair treatment Loyalty and alliance

Human brotherhood Many verses in the Qur’an refer to humankind being one nation emanating from a single origin. The Qur’an emphasizes that all people were created from one person, Adam,17 although they differ in size, race, language, nation, tribe, and whether they are believer or atheist, good or bad, constructive or destructive. These differences should not contradict the principle of unity. They are intended, rather, to serve as a medium for people to come together and not to enter into conflict or to despise one another.18

ISLAMIC SOURCES AND THE TREATMENT OF NON-MUSLIMS

13

Consequently, the protection, rights and security of nonMuslims are derived from the principle of human brotherhood, since all mankind is the creation of God, the only God, without discrimination between Muslims and non-Muslims. Islam enjoins and promotes universal brotherhood, peace and unity. The only difference that the Qur’an recognizes is in piety towards God (taqwa): O mankind! We created you from a single [pair] of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other [i.e. not that ye may despise each other]. Verily the most honoured of you in the sight of God is [he who is] the most righteous of you. And God has full Knowledge and is well acquainted [with all things].19 As this verse shows, Islam honours mankind, especially believers in God, and mankind should promote peace, unity and universal brotherhood. Religious tolerance Religious tolerance is an essential cornerstone for the peaceful coexistence of different religious groups in a community, and is an important right given by Islam to non-Muslims. The Qur’an frequently calls for tolerance and respect towards the People of the Book, who are entitled to freedom of belief, conscience and worship. Neither the Qur’an nor the sayings of the Prophet have ever encouraged the use of force, pressure or manipulation in regard to religious belief. The most obvious verse that emphasises freedom of religion is the following: Let there be no compulsion in religion …20 The reason is that faith, to be genuine, needs to be an absolutely free and voluntary act. Indeed, this verse was revealed to condemn the attitude of some Jews and Madinans – those newly converted to Islam in Madinah – who wished to convert their children to their new faith. 21 It is clearly stressed that faith is an

14

ISLAMIC JERUSALEM AND ITS CHRISTIANS

individual commitment and even parents must refrain from interfering. The very nature of faith, as emphasized in the basic text of Islam, is that it is a voluntary act born out of conviction and freedom. Commenting on the above verse, Ibn Kathir22 (d. 774 AH / 1372 CE) argues that Islam is very clear on this point and that no one must force anyone else to embrace Islam. He states that those who have been guided by God will embrace Islam. However, for those whose hearts God has blinded, it is of no use to accept Islam, because without good will they would not benefit from being forced.23 Qutb24 (d. 1386 AH /1966 CE), a well-known Egyptian thinker in the Muslim Brothers and a Qur’anic interpreter, highlights the central concept derived from the verse – freedom of creed and freedom of choice. He believes that this requires the honouring of the human being and respect for his thoughts, will and feelings, and for his choice either to believe, or to reject belief and accept the consequences. Qutb argues that freedom of belief is the most basic right that identifies man as a human being; to deny anyone this right is to deny his or her humanity.25 Muhammad Abu Zahra, a contemporary Egyptian jurist, comments that the Islamic rules governing human relations wholly respect freedom of creed and belief.26 He adds that the Qur’an rejects compulsion to make people embrace a certain religion, and forbids Muslims to compel anyone to adopt a creed or belief. By the same token, ‘Abdelati, another Egyptian scholar, says that Islam takes this position because religion depends upon faith, will and commitment.27 He suggests that these three aspects are worth nothing if they have been induced by force and compulsion. In addition, al-Mawdudi, a noted Pakistani scholar, say that the term religion in this verse signifies belief in God, and that the entire system of life as it should be led rests upon it. The verse’s meaning, he says, is that the system of Islam, embracing moral beliefs and practical conduct, cannot be imposed by force.28 Wahba al-Zuhaili, a leading contemporary Syrian jurist commenting on this verse, agrees that compulsion in religion is

ISLAMIC SOURCES AND THE TREATMENT OF NON-MUSLIMS

15

prohibited. The Qur’an does not accept forcing non-Muslims to convert to Islam as a right approach.29 Malekian went further, positing a link between the concept of freedom in religion and the words of God, ‘For persecution is worse than slaughter’.30 He claims that this phrase attributes blame to those who persecute others for religious reasons. He emphasizes that interference in the matter of religion is prohibited by Muslim law, and that no one, whether Muslim or non-Muslim, should be forced to accept another religion or be persecuted by others on religious grounds.31 An example from the Umayyad period (661–750 CE) demonstrating freedom of religion is when Caliph al-Walid Ibn ‘Abd al-Malik forcibly took possession of part of a Christian cathedral in Damascus and incorporated it into a mosque. No redress took place under his successor, Caliph Yazyd Ibn alWalid Ibn ‘Abd al-Malik, but when Caliph ‘Umar Ibn ‘Abd al‘Aziz succeeded him, the Christians of Damascus reported this injustice. ‘Umar wrote to the official in charge to pull down the portion of the mosque that had formerly belonged to the cathedral, and the land was handed back to the Christians.32 When ‘Ammar Ibn Yasir, one of the Prophet’s companions, was forced under torture to say that he was a non-believer and was made to curse God and the Prophet, a Qur’anic verse was revealed to declare that what ‘Ammar had uttered was invalid, since he had spoken those words under duress: Anyone who, after accepting faith in God, declares himself unbeliever under compulsion is still a believer, his heart remaining firm in faith.33 Based on the example of ‘Ammar, one can say that the concept of compulsion of anyone is not acceptable in Islam. Indeed, compulsion has never been an appropriate way of converting anyone to a religion. It is therefore logical to say that once the force is removed, the belief that was expressed under force will also go; thus compulsion is useless. Furthermore, if someone is forced to take an action under pressure, he will be pushed into

16

ISLAMIC JERUSALEM AND ITS CHRISTIANS

hypocrisy; as a result, the user of force will have to bear responsibility for his own behaviour. The religious freedom of a non-Muslim is to be fully protected, and he/she is to be given total freedom to profess his/her religion. Justice and fair treatment The fundamental Qur’anic verses that determine the nature of Muslim treatment of non-Muslims are the following: God forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for [your] Faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them: For God loves those who are just. God only forbids you, with regard to those who fight you for [your] faith, and drive you out of your homes, and support [others] in driving you out, from turning to them [for friendship and protection]. It is such as turn to them [in these circumstances] that do wrong.34 Set out here are very important injunctions determining the attitude of Muslims to non-Muslims. They are obviously not prevented from establishing good relationships with nonMuslims. On the contrary, the Muslim treatment of nonMuslims should be based on principles of good relationship and justice, especially towards those who have peaceful intentions towards Muslims. More specifically, Muslims are asked to deal with non-Muslims kindly and justly, unless the latter are out to destroy Muslims and their faith. Al-Tabari35 (d. 310 AH/922 CE) concludes that the most accurate interpretation of these verses is that Muslims should be just and fair, and have the best relationship with those nonMuslims who are not hostile to Muslims on account of their religion, or drive Muslims from their homes. This includes people of all faiths and sects. Support of this strong opinion comes from the story of Asma’ and her mother (see below). AlTabari says that God ordered Muslims to treat non-Muslims kindly and justly, and that God loves those who treat people in this way. God’s orders are generalized with no exclusion of any

ISLAMIC SOURCES AND THE TREATMENT OF NON-MUSLIMS

17

particular group or religion. Al-Tabari’s view is that God excluded from the above injunction those who caused harm to or waged war against Muslims, and warned Muslims not to be supporters or allies of these groups, or they would be disobeying the command of God.36 In like manner, al-Qurtubi37 (d. 761 AH /1360 CE) comments that this verse represents permission from God to establish good relationships with non-Muslims, especially those who do not treat Muslims as enemies38 or wage war against them. He agrees with Ibn al-‘Arabi39 (d. 543 AH /1148 CE), who interprets the meaning of ‘dealing justly’ (Arabic tuqsitu) differently from other Qur’anic scholars, when he says that this term does not, in fact, imply ‘being just’ with non-Muslims, as the translation seems to indicate.40 According to Ibn al-‘Arabi, tuqsitu means supporting non-Muslims financially as a demonstration of good relations, because, in light of another verse, Muslim justice is obligatory towards everybody, whether friend or foe. Moreover, al-Zamakhshari41 (d.538 AH /1143 CE) says that God gave permission to Muslims to deal justly with nonMuslims who do not wage war against them. However, in his permission God excluded those who cause harm to Muslims and wage war against them. The interpretation of ‘dealing justly’ means to treat non-Muslims justly and not to oppress them.42 Al-Razi43 (d. 604 AH /1207 CE) agrees with these interpretations and adds that the verse is an authorization of good relations with non-Muslims. In interpreting ‘dealing justly’, al-Razi quotes Ibn ‘Abbas (a well-known companion of the Prophet), who considers that it means having a good relationship. Al-Razi quotes Muqatil when he comments on ‘For God loves those who are just’, saying that Muslims must adhere to agreements with non-Muslims and treat them justly.44 Ibn Kathir in his attempts to interpret this verse, says that it contains the permission to perform good deeds to those who do not fight Muslims in the matter of religion or drive them from their homes. In addition, it enjoins Muslims to deal with nonMuslims kindly, justly and equitably.45 Qutb discusses the verse

18

ISLAMIC JERUSALEM AND ITS CHRISTIANS

and concludes that this good and just relationship should not be disturbed. But, as is the case with other Qur’anic interpretations, Qutb stipulates that this attitude to non-Muslims can change if their aggression has to be dealt with, or if the breaking of a truce is expected, or an obstacle develops to delivering the message of Islam. Apart from that, the behaviour should be based on peace, love and justice for all mankind.46 To sum up, the general rule for the treatment of non-Muslims by Muslims is very clearly spelled out and leads to two important observations. First, the basis of this treatment should be justice and kindness, that is, peaceful coexistence. It is also obvious that deviation from the basic rule of friendship and peaceful coexistence can be justified only in certain exceptional situations. These include, for example, when people fight Muslims because of their faith, or try to destroy the Muslim religious identity. This exception is logical, based as it is on the concept of selfpreservation. The other exception given in the verse is when Muslims are driven from their homes, when violence and hostility are used against them, or when support is given to others to force Muslims from their homes. Second, the use of the two keywords ‘kindly’ and ‘justly’ is significant. To be ‘just’, in addition to what has been said, means that Muslims cannot persecute non-Muslims, take away their rights or otherwise damage them simply because they are nonMuslims. To be ‘kind’ (tabarruhum) comes from the Arabic word birr, which goes beyond the implication of kindness or justice and has no exact equivalent in English. The Qur’an uses birr for the basis of the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims. The word is normally used to describe the way a Muslim should deal with his or her parents, and encompasses everything that is good in a relationship. Muslim scholars, for example Mawlawi, a contemporary Lebanese jurist, argue that birr is the foundation of the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims. Mawlawi goes further, claiming that birr is derived from everything that is good, decent, respectable and compassionate.47 In Muslim literature, especially in the prophetic traditions, the Prophet Muhammad uses birr for the relationship between a

ISLAMIC SOURCES AND THE TREATMENT OF NON-MUSLIMS

19

person and his parents. A person needs to birr his parents, meaning a treatment that is more than kindness. It is thus obvious that, on the basis of this general rule in the Qur’an, any non-Muslim who accepts the need for peaceful coexistence with Muslims is to be treated with birr – justly and kindly. Imam alBukhari (d. 256 AH /860 CE) reported that Asma’, the daughter of Abu Bakr, the first caliph, said: ‘My mother came to me while she was still a polytheist, so I asked God’s messenger: My mother, who is ill-disposed to Islam, has come to visit me. She wants something from me. Shall I maintain [good] relations with her?’ the Prophet replied, ‘Yes, maintain [good] relations with your mother.48 Interestingly, Imam al-Qarafi (d. 684 AH /1285 CE), a wellknown Maliki jurist, considered that birr or fair treatment to non-Muslims consists of the following: Showing kindness to their weak and helping their poor and destitute, and feeding their hungry, clothing their naked, and uttering kind words to them from the position of grace and mercy and not from the position of fear and disgrace and removing their hardship as their neighbours if you [Muslims] have power to remove it, praying for their guidance so that they can become happy and fortunate people, giving them good advice in all their affairs – the affairs of this world and the hereafter and looking after their interest in their absence. If anyone hurts them and deprives them of their property or family, possessions or their rights, you should help them by removing their persecution and make sure to restore all their rights back to them.49 On the other hand, it is also reasonable to say that those who incite hostility or hatred against Muslims and try to destroy them cannot expect to have this kind of friendship. This not only applies to non-Muslims; if a Muslim violates the dictates of

20

ISLAMIC JERUSALEM AND ITS CHRISTIANS

Islam, he or she will be punished. Likewise, a non-Muslim who violates the terms of agreement with Muslims and the Muslim state should also be punished. The issue is no more than a requirement to comply with the rules. As far as the concept of justice is concerned, justice (‘adl) must be seen to be done towards Muslims and non-Muslims alike. Islam calls for justice not only for Muslims but for all mankind, irrespective of creed, colour, race and nationality. One Qur’anic verse says: O ye who believe! Stand out firmly for God, as witnesses to fair dealing, and let not the hatred of others to you make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice. Be just: that is next to Piety: and fear God. For God is well acquainted with all that ye do.50 This implies that implementing justice and acting righteously in a favourable or neutral atmosphere is meritorious enough; however, the real test comes when one has to act justly towards people one hates or for whom one has an aversion. This verse was revealed to show the need to deal justly with the Jews in Madinah, whom the Prophet had asked to contribute to the blood money of the two men from Banu ‘Amer who had been killed by ‘Amir Ibn Umayyah. In the Prophet’s presence, the Jews pretended that they had agreed to contribute, but behind his back they were plotting how to kill him. God informed the Prophet of their intention, and the Prophet was very angry about this betrayal. However, God revealed the above verse to ask him not to act unjustly against the Jews over this incident.51 Al-Zamakhshari interprets this verse to mean that Muslims should not act unjustly against non-Muslims by killing their women and children or breaking agreements with them simply through hatred. He concludes that Islam has strongly commanded Muslims to be just in their dealings with nonMuslims.52 Interestingly, al-Qurtubi adds that even if nonMuslims kill Muslim women and children and caused great

ISLAMIC SOURCES AND THE TREATMENT OF NON-MUSLIMS

21

sadness, Muslims are not allowed to imitate them, as this would prevent justice taking place.53 Similarly, Ibn Kathir interprets this verse to mean that a Muslim should not let the hatred of a particular group be a reason for injustice.54 Justice should be applicable to everybody, both friends and enemies, for God says, ‘be just: that is next to piety’. Abu Zahra explains that human relations as regulated by Islam are based on justice, whether the relations are with a loyal or a hostile group.55 He refers to the above verse, and stresses that justice should be conducive to piety. This and preceding verses define the general principle for Muslim relations and for the treatment of non-Muslims. If some non-Muslims are hostile, cruel, or make trouble, it is not permitted for a Muslim who is in power to deviate even slightly from the path of justice in dealing with them. Finally, the Qur’an urges Muslims to base their relations with non-Muslims on peaceful cooperation, and warns them against placing religious solidarity over covenanted rights and the principles of justice. Loyalty and alliance Fair treatment of non-Muslims and cooperation with them are not the same as loyalty (al-muwalah). Rather, they are practical ways of promoting good and combating evil. There is a distortion of the word loyalty that expands its meaning to include cooperation. The loyalty that the Qur’an warns about is where a Muslim favours non-Muslims over Muslims when granting love and support. This issue is clarified in several Qur’anic verses, for example: Let not the Believers take for allies or helpers Unbelievers rather than Believers.56 Also: To the hypocrites give the good tidings that there is for them but a grievous penalty. Those who take for Alliance

22

ISLAMIC JERUSALEM AND ITS CHRISTIANS

unbelievers rather than believers: Is it honour they seek among them? Nay, all honour is with God.57 In his explanation of these verses, al-Tabari says that they prohibit Muslims, first, from being like non-Muslims in their morals and values, and second, from preferring non-Muslims over Muslims. But he adds that loyalty could even mean supporting non-believers in their efforts against Muslims, such as spying on the Muslim state to the benefit of its rivals and enemies. This type of loyalty is at the expense of Muslims. There is an enormous difference between this and cooperating with Muslim interests for the collective well-being.58 The question that arises is how Muslims can fulfil the meaning of birr, love, kindness, affection, and good treatment regarding non-Muslims, when the Qur’an itself forbids loyalty to nonMuslims and condemns Muslims who take on non-Muslims as helpers, allies, and supporters, as illustrated in verses like the following: O ye who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians for your allies. They are but allies to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them [for alliance] is of them. Verily God guides not an unjust people.59 In an attempt to answer this question, al-Qaradawi points out that these verses are not unconditional, to be applied to every single Jew, Christian, or non-Muslim. Interpreting them in this manner contradicts the injunctions of the Qur’an to show affection and kindness to the benign and peace-loving peoples of every religion.60 Most Qur’anic commentators have linked their interpretation to the reason behind the revelation of this verse. For example, al-Zamakhshari and Ibn Kathir61 say that Muslims should not take on Christians and Jews as supporters, or even support them as if they were Muslims. Al-Zamakhshari explains this by quoting that they are ‘allies to each other’.62 Both then refer to the reason behind the revelation, which is that ‘Ubada Ibn al-Samit abandoned his Jewish allies. However, when

ISLAMIC SOURCES AND THE TREATMENT OF NON-MUSLIMS

23

the Prophet asked ‘Abdullah Ibn Ubay to do the same he refused, saying that he feared the Jews might defeat the Muslims, and should that happen he wanted to be in favour with the Jews and to use that for his own advantage.63 Al-Razi agreed with al-Zamakhshari on the reason for the revelation, adding that ‘not to take Jews and the Christians for your allies’ means not to rely on or ask them for support.64 AlQurtubi states that anyone who takes on Jews and Christians as supporters against Muslims is to be considered as one of the Jews and Christians. He gives a further two reasons for the revelation,65 with which Ibn Kathir agrees.66 The first concerns two Muslim men. After observing the defeat of Muslims in the battle of Uhud,67 one of them decided to become an ally of the Jews, the other an ally of the Christians. The second reason, alQurtubi says, is that the verse was revealed after Abu Lubabah’s incident, which he does not describe. It seems clear that whatever this incident was, it led to prohibiting Muslims from taking on Jews and Christians as supporters against their own faith. Other verses in the Qur’an are specific to unbelievers in general rather than to the People of the Book, and prohibit Muslims from taking on unbelievers as allies against Muslims or instead of Muslims.68 An-Na‘im, a contemporary Sudanese scholar, considers that these verses should have been seen as providing the necessary psychological support for the survival and cohesion of a vulnerable community of Muslims in a hostile environment.69 However, it should be borne in mind that the warning against taking Jewish or Christian allies is not general in application and does not include every individual Christian or Jew. If it were so inclusive, it would contradict other verses and instructions in the Qur’an that permit kindness to those who are decent, have good relations with Muslims and cause them no harm. The following verse in that Qur’anic chapter says: Those in whose hearts is a disease. Thou seest how eagerly they run about amongst them [non-Muslims], saying ‘We do fear lest a change of fortune bring us disaster’. Ah!

24

ISLAMIC JERUSALEM AND ITS CHRISTIANS

Perhaps God will give thee [Muslims] victory, or a decision from Him then will make them regret the thoughts, which they secretly harbour in their hearts’.70 It is very important to refer to the circumstances in which this verse was revealed. It deals specifically with certain hypocrites who were in the Muslim ranks. On the surface, they claimed to be Muslims. However, they thought it possible that nonMuslims who were in conflict with Muslims at that time might gain the upper hand or even achieve victory. Therefore, they secretly tried to keep up their friendship and alliance with the non-Muslims, even when the latter were actively hostile to Muslims. They did this in the hope that, if the Muslims were victorious, they could support them publicly because they saw themselves as being in the Muslim ranks. On the other hand, if the non-Muslims were the victors, the hypocrites could ask them for protection from the Muslims because they had friendly ties with the non-Muslims. It is clear that the Qur’an is condemning this kind of behaviour from pseudo-believers who called themselves Muslims. In spite of this, the Qur’an does not dismiss the possibility of future reconciliation. Moreover, Muslims are encouraged to hope for better circumstances and improved relationships. One verse says: It may be that God will establish friendship between you and those whom ye [now] hold as enemies.71 This shows the attitude of Islam towards those who harm Muslims. As mentioned above, Islam gives a person the right to defend his/her life and his/her rights, but there is still an appeal to repay evil with good if this will result in improved relations. All these verses, both friendly and hostile, are circumstantial, that is, they refer to particular incidents, individuals or groups of people. They did not prevent Muslims from taking on nonMuslims as allies because they were not Muslims, but were associated with particular historical incidents in which a Muslim

ISLAMIC SOURCES AND THE TREATMENT OF NON-MUSLIMS

25

sought the support of Jews and Christians at the expense of his own people. The Dhimma Pact and the Jizyah Tax To regulate the attitude and the way that Muslims should treat non-Muslims, Islam introduced the dhimma pact and the jizyah tax. The term dhimma literally means pledge and guarantee.72 It was the contract for protection that was made with Christians, Jews and others (such as Zoroastrians) who were judged to be the People of the Book, as well as any other non-Muslims,73 when they agreed to live within the Muslim state and to pay jizyah. Muhammad al-Buti, a leading contemporary Syrian jurist, argues that the dhimma pact was a contract that could be no more than a bay‘ah (a pledge of allegiance to obey the rules of the state and pursue its public interest), which took place between the head of the state and all citizens.74 Therefore no one, Muslim or non-Muslim, could be excluded from this bay‘ah because they were citizens,75 or, as described by contemporary scholars, they were holders of Muslim state citizenship (al-jinsiyyah alIslamiyyah).76 The only difference was that Muslims were obliged to obey this bay‘ah as a religious duty,77 whereas for non-Muslims it was a fulfilment of their pact or agreement with Muslims that secured their own protection. The raising of the jizyah from non-Muslim citizens within the Muslim state needs some explanation, since it can be misunderstood. The word jizyah is derived from the verb jaza, meaning ‘he renders [something] as satisfaction or compensation [in lieu of something else]’, and it represents money collected from the dhimmi.78 ‘Abdullah Yusuf ‘Ali describes the jizyah as ‘a poll tax levied from those who did not accept Islam, but were willing to live under the protection of Islam, and were thus tacitly willing to submit to its ideals that were enforced in the Muslim state’.79 It was a small supplementary tax that was neither heavy nor unjust. Siddiqi, in his translation of Sahih Muslim, defines jizyah as a sort of compensation paid to the Muslim state by non-Muslims living under its protection, for not participating in military service and

26

ISLAMIC JERUSALEM AND ITS CHRISTIANS

yet enjoying the pact of protection (dhimma).80 Moreover, if a non-Muslim citizen participated in military service during a particular year, he was exempted from the jizyah for that year.81 It can be argued that exempting non-Muslims from military service made sense because it was illogical to ask non-Muslims to fight for the sake of Islam. It would be like enforcing them to practice a system of worship without a basic belief. However, non-Muslims could decide to participate in military service for other reasons, for example, to defend the state they were living in. Initially, this tax did not exist in the early years of the Muslim state, in Madinah or elsewhere. There is disagreement among scholars as to the actual date that jizyah was prescribed. For example, Ibn al-Qayyim (d. 751 AH/1350 CE) states that jizyah was not taken from non-Muslims before the revelation of the verse legitimizing it in year 8 AH (629 CE),82 whereas Abu ‘Ubayd (d. 224 AH/ 839 CE)83 and Ibn Kathir84 consider 9 AH to be the year of revelation of this verse and its Qur’anic endorsement: Fight those who believe neither in God nor in the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by God and His Messengers, nor acknowledge the Religion of truth, from among the People of the Book, until they pay the jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.85 No fixed rate for jizyah was set either by the Qur’an or by the Prophet Muhammad. The jurists, therefore, differ as to the amount of jizyah that should be paid.86 According to Abu Hanifah, the rate was 48 dirhams for rich people, 24 dirhams for the middle class and 12 dirhams for the poor. He thus specifies the maximum and minimum amounts and disallows any further discussion.87 The Hanbali jurists followed the opinion of Caliph ‘Umar. They agreed with the Hanafi jurists, but permitted the amount to be increased or decreased in accordance with people’s economic situation.88 Imam al-Shafi‘i does not stipulate the

ISLAMIC SOURCES AND THE TREATMENT OF NON-MUSLIMS

27

maximum.89 Al-Shafi‘i suggests one dinar per year (about £30 today), which would be the Arabian gold dinar of the Muslim states. Imam Malik suggests that, if the dhimmi was poor (ahl alWariq),90 the rate would be 40 dirhams. However, if he had more money (ahl al-dhahab/gold), it would be 4 dinars.91 The difference was between those using silver and those using gold. He also states that it is not permissible to increase this amount. In like manner, Abu Yusuf (d. 183 AH/ 799 CE) wrote that the Muslim state should take from non-Muslims only what was mutually fixed at the time of peacemaking. All terms of the treaty should be strictly adhered to and no addition permitted.92 Generally speaking, the amount specified by jurists is trivial and paid only once a year. In fact, the level of jizyah varied and there were exemptions for the poor, females, children, slaves, monks and hermits.93 The different amounts cited by various jurists indicate that there was no fixed rate, and its flexibility depended on time, place and economic situation. The jizyah collector had to try to harmonize the different figures given by various jurists and levy an amount in accordance with people’s means. On his attempt to clarify the rationale behind this tax, al-Buti argues that the jizyah paid to the Muslim state by non-Muslims was similar to zakah,94 the obligatory tax paid by Muslims to the Muslim state.95 The only difference was that Muslims paid zakah as part of their religious duty and as a form of worship, while dhimmis paid jizyah, a lesser amount, in fulfilment of their social duty to the Muslim state in which they were living, and it was spent in their protection. Al-Buti also illustrates that choosing the term jizyah for this tax or compensation did not derive from a religious decision or Islamic order. There is no evidence in Islam to show that Muslims were worshipping (ta‘abbud) in naming this tax jizyah. They could easily have used another term. Al-Buti clarifies this by giving the example of ‘Umar Ibn al-Khattab and the Christians of Banu Taghlib. This group asked ‘Umar to take jizyah from them in the name of sadaqa (a voluntary tax for charity), even if this meant doubling the jizyah payment.96 Al-

28

ISLAMIC JERUSALEM AND ITS CHRISTIANS

Buti adds that as a result, the majority of scholars, Shafi‘is, Hanafis and Hanbalis, agreed that it is acceptable to take jizyah from dhimmis under the name of sadaqa, but the amount is doubled.97 The interpretation ‘with willing submission’ (‘an yadin), taken from the last part of the verse that legitimizes the jizyah, means literally ‘from the hand’. It has been variously interpreted. AlZamakhshari believes it could have two meanings. First, the hand can be seen as a symbol of power or authority; second, it can be seen as a kind of favour from the Muslims to the dhimmis when they were saved from being killed.98 Al-Razi agrees with alZamakhshari.99 Al-Qurtabi, in his interpretation of the term, discusses several meanings. For example, he quotes Ibn ‘Abbas when he says that its meaning is to pay the money personally to the jizyah collector and not to send it by anyone else.100 Similarly, al-Tabari says that jizyah is given from the hand of the dhimmis to the hand of the collector.101 Finally, Ibn al-‘Arabi lists fifteen potential meanings, such as giving the money in humility, under a pledge, being rich enough to be able to pay it, coming in person to pay it and not sending someone else, and not thanking the dhimmi when he pays, or praying for him, etc.102 In the latter sense, the hand is the symbol of the ability to pay the jizyah, and it is not taken from those who cannot afford it. Children, the elderly, the poor and women are therefore exempted. In fact, a literal interpretation of this verse means that it does not apply to anyone who is not actually fighting against Muslims. The payment here clearly refers to a sign of ending a war and is a token of civil obedience or of regional reconciliation. Agreement to pay jizyah signifies the end of fighting. There are disagreements among Muslim scholars, both Qur’anic interpreters and Muslim jurists, about the meaning of the word ‘subdued’ (saghirun) in the verse. Some Muslim scholars interpret it to mean that jizyah will be taken from the dhimmis with belittlement and humiliation.103 However, other Muslim scholars interpret the word to mean submission to the Muslim political authority. Thus, paying jizyah shows adherence to the

ISLAMIC SOURCES AND THE TREATMENT OF NON-MUSLIMS

29

Muslim state, and in return the state will offer support and protection. For example, al-Shafi‘i and Ibn al-Qayyim opine that ‘subdued’ means accepting the law of Islam with regard to dhimmis.104 Ibn Hazm defines the term by saying that the laws of Islam will apply to them: dhimmis should not display their unbelief or do something that Islam does not allow.105 AlNawawi 106 and Ibn al-Qayyim refute the aspect of humiliation and point out that there is no evidence for this sort of behaviour in the Qur’an or the prophetic tradition, or in the practice of the Prophet’s companions.107 Al-Nawawi adds that jizyah must be taken kindly, as if removing a debt from someone. Abu Yusuf discusses the kindness of taking the jizyah when he states that: No one from the dhimmis would be beaten in extracting jizyah from them; nor would they be made to stand in the sun nor would any persecution be inflicted upon their bodies. Instead kindness will be shown to them. They would be restrained till they paid what was incumbent upon them and they would not be released from this detention till jizyah is taken from them in full.108 On the same lines, al-Buti adds that non-Muslims are not viewed by Muslim rulers as a burden so long as they remain submissive to the regime in the same way as Muslims.109 It is unlikely that the Qur’an meant humiliation of the dhimmis. If jizyah were considered a humiliation, that is, a punishment because they were not Muslims, no one among non-Muslims would be exempted. This is shown in Abu Yusuf’s reply about the exemption to dhimmi given by the Abbasid Caliph Harun alRashid (d.193 AH/809 CE): Jizyah would not be charged from a destitute to whom charity is given nor from the blind who have no provision or any work nor will it be charged from a dhimmi to whom charity is given nor from one who sits [at home due to disability]. But if they are prosperous then it will be charged from them. Similarly would be the case of the blind.

30

ISLAMIC JERUSALEM AND ITS CHRISTIANS

Similarly, jizyah would be charged from the monks who live in a monastery but are prosperous. But if they are poor people to whom charity is given by prosperous co-religious people, jizyah will not be charged from them. Similarly, jizyah is leviable on the people of synagogues if they have declared their whole property as trust for monasteries, the monks and the workers living there, even then jizyah will be charged from them and the required amount will be charged from the in charge of the monastery. But if the [person] in charge of the monastery denies having received these donations and he swears by God to this effect and takes an oath in the manner in which his co-religious people take an oath that he has not received anything from the trust, then he will be left alone and jizyah will not be levied from him.110 Furthermore, immediately after Khalid Ibn al-Walid had conquered al-Hira in southern Iraq, he wrote a letter to Caliph Abu Bakr telling him how he had implemented the jizyah tax but had exempted non-Muslims who were poor, old and handicapped: I counted the male population, they were seven thousand. On further examination, I found that one thousand of them were permanently sick and unfit. So, I excluded them from the imposition of jizyah; and those susceptible to jizyah thus remained six thousand people … I have granted them the right that when a man becomes unfit to work because of old age, or who should otherwise be affected by calamity, or one who was rich but became poor to the extent that he requires the charity of his religion, I shall exempt him from the jizyah and he and his family will be supported by the Muslim treasury by means of maintenance allowance as long as he lives in the Muslim territory.111 It is beyond doubt that Islam would ever impose jizyah as a punishment or compensation from non-Muslims for their lack

ISLAMIC SOURCES AND THE TREATMENT OF NON-MUSLIMS

31

of belief in God, because it is only required from adult males. If it was a sort of compensation or punishment, then women, children and poor dhimmis would have had to pay it too. On the contrary, once a dhimma pact is concluded, the dhimmis automatically become citizens of the Muslim state and share all the basic rights of Muslims, regardless of which group is the ethnic majority or minority. It should be noted that the terminology of minority has no place in Islamic law.112 Al-Buti argues that it has no place in the sources of shari‘ah and that the jurists have never used it. He adds that it is derived from western societies who use it to distinguish between ethnic groups in their midst. This meaning, he says, is alien to the spirit of Islam, because it divides a population into first- and second-class citizens. Everyone who lives in the Muslim state enjoys the same citizenship rights, despite the differences they may have in their religion or population size. Lastly, he states that there are no first -or second- class citizens according to Muslim law.113 However, a number of non-Muslim writers assert that nonMuslims living under the Muslim state were treated as secondclass citizens.114 Others go further, claiming that non-Muslims were treated not only as second-class citizens, but as third-class citizens. In the words of Abraham and Haddad: In an Islamic State, Islam is the ideology of the State and, therefore, there is no room for those who are outside the State’s ideology in the government, they are seen as thirdclass citizens or aliens and possibly, dangerous creatures whose loyalty is questioned and always suspect …115 These authors establish their view by referring to the status of dhimmis recorded in the literature of Islamic law, which says that dhimmis were not allowed to be either a head of state (caliph) or a judge.116 But they contradict themselves. First, they accept that the Muslim state is an ideological state. More specifically, it is a state based on an idea, in this case Islam. According to Muslim belief, the leader of a Muslim state must be a Muslim. AlMarwadi a Shafi‘i jurist, defines leadership in Islam as a position

32

ISLAMIC JERUSALEM AND ITS CHRISTIANS

‘prescribed to succeed the Prophethood as a means of protecting the din (religion) and of managing the affairs of the world’,117 therefore the position of caliph or judge is a religious office, and one of the conditions that has to be fulfilled is that the person is a Muslim. Hence, in Islam the head of state is the head of the Muslim religion in that state. From this, it can be easily understood why a non-Muslim citizen cannot be elected head of a Muslim state. A caliph or judge must be well-educated and religious; his rank involves giving orders and solving citizens’ problems according to Islamic rules with which he should be familiar. Even among Muslims not everyone was entitled to become caliph.118 This exception for the head of state does not mean that nonMuslims cannot work with the Muslim ruling elite and hold government positions, or that they are excluded from the political and administrative life of the state. Tritton, in his book The Caliphs and their Non-Muslim Subjects, mentions many examples where Muslims employed the People of the Book in governmental positions.119 Moreover, both al-Mawardi, and alFarra’, a Hanbali jurist, do not hesitate to support the view that the Caliph could appoint non-Muslim citizens as ministers and as members of executive councils.120 Therefore, excluding nonMuslims from the position of head of state is not discrimination, but a matter of eligibility for the post. It can be said, therefore, that the conclusion reached by some writers to the contrary is incorrect, since non-Muslims have never been classified as second- or third-class citizens. Finally, it should be noted that neither the Qur’an nor the prophetic traditions have ever disallowed Muslims from employing non-Muslims. The applicability of the dhimma system and jizyah tax in the contemporary world is an important subject. In my opinion, the dhimma pact that was applied in the past is no longer valid in the contemporary world, because, on the one hand, of the huge and complicated changes that have taken place in the rules, regulations and laws governing the relationships between nations and states in the international domain, and on the other hand, the changed relationship between the state and its diverse

ISLAMIC SOURCES AND THE TREATMENT OF NON-MUSLIMS

33

citizens. If the dhimma pact is to be applied in today’s world, then we would need to differentiate between two different cases. First, if the dhimma pact is to be utilized in international law as a mechanism to prevent and end conflict, then the traditional dhimma pact and jizyah tax are inapplicable, as most countries do not recognize this Islamic system. The dhimma pact should therefore be developed to suit the requirements of international law and without the stipulation for jizyah, an option that is juristically permissible in Islam.121 Second, on a national level the dhimma pact and jizyah tax are still applicable, but their names must be changed, for example, to social tax, citizen’s contribution, etc. It is well known that non-Muslim citizens in Muslim countries today participate in their nation’s military forces; in these circumstances non-Muslims should be particularly exempt from paying this kind of tax.122 Finally, because a state or country ought to implement equality among its citizens, non-Muslim citizens should be asked to participate in national expenditure in the same way as Muslims did when they paid zakah. Rights and Obligations of Dhimmis Once the leader of a Muslim state agrees with non-Muslims on the dhimma pact, non-Muslims become eligible for a number of rights (huquq) and benefits. Muslim scholars have discussed the rights of dhimmis extensively. For example, Imam al-Mawardi asserted that the leader, being an authority on the Muslim state, must impose jizyah on all People of the Book who come under dhimmi protection, so that they can be considered residents in Dar al-Islam, the House of Islam The payment of jizyah assured them two rights. First, dhimmis would be left in peace; second, their domestic security would be assured and their defence from external attack guaranteed.123 Abu Yusuf advised Caliph Harun al-Rashid on the rights of non-Muslims: O Amir of the Faithful, it is necessary that you should show kindness to the dhimmis of your Prophet Muhammad and you should keep an eye on them so they are not

34

ISLAMIC JERUSALEM AND ITS CHRISTIANS

oppressed or persecuted, nor is anything imposed upon them beyond their capacity; nor should anything be taken from their properties except with justification which is incumbent upon them. It has been related to the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) that he said, ‘whoever oppresses one with whom a treaty has been made, or imposes on him a burden beyond his capacity, then he will have to answer me on the Day of Judgment’. Furthermore, the Holy Prophet’s talk with ‘Umar Ibn alKhattab at the time of his death, contained ‘I commend to the caliph after me that he exercise good treatment on those who are under the Prophet’s protection. He should keep to the covenant with them, fight those who are after them, and do not tax them beyond their capacity’.124 Ibn Juzay (d. 741 AH/ 1340 CE) states that Muslims should allow dhimmis to live in the Muslim state, and assure them of protection regarding their lives and property. Also, Muslims should not interfere with the churches of Christian dhimmis or with their lifestyle, such as drinking wine and eating pork, as long as they did not do this in public.125 Non-Muslims should be left alone to be governed by their own personal laws, and Muslim state should not interfere with these. There are many verses in the Qur’an, along with prophetic traditions, that prohibit Muslims from showing injustice and from attacking others in general. The first Muslim caliphs used to ask about the situation of non-Muslims whenever nonMuslims from neighbouring provinces came to Madinah. When any complaint came from a non-Muslim, they would give the matter urgent attention in order to ensure that justice was done. For instance, Caliph ‘Umar used to question delegates regarding the condition of non-Muslims. He would ask whether any Muslim had hurt the feelings of non-Muslims in their provinces. Once he asked a delegate to tell him about the treatment of nonMuslims at the hands of Muslims in their towns and homes. The delegate replied: ‘they fulfil their pledge by exercising only fair treatment’.126

ISLAMIC SOURCES AND THE TREATMENT OF NON-MUSLIMS

35

Furthermore, al-Qaradawi believes that there is a consensus among scholars of the different juristic schools regarding the obligation of Muslims to protect dhimmis and support them, because when Muslims concluded the dhimma pact, they undertook to protect non-Muslims from internal oppression, as they had become citizens of the Muslim state. He quotes Ibn ‘Abdin a well-known Hanafi jurist, in support of his view that oppressing a dhimmi was a greater sin than oppressing a Muslim.127 Imam al-Qarafi quotes Ibn Hazm from the latter’s book, Maratib al-Ijma‘: If enemies at war come to our country aiming at a certain dhimmi, it is essential for us that we come out to fight them with all our might and weapons since he is under the protection of God and his messenger. If we did anything less than this, it means we have failed in our agreement for protection.128 Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728 AH/1328 CE), a well-known Syrian jurist uses the example of his request to the leader of the Tartar invasion of Syria, asking him to spare the suffering of his people. The Tartar leader agreed to this in regard to Muslims, but refused to treat non-Muslims (mostly the Christians taken from Islamic Jerusalem) in the same way. Ibn Taymiyyah said that this would not please the Muslims, since the Jewish and Christian families were under their protection. On the insistence of Ibn Taymiyyah, all non-Muslim prisoners of war, including Jews and Christians, were released.129 According to Imam al-Mawardi, there are two kinds of conditions in the dhimma pact. The first is obligatory and the second is recommended. He divides the obligations (wajibat) into six conditions, as follows:130 1. Not to disparage or misquote the Book of God. 2. Not to accuse the Prophet of lying or speak of him disparagingly.

36

ISLAMIC JERUSALEM AND ITS CHRISTIANS

3. Not to speak of the religion of Islam with slander or calumny. 4. Not to approach a Muslim woman to commit fornication or with a view to marriage. 5. Not to try and undermine the faith of a Muslim believer in his religion or cause harm to Muslim assets and property or to the religion of Islam. 6. Not to help the enemy or any of their spies. Ibn Qudama (d. 630 AH /1233 CE), a Hanbali jurist, states in his book al-Mughni that the dhimmis’ obligations can be summarized in five points:131 1. Paying jizyah and accepting the laws of Islam with regard to non-Muslims. 2. Not to harm Muslims in their lives and property, that is, not to beat Muslims or steal from them. 3. Not to denigrate or misquote the Book of God. Not to accuse the Prophet of lying or speak of him disparagingly, and not to slander or defame the religion of Islam. 4. To try and avoid those things prohibited by Muslims, such as drinking alcohol in Muslim public places. 5. To be distinct from Muslims by means of an identifying mark, and wearing distinctive clothes. In discussing the obligations, Imam al-Farra’ said they should not hurt Muslims or cause harm to their assets or religion, and summarized them as follows: 1. Not to gather in preparation to fight against Muslims. 2. Not to approach a Muslim woman to commit fornication. 3. Not to marry a Muslim woman. 4. Not to undermine a Muslim’s faith in his religion. 5. Not to commit a highway robbery. 6. Not to support a spy. 7. Not to write to the enemy about the situation of the Muslims. 8. Not to kill a Muslim man or woman.132

ISLAMIC SOURCES AND THE TREATMENT OF NON-MUSLIMS

37

It is obvious that a citizen in any state must have a set of rights and, in return, certain obligations. These rights and obligations keep in society in balance and guide the state in its dealings with individuals and groups. In the case of dhimmi citizens, the above rights seem to be fair and to indicate the spirit of tolerance in Islam. They are also clear signs that Islam works to fulfil its commitment to all citizens regardless. Muslims have obligations towards the Muslim state, such as obedience and military service, and it is logical that dhimmis should have obligations as well. For example, because Muslims follow the instruction of a divine book, the Qur’an, one of the obligations of dhimmis is that they are not allowed to speak badly of the Qur’an. This seems to be a reasonable requirement. Guidelines from the Sunnah As a result of his leadership role, the Prophet, as well as being a messenger and legislator, put the theoretical concepts of the Qur’anic verses into practice in his speech and daily life. He began to apply the ‘Dos and Don’ts’ of the Qur’an in regard to non-Muslims, in accordance with the priority of establishing peace and cooperation between Muslims and others. Obviously, precepts without practice would result in mere idealism that would cease to influence people’s lives.133 Five main cases illustrate the attitude of the Prophet Muhammad towards nonMuslims: • • • • •

The migration to Abyssinia The constitution of Madinah The Prophet’s letters to non-Muslim leaders Treaties with the People of the Book The practices of the Prophet

The migration to Abyssinia When the Prophet Muhammad began his prophetic mission to call others to Islam, he and his followers faced immense opposition. This turned into a persecution so great that the

38

ISLAMIC JERUSALEM AND ITS CHRISTIANS

Prophet advised his followers to migrate to Abyssinia and seek the protection of the Christian king Negus (Najashi). The situation became extremely grave, and by the middle of the fifth year of the prophethood it was no longer tolerable.134 Umm Salamah, who was among the group who migrated to Abyssinia, reported that: When the Prophet Muhammad saw the affliction of his companions, though he escaped it because of his standing with God and his uncle Abu Talib, he could not protect them. The Prophet said to his companions: ‘I propose that you migrate to Abyssinia, where there is a Christian king, well known for his justice. He is said to have not wronged any one in his kingdom and it is a friendly country, until such time as God shall relieve you from your distress’. Therefore his companions went to Abyssinia, being afraid of apostasy, and fled to God with their religion.135 The Muslims who migrated (including 83 adult males) were hospitably treated by the Christian king and allowed to practice their religion, as Prophet Muhammad had expected. They encountered gracious hospitality from the Christians in Abyssinia. This was the first migration of Islam.136 Its significance lay in that it was to a country ruled by a just Christian king. This highlights some of the most profound principles of Islam. First, at that time Muslims and Christians were not in a state of conflict or hatred; and second, even though Muslims had differences with Christians, the latter were viewed as being allies with them against the injustice of the Makkan unbelievers. In fact, the Qur’an137 and the Prophet had highlighted these facts on several occasions, as explained below. It is important to emphasize that the principled behaviour shown by Muslims to the People of the Book was the reason why they were so favoured by the Christian king and welcomed in a Christian land. This Muslim migration to Abyssinia opened the first chapter in Christian-Muslim relations.

ISLAMIC SOURCES AND THE TREATMENT OF NON-MUSLIMS

39

The constitution of Madinah On his arrival in Madinah from Makkah, the Prophet Muhammad started to build the basis for relations between the first Muslim state and its non-Muslim inhabitants. He began by applying the principles of good relations and cooperation. There was a substantial Jewish community in Madinah, and the Prophet wrote a document about the immigrants (al-muhajirun) and the helpers (al-ansar), in which he proposed an agreement between them and the Jews. This agreement spelled out the Jews’ rights as non-Muslim citizens in the Muslim state. As a result, the Prophet managed to establish in Madinah a multifaith political community, based on a set of universal principles that formed the Constitution of Madinah (sahifat al-Madinah). Developing a constitution to regulate the internal and external affairs of the city was one of the major contributions of the Prophet and his companions in Madinah, and can be considered a turning point for its inhabitants. This remarkable work was developed and administrated by the Prophet during the first year of his arrival. The task, with its many civil, judicial and political articles, including defence and alliance, had to be coordinated and approved by the leaders of eleven Jewish tribes, by leaders of the Arab tribes in and around the city and by the Muslims themselves. The constitution was based on cooperation, maintaining virtue and preventing evil. Regarded as the first-ever written constitution, the document stated reciprocal obligations as follows: In the name of God the Compassionate, the Merciful; this is a document from Muhammad the Prophet [governing the relations] between the believers and the Muslims of Quraysh and Yathrib and those who are to follow and join them … The Jews shall contribute to the cost of war so long as they are fighting alongside the believers. The Jews of the Banu ‘Awf are one community with the believers (the Jews have their religion and the Muslims have theirs), their freemen and their persons except those who behave unjustly and sinfully, for they hurt only themselves and

40

ISLAMIC JERUSALEM AND ITS CHRISTIANS

their families. The same applies to the Jews of the Banu alNajjar, Banu al-Harith, Banu Sa‘ida, Banu Jusham, Banu alAws, Banu Tha‘labah, and the Jafna, a clan of the Tha‘labah and the Banu al-Shutayba. Loyalty is a protection against treachery. The freemen of Tha‘labah are as themselves. The close friends of the Jews are as themselves. None of them shall go out to war save with the permission of Muhammad, but anyone shall not be prevented from taking revenge for a wound. He who slays a man without warning slays himself and his household, unless it be one who has wronged him, for God will accept that. The Jews must bear their expenses and the Muslims their expenses. Each must help the other against anyone who attacks the people of this document. They must seek mutual advice and consultation, and loyalty is a protection against treachery. A man is not liable for his ally’s misdeeds. The wronged must be helped. The Jews must pay with the believers so long as war lasts. Yathrib shall be a sanctuary for the people of his document. A stranger under protection shall be as his host doing no harm and committing no crime. A woman shall only be given protection with the consent of her family. If any dispute or controversy likely to cause trouble should arise it must be referred to God and to Muhammad the apostle of God. God accepts what is nearest to piety and goodness in this document. Quraysh and their helpers shall not be given protection. The contracting parties are bound to help one another against any attack on Yathrib. If they are called to make peace and maintain it they must do so; and if they make a similar demand on the Muslims it must be carried out except in the case of a holy war. Every one shall have his portion from the side to which he belongs; the Jews of al-Aws, their freemen and themselves have the same standing with the people of this document in pure loyalty from the people of this document. Loyalty is a protection against treachery: He who acquires aught acquires it for himself. God approves of this document. This deed will not protect the unjust and the sinner. The

ISLAMIC SOURCES AND THE TREATMENT OF NON-MUSLIMS

41

man who goes forth to fight and the man who stays at home in the city is safe unless he has been unjust and sinned. God is the protector of the good and God -fearing man and Muhammad is the apostle of God.138 The rules enunciated in the constitution were aimed at maintaining peace and cooperation, protecting the life and property of the inhabitants of Madinah, fighting aggression and injustice regardless of tribal or religious affiliation, and ensuring freedom of religion and movement. It supported community defence against enemies and promoted justice, goodness and resistance to evil. Jews and Muslims lived side by side in peace for many years. In discussing this treaty, al-Mubarakpuri noted that it came within the context of a larger framework of Muslim relationships. He summarized the most important provisions of the treaty in twelve points:139 1. The Jews of Banu ‘Awf are one community with the believers. The Jews will profess their religion and the Muslim theirs. 2. The Jews shall be responsible for their expenditure, and the Muslims for theirs. 3. If attacked by a third party, each shall come to the assistance of the other. 4. Each party shall hold counsel with the other. Mutual relations shall be founded on righteousness; sin is totally excluded. 5. Neither shall commit sins to the prejudice of the other. 6. The wronged party shall be assisted. 7. The Jews shall contribute to the cost of war so long as they are fighting alongside the believers. 8. Madinah shall remain sacred and inviolable for all that join this treaty. 9. Should any disagreement arise between the signatories to this treaty, then God, the all-High, and His Messenger shall settle the dispute.

42

ISLAMIC JERUSALEM AND ITS CHRISTIANS

10. The signatories to this treaty shall boycott the Quraish commercially; they shall also abstain from extending any support to them. 11. Each shall contribute to defending Madinah, in case of a foreign attack, in its respective area. 12. This treaty shall not hinder either party from seeking lawful revenge. Al-Buti attempted to explain the significance of this constitution by referring to a major clause: ‘The Jews of the Banu ‘Awf are one community with the believers (the Jews have their religion and the Muslims have theirs), their freemen and themselves except those who behave unjustly and sinfully, for they hurt but themselves.’ He comments that this is a clear and straightforward text showing that the Muslim state – Madinah – is a partnership between two different groups, Muslims and Jews.140 No one would be excluded from this partnership except those who behaved unjustly. The appeal of this is that ‘except those’ does not apply only to Jews, but to everyone resident in Madinah. He argues that when the constitution of Madinah states: ‘The Jews, of the Banu ‘Awf are one community with the believers’, it did not mean that they were part of the Muslim community. If this was the case, it would be a clear statement that their identity was merged into the Muslim state. However, the constitution gave them the right to be an independent community inside the Muslim state. Furthermore, al-Buti adds that other clauses in this constitution assign equality of duties and rights to all the inhabitants of the Muslim state, and none of the clauses is derived from religious differences. Hamidullah goes further, saying that with this constitution the autonomous Jewish villages acceded of their free will to the confederal state, and as a result recognised Prophet Muhammad as their supreme political head. He says this implies that nonMuslim citizens possessed voting rights in electing the head of the Muslim state.141 It is remarkable that the Madinah constitution placed rules of justice over and above religious solidarity, and affirmed the right

ISLAMIC SOURCES AND THE TREATMENT OF NON-MUSLIMS

43

to justice of the victims of aggression irrespective of tribal or religious affiliation. Of course, any newly established state must work hard to integrate all inhabitants regardless of religion, race or colour, in order to ensure the state’s continuation and stability. El-Awaisi argues that core Muslim teachings reject the philosophy of a conflict based on eliminating the other party so that the victor could have the stage to himself.142 He adds that: As confirmation of that idea, Islam favoured another method, namely tadafu‘ or counterbalance, as a means of adjusting positions using movement instead of conflict…This conflict-free method is what Islamic teachings see as a means of preserving a non-Muslim presence in this life. Tadafu‘ is not only to preserve Muslim’s sacred places, but to preserve the sacred places of others. The Qur’an says: ‘And if God had not counterbalanced (duf‘u) some people’s deeds by others, there surely would have been pulled down monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques, in which the name of God is commemorated in abundant measure.’ This means that, from a Muslim point of view, tadafu‘ is the means of preserving a plurality of sacred places or the plurality of religions.143 Moreover, one of the aims of Islam is to provide a peaceful life based on mutual respect. At the time there were no Christians in Madinah, but the Prophet would have established with them an agreement similar to the Madinah constitution, with the same conditions, had they been living in the city. The Prophet’s blueprint for a plural society carries the same moral authority as any other of his practices. The principles of Islam were intended to apply in all places where Muslims lived alongside the followers of other religions. To conclude, the Prophet’s treatment of the People of the Book, in this case Jews, showed religious tolerance as well as prudence. The constitution established the pattern for future relations in the Muslim state between Muslims and non-

44

ISLAMIC JERUSALEM AND ITS CHRISTIANS

Muslims. The basic principle was religious tolerance and noninterference in the religious affairs of the non-Muslim group. The constitution recognized freedom of religion for all citizens. It made non-Muslim citizens equal partners with the Muslim inhabitants of Madinah in the material wealth and progress of the Muslim state. It gave rights of protection, security, peace and justice not only to Muslims, but also to Jews who lived in Madinah, as well as to allies of the Jews who were non-Muslims. It allowed Jews to practice their religion freely. The Prophet’s letters to non-Muslim leaders According to Muslim belief, the call of Islam must reach everybody.144 Therefore, Muslim conquests and the spread of Islam outside Arabia were merely a fulfilment of divine command. During the sixth year of hijrah (the migration of the Prophet and other Muslims to Madinah) the Prophet sent letters to several kings and rulers beyond Arabia (including the two superpowers, the Byzantines and the Persians), calling on them to accept Islam. He wrote to Negus, King of Abyssinia (Ethiopia); the Viceregent of Egypt; Chosroes, Emperor of Persia; Caesar, Emperor of Rome; Mundhir Ibn Sawa, Governor of Bahrain; Haudha Ibn ‘Ali, Governor of Yamamah; Harith Ibn Shammer al-Ghassani, King of Damascus; Jaifer, King of Oman and his brother ‘Abd al-Jalandi.145 The style of these letters is almost the same, with slight variations. In his letter to Heraclius, king of Byzantium, the Prophet states: In the name of God, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful. From Muhammad, the servant of God and his Messenger, to Heraclius, king of Byzantines. Blessed are those who follow true guidance. I invite you to embrace Islam so that you may live in security. If you come within the fold of Islam, God will give you double reward, but in the case where you turn your back upon it, then the burden of the sins of all your people shall fall on your shoulders. [The message then quotes the following Qur’anic verse] ‘Say O People of the Book! Come to common terms as

ISLAMIC SOURCES AND THE TREATMENT OF NON-MUSLIMS

45

between us and you: that we worship none but God; that we associate no partners with Him; and that none of us shall take others as lords besides God.’ If then they turn back, say ye: ‘bear witness that we (at last) are Muslims (bowing to God’s will).146 In the letter to the King of Abyssinia, he wrote: This letter is sent from Muhammad, the Prophet to Negus al-Ashama, King of Abyssinia. Peace be upon him who follows true guidance and believes in God and His Messenger. I bear witness that there is no god but God Alone with no associate. He has taken neither a wife nor a son, and that Muhammad is His slave and Messenger. I call you unto the fold of Islam; if you embrace Islam, you will find safety, O People of the Book! Come to common terms as between us and you: that we worship none but God; that we associate no partners with Him; and that none of us shall take others as lords besides God. If then they turn back, say ye: ‘bear witness that we are Muslims’ [bowing to God’s Will]. Should you reject this invitation, then you will be held responsible for all the sins of the Christians of your people. 147 King Negus of Abyssinia and the Vicegerent of Egypt welcomed the invitation;148 Negus and the ruler of Bahrain accepted Islam, and Emperor Heraclius acknowledged Muhammad’s prophethood, but replied that his nation would not be adopting Islam, and the Emperor of Persia tore the letter into shreds.149 These letters to leaders and kings show the Prophet’s respect for their rank. On the other hand, he called himself the servant of and the messenger of God. The Prophet also emphasized the common areas of belief, rather than any differences. Lastly, he managed to communicate the message of Islam to most kings and leaders of that time. While some accepted the message and others did not, the idea of embracing Islam and the arrival of a new prophet preoccupied all of them.

46

ISLAMIC JERUSALEM AND ITS CHRISTIANS

Treaties with the People of the Book In addition to sending letters, Prophet Muhammad continued to build new relations by concluding a number of treaties with the People of the Book. He entered into many alliances with nonMuslims, securing peace and tranquillity for Muslim and nonMuslim alike. Muslim historians noted these treaties. For example, Imam Abu Yusuf and al-Baladhuri reported several pacts made by the Prophet Muhammad with the People of the Book living in Najran, Tabalah, Jarash, Ayla, Adhruh, Maqna,150 al-Jarbah, Yemen and Oman, in which they were promised protection of their lives, rights, property and beliefs in return for paying jizyah. The text of the pact with the Christians of Najran, who lived in southern Arabia north-east of Yemen in the midst of an idolatrous tribe, is typical: In the name of God, the Compassionate and Merciful, this is what Muhammad the Prophet of God wrote to the people of Najran, when they were under his command … And for the people of Najran and its bordering country, there is the protection of God and the compact of Muhammad the Prophet (regarding their property, their lives, their land and their people, whether present or absent, in their families and their trade, whether great or small. No Bishop will be forced to renounce his bishopric nor any monk will be asked to forsake his monastery nor any diviner abandon his profession. None of them will be subjected to humiliation. There will be no retaliation for the bloodshed committed in preIslamic times. They will not be made to suffer any loss; they will not be reduced to destitution. No troops will trample upon their land. If any of them claims his right, justice will be done to him: neither will he be wronged, nor will he be allowed to do any wrong to others. I will not be responsible if any of the governors devours usury and no man will be taken to task on account of wrong done by others. Whatever this document contains has the protection of

ISLAMIC SOURCES AND THE TREATMENT OF NON-MUSLIMS

47

God and the protection of the Prophet till God issues some other command so long as people discharge their duties rightly and do not attempt to flee away after doing wrong. Abu Sufyan Ibn Harb, Ghailan Ibn ‘Amr Malik Ibn ‘Awf from Banu Nasr, Aqra’ Ibn Habis Al-Hanzali and Mughira Ibn Shu‘bah witnessed the document. This document was written for them by ‘Abdallah Ibn Abu Bakr.151 Prophet Muhammad signed a similar pact with the Christians of Ayla (al-‘Aqabah, in southern Jordan). He first sent a letter to Yuhanna, the Christian chief of Ayla, inviting him to come to terms with Islam and offering conditions for peace: To Yuhanna Ibn Ru’ba and the chiefs of the people of Ayla. Peace be upon you. Praise be to God, besides whom there is no god. I shall not fight you until I have written to you. Accept Islam or pay the jizyah, and obey God and His Prophet and the messengers of the Prophet …152 Yuhanna accepted the conditions and hastened to the Prophet Muhammad’s camp. A treaty was concluded between them, as follows: In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful; This is a guarantee from God and from the Prophet Muhammad, the messenger of God, to Yuhanna Ibn Ru’ba and the People of Ayla; for their vessels and their travellers is the security of God and Muhammad, the messenger of God, and for who are with them, whether from al-Sham [Syria] or Yemen or from the sea-coast; those who breach this pact by causing a grave event (hadath), their wealth will not save them; they will be the fair price of whosoever captures them; it will be unlawful to prevent them [the people of Ayla] from going to the springs of water, or to stop them from the road they follow, by land or by sea.153

48

ISLAMIC JERUSALEM AND ITS CHRISTIANS

This demonstrates the practical application of the Prophet Muhammad’s pacts or treaties with the People of the Book. First, once they had accepted the agreements, they became part of the Muslim state and benefited from its protection. It should be noted that new terms appeared in these pacts – the jizyah tax and the concept of the dhimma pact and dhimmis. Non-Muslims agreed to pay jizyah, and in return the Prophet granted them freedom to practice their religion and live a peaceful life under the protection of the Muslim state. In addition, it can be seen from his actions that the Prophet Muhammad provided excellent facilities for non-Muslims. He highlighted the duties of Muslims towards non-Muslims, warned Muslims against mistreating dhimmis and threatened them that if they did so, God would punish them. For example, he said: He who hurts a dhimmi hurts me, and he who hurts me hurts Allah.154 Moreover, the Prophet asserted the significance of the pledge with non-Muslims: Whoever kills a person having a treaty with the Muslims, shall not smell the fragrance of paradise though its fragrance is perceived from a distance of forty years.155 Muslims were ordered to treat conquered people with warmth and love, and to be compassionate and understanding. The Prophet said: Do not kill an old man, a small child, or a woman. Do not commit acts of treachery nor make profits of the spoils of war.156 Release the captured, support whoever asks for help, feed the hungry, and visit the sick.157

ISLAMIC SOURCES AND THE TREATMENT OF NON-MUSLIMS

49

Let it be known, if any one including Muslims commits injustice, or insults, aggravates, mistreats or abuses a person of the People of the Book [protected by the state or by an agreement], he will have to answer me [or his immoral action] on the Day of Judgment.158 Years before the conquest of Egypt by the Muslims, the Prophet did not forget to instruct and advise Muslims on how they should treat non-Muslims, particularly the Copts. Ibn ‘Abd alHakam (d. 256 AH /817 CE) a Muslim historian, outlined ten traditions dealing with the Prophet’s advice. For example, one Hadith of the Prophet is: When you conquer Egypt, take good care of the Copts, and treat them well as they have a pledge (dhimmtan) and kinship (rahman).159 These sayings and practices of the Prophet Muhammad illustrate the commendable principles in the Muslim treatment of nonMuslims. An Overview of Jihad Although jihad holds an important position in Islam, it is not my intention to discuss its legislation or literature. My focus is on the important role of jihad in governing the relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims. This is a very large subject, and I refer interested readers to the literature of fiqh to learn more about it.160 The word jihad is derived from Arabic j-h-d, which means to struggle, strive, attempt, endeavour or make an effort. Jihad is also constructed from the Arabic word juhd, which means exerting one’s capacity and power in repelling the enemy to the best of one’s ability, whether by word or deed.161 The Qur’an says: O ye who believe! Shall I lead you to a bargain that will save you from a grievous Chastisement? That ye believe in

50

ISLAMIC JERUSALEM AND ITS CHRISTIANS

God and his Messenger, and that ye strive [your utmost] in the cause of God, with your wealth and your persons: that will be best for you, if ye but knew!162 Jihad has played a major role in Muslim treatment of nonMuslims. It is obvious from the above verse that Muslims are allowed to fight non-Muslims if the latter take up arms against them. A review of the prophetic traditions shows that the Prophet fought in only two situations. First, when Muslims were being attacked or when they expected an attack, such as knowing that an enemy was making preparations for attacking the Muslim community. The Prophet in his wisdom could not have waited until his people had been attacked. The Qur’an says: If then any one transgresses the prohib