|
It has always been said that the attitude of non-Muslim communities
towards Islamic rule is a critical and delicate question which many people
hesitate to discuss for fear of causing dissension between Muslims and
non-Muslims.
Let us be frank with the Christians of the Islamic East and put to them
these question: What do they fear from the rule of Islam? Are they afraid
of the holy texts of Islam or of the manner of their application? As for
the provisions, we may quote the Holy Qur’an:
“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 loveth those who are just” (60: 8); And
“The food of the people of the Book is lawful
unto you and yours is lawful unto them. (Lawful unto you in marriage) are
(not only) chaste women who are believers, but chaste women among the
people of the book” (5:5).
We should also refer to the general principle in Islamic jurisprudence:
“they shall have the same obligations and rights as we”. The Islamic holy
texts enjoin Muslims to treat non-Muslims in a kind and fair manner. Apart
from the rights and obligations involving worship, they are equal to
Muslims with respect to all other rights and obligations related to social
life and the rights of citizens. In addition, Islamic faith strives to
strengthen the links connecting the non-Muslims to visit them and to eat
their food, which is the custom of close friends.
Moreover, Islam tries to make the relationship grow closer by permitting
inter-marriage, the strongest social bond, between Muslims and
non-Muslims. As to the practical application of the Islamic holy texts we
had better quote a European Christian, who cannot be accused of bias or
prejudice, Sir T.W.Arnold in his book “The Preaching of Islam”.
“That force was not the determining factor in these conversions may be
judged from the amicable relations that existed between the Christian and
the Muslim Arabs. Muhammad himself had entered into treaty with several
Christian tribes, promising them his protection and guaranteeing them the
free exercise of their religion and to their clergy undisturbed enjoyment
of their old rights and authority”. (pp. 47-48).
He goes on to say:
“From the examples given above of the toleration extended towards the
Christian Arabs by the victorious Muslims of the first century of the
Hijrah and continued by succeeding generations, we may surely infer that
those Christian tribes that did embrace Islam, did so of their own choice
and free will”. (P.51).
“When the Muslim army reached the valley of Jordan and Abu Ubayda pitched
his camp at Fihl, the Christian inhabitants of the country wrote to the
Arabs, saying: “O Muslims, we prefer you to the Byzantines, though they
are of our own faith because you keep better faith with us and are more
merciful to us and refrain from doing us injustice and your rule over us
is better than theirs, for they have robbed us of our goods and our
homed”. (P.55).He also tells us:
“Such was the state of feeling in Syria during the campaign of 633-639 in
which the Arabs gradually drove the Roman army out of the province. And
when Damascus, in 637, set the example of making terms with the Arabs,
and thus secured immunity from plunder and other favourable conditions,
the rest of the cities of
Syria were not slow to
follow. Emessa, Arethusa, Hieropolis and other towns entered into treaties
whereby they became tributary to the Arabs.
Even the patriarch of
Jerusalem
surrendered the city on similar terms. The fear of religious compulsion on
the part of the heretical emperor made the promise of Muslim toleration
appear more attractive than the connection with the
Roman Empire and a Christian government, and after the first
terrors caused by the passage of an invading army, there succeeded a
profound revulsion of feeling in favour of the Arab conquerors.” (p.55).
This is the evidence given by a Christian scholar on Islam. What is it
then that the Christians fear from Islamic rule?
It may be that the Christians are afraid of Muslim fanaticism. If this is
true, it seems that they have no idea of what fanaticism is. Here are a
few examples of fanaticism. Courts of inquisition set up by the Christian
Church were primarily meant to exterminate the Muslims of Spain. The said
courts tortured Muslims in a monstrous way which had never been
experienced before. People were burned alive, their fingernails were
pulled off, their eyes were put out, and their limbs were amputated. This
torture was inflicted in order to force the people to change their
religion and adopt a particular Christian creed.
Have the Christians of Islamic East ever suffered
such treatment?
Massacres are carried out for the extermination of Muslims in Europe:
Yugoslavia, Albania, Russia or countries under European rule such as North
Africa, Somalia, Kenya, Zanzibar or in other countries: India and Malaya.
Such massacres are staged sometimes on the pretext of the purgation of
ranks and sometimes for the maintenance of peace and security.
Another significant example is the treatment of Muslims in
Ethiopia which has
ancient historical, geographical, cultural and religious links with Egypt.
It has a mixed population of Muslims and Christians. Although Muslims
account for 35% -65% of the total population there is not a single school
where Islamic faith or Arabic is taught
Private schools which the Muslims open at their own expenses are subjected
to exorbitant taxes and inconveniences which lead to their closing and
disheartening those who may think of opening new schools. In this way,
Islamic teaching is confined to a primitive way of teaching.
Until very recently – just before the Italian invasion – a Muslim who
could not pay a debt to his Christian creditor was taken in slavery by the
Ethiopian Christians. The Muslim was caught, sold and tortured under the
government’s sight. It goes without saying that there is not a single
Muslim in the cabinet or in any key post to represent the one – third of
the population. Have the Christians of the Islamic world ever experienced
such a treatment? Would they accept reciprocal treatment?
That is real fanaticism.
The communists believe that the real existence of man is essentially an
economic existence. If so, have the Christians living in Islamic countries
ever been denied the right to acquire and dispose of property or to amass
wealth? Have they ever been denied, on account of their religious belief,
the right to have education, to join public service or promotion to higher
public posts?
As for the moral and spiritual existence, it should be stressed that the
Christians living under Islamic rule have never been subjected to any form
of religious persecution with the exception of the very rare incidents
engendered by the British Colonialists for the purpose of sowing
dissension and diversion. It is alleged that the imposition of tribute on
no-Muslims is the result of religious discrimination. The best refutation
of this baseless accusation lies in the words of T.W.Arnold, who says:-
“On the other hand, when the Egyptian peasants, although Muslim in faith,
were made exempt from military service, a tax was imposed upon them as on
the Christians in lieu thereof”.
“As stated above, the jizyah was levied on the able-bodied males, in lieu
of the military service they would have been called upon to perform had
they been Musalmans; and it is very noticeable that when any Christian
people served in the Muslim army, they were exempted from the payment of
this tax. Such was the case with the tribe of al-Jurajimah, a Christian
tribe in the neighbourhood of
Antioch,
who made peace with the Muslims, promising them to be their allies and
fight on their side in battle, on condition that they should not be called
upon to pay jizyah and should receive their proper share of the booty”.
From this it is clear that the imposition of tribute is not the result of
any religious discrimination. The truth is that the tribute was imposed on
all those who did not take part in military service regardless of their
religious belief. It would be useful to refer in this respect to the
following Holy verse:
“ Fight those who believe not in God nor the Last Day, nor hold that
forbidden which hath been forbidden by God and His Apostle, nor
acknowledge the Religion of Truth (even if they are) of the People of the
Book, until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission and feel
themselves subdued”. (9: 29).
It should be pointed out that this verse refers to non-Muslims who wage
war against Islam. It does not apply to the non-Muslims living in Islamic
–countries.
In conclusion, I should like to warn that the seeds of dissention between
Muslims and non-Muslims living in Islamic countries are sown by
colonialists as well as by communists. The communist devils address each
community in accordance with its particular aspirations.
They address the working classes saying, “If you adopt communism we shall
hand over all factories to you” while speaking to peasants, they promise
to give them the lands. On talking to unemployed graduates they say, “If
you become communists you will get the jobs that fit in with your
qualifications”.
As for the youth suffering from sexual repression, the communists promise
them a free society, where every one can act as one likes without
intervention by law or subjection to traditions. The communists address
Christians in the following manner: “If you adopt communism we shall
destroy Islam, the religion that discriminates among people on account of
their religion”. But “It is a grievous thing that comes from their mouths
as a saying, for, what they say is nothing but falsehood” (18: 5).
It cannot be said that Islam distinguishes among people on account of
their religion because Islam confers the essential rights on all people
without any distinction. Islam brings all people together on a purely
human basis and at the same time guarantees them absolute freedom to adopt
the religion of their choice, under its own care and protection.
Besides, as the Christians of the East are also anxious to retain their
historical links with Muslims and protect their mutual interests, let us
hope that they would not listen to these propagandists or dissenters.
|