It should be pointed out here that while Jizya tax was collected from able-bodied non-Muslim adult males who did not volunteer to join war efforts in a Muslim-administered country, a similar form of war tax was also collected from able-bodied Muslim adult males who refused to join war efforts to defend the country. There was, therefore, no discrimination between able-bodied Muslim males and able-bodied non-Muslim males when it came to the payment of war-tax, as long as the person in question would not volunteer in war-efforts for defense of the Muslim-administered state. Zakat (2.5% of savings) and %u2018Ushr (10% of agricultural products) were collected from all Muslims, who owned some wealth (beyond a certain minimum, called Nisab). They also had to pay sadaqah, fitrah and Khums. None of these taxes were collected from any non-Muslim. As a matter of fact, the per capita tax collection from Muslims was several fold that of non-Muslims. I would also like to state here that before the advent of Islam in India, Rajputs living in western India used to collect a similar form of Jizya or war tax which they called "Fix" tax. (Ref: Early History of India by Vincent Smith) War tax was not a sole monopoly among the Indian or Muslim rulers. Historian Dr. Tripathy mentions a number of countries in Europe where war-tax was practiced. (Ref: Some Aspects of Muslim Administration by Sri Tripathy)
RE:THE GREAT MOGHUL EMPEROR - AURAGAZEB
by JATIN HALDANKAR on Jul 27, 2007 03:50 PM Permalink
JIZIYA is not a tax as many people think .its a set of around 20 restrictions to be imposed on non-muslim subjects in a country occupied by muslims. the terms were set by caliph umar when he invaded egypt and subjugated christians and jews. in india, jiziya was applied to Hindus , sikhs, buddhist and jains.. those who pay jiziya are called Dhimmi which means subjugated , miserable , inferior.
the terms of jiziya are as follows..
1. Display of non-Muslim religious symbols was prohibited on buildings and on clothing.
2. Loud prayers were forbidden.
3. Dhimmis were prohibited from proselytizing.they were also forbidden from preventing a dhimmi from being converted to islam.
4. Dhimnmis were prohibited fromn publishing or sale of non-Muslim religious literature and a ban on teaching the Qur%u2019an.
5. Dhimmis had to bury their dead without loud lamentations and prayers.
6. Dhimmis were not to rebuild or repair destroyed temples.
7. Dhimmi testimony and oaths were not valid against Muslims.On the other hand, Muslims could testify against Dhimmis.
8. Dhimmis had no right to bear arms of any kind.
9. Dhimmis were forbidden to ride horses or camels; they were only allowed to ride donkeys.
10.Dhimmis could not to build houses higher than those of Muslims.
11.Dhimmi man could not marry a Muslim woman.
12.Dhimmis had to build their houses away from muslim localities.
RE:THE GREAT MOGHUL EMPEROR - AURAGAZEB
by JATIN HALDANKAR on Jul 27, 2007 03:46 PM Permalink
The Jaziyah argument cuts both ways, if as the author claims that it's a tax that non-Muslims have to pay for not joining the army, then that forces the poorer sections of society to convert or join the arm y therefore inflating the Hindu numbers in the army. This conclusively proves that the whole aim of Aurangzeb's re imposition of Jaziyah was win-win for him. Get the Hindus to convert or at least get them to fight other Hindus and convert them.
These were alliances of convenience (in fact Indians should take note what happens when they fight amongst themselves). Aurangzeb had made the titles hereditary and the Hindu Zamindars wanted to legitimise their rule. Tactically this was a smart move by Aurangzeb to get the Hindus rulers into his orbit by getting them onside and then sorting them out one by one, divide and rule. Jaswant Singh is a case in point, just after he died all temples in his kingdom were destroyed. Earlier the mansabdari system too was created to incorporate these "civilized" and settled centres of society, by Akbar, it was based on sem-meritocracy to enable non-muslims to rise to a position of some power. Aurangzeb simply used it as a divide and rule instrument.
