Now let us deal with Aurangzeb%u2019s imposition of Jizya tax which had drawn severe criticism from many Hindu historians. It is true that Jizya was lifted during the reign of Akbar and Jahangir and that Aurangzeb later reinstated this. Before I delve into the subject of Aurangzeb%u2019s Jizya tax, or taxing the non-Muslims, it is worthwhile to point out that Jizya is nothing more than a war tax which was collected only from able-bodied young non-Muslim male citizens living in a Muslim country who did not want to volunteer for the defense of the country. That is, no such tax was collected from non-Muslims who volunteered to defend the country. This tax was not collected from women, and neither from immature males nor from disabled or old male citizens. For payment of such taxes, it became incumbent upon the Muslim government to protect the life, property and wealth of its non-Muslim citizens. If for any reason the government failed to protect its citizens, especially during a war, the taxable amount was returned. 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 p
RE:THE GREAT MOGHUL EMPEROR - AURAGAZEB
by JATIN HALDANKAR on Jul 27, 2007 03:49 PM Permalink
RE:THE GREAT MOGHUL EMPEROR - AURANGZEB by JATIN HALDANKAR on Jul 10, 2007 05:17 PM Well first of all Jiziya was not a war tax at all , it was a tax to humiliate non-muslims. it can't be compared to war taxes imposed by rajputs, the rajput tax used to applied before war to raise additional money for preparing for war with muslims.it was for the countrys defence.while jiziya was an extortion. it was paid to save oneself from being killed or forcibly converted to islam.when payment of jiziya ceased,jihad resumed.
iam quoting a few verses from islams holy books:
Sura 9:29 ------------------ stipulates that jizya be exacted from non-Muslims as a condition required for jihad to cease. Failure to pay the jizya could result in the pledge of protection of a dhimmi's life and property becoming void, with the dhimmi facing the alternatives of conversion, enslavement or death (or imprisonment, as advocated by Abu Yusuf, the chief qadi %u2014 religious judge %u2014 of Abbasid caliph Harun al-Rashid).
Ibn Kathir on Sura 9:29,
--------------------- writes that dhimmis must be:
disgraced, humiliated and belittled. Therefore, Muslims are not allowed to honor the people of the dhimma or elevate them above Muslims, for they [dhimmis] are miserable, disgraced, and humiliated.[107] Al-Muwatta --------------
RE:THE GREAT MOGHUL EMPEROR - AURAGAZEB
by JATIN HALDANKAR on Jul 27, 2007 03:52 PM Permalink
Zakat is a religious duty, but Jizyah is discrimination and way to eventually convert non-muslims to Islam. The two are very different. Taxation was a concern for non-Muslims who were paying a higher tax than the zakat tax paid by Muslims. It was also an important factor persuading many dhimmis to convert to Islam, though during the first century after the Arab conquest of Syria and Palestine conversion to Islam was not encouraged "partly because the jizyah constituted an important source of state revenue"
