The Preaching of Islam: A History of the Propagation of the Muslim FaithArnold, Thomas Walker, Sir
Islamic
The Preaching of Islam: A History of the Propagation of the Muslim Faith
Arnold, Thomas Walker, Sir
Islam -- History; Islam -- Missions -- History; Islam -- Relations
of their expressions of speech, [86] nor adopt their surnames; that we
will not ride on saddles, or gird on swords, or take to ourselves arms
or wear them, or engrave Arabic inscriptions on our rings; that we will
not sell wine; that we will shave the front of our heads; that we will
keep to our own style of dress, wherever we may be; that we will wear
girdles round our waists; that we will not display the cross upon our
churches or display our crosses or our sacred books in the streets of
the Muslims, or in their market-places; [87] that we will strike the
bells [88] in our churches lightly; that we will not recite our
services in a loud voice when a Muslim is present, that we will not
carry palm-branches or our images in procession in the streets, that at
the burial of our dead we will not chant loudly or carry lighted
candles in the streets of the Muslims or their market-places; that we
will not take any slaves that have already been in the possession of
Muslims, nor spy into their houses; and that we will not strike any
Muslim. All this we promise to observe, on behalf of ourselves and our
co-religionists, and receive protection from you in exchange; and if we
violate any of the conditions of this agreement, then we forfeit your
protection and you are at liberty to treat us as enemies and rebels.”
[89]
The earliest mention of this document is made by Ibn Ḥazm, who died in
the middle of the fifth century of the Hijrah; its provisions represent
the more intolerant practice of a later age, and indeed were
regulations that were put into force with no sort of regularity, some
outburst of fanaticism being generally needed for any appeal to be made
for their application. There is abundant evidence to show that the
Christians in the early days of the Muhammadan conquest had little to
complain of in the way of religious disabilities. It is true that
adherence to their ancient faith rendered them obnoxious to the payment
of jizyah—a word which originally denoted tribute of any kind paid by
the non-Muslim subjects of the Arab empire, but came later on to be
used for the capitation-tax as the fiscal system of the new rulers
became fixed; [90] but this jizyah was too moderate to constitute a
burden, seeing that it released them from the compulsory military
service that was incumbent on their Muslim fellow-subjects. Conversion
to Islam was certainly attended by a certain pecuniary advantage, but
his former religion could have had but little hold on a convert who
abandoned it merely to gain exemption from the jizyah; and now, instead
of jizyah, the convert had to pay the legal alms, zakāt, annually
levied on most kinds of movable and immovable property. [91] The
pecuniary temptation to escape the incidence of taxation by means of
conversion was considerably lessened when financial considerations
compelled the Arab government, towards the end of the first century, to
insist on the new converts continuing to pay jizyah even after they had
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account