What is origin of Jazia? Why people should be taxed for honestly following different faith?
Isn’t jazia inhuman?
Zazia is definately inhuman. I have seem many muslims on this forum justifying it. The people who support zazia should be asked to pay special tax to live in non-muslim countries.
I have heard this explanation:
In a muslim country the muslim citizens are called upon to defend their state, which can be a risky undertaking. I believe that at one time it was the duty of every able bodied man to do this. Non-muslims living in a muslim stae, while protected by the state, are not required for defensive purposes, therefore they are expected to compensate by pating this tax.
Now this reason has been forgotten and is usually no longer applicable but the memories and traditions persist. Many misinterpretations on both sides have caused a lot of hatred and misunderstanding. I am not justifying the jaziya, I wanted to explain its origins.
Hussain,
that made perfect sense. it also explains why Akbar abolished Jizya, he was using hindus too in his troops.
As far as I remember, Hindus do not even qualify for jazia. It is death or Islam kinda choice. Cuz, hindus are considere 'zimmis' or idol-worshippers or pagans. take ur pick.
wasnt that only under some demented rulers like Aurangazeb or the Arabs? Most of the muslim rulers of India didnt try that stuff..
Fifth Sikh guru 'Guru Arjan Dev Ji' was tortured and killed by Jahangir because he refused to become muslim. With the exception of Akbar all the muslim rulers collected zajia and forcible conversions.
ZZ, this is the origin of Jazz music. No country applies it anymore, even the staunchest of Islamic countries, e.g., Iran, there is no such practice. One can argue that tax on foreigners, for example in India, is no different than the concept of Jazia. India charges a hefty Visa fee (I am told $100 to visit there), and there are different rates for services provided to Foreigners vs locals. I think India borrowed the idea from Jazia concept.
Let’s talk about more contemporary music.
that might be true, but it would be wrong to blame muslims of the sub-continent for what a handful of tyrant rulers did. also, i have heard that there were muslims in Guru Arjun Singh's army who fought alongside the sikhs against jahangir's army. it probably had a good deal of political element, jehangir being scared of the rising sikh power..
Nobody is blaming anyone. But this is what Pakistanis should realize while singing glory to history of Islam in subcontinent. They should realize barabarism, intolerace and abuse of force inflicted on local population in course of time in stead of claiming that sufi saints converted Hindus by pleading (and simulataneously sufis are not good muslims, wahabis are).
With blinkers on their eyes, they would shout hoarse on Babbri mosque incident, but ghazanavi remains a hero. 'butshikan', idol-breaker remains a praise. liberalism remains a tabboo.
I would not have got in game of analyzing Islam, but they asked for it.
Dear ZZ, everyone is guilty of baptismizing his or her wrong deeds. What makes you think that Ghaznavi was a Hero? If you ask me, he was a tyrant of the first degree. There were no Heroes, and all of us are losers. But let’s view the situation in some context. The atrocities committed by Muslim invaders in India are no different than any other colonial expedition. The magic lies in getting out of box where such experiences shove one’s in. To start blaming history for misdeeds and mismanagement of our society, we remain in that box called ignorance. If there are issue that are result of our colonial past, the only way forward is to think of solutions to get out of it. The only thing that is explicit about history is that there are no ifs or buts, it just happened. There is lots of things one can do to patch up relations. Trivializing the past is not one of them.
I was just pointing out the skewed viewpoint on history that Pakistanis seem to have. You dont have it. There could be few others who dont. But official pakistani history, as I has been said in Pakistani newspapers praises the vandalism of Gahazanavi and does not talk of tyranny of Aurangzeb.
The difference between other colonial expeditions with that of Muslims is that others were not condoned by religion. Bible does not teach to cut the hands of Dhaka artisans if English cloths cant compete with locally made cloths. British did it. And they are not proud of it.
The other colonial conquests did not leve legacy of victims, afterall people who converted were mainly victims, praising how great their tormentors were. And did not have seal of approval from the faith. There wont be a single voice of dissent from a single mosque if Pak uses nukes on India or Israel. Basic human values are but forgotten in current Islam.
The other colonial conquests did not leve legacy of victims<<<
Dear ZZ, I have a very strong reaction to the above statement. I don’t want to go further on it but I will simply say that Colonialism is synonymous with Victimization Grossness, and Savageness. I would argue that not a single experience of Colonialism exists without brutalization of indigenous cultures. I can point to you over two million such incidences in History of mankind, and I am talking about Roman, Greeks, and Egyptians (much before the introduction of Monotheism).
In terms of Pakistan nuking India or Israel, it is as much to do with religion as was the partition of India. It were political egotists in play behind the religious mask. If you think that Mosques will condone nuke attack on India or Israel, it remains to be seen. The problem in Pakistan is “ignorance” and not a religious hype. When people are educated about the consequences of nuke attack, they will not want it. They are simply left in the dark, and one day they will rise up to the occasion and realize that they need clean water and education and not their resources spent on killing other.
THere are an awful lot of generalisations being used here: "hindus are... " "muslims say... ". What about, "Some hindus feel... " and "Some muslims believe..." . Let's start from the positoin that all people are basically good, and then there are reasons why there is hatred anmd misunderstanding. Then try to solve it instead of throwing aroung accusations and guilt. There were good hindu rulers and bad ones.
Their religion didn't keep them immune from mistakes, and there were also good muslim rulers and bad ones. Their religion didn't prevent them from making mistakes either. And instead of trying to understand and build something positive there seems to be so much hate going aroung becuase of what our great great great granfathers' great great granfathers did to each other because each wanted to be richer that the other, we are still playing the same stupid game.
ZZ,
I agree with you healing and good relations only began when people realize their mistakes and feel sorry. In a mindset where the barbarian are called heros and praised and anybody of different religion is a dehumanized by calling Kaffir there is no room for friendship and trust.
Pakistanis have to examine their motives and take a deep look at their idealogy, reform their thinking before India and Pakistan can have good relationship or even working relationship.
P.S. I glad you brought out all the issues it about time Indians tell their side of the story and history as they understand it.
For a country like Pakistan with its current status we don’t have to look deep in to our ideology....its there. I think the Indians must understand one thing Pakistan is a state in existence for the last fifty years (whatever is the status of the state) and people are there to defend its existence.
Let me give you a current example, Israel is the second only state next to Pakistan which was created based on religion, religion plays a big role there Arabs (Muslims) and Jews ...but the peace process started only when the Arabs had to agree on one condition that the state of Israel exists. After they agreed to that, the process went ahead...hopefully it would last.
The same goes here, the Indians should came with the terms that now the partition is an old story. We should work on co-existence rather than invading or annexation of each other.
the Indians should came with the terms that now the partition is an old story. We should work on co-existence rather than invading or annexation of each other.<<
Indians have never invaded Pakistan and have on desire to do so. Pakistan has to reign in its hatred of India and stop hate propaganda. I think you should read ZZ post about 'Nayyar defends himself', to understand the extent of hatred and twisted history taught in Pakistani schools. Also, there are hundreds of religious schools constantly brain washing the followers to kill kaffirs. Many posts on this forum are reflection of this kind of thinking.
[This message has been edited by Rani (edited May 15, 2000).]
Nobody is invading or annexing Pakistan. Indian leaders will have no clue of what to do with big muslim majority provinces and a border with talibans. so dont worry about that.
NYA, Jazia is not like tax for foreigners (more like tax for locals, perhaps), it is more like a tolerance tax that Jews had to pay in medieveal Europe to keep their faith.
It was not the case of bad rulers. Religion dictated so. Muslim ulema were constantly critical of rulers who did not impose Jazia. In fact, for idol worshippers, choice was death or Islam without compromise. Islam separtes unbelievers in those with book and those without book. Hindus came in later and thus inferior category in fact even lower than fire worshipper parsis.
So let us stop pretending that acts of tyranny were due to bad muslim rulers. It was bad principles to begin with.
Compare Mohammad with Buddha. Mohammad went around conquring arabia to spread his faith. Buddha did not even lift a danda. Buddhism remains the largest gfaith. Of course, Buddha lived in civilized India and not in Arab tribals. But the difference is striking. Baba Nanak did not have to hurt anyone to spread his faith.
I am thankful to all the muslim invaders who came to the Sub-continent and demolished temples, thus giving way to the code of righteousness. And I am thankful for converting all the hindu temples into mosques. Where Azzan is called five times a day than the bells ringing.
The legacy still goes on. In BC, ten churches were converted into msoques just last year. In UK, the number is ten times as much.
All the idol-worshippers grieve as much as you want, there will be many more churches and temples to be vanished...Islam is the future!
[This message has been edited by outlaw (edited May 15, 2000).]
Right 'jiski lathi uski bhains' according to outlaw, why RSS and Bajrang Dal are wrong in that case. And why not honor Kalyan singh for demolishing Babri Mosque? So Hindus need more of Kalyan Singhs, not less.