Introduction
Why do Muslim scholars who defend jizya as a “normal tax” forget that it was collected with a sword on the necks of non-Muslims? Islamic scholars and Muslims justify it by saying that Hindus paid jizya while Muslims paid zakat, but the two are not the same. In India, jizya was no ordinary tax—it was Islam’s weapon that either forced Hindus to become Muslims or broke their backs. The Quran, Hadith, and history scream that jizya was not a message of peace but a tool of religious oppression. In this article, we expose the difference between jizya and zakat—removing the pretense, bringing out the truth.
Part 1: Jizya—Islam’s Oppressive Tax
- 1.1 What Was Jizya? A tax collected from non-Muslims (dhimmis) so they could preserve their religion under Islamic rule. In Islam, dhimmis (ذمي) were those non-Muslims who lived in an Islamic state governed by Sharia law. Dhimmis—meaning those wretches whom Islam made second-class. Rights? Just in name. Accept Islam, and jizya is waived—this wasn’t a tax, it was a game of coercion.
- 1.2 Quran’s Command: Surah Tauba (9:29)—“Fight those who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day, until they pay jizya, and that too while bowing.” This wasn’t a message of peace, it was a decree to crush non-Muslims. Scholars call it a “protection tax”—protection from what? The same sword held at their throats?
Part 2: The Dark History of Jizya
- 2.1 Muhammad’s Era: Jizya began with Muhammad himself. The Jews of Khaibar were looted, their lands seized, and 50% of their income taken as tax—this was Islam’s “justice.” Sir William Muir screams in his book “The Life of Muhammad”: This wasn’t protection, it was exploitation.
- 2.2 Umar’s Tyranny: In Hanafi Fiqh’s “Hidaya” (Book IX, Chapter 8), Caliph Umar made jizya a system:
- Rich: 48 dirhams (4/month)
- Middle: 24 dirhams (2/month)
- Poor: 12 dirhams (1/month)
Taken even from the poor—was this a tax, or a conspiracy to break non-Muslims?
Part 3: Jizya’s Assault on India
- 3.1 Muhammad bin Qasim (712 CE): Attack on Sindh, jizya’s sword on the necks of Hindus and Buddhists. Brahmins were first exempted, then later crushed. (Reference: “Chachnama”)
- 3.2 Firoz Shah Tughlaq (14th Century): Imposed jizya on Brahmins too. A strike happened in Delhi, but the ruler’s answer? Sword and oppression. Vincent Smith writes in “The Oxford History of India”—this wasn’t a tax, it was oppression.
- 3.3 Aurangzeb (1679 CE): Akbar removed it for 9 years, but Aurangzeb imposed it again—48, 24, 12 dirhams. A weapon to break every Hindu’s back. (Reference: “Maasir-e-Alamgiri”)
Part 4: Zakat vs. Jizya—The Truth Behind the Sham
- 4.1 Real Difference: Zakat only on rich Muslims—just 2.5%, and it helps poor Muslims. Jizya? On every non-Muslim—even the poor weren’t spared. Example:
- Poor Muslim: Got bread from zakat.
- Poor Hindu: Paid jizya and starved.
4.2 Intent’s Game: Zakat was charity, jizya was tyranny. One built society, the other broke it. Jizya was pressure to accept Islam—refuse, and be robbed. This wasn’t a tax, it was a weapon to crush non-Muslims.
| Aspect | Zakat | Jizya |
|---|---|---|
| Who Pays | Wealthy Muslims | Both poor and wealthy non-Muslims |
| Rate | 2.5% (on wealth/property) | Fixed rate (12, 24, 48 dirhams) |
| Purpose | Welfare of poor Muslims | To impose religious subordination on non-Muslims |
| Exemption | Poor Muslims are exempt from Zakat | Poor non-Muslims had to pay Jizya as well |
| Legal Status | Religious obligation | Mandatory tax under Islamic rule |
Part 5: Today’s Price—Jizya’s Burden
- 5.1 Calculation: 1 dirham = 2.975 grams of silver. Gold-silver ratio 1:15.5. In March 2025, gold ₹8,684/gram—1 dirham = ₹1,665.
- Rich: 48 × ₹1,665 = ₹79,920/year
- Middle: 24 × ₹1,665 = ₹39,960/year
- Poor: 12 × ₹1,665 = ₹19,980/year
- 5.2 Truth: Snatching ₹19,980 from a poor Hindu today—is this protection, or looting his bread?
Part 6: Conclusion—Jizya’s Dark Face
Jizya wasn’t a tax, it was Islam’s oppressive weapon. Zakat on rich Muslims, jizya on every Hindu—even the poor weren’t spared. From Khaibar to Aurangzeb, it remained a means to break non-Muslims. Brahmins’ exemption was snatched—Firoz and Aurangzeb chewed Hindu bones. Calling something that robs even the poor’s bread a tax is pretense—it was religious oppression, nothing else.
Part 7: Questions That Sting
- Zakat gives bread to the poor, jizya leaves them hungry—what justice is this?
- Quran’s “pay jizya while bowing”—is this protection or chains of slavery?
- If it was a tax, why wasn’t the poor Hindu spared?
If alcohol can be haram, why not jizya?
Jizya wasn’t a message of peace, it was a hammer to crush Hindus—history bears witness.