Huwaidi and Concept of “Dzimmah”

Does the classic concept regarding dzimmi or ahludz dzimmah still stand? In the political framework of classic Islam, the non-Muslims who did not fight Muslims (kafir dzimmi) are given safeguards and political protection, though with a status in terms of nationality. In the latest debate regarding Islamic shari’a, several Islamic groups have said that implementation of Islamic law is imperative including the entire framework of the classic inheritance, that is, including the concept of dzimmah.

I have recently read a book by Fahmi Huwaidy, an Egyptian author who represented enlightened Islamist circle, under the title “Muwathinun La Dzimmiyyun” (the citizens, not the people of dzimmi). To me, it is the latest ijtihad (individual interpretation and judgment) regarding the fundamental notion of the modern political concept, about the citizenship.  There is not a good enough synonym for the term citizenship that fits with the modern notion of the term. His book delivers a critical interpretation regarding the relationship between Muslim and non-Muslim citizens. Huwaidy relates that though the classic concept regarding dzimmy (the protected non-Muslim citizen), was effective in its age, it cannot be used currently.

The Muslim community cannot avoid the fact that the concept differs from the basics of “membership in a nation” determined not by religion, but by the principle of muwathanah, or nationality. It is nationality that relates people within a nation and not the unity of religion.  Huwaidy, to me, has cleverly joined the ulema’s point of view and the point of view of the modern intellectuals. Herein Huwaidy outdoes other Egyptian writers such as Muhammad Al Ghazali.  We need this sort of Muslim intellectual—someone who can show the proper combination between mastering tradition and using the tools of modern science. We don’t need people who have an apologetic attitude or the attitude that everything is perfectly provided for in Islam and that there is no more necessity to learn from other civilizations.

Nevertheless, we also object to the attitude of “intellectual imitating” which is not critical toward whatever come from “outside”; whether it is interpreted as “western” or “eastern”. From such intellectuals we expected that ideal Islam could be interpreted properly and congruently with the development and experience of modernity, including the experience to rule a nation that is obviously poles apart from nations in the age of the prophet, sahabat (prophet’s companions), or of those in the sultans classic periods.

(Translated by Lanny Octavia, edited by Jonathan Zilberg)