DHIMMA OBLIGATIONS AND RESTRICTIONS, ACCORDING TO

EARLY AND MEDIAEVAL ISLAMIC SOURCES

J. Luis Dizon (998869513)

NMC 270 H1F
Submitted to: Dr. Amir Harrak
03 December 2014

0 | Page

The Dhimma ( )comes the Arabic verb dhamma (), which means to affix blame or
to find fault.1 It refers to a system of subjugation by which Christians and other People of
the Book are allowed to live in Muslim lands in exchange for payment of the Jizya and
various restrictions placed upon them. Those under such subjugation are referred to as
dhimmis. This system was developed in response to the growing political influence of Islam,
as Muslims expanded their influence over the known world through a combination of
diplomacy and conquest. Initially, the Dhimma system (as found in the Quran and Sirah)
was fairly simple, being composed of the payment of a fixed sum, and the threat of military
action against those who refused to do so. As time went on, a variety of restrictions were
developed against the dhimmis to incentivize their conversion to Islam. It worked, as nonMuslim majorities gradually shrunk to minorities over the course of centuries.
The Dhimma has been the object of controversy recently as debates ensue over
whether it is a system of oppression or of tolerance. On the one hand are populist writers
who point to it as evidence that Islam is oppressive towards non-Muslims. 2 On the other
hand are more apologetically inclined works that portray the Dhimma as being advanced in
its time in terms of religious pluralism.3 Because of this discrepancy of perceptions
regarding the nature of the system, many scholars have opted to avoid making value
1 Sidney H. Griffith, The Church in the Shadow of the Mosque: Christians and Muslims in the World of Islam
Princeton University Press, 2012), 16. This is corroborated in E.W. Lanes Arabic-English Lexicon, which states
that the meaning of the word is to blame, dispraise, find fault with, censure, in respect of evil conduct (Bk. 1,
p. 975. Cited in Mark Durie, The Third Choice: Islam, Dhimmitude and Freedom (Deror Books, 2010), ch. 6.).

2 The most popular example of this today is Robert M. Spencer, who has written numerous works on Islamic
fundamentalism. Some representative works include The Myth of Islamic Tolerance: How Islamic Law Treats
Non-Muslims (Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 2005), The Truth About Muhammad: Founder of the World's
Most Intolerant Religion (Regnery Publishing, 2006) and most recently, Not Peace but a Sword: The Great
Chasm between Christianity and Islam (Catholic Answers, 2013).

3 Representative of this viewpoint is John L. Esposito, who has written such books as The Oxford History of
Islam (Oxford University Press, 1999) The Islamic Threat: Myth or Reality? (Oxford University Press, 1999)
and most recently, What Everyone Needs to Know about Islam (Oxford University Press, 2011)

1 | Page

judgments regarding it. Anver Emon, for example, states that the Islamic legal traditions
contain examples that vindicate both perspectives of tolerance and intolerance toward
the non-Muslim, thereby suggesting that the question whether Islam is tolerant or not is
one that cannot be answered definitively one way or another. 4
As such, the goal of this essay is to get beyond populist presentations of the Dhimma
both positive and negativeand examine firsthand the various sources for Islamic law
during the early and mediaeval Islamic sources (The Quran, hadith and sirah literature,
commentaries, and other legal documents) to examine what kinds of rights and restrictions
are entailed in the Dhimma, as well as how the system developed from its simplest form
during the lifetime of Muhammad to its more developed forms during the Umayyad and
Abbasid caliphates and beyond.
It should be noted at this point that the implementation of the Dhimma was far from
consistent, and varies according to location and time period. As many historians have
pointed out, there were many points in history when the full range of restrictions demanded
by the system were not enforced, and Christians and Jews had more rights and
opportunities available to them than a strict implementation of it would have allowed
(although even in such circumstances, they were far from equal to their Muslim
counterparts in social standing).5 There were also points where the reverse was true, and
the practice was more severe than the texts themselves warranted. As such, this essay will
focus more on the theological and legal aspects of the system, as opposed to the historical

4 Anver M. Emon, Religious Pluralism and Islamic Law: Dhimmis and Others in the Empire of Law (Oxford
University Press, 2012),

5 Esposito, The Oxford History of Islam, 308-309. See also Philip Jenkins, The Lost History of Christianity
(San Francisco, CA: HarperCollins, 2009), 108-110; Bernard Lewis, Islam in History (New York: The Library
Press, 1973), 164

2 | Page

and sociological aspects. Historical anecdotes will be mentioned, but only insofar as they
provide background behind the implementation and development of the Dhimma.

SOURCES OF ISLAMIC LAW

To begin with, it is necessary to briefly go through the sources of Islamic law. Traditionally,
there are four sources (grouped into three levels) from which Islamic law is derived. The
first is Islams main holy text, the Quran. Some people think that if a certain teaching or
practice is not mentioned in the Quran, then that proves that that teaching or practice is not
Islamic. However, this is not the case, as Islam derives its theology and its legal rulings from
multiple sources, of which the Quran is just one (albeit the primary source). After the
Quran comes the Sunnah, which are traditions concerning Muhammads behaviour and
teachings. These are recorded in the various hadith narrations (pl. ahadith), as well as in the
sirah (biographical literature) of Muhammad.6
Together, the Quran and the Sunnah form the first level in establishing Islamic Law.
Below this first level is the third source, which is Qiyas (analogical deduction), which forms
the second level for establishing Islamic Law. Qiyas is the process by which specific
commands and incidents are taken from first level sources, and legal rulings are
extrapolated from those based on the legal/ethical principles guiding them. Thus, Qiyas is
used to develop legal rulings for situations that are not directly addressed in the Quran or
the Sunnah.7

6 Knut S. Vikr, Between God and the Sultan: A History of Islamic Law (Oxford University Press, 2005), 31.
7 Ibid., 31-32.
3 | Page

The fourth source in the development of Islamic Law is Ijma (consensus), which
forms the third and final level in establishing Islamic Law. Once a ruling has been developed
by way of qiyas, it is only a potential legal rule, not an actual one. That ruling must achieve a
consensus within one or more of the madhhabs (schools of Islamic jurisprudence). In
Sunnism, there are four schools: Hanafi, Shafii, Maliki and Hanbali. In Shiism, there is also
the Jafari school. Because these different schools of thought have different methods of
reasoning, rulings may attain Ijma in some madhhabs but not in others. 8

THE QURAN
Having discussed the sources of Islamic law, we now turn to the Quran. There is only one
passage in the entire Quran that speaks on the issue of placing Jews and Christians in a
system of subjugation, and that is surah 9:29:

Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not
in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by
His messenger, and follow not the Religion of Truth, until they pay the tribute
readily, being brought low.9

Surat al-Tawba, where this ayah appears, is regarded as one of the last Quran chapters
(along with al-Maida and al-Nasr) to be revealed before Muhammads death. The ayah
directs Muslims to fight those who were given the book () . This referred to
the Jews and the Christians, because of their having books that Islam recognizes as
scripture. They are collectively referred to as People of the book ( , cf. Surah 98:6)

or, in the case of Christians, People of the Gospel (

, cf. Surah 5:47). This status is
8 Ibid., 32.
9 English translation is by Muhammad Marmaduke Pickthall.
4 | Page

later extended to Zoroastrians and Hindus, as Muslims expand beyond the Arabian
peninsula into Persia, India and Southeast Asia.
The ayah goes on to say that the people are to be fought against until they pay the
Jizya () . The jizya is basically a poll-tax that is levied upon People of the
Book who have been reduced to dhimmi status. The tax is paid by all able-bodied adults,
with the exception of clergy. It is commonly held that the jizya is paid in lieu of military
service.10 While this is part of the picture, it is an incomplete explanation for why the Jizya
is exacted. E.W. Lane notes in his Arabic-English Lexicon that the jizya is paid as though it
were a compensation for their not being slain.11 Various other Muslim commentators
describe the Jizya as a pardon for death and satisfaction for their blood.12 The 8th
century Hanafi jurist Abu Yusuf Yaqub states regarding the jizya:
The wali is not allowed to exempt any Christian, Jew, Magian, Sabean or
Samaritan from paying the tax, and no one can obtain a partial reduction. It is
illegal for one to be exempted and another not, because their lives and
possessions are spared only on account of the payment of the poll tax. 13
It is stated that It is further noted that the moment dhimmis cease to pay the jizya, their
protection is nullified and the state of jihad resumes against them. This is made clear by by
Shafii jurist al-Mawardi (d. 1058), who stated that if they refuse to make payment,

10 Esposito, The Oxford History of Islam, 307-308 and 135.

11 Cited in Durie, The Third Choice, ch. 6.
12 Ibid.
13 Bat Yeor, The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam: From Jihad to Dhimmitude (Madison, NJ:
Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1996), 322.

5 | Page

however, the reconciliation ceases, their security is no longer guaranteed and war must be
waged on them - like any other persons from the enemy camp. 14
One notable practice that developed among Hanafi and Shafii schools of
jurisprudence was the practice of striking the dhimmi as they pay the jizya, usually at the
back of the neck (although sometimes the jaw under the ear is hit instead). This is attested
to in the writings of Al-Ghazali (d. 1111), Al-Razi (d. 1210) and Nasafi (d. 1310). 15 To this, AlTabari (d. 923) adds that the posture of the dhimmi as he hands over the jizya is that they
lower themselves by walking on their hands, reluctantly. 16 Al-Suyuti (d. 1505) describes
how the dhimmi is to have dirt on his head as he gives the jizya, and how the Muslim
receiving the Jizya is always to have a whip on hand. 17 The intent is to remind dhimmis of
their subjugated state (as indicated below under the discussion of the phrase made little).
Moving on, surah 9:29 also states that the jizya is to be given out of hand () .
What this phrase means is not agreed on by Muslim scholars. Al-Baydawi (d. 1280) and AlKhazin (d. 1340) interpret this to mean that the jizya is paid by dhimmis out of gratitude to
the Muslims for having their lives spared. 18 An alternate interpretation, provided by AlZamakhshari (d. 1143), is that this expression means that the Jizya is given submissively, in
a forthcoming, obedient manner. He likens the dhimmi to a sheep with a leash around its

14 Asadulah Yate, The Laws of Islamic Governance, 70-78. Cited in Durie, The Third Choice, ch. 6.
15Ibid.
16Andrew Bostom, The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims (Amherst, NY:
Prometheus Books, 2010), 128.

17 Ibid., 127.
18Durie, The Third Choice, ch. 6.
6 | Page

neck, and refusal to pay with taking off the leash. 19 This is also the interpretation given by
the famous Quranic commentator Ismail b. Kathir (d. 1373), who interprets the verse to
mean in defeat and subservience.20 Yet another interpretation, relatively recent in origin,
is that the phrase means that the dhimmi should pay the jizya in person (ie. with his own
hand), rather than by means of an intermediary such as a clergyman or community leader. 21
Finally, at the end the ayah, it is stated that the dhimmis are to be made little (

) . Ibn Kathir interprets this to mean disgraced, humiliated and belittled, and
asserts that in light of this, Muslims are not allowed to honor the people of Dhimma or
elevate them above Muslims, for they are miserable, disgraced and humiliated. 22 He then
states that this phrase is to become the basis for various restrictions placed upon dhimmis
later on, which will be seen in later sections below.
As can be seen here, the meaning of this verse has been expanded upon quite a lot
over the centuries to create an entire theology of subjugation. This verse is further
corroborated by other documents from the Islamic tradition, which will be examined next.

REFERENCES IN THE HADITH AND SIRAH LITERATURE

The exacting of the jizya as described in surah 9:29 can be found in the hadith and sirah
literature, written between 150-250 years after the lifetime of Muhammad. These sources
still do not provide a fully-developed Dhimma system, but they do provide more details on

19 Ibid.
20 Bostom, The Legacy of Jihad, 129.
21 Durie, The Third Choice, ch. 6.
22 Bostom, The Legacy of Jihad, 129.
7 | Page

how the Jizya is to be exacted from dhimmis, as well as the mandate to implement such a
system among them.
The earliest instance of the implementation of the Dhimma goes back to 628, when
Muhammad went to war against the Jewish community at Khaybar. This is recorded in the
Sirat Rasul Allah of Ibn Ishaq (ca. mid-8th century A.D.) The Jews surrendered and were
allowed to remain on that land on the condition that they recognize the Muslims as the legal
owners of the land. Although there was no jizya at this point, the tax is foreshadowed by the
fact that the Jews were forced to pay half the produce of the land to the Muslims. 23
The earliest references to the exacting of the jizya from Dhimmis appears later on in
Sirat Rasul Allah. One such reference reads:
A Jew or a Christian who becomes a sincere Muslim of his own accord and
obeys the religion of Islam is a believer with the same rights and the same
obligations. If one of them holds fast to the religion he is not to be turned from
it. Every adult, male or female, bond or free, must pay a gold dinar or its
equivalent in clothes. He who performs this has the guarantee of God and His
apostle; he who withholds it is the enemy of God and His apostle and all
believers.24
The passage in question comes at the end of a narrative detailing the conversion of the
Jewish Banu al-Harith tribe to Islam. It is stated therein that Khalid b. al-Walid was sent to
the Banu al-Harith by Muhammad in 631 in order to give them three days to accept Islam. If
they rejected Islam after that period, they will be attacked. It so happened that most of the
Banu al-Harith accepted Islam, and were then instructed in the sunnah of the prophet.25
Afterwards, the above passage was given for those among the Banu al-Harith who remained
23Alfred Guillaume, The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of Ibn Ishaqs Sirat Rasul Allah (Oxford
University Press, 1955), 515.

24 Ibid., 647-648. See p. 643 for another reference to the Jizya with nearly identical wording.
25 Ibid., 645-647.
8 | Page

in Judaism. Here, we can infer that 1) the jizya began to be implemented shortly after the
conquest of Mecca for Jews and Christians who did not convert to Islam, 2) a fixed price had
already been established by that period, along with a list of who is required to pay the tax,
and 3) the guarantee of safety is given to those who paid the jizya, with the implied threat of
military action against those who refused to pay it and thus rendered themselves as
enemies. Notably absent are any list of restrictions, which indicate that such restrictions
were not yet implemented at the time.
Another notable fact about this passage is that it is one of our earliest historical
references to the three-fold call that Muslim armies were to give to non-Muslims that they
were to come upon. This three-fold call appears in Sahih Muslim, and is reiterated in many
other Islamic sources that come after it. The hadith states:
Fight in the name of Allah and in the way of Allah. Fight against those who
disbelieve in Allah. . . . If they refuse to accept Islam, demand from them the
jizya. If they agree to pay, accept it from them and hold off your hands. If they
refuse to pay the tax, seek Allah's help and fight them. 26
The three-fold call is only made available to those who are described as people of the book
(as mentioned above). For pagans without valid scriptures, the jizya was not made an
option, and they could only choose between conversion to Islam and the sword. 27
Historically, the vast majority of conquered populations in the early Islamic period
chose to pay the jizya rather than convert to Islam. As such, the Muslims often found
themselves the minority in the newly conquered lands. It would not be until several
centuries before they became the majority in those lands. 28 This was facilitated by the jizya,
26 Sahih Muslim 27:4294, cited in Durie, The Third Choice, ch. 6.
27 Ibid.
28 Efraim Karsh, Islamic Imperialism: A History (Yale University Press, 2006), 25-26.
9 | Page

which incentivized conversion to Islam.29 It was also facilitated by various practices that
were instituted to keep dhimmis in a state of inferiority, in line with the injunction in surah
9:29 that they are to be made little. One such practice, recorded in Sahih Muslim and
reiterated in Riyad al-Saliheen, is the prohibition of Muslims initiating greetings to
dhimmis, and the requirement that they be forced to the narrowest part of a road:
Abu Hurairah reported: The Messenger of Allah said, Do not greet the Jews
and the Christians before they greet you; and when you meet any one of them
on the road, force him to go to the narrowest part of it. 30
The commentary provided for in Riyad al-Saliheen states the it shows the dignity of
Muslims and the disgrace and humiliation of the non-Muslims. 31 Ibn Kathir reflects the
same understanding (see below). This shows that the clear intent of the practice is to
implement the injunction found at the end of surah 9:29.
All that being said, we find that neither the Quran nor the ahadith provide a fullblown Dhimma system, even though elements of it (such as the jizya and the humiliated
stature of the dhimmis) are visible therein. For a more comprehensive account of the
Dhimma, it is necessary to look at one more important document.

THE PACT OF UMAR

29 Durie, The Third Choice, ch. 6.

30 Sahih Muslim 26:5389, cited in Al-Imam Abu Zakariya Ad-Dimashqi, Riyad-us-Saliheen (Riyadh:
Darussalam, 1999), 2:711.

31 Ibid.
10 | Page

Perhaps the earliest document that provides a comprehensive description of the Dhimma
system is what is known as the Pact of Umar. As the name indicates, the Pact is attributed
to the second caliph, Umar b. Al-Khattab (d. 644), though there is some doubt as to whether
the text actually goes back to him.32 There are many variants and accretions in the text, and
the standard version dates only to the 9th century. 33 Nonetheless, this document has served
as precedent for later dhimmi laws, as seen below.
This Pact was first promulgated after Muslim armies under Umar conquered Syria
and Palestine, and was later implemented in other conquered territories. It begins with a
prologue indicating that the Christians of the conquered regions sought protection for their
lives and possessions from the Muslims. 34 It then goes on to give a description of the
restrictions imposed on them in return for safety:
We will not erect in our city or the suburbs any new monastery, church, cell or
hermitage; that we will not repair any of such buildings that may fall into ruins,
or renew those that may be situated in the Muslim quarters of the town; that we
will not refuse the Muslims entry into our churches either by night or by day;
that we will open the gates wide to passengers and travellers; that we will
receive any Muslim traveller into our houses and give him food and lodging for
three nights; that we will not harbor any spy in our churches or houses, or
conceal any enemy of the Muslims.
That we will not teach our children the Quran; that we will not make a
show of the Christian religion nor invite anyone to embrace it; that we will not
prevent any of our kinsmen from embracing Islam, if they so desire. That we
will honor the Muslims and rise up in our assemblies when they wish to take
their seats; that we will not imitate them in our dress, either in the cap, turban,
sandals, or parting of the hair; that we will not make use of their expressions of
speech, 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
32 Esposito, The Oxford History of Islam, 308.
33 Jacob Rader Marcus, The Jew in the Medieval World: A Sourcebook, 315-1791 (Cincinnati, OH: Hebrew
Union College Press, 1999), 14.

34 Ibid., 14-15.
11 | Page

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
marketplaces; that we will strike the clappers 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 marketplaces; 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. 35
In the Shafii legal manual Kitab al-Umm (ca. 9th century) is a longer version of the Pact,
which reflects further restrictions imposed by the Shafii school upon dhimmis. Therein it
states that anyone who speaks blasphemously of Muhammad, the Quran or Islam forfeits
the protection of the authorities.36 Additional restrictions found in the longer version
include turning Muslims away from their religion, marrying Muslim women, allowing
Muslims to marry in the presence of non-Muslim witnesses, selling anything to Muslims
that is haram, using idolatrous language about Jesus in the presence of Muslims, taking the
high side of the road and staying in the Hijaz for longer than three days. 37 The payment of
the jizya is also limited to free adult men and women who are of sound mind, exempting
slaves and the mentally unsound from payment.38
Interestingly, many of the provisions contained in the Pact are not original to it. In
fact, no less than six of the restrictions mentioned therein are derived from Byzantine laws
35 Ibid., 15.
36 Norman Calder, Jawid Mojaddedi and Andrew Rippin (eds.), Classic Islam: A Sourcebook of Religious
Literature London: Routledge, 2003), 91.

37 Ibid., 91-92.
38 Ibid., 92.
12 | Page

enacted against the Jews.39 This is evidence against Espositos claim that the legal status of
religious minorities was improved under Islamic law. 40 If the restrictions imposed upon
Dhimmis by the Pact are based upon similar restrictions by the Byzantines, then their legal
status is neither qualitatively better nor worse than it had been prior to Islam, but is in
continuity with their previous state. If the de facto status of religious minorities improved
under the Muslims, it was only insofar as the restrictions imposed by the Pact were not
being enforced by the authorities.
The enduring legacy of the Pact of Umar can be seen by how it continues to be cited
by Muslim theologians and jurists throughout history. In his commentary on Surah 9:29,
Ibn Kathir cites both the Pact and the hadith about forcing dhimmis onto the narrowest part
of the word as examples of how dhimmis are to be made little, stating that these
conditions that ensured their continued humiliation, degradation and disgrace. 41 The Pact
is also cited in modern legal opinions given by various Muslim scholars from Cairo in the
18th century.42 This demonstrates that the Pact is not just a historical artifact, but actually
set a precedent for dhimmi laws for many centuries to come.

CONCLUSION
The Dhimma system as shown here has many dimensions to it, with various provisions
being developed to bring out the full significance of this system. It can be seen here that it is
by no means close to modern conceptions of religious pluralism, although this is to be
39 Marcus, The Jew in the Medieval World, 15. See pp. 3-7 for examples of such laws.
40 Esposito, What Everyone Needs to Know About Islam, 74.
41 Bostom, The Legacy of Jihad, 129.
42 Marcus, The Jew in the Medieval World, 16-20.
13 | Page

expected, since such modern conceptions are anachronistic. This does pose challenges for
Muslims who seek to provide an interpretation of Islamic law and social theory that is
palatable to an audience that is steeped in the western liberal tradition without straying
from the larger Islamic tradition. While such an interpretation is arguably possible, it is not
easy to shake off centuries of traditional legal rulings, which is why debates regarding the
provisions of the Dhimma are unlikely to be resolved anytime soon.

14 | Page

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Ad-Dimashqi, Al-Imam Abu
Darussalam, 1999.

Zakariya.

Riyad-us-Saliheen

(2

Volumes).

Riyadh:

Bostom, Andrew. The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims.
Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books, 2010.
Calder, Norman, Jawid Mojaddedi and Andrew Rippin (eds.). Classic Islam: A Sourcebook
of Religious Literature. London: Routledge, 2003.
Durie, Mark. The Third Choice: Islam, Dhimmitude and Freedom. Deror Books, 2010.
Kindle Edition.
Emon, Anver M. Religious Pluralism and Islamic Law: Dhimmis and Others in the Empire
of Law (Oxford Islamic Legal Studies). Oxford University Press, 2012.
Esposito, John L. The Oxford History of Islam. Oxford University Press, 1999.
________. What Everyone Needs to Know about Islam (2nd ed.). Oxford University
Press, 2011.
Glasse, Cyril. The New Encyclopedia of Islam. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2013.
Griffith, Sidney H. The Church in the Shadow of the Mosque: Christians and Muslims in
the World of Islam. Princeton University Press, 2012.
Guillaume, Alfred. The Life of Muhammad: A Translation of Ibn Ishaqs Sirat Rasul Allah.
Oxford University Press, 1955.
Jenkins, Philip. The Lost History of Christianity. San Francisco, CA: HarperCollins, 2009.
Karsh, Efraim Karsh. Islamic Imperialism: A History. Yale University Press, 2006.
Lewis, Bernard. Islam in History. New York: The Library Press, 1973.
Marcus, Jacob. The Jew in the Medieval World: A Sourcebook, 315-1791. Cincinnati, OH:
Hebrew Union College Press, 1999.

15 | Page

Pickthall, Muhammad Marmaduke. The Meaning of the Glorious Koran: An Explanatory

Translation. Public Domain.
Vikr, Knut S. Between God and the Sultan: A History of Islamic Law. Oxford University
Press, 2005.
Yeor, Bat. The Decline of Eastern Christianity Under Islam: From Jihad to Dhimmitude.
Madison, NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, 1996.
________. Understanding Dhimmitude: Twenty-one Lectures and Talks on the Position
of Non-Muslims in Islamic Societies. RVP Publishers, 2013.

16 | Page