By Rachel Avraham
Many argue that Muslims and Arabs cannot be antisemitic, claiming that Arabs, like Jews, are considered Semites (descendants of Shem, descendants of Noah). In practice, however, Muslim and Arab antisemitism demonstrably exists, as the term “antisemitism” is not literally directed at hating “descendants of Shem,” but rather a euphemism for the hatred of Jews. Muslim antisemitism differs from the classical antisemitism we recognize from the West, where antisemitism is primarily linked to racial theories and not solely to religious discrimination. Muslim antisemitism is far more connected to the religious inferiority of Jews compared to the religious superiority of Muslims; in essence, Muslim antisemitism diminishes Jews to enhance the perceived greatness of Muslims.
The first aspect of Islam where we can observe an antisemitic facet is regarding the status of protected people (Dhimmi). Jews and Christians are not considered infidels by Muslims but rather protected people. The difference between a protected person and an infidel is that an infidel must be killed, whereas a protected person does not necessarily have to be killed—if a protected person pays a poll tax (jizya), they can live. If they do not pay the poll tax, they can be killed. According to Muslim tradition, the Prophet Muhammad established the practice of the poll tax after besieging the Jewish city of Khaybar for many days and eventually agreeing to spare the inhabitants’ lives if they paid half of their wealth to him and his followers.
Another aspect of Shariah law that demonstrates inherent antisemitism is that in criminal proceedings, a Jew is not considered a truly reliable witness. A Jew cannot testify in a Sharia court against a Muslim, nor can two Jews or ten Jews; they are simply not considered valid witnesses. This means that if a Jew claims in a Sharia court that a Muslim robbed them, even if another Jew testifies that they saw the Muslim robbing the Jew, the court will not accept the claim and will release the Muslim. In cases where there are no other witnesses, a Jew’s testimony may be accepted in court, not as direct testimony but more as a “reasonable assumption.” Only in recent years, in relatively secular countries like Egypt, Tunisia, and Jordan, have Jewish testimonies begun to be accepted in court, mainly in civil matters and not Sharia matters.
However, most laws that discriminate against Jews (as well as Christians) were enacted in the collection known as the “Pact of Umar.” Umar refers to Umar ibn al-Khattab, the second Caliph of Islam who succeeded the Prophet Muhammad. During Caliph Umar’s reign, the Muslims, who at that time only controlled the Arabian Peninsula, conquered vast territories in the Middle East—Egypt, the Land of Israel, Greater Syria, Transjordan, Iraq, and the entire Persian Empire. As Muslims who originated from the Arabian Peninsula suddenly found themselves ruling over numerous non-Muslim communities (primarily Jews and Christians, since idolaters, considered infidels, must be killed according to Islamic belief), they needed some kind of “protocol refresh” to know how to deal with these communities. Therefore, a collection of laws was written, known as the “Pact of Umar,” which codified the laws concerning Jews and Christians living under Muslim rule.
As mentioned, most of the laws restricting Jews present them as inferior to Muslims, and this was true for most of the laws in the Pact of Umar. Firstly, Jews were forbidden from building new synagogues, forbidden from renovating synagogues, and a synagogue could not be taller than a mosque; similarly, Jewish homes could not be taller than Muslim homes. Additionally, it was forbidden to perform Jewish ceremonies outside the Jewish house of worship. Non-Muslims were forbidden from studying the Quran, and a person who converted to Islam and then reverted to their original religion was subject to the death penalty.
Contrary to popular belief, the Nazis were not the first to decide to mark Jews with a yellow badge; it was the Muslims who did so first. According to the Pact of Umar, Jews and Christians had to be marked when they walked in public—Christians were marked with a blue sign, and Jews were marked with a yellow sign. Regarding the marking, one can see how the Pact of Umar became deeply rooted in Muslim tradition until modern times, as Yemeni Jews refer to their sidelocks as “simanim,” meaning “signs”! One can infer from this that Muslims in Yemen forced Jews to mark themselves, and they chose (or were dictated by the authorities) to use their sidelocks. Protected people were forbidden from holding senior public positions. Similarly, they were forbidden from ruling over Muslims and from serving as judges or any other position of authority over Muslims.
Another prohibition was the ban on carrying weapons or swords, thus always being vulnerable to attack. When a Jew walked down the street and a Muslim passed by, the Jew had to walk on the side of the road, not on the sidewalk, but in the drainage areas of the road. Furthermore, Jews were not allowed to ride horses like Muslims, but only donkeys and mules. A Jew who violated these sanctions would lose their status as a protected person and be considered an infidel in the eyes of the Muslim authorities. However, it is important to note that unlike Nazi racial theories, which believed Jews were inferior due to their race. This meant that even if a person changed their religion, they were still considered an inferior person. Early Muslims believed all restrictions would be lifted once a protected person converted to Islam. Nevertheless, although the Pact of Umar refers to Jews and Christians together as protected people, Christians were sometimes granted “concessions” that Jews were not. According to Shia jurisprudence, Jews are considered impure—therefore, on rainy days, Jews in Iran were forbidden from going out and walking in the streets, so that rainwater, which would become contaminated upon touching Jews, would not seep into the groundwater and poison the population’s drinking water.
Generally speaking, throughout history, it was preferable for a Jew to live under Muslim/Arab rule rather than under Christian/European rule. Christians in Europe tended to be much crueler to Jews than Muslims. There is historical evidence of many business collaborations between Muslims and Jews, and even several instances where Jewish testimony was accepted in court. But all relations between Muslims and Jews changed after the rise of the Zionist movement and the establishment of the State of Israel. Even before the establishment of the State of Israel, in the 1940s, a certain individual translated Hitler’s writings into Arabic and disseminated them throughout the Middle East. That individual was the Mufti (Muslim religious leader) of Jerusalem, Amin al-Husseini, a local leader of the Arabs of Palestine who decided to help Hitler exterminate all the Jews in the world, with Hitler “taking care” of European Jews and Amin al-Husseini “taking care” of Middle Eastern Jews. The translation of Hitler’s ideology into Arabic eventually led to the Farhud—a Nazi-Arab pogrom committed against the Jews of Baghdad on the eve of Shavuot in 1941. During the riots, approximately 1,000 people were killed, about 2,200 people were wounded, and extensive Jewish property was looted. This was the first Nazi event in the Middle East caused by the efforts of the “Palestinians.”
Beyond Nazi racial theory, another phenomenon from Europe arrived to the Middle East—blood libels. In February 1840, a French monk disappeared from Damascus, and after he and his Muslim servant were searched for and not found, the Catholics in Damascus decided that the Jews were responsible for his disappearance. Just like in Europe, the Catholics in Damascus assumed and spread the rumor that the Jews had killed the monk to use his blood for making matzah for Passover. This blood libel caused the residents of Damascus to riot against the Jewish population and to loot and vandalize their property, but that was not all. The Ottoman authorities joined in this blood libel, arresting seven Jews and interrogating them under torture until they confessed to the murder. Ultimately, only after powerful Jews from Europe exerted pressure on the Ottoman Sultan were the surviving Jews released from detention, but the Jewish community of Damascus continued to live in fear for many years to come.
Antisemitism grew among Muslims after the State of Israel was established. Jews became identified with “Zionists” or “Israelis,” or in short, “the enemy.” The property of Jews in Islamic countries was forcibly taken from them, they were arrested and interrogated under torture for no reason, and sometimes Jews were even publicly hanged in the town square. Jewish lives became unbearable, which is why today there are hardly any Jews living in Muslim countries. Today, Muslims primarily have friction with Jews in Europe, where Muslims promote antisemitism under the guise of “anti-Zionism,” even though, as mentioned, it makes no real difference to them—Jewish and Zionist are the same thing; both are considered the enemy.
__________________________________
