Combating Islam

Neo-Dhimmīhood

How Modern Islamic States Repackage Medieval Discrimination

While the term dhimmī is largely absent from the legal language of today’s Islamic governments, the core mechanisms of the dhimmah system—religious hierarchy, institutional discrimination, and ritual-based exclusion—continue to shape the treatment of non-Muslims in countries such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Pakistan. Far from being relics of the past, the dhimmī principles of the classical fiqh have been selectively revived, rebranded, and codified in modern legal systems.

This post explores how Islamic theocracies and semi-theocracies have modernized dhimmitude, replacing jizyah and belts with blasphemy laws, religious apartheid, and constitutional exclusion—while maintaining the core idea: non-Muslims must never enjoy equal status under Islamic rule.

1. Saudi Arabia: Ritual Apartheid in the Heartland of Islam

A. Official Theology

Saudi Arabia follows the Hanbali school, particularly the Wahhabi interpretation, which has historically regarded non-Muslims as physically and spiritually impure (najis).
The Kingdom officially considers itself the guardian of Islam’s holiest sites, and non-Muslims are banned from entering Mecca and most parts of Medina.

B. Legal Framework

No citizenship is granted to non-Muslims.
Public non-Muslim worship is completely banned. Churches, temples, or synagogues do not exist legally.
Proselytization by non-Muslims is criminalized.
Blasphemy and apostasy laws carry severe punishments, including death, and apply to both Muslims and non-Muslims.

C. Social and Ritual Segregation

Non-Muslims are forbidden from touching copies of the Qur’an, using certain ritual facilities, or expressing religious symbols in public.
The state religious authorities continue to affirm the najāsah of unbelievers in fatwas and educational material.

D. Neo-Dhimmī Pattern

Although jizyah is no longer collected, the exclusion from rights, forced invisibility, and ritual segregation of non-Muslims mimic classical dhimmī status—with modern authoritarian enforcement.

2. Iran: Theocratic Exclusion and Ritual Contamination

A. Official Shiʿi Doctrine

In Twelver Shiʿism, non-Muslims—especially polytheists—are considered najis (ritually impure) by default.
This includes Zoroastrians, despite their status in early Islamic law as People of the Book.
Prominent jurists such as Khomeini maintained the literal impurity of unbelievers in their Risalah rulings.

B. Constitutional Framework

Iran's constitution recognizes only three non-Muslim groups as protected: Jews, Christians, and Zoroastrians.
Baháʼís, who are viewed as apostates, are denied all recognition and protection—effectively stateless within their own country.
Non-Muslims are barred from presidency, judiciary, and military command positions.

C. Discriminatory Enforcement

Non-Muslim men cannot marry Muslim women.
Religious minorities face limitations in property rights, inheritance, and education.
Baháʼís cannot attend university or hold government jobs.

D. Ritual Enforcement of Najāsah

Public baths, restaurants, or homes could be deemed defiled if a najis person entered.
Reports continue of social ostracization based on impurity doctrines.

E. Neo-Dhimmī Continuity

In Iran, ritual impurity is still legal reality—embedding dhimmī principles within constitutional theocracy.

3. Pakistan: Legal Inferiority through Blasphemy and Constitutional Apartheid

A. Constitutional Framework

Islam is the state religion, and the president and prime minister must be Muslims.
Ahmadiyya Muslims were declared non-Muslim in 1974 and are banned from calling themselves Muslims, using Islamic greetings, or referring to their places of worship as mosques.

B. Blasphemy Laws as Neo-Jizyah

Pakistan's blasphemy laws (Sections 295–298 of the Penal Code) are used disproportionately against non-Muslims, often to settle personal scores.
Penalties include life imprisonment and death—with no burden of proof required beyond accusation.
Fear of mob violence ensures forced silence and submission, echoing Qur’an 9:29’s instruction that non-Muslims must feel "subdued."

C. Institutional Exclusion

Reserved seats in parliament reinforce minority status rather than inclusion.
Educational curricula glorify Islamic conquest and marginalize minority histories and beliefs.
Non-Muslim testimonies are often treated as unreliable in practice.

D. Social Dhimmitude

Hindus and Christians often work as sweepers, a modern version of “ritually degrading” labor.
Churches and temples exist but are often targets of attacks and forced conversions.

E. Neo-Dhimmī Dynamics

In Pakistan, the dhimmī system has reemerged as a blend of legal discrimination, ritual intimidation, and psychological warfare. The jizyah has become blasphemy law; humiliation has become constitutional exclusion.

4. Key Parallels Between Classical Dhimmitude and Modern Practice

Classical Dhimmitude	Modern Islamic States
Jizyah taxation and humiliation	Blasphemy laws and religious apartheid
Prohibition on public worship	Bans on church building, preaching, public religious expression
Clothing and visibility restrictions	Forbidding religious symbols, forced invisibility
Ritual impurity laws	Modern fatwas affirming najāsah, social segregation
Prohibition on office or military roles	Constitutional bars on non-Muslims holding high office
Legal inferiority in testimony	De facto unreliability of non-Muslim witnesses in court

5. Conclusion: Dhimmitude Is Alive—Only the Labels Have Changed

Modern Islamic states have not abandoned the dhimmī paradigm. Instead, they have:

Dropped the terminology to avoid global scrutiny,
Repackaged discrimination into laws of blasphemy, impurity, and national identity,
And enshrined Muslim supremacy into constitutions and social norms.

The result is a system that preserves the logic of classical fiqh: Islam dominates, others submit.

Invitation for Correction

If you believe this post misrepresents the modern application of Islamic law, you are invited to submit corrections with references to official constitutions, laws, fatwas, or legal commentaries from the Islamic governments discussed.