Editing Dhimmi (section)

==The "Dhimma contract"==
Based on [[Quran]]ic verses and Islamic traditions, ''sharia'' law distinguishes between Muslims, followers of other [[Abrahamic religions]], and [[Paganism|Pagans]] or people belonging to other [[Polytheism|polytheistic]] religions. As [[Monotheism|monotheists]], Jews and Christians have traditionally been considered "[[People of the Book]]", and afforded a special legal status known as ''dhimmi'' derived from a theoretical contract—"dhimma" or "residence in return for taxes". Islamic legal systems based on ''sharia'' law incorporated the [[religious law]]s and courts of [[Christianity|Christians]], [[Judaism|Jews]], and [[Hinduism|Hindus]], as seen in the early [[caliphate]], [[al-Andalus]], [[Muslim conquest in the Indian subcontinent|Indian subcontinent]], and the [[Millet (Ottoman Empire)|Ottoman Millet]] system.<ref name="Weeramantry-138_2">{{Harvnb|Weeramantry|1997|p=138}}</ref><ref name=Sachedina>{{cite book|title=The Islamic Roots of Democratic Pluralism|author=Sachedina, Abdulaziz Abdulhussein|year=2001|publisher=[[Oxford University Press]]|isbn=978-0-19-513991-4|url-access=registration|url=https://archive.org/details/islamic_sac_2001_00_4172}}</ref>{{page needed|date=January 2016}}

In Yemenite Jewish sources, a treaty was drafted between Muhammad and his Jewish subjects, known as ''kitāb ḏimmat al-nabi'', written in the 17th year of the [[Hijri year|Hijra]] (638 CE), which gave express liberty to the Jews living in Arabia to observe the Sabbath and to grow-out their side-locks, but required them to pay the ''[[jizya]]'' (poll-tax) annually for their protection.<ref>[[Shelomo Dov Goitein]], ''The Yemenites – History, Communal Organization, Spiritual Life'' (Selected Studies), editor: Menahem Ben-Sasson, Jerusalem 1983, pp. 288–299. {{ISBN|965-235-011-7}}</ref> Muslim governments in the Indus basin readily extended the ''dhimmi'' status to the Hindus and Buddhists of India.<ref>[[Marshall Hodgson]], ''The Venture of Islam Conscience and History in a World Civilization Vol 2''. [[University of Chicago]], 1958, p. 278.</ref> Eventually, the largest [[Madhhab|school]] of [[Fiqh|Islamic jurisprudence]] applied this term to all Non-Muslims living in Muslim lands outside the [[Hejaz|sacred area]] surrounding [[Mecca]], [[Arabian Peninsula|Arabia]].<ref>al-Misri, Ahmad ibn Naqib (edited and translated from Arabic (with commentary) by Nuh Ha Mim Keller) (1994 revised ed.), p. 603.</ref>

In medieval Islamic societies, the ''[[qadi]]'' (Islamic judge) usually could not interfere in the matters of non-Muslims unless the parties voluntarily chose to be judged according to Islamic law, thus the ''dhimmi'' communities living in Islamic states usually had their own laws independent from the ''sharia'' law, as with the Jews who would have their own [[Beit din|rabbinical courts]].<ref name="Cohen">{{cite book|title=Under Crescent and Cross: The Jews in the Middle Ages|author=Cohen, Mark R. |publisher=[[Princeton University Press]]|year=1995|isbn=978-0-691-01082-3 |page=74 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=fgbib5exskUC&q=cohen+Under+Crescent+and+Cross|access-date=10 April 2010 |author-link=Mark R. Cohen }}</ref> These courts did not cover cases that involved other religious groups, or capital offences or threats to public order. By the 18th century, however, ''dhimmi'' frequently attended the Ottoman Muslim courts, where cases were taken against them by Muslims, or they took cases against Muslims or other ''dhimmi''. Oaths sworn by ''dhimmi'' in these courts were tailored to their beliefs.<ref name="al-Qattan-99">{{cite journal |author=al-Qattan, Najwa |title=Dhimmis in the Muslim Court: Legal Autonomy and Religious Discrimination |journal=[[International Journal of Middle East Studies]] |volume=31 |issue=3 |pages=429–444 |year=1999 |issn=0020-7438 |doi=10.1017/S0020743800055501 |s2cid=159763960 }}</ref> Non-Muslims were allowed to engage in certain practices (such as the consumption of alcohol and pork) that were usually forbidden by Islamic law,<ref>{{cite book|first1=Muhammad|last1=Hamidullah|author-link=Muhammad Hamidullah|date=1970|title=Introduction to Islam|publisher=International Islamic Federation of Student Organizations|page=180}}</ref> in point of fact, any Muslim who pours away their wine or forcibly appropriates it is liable to pay compensation.{{sfn|Abdel-Haleem|2012|p=73}} Some Islamic theologians held that Zoroastrian "[[Xwedodah|self-marriages]]", considered incestuous under ''sharia'', should also be tolerated. [[Ibn Qayyim Al-Jawziyya]] (1292–1350) opined that most scholars of the [[Hanbali]] school held that non-Muslims were entitled to such practices, as long as they were not presented to sharia courts and the religious minorities in question held them to be permissible. This ruling was based on the precedent that there were no records of the [[Islamic prophet]] [[Muhammad]] forbidding such self-marriages among Zoroastrians, despite coming into contact with Zoroastrians and knowing about this practice.<ref>Jackson, Sherman A. (2005). [https://books.google.com/books?id=nprKYM8sleYC&dq=ankiha+fasida&pg=PA144 p. 144] (via [[Google Books]]). Retrieved 19 September 2011.</ref> Religious minorities were also free to do as they wished in their own homes, provided they did not publicly engage in illicit sexual activity in ways that could threaten public morals.<ref>Jackson, Sherman A. (2005). [https://books.google.com/books?id=nprKYM8sleYC&dq=ankiha+fasida&pg=PA145 p. 145] (via [[Google Books]]). Retrieved 19 September 2011.</ref>

There are parallels for this in [[Roman law|Roman]] and [[Halakha|Jewish law]].<ref>[[H. Patrick Glenn|Glenn, H. Patrick]] (2007). ''Legal Traditions of the World: Sustainable Diversity in Law'' (3rd edition). New York City; Oxford: [[Oxford University Press]]. {{ISBN|978-0-19-920541-7}}. pp. 217–219.</ref> According to law professor [[H. Patrick Glenn]] of [[McGill University]], "[t]oday it is said that the dhimmi are 'excluded from the specifically Muslim privileges, but on the other hand they are excluded from the specifically Muslim duties' while (and here there are clear parallels with western public and private law treatment of aliens—Fremdenrecht, la condition de estrangers), '[f]or the rest, the Muslim and the dhimmi are equal in practically the whole of the law of property and of contracts and obligations'."<ref>[[H. Patrick Glenn|Glenn, H. Patrick]] (2007). ''Legal Traditions of the World&: Sustainable Diversity in Law'' (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford: Oxford University Press. {{ISBN|978-0-19-920541-7}}. p. 219.</ref> Quoting the Qur'anic statement, "Let Christians judge according to what We have revealed in the Gospel",<ref>{{qref|5|47|b=yl}}</ref> [[Muhammad Hamidullah]] writes that Islam decentralized and "communalized" law and justice.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Hamidullah|first=Muhammad|author-link=Muhammad Hamidullah|date=1986|title=Relations of Muslims with non-Muslims|journal=Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs|volume=7|issue=1|page=9|doi=10.1080/13602008608715960|issn=0266-6952|url=https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/istem/issue/26528/279243}}</ref> However, the classical ''dhimma'' contract is no longer enforced. [[Western culture|Western influence]] over the Muslim world has been instrumental in eliminating the restrictions and protections of the ''dhimma'' contract.<ref>{{cite book|last=Lewis|first=Bernard|title=The Jews of Islam|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=W0EbKFRxrT4C|year=1984|publisher=Princeton University Press|isbn=978-0-691-00807-3 |page=184}}</ref>

===The Dhimma contract and Sharia law===
{{Main|Sharia}}
The ''dhimma'' contract is an integral part of traditional Islamic law. From the 9th century AD, the power to interpret and refine law in traditional Islamic societies was in the hands of the scholars (''[[ulama]]''). This separation of powers served to limit the range of actions available to the ruler, who could not easily decree or reinterpret law independently and expect the continued support of the community.<ref>Basim Musallam, ''The Cambridge Illustrated History of the Islamic World'', edited by [[Francis Robinson]]. Cambridge University Press, 1996, p. 176.</ref> Through succeeding centuries and empires, the balance between the ulema and the rulers shifted and reformed, but the balance of power was never decisively changed.<ref>Hodgson, ''The Venture of Islam Vol 3'', 1961, pp. 105–108.</ref> At the beginning of the 19th century, the [[Industrial Revolution]] and the [[French Revolution]] introduced an era of [[Western culture|European world hegemony]] that included the domination of most of the Muslim lands.<ref>Hodgson, ''The Venture of Islam Vol 3'', 1961, pp. 176–177.</ref><ref>Sarah Ansari, ''The Cambridge Illustrated History of the Islamic World edited by [[Francis Robinson]]''. Cambridge University Press, 1996, p. 90.</ref> At the end of the [[World War II|Second World War]], the European powers found themselves too weakened to maintain their empires.<ref>Hodgson, ''The Venture of Islam Vol 3'', 1961, pp. 366–367.</ref> The wide variety in forms of government, systems of law, attitudes toward modernity and interpretations of sharia are a result of the ensuing drives for independence and modernity in the Muslim world.<ref>Sarah Ansari, ''The Cambridge Illustrated History of the Islamic World edited by [[Francis Robinson]]''. [[Cambridge University Press]], 1996, pp. 103–111.</ref><ref>[[Marshall Hodgson]], ''[[The Venture of Islam]] Conscience and History in a World Civilization Vol 3''. [[The University of Chicago]], 1961, pp. 384–386.</ref>

Muslim states, sects, schools of thought and individuals differ as to exactly what sharia law entails.<ref>Otto, Jan Michiel. ''Sharia and National Law in Muslim Countries: Tensions and Opportunities for Dutch and EU Foreign Policy ''. Amsterdam University Press, 2008, p. 7.</ref> In addition, Muslim states today utilize a spectrum of legal systems. Most states have a mixed system that implements certain aspects of sharia while acknowledging the supremacy of a constitution. A few, such as Turkey, have declared themselves secular.<ref>Otto, ''Sharia and National Law in Muslim Countries'', 2008, pp. 8–9.</ref> Local and customary laws may take precedence in certain matters, as well.<ref>Otto, ''Sharia and National Law in Muslim Countries'', 2008, p. 29.</ref> Islamic law is therefore polynormative,<ref>Otto, ''Sharia and National Law in Muslim Countries'', 2008, p. 10.</ref> and despite several cases of regression in recent years, the trend is towards liberalization.<ref>Otto, ''Sharia and National Law in Muslim Countries'', 2008, p. 18. {{ISBN?}}</ref> Questions of human rights and the status of minorities cannot be generalized with regards to the Muslim world. They must instead be examined on a case-by-case basis, within specific political and cultural contexts, using perspectives drawn from the historical framework.<ref>Otto, ''Sharia and National Law in Muslim Countries'', 2008, pp. 37–39.</ref>

===The end of the Dhimma contract===
The status of the ''dhimmi'' "was for long accepted with resignation by the Christians and with gratitude by the Jews" but the rising power of Christendom and the radical ideas of the French Revolution caused a wave of discontent among Christian dhimmis.<ref>{{cite book |last=Lewis |first=Bernard |title=The Jews of Islam |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=W0EbKFRxrT4C |year=1984 |publisher=Princeton University Press |isbn=978-0-691-00807-3 |page=62 }}</ref> The continuing and growing pressure from the European powers combined with pressure from Muslim reformers gradually relaxed the inequalities between Muslims and non-Muslims.<ref>{{cite book |last=Lewis |first=Bernard |title=The Jews of Islam |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=W0EbKFRxrT4C |year=1984 |publisher=Princeton University Press |isbn=978-0-691-00807-3 }} summary of pp. 62–66. See p. 62 (2nd paragraph), p. 65 (3rd paragraph)</ref>

On 18 February 1856, the [[Ottoman Reform Edict of 1856]] ({{langx|ota|خط همايونى|Hatt-i Humayan}}) was issued, building upon the 1839 edict. It came about partly as a result of pressure from and the efforts of the ambassadors of [[Second French Empire|France]], [[Austrian Empire|Austria]] and the [[United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland|United Kingdom]], whose respective countries were needed as allies in the [[Crimean War]]. It again proclaimed the principle of equality between Muslims and non-Muslims, and produced many specific reforms to this end. For example, the ''jizya'' tax was abolished and non-Muslims were allowed to join the army.<ref>Lapidus (1988), p. 599</ref><ref>Lapidus (2002), p. 495</ref>

According to some scholars, discrimination against ''dhimmis'' did not end with the Edict of 1856, and they remained second-class citizens at least until the end of World War I.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Morris |first=Benny |title=Righteous Victims: A History of the Zionist-Arab Conflict, 1881–2001 |publisher=Vintage Books |year=2001 |isbn=978-0679744757 |pages=13}}</ref> H.E.W. Young, the British Council in Mosul, wrote in 1909, "The attitude of the Muslims toward the Christians and the Jews is that of a master towards slaves, whom he treats with a certain lordly tolerance so long as they keep their place. Any sign of pretension to equality is promptly repressed."<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Young |first=H. E. Wilkie |year=1971 |title=Mosul in 1909 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/4282373 |journal=Middle Eastern Studies |volume=7 |issue=2 |pages=229–235|doi=10.1080/00263207108700177 |jstor=4282373 }}</ref>

===Views of modern Islamic scholars on the status of non-Muslims in an Islamic society===
* The Iranian [[Shia Islam|Shi'a]] Muslim Ayatollah [[Ruhollah Khomeini]] indicates in his book ''[[Islamic Government: Governance of the Jurist]]'' that non-Muslims should be required to pay the [[Tax per head|poll tax]], in return for which they would profit from the protection and services of the state; they would, however, be excluded from all participation in the political process.<ref>Hukuma Islamiyya, n.p. (Beirut), n.d., pp. 30ff.; Vilayat-i Faqih, n.p., n.d., pp. 35ff.; English version (from the Arabic), ''Islamic Government'' (U.S. Joint Publications Research Service 72663, 1979), pp. 22ff.; French version (from the Persian), Pour un gouvernement islamique (Paris, 1979), pp. 31ff. Another version in Hamid Algar, ''Islam and Revolution: Writings and Declarations of Imam Khomeini'' (Berkeley, 1981), pp. 45ff.</ref>{{failed verification|date=December 2020}} [[Bernard Lewis]] remarks about Khomeini that one of his main grievances against the Shah, [[Mohammad Reza Pahlavi]], was that his legislation allowed the theoretical possibility of non-Muslims exercising political or judicial authority over Muslims.<ref>Bernard Lewis, ''[[The Jews of Islam]]'' notes on p. 3</ref>
* The Egyptian theologian [[Yusuf al-Qaradawi]], chairman of the [[International Union of Muslim Scholars]],<ref name="chair">{{Cite news|title=Qatar-based cleric calls for Egypt vote boycott|date=11 May 2014|author=AFP (news agency) |newspaper=Yahoo News|url=https://uk.news.yahoo.com/qatar-based-cleric-calls-egypt-vote-boycott-192234858.html#9K9eVKw|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140616031315/https://uk.news.yahoo.com/qatar-based-cleric-calls-egypt-vote-boycott-192234858.html|archive-date=16 June 2014|url-status=live}}</ref> has stated in his [[Al Jazeera Media Network|Al Jazeera]] program ''Sharia and Life'', which has an estimated audience of 35 to 60 million viewers:<ref>{{cite book |title=The People Want: A Radical Exploration of the Arab Uprising|author=Gilbert Achcar|year=2013|page=112|publisher=University of California Press|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=-CxxOnASaMAC&pg=PA112
|isbn=978-0520956544}}</ref> "When we say ''dhimmis'' (''ahl al-dhimma'') it means that [...] they are under the covenant of God and His Messenger and the Muslim community and their responsibility (''ḍamān''), and it is everyone's duty to protect them, and this is what is intended by the word. At present many of our brethren are offended by the word ''dhimmis'', and I have stated in what I wrote in my books that I don't see anything to prevent contemporary Islamic [[ijtihad]] from discarding this word ''dhimmis'' and calling them non-Muslim citizens."<ref>لما نقول أهل الذمة يعني أهل ذمة الله يعني هم في عهد الله وعهد رسوله وعهد جماعة المسلمين وضمانهم، الجميع عليه أن يحميهم، فهذا هو المقصود من الكلمة. الآن يتأذى منها الكثير من أخواننا كلمة أهل الذمة، وأنا ذكرت فيما كتبت في كتبي أنني أنا لا أرى أي مانع أمام الاجتهاد الإسلامي المعاصر أن يحذف كلمة أهل الذمة هذه ونسميهم المواطنون من غير المسلمين [http://www.aljazeera.net/programs/religionandlife/2008/5/6/%D8%BA%D9%8A%D8%B1-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B3%D9%84%D9%85%D9%8A%D9%86-%D9%81%D9%8A-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%AC%D8%AA%D9%85%D8%B9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A5%D8%B3%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%85%D9%8A Transcript of the 5-6-2008 "Sharia and Life" episode], Aljazeera.net</ref>
*Another Egyptian Islamist, [[Mohammad Salim al-Awa]] argued the concept of dhimmi must be re-interpreted in the context of [[Egyptian nationalism]]. Al-Awa and other Muslim scholars based this on the idea that while the previous ''dhimma'' condition result from the [[Muslim conquest of Egypt|Islamic conquest]], the modern Egyptian state results from a joint Muslim-Christian campaign to end the [[History of Egypt under the British|British occupation of Egypt]]. In modern-day Egypt, he argues, the constitution replaces the ''dhimma'' contract.<ref>{{cite book|title=Political Islam, Citizenship, and Minorities: The Future of Arab Christians|author=Andrea Zaki Stephanous|pages=160–161|quote="Both Muslims and al-dhimmiyun struggled for the liberation of this land for more than a century and, because of the blood that was shed by both, a new order was created...In the modern state, the constitution took the place of the al-dhimmi contract."}}</ref>
* [[Muhammad Husayn Tabataba'i]], a 20th-century [[Shia Islam|Shia]] scholar writes that dhimmis should be treated "in a good and decent manner". He addresses the argument that good treatment of dhimmis was abrogated by Quranic verse 9:29<ref>Quran 9:29—"Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the [[Islamic eschatology|Last Day]] and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture—fight until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled."</ref> by stating that, in the literal sense, this verse is not in conflict with good treatment of dhimmis.<ref>{{cite web|author1=Muhammad Husayn Tabataba'i|author-link1=Muhammad Husayn Tabataba'i|title=Surah Al-Baqarah, verses 83–88|url=http://www.almizan.org/|website=almizan.org|access-date=1 January 2016|language=ar, en|quote=as-Sadiq (a.s) said: "Verily Allah sent Muhammad (s.a.w.) with five swords: So (there is) a sword against a dhimmi (free non-Muslim subject of an Islamic country). Allah said: and speak to men good (words); it was revealed about the dhimmis, then it was abrogated by another verse, Fight those who do not believe in Allah... (9:29) (al-'Ayyashi)  The author says: In this tradition the Imam has taken the "speech" to mean behavior. We say: Do not speak to him but good; what we mean is: Do not deal with him but in a good and decent manner. This meaning will apply only if we take the word, "abrogated" in its terminological sense. But it may also be taken in its literal sense (as we shall explain under the verse: Whatever signs We abrogate or cause to be forgotten ...2:106); and in that case this verse will not be in conflict with that of the fighting. It should be pointed out that such uses of words in their literal meanings (as against their terminological ones) are not infrequent in the traditions of the Imams.}}</ref>
* [[Javed Ahmad Ghamidi]], a Pakistani theologian, writes in ''[[Mizan]]'' that certain directives of the Quran were specific only to Muhammad against peoples of his times, besides other directives, the campaign involved asking the polytheists of Arabia for submission to Islam as a condition for exoneration and the others for jizya and submission to the political authority of the Muslims for exemption from [[capital punishment]] and for military protection as the dhimmis of the Muslims. Therefore, after Muhammad and [[Companions of the Prophet|his companions]], there is no concept in Islam obliging Muslims to wage war for propagation or implementation of Islam.<ref>[[Javed Ahmed Ghamidi]], ''[[Mizan]]'', Chapter: The Islamic Law of Jihad, Dar ul-Ishraq, 2001. {{OCLC|52901690}} [http://www.studying-islam.org/articletext.aspx?id=771]</ref><ref>"Misplaced Directives", [http://www.renaissance.com.pk/ ''Renaissance''] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060813123204/http://www.renaissance.com.pk/ |date=13 August 2006 }}, [[Al-Mawrid Institute]], Vol. 12, No. 3, March 2002.{{cite web |url=http://www.renaissance.com.pk/martitl2y2.html |title=March_Content2002 |access-date=5 October 2006 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061115065145/http://www.renaissance.com.pk/martitl2y2.html |archive-date=15 November 2006 }}</ref>
* The Iranian Shia jurist Grand Ayatollah [[Naser Makarem Shirazi]] states in ''Selection of the [[Tafsir Nemooneh]]'' that the main philosophy of jizya is that it is only a financial aid to those Muslims who are in the charge of safeguarding the security of the state and dhimmis' lives and properties on their behalf.<ref>[http://library.tebyan.net/books1/1016.htm ''Selection of Tafsir Nemooneh''], Grand Ayatollah Makarim Shirazi, p. 10, vol. 2, on verse 9:29 {{webarchive |url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061118113944/http://library.tebyan.net/books1/1016.htm |date=18 November 2006 }}</ref>
* Prominent Islamic thinkers like [[Fahmi Huwaidi]] and [[Tarek El-Bishry]] have based their justification for full citizenship of non-Muslims in an Islamic states on the precedent set by Muhammad in the [[Constitution of Medina]]. They argue that in this charter the People of Book, have the status of citizens (''muwatinun'') rather than dhimmis, sharing equal rights and duties with Muslims.<ref>{{cite encyclopedia|author1=Muhammad Muslih|author2=Michaelle Browers|title= Democracy |encyclopedia=The Oxford Encyclopedia of the Islamic World|editor=John L. Esposito|publisher=Oxford University Press|location=Oxford|year=2009|url=http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780195305135.001.0001/acref-9780195305135-e-0185|url-access=subscription|doi=10.1093/acref/9780195305135.001.0001|isbn=978-0195305135}}</ref>
* Legal scholar L. Ali Khan also points to the [[Constitution of Medina]] as a way forward for Islamic states in his 2006 paper titled ''The Medina Constitution''. He suggests this ancient document, which governed the status of religions and races in the first Islamic state, in which Jewish tribes are "placed on an equal footing with [...] Muslims" and granted "the freedom of religion," can serve as a basis for the protection of minority rights, equality, and religious freedom in the modern Islamic state.<ref>Khan, Ali, ''Commentary on the Constitution of Medina'' in ''Understanding Islamic Law: From Classical to Contemporary'', Edited by Aminah Beverly McCloud and Hisham Ramadan, Alta Mira Press, 2006, pp. 205–208. {{ISBN?}}</ref><ref>{{cite SSRN |title=The Medina Constitution|first=Ali|last=Khan|date=17 November 2006|ssrn = 945458}}</ref>
* [[Tariq Ramadan]], Professor of Islamic Studies at the [[University of Oxford]], advocates the inclusion of academic disciplines and Islamic society, along with traditional Islamic scholars, in an effort to reform Islamic law and address modern conditions. He speaks of remaining faithful to the higher objectives of sharia law. He posits universal rights of dignity, welfare, freedom, equality and justice in a [[Religious pluralism|religiously]] and [[Cultural pluralism|culturally pluralistic]] Islamic (or other) society, and proposes a dialogue regarding the modern term "citizenship," although it has no clear precedent in classical [[fiqh]]. He further includes the terms "non-citizen", "foreigner", "resident" and "immigrant" in this dialogue, and challenges not only Islam, but modern civilization as a whole, to come to terms with these concepts in a meaningful way with regards to problems of racism, discrimination and oppression.<ref>Ramadan, Tariq, ''Radical Reform: Islamic Ethics and Liberation'', Oxford University Press, 2009, pp. 268–271. {{ISBN?}}</ref>