Talk:Dhimmitude

Edited Misleading bernard lewis Quote

The full Bernard Lewis quote has been provided to correct the partial misleading quote. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.29.197.150 (talk) 21:16, October 14, 2006‎ (UTC)

Discrimination

Adding the discrimination category and side-bar implies that "Dhimmitude" is real. But from the article we can see that Dhimmitude is at best a controversial concept and at worst a myth. We can't treat it as fact.VR _talk 03:34, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

What you say is demonstrably false. For instance, religions other than Islam are not permitted in Saudi Arabia. See Freedom_of_religion_in_Saudi_Arabia. Consider Tomorrow's Pioneers, a television show produced by Hamas that teach children to hate Jews. Read the article Persecution of Christians and pay particular attention to the section on persecution by Muslims and Muslim nations. People are still killed by government officials and by mobs for converting from Islam to other religions. Shall I go on? Is any of this not proof of discrimination? None of this is a "myth" as stated by Bernard Lewis. Besides, Lewis was talking about the status of HISTORICAL dhimmi, not present. This article isn't particularly concerned with the case of historical dhimmis. -- Frotz(talk) 09:46, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

Your above justification is purely WP:OR. Few reliable sources, if any, consider Saudi laws to be an example of dhimmi. Not to say that historically dhimmis weren't discriminated against (they were, they couldn't carry arms etc.), but this article is about a politically motivated neologism, not actual history.VR _talk 18:05, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Are you saying that it's OR to look at other Wikipedia articles for my justification? Look at the article for Bat Ye'or. There is a quote from Robert Spencer linking the two terms of "dhimmitude" and "discrimination". Put the two terms into Google and see what you find. What more proof do you need? -- Frotz(talk) 20:23, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Frotz, your arguments have no basis in wikipedia policy. You can neither rely on google, or other wikipedia article to make assertions on content. The term dhimmitude is controversial and disputed by scholars. Thus we can't treat it as fact.VR _talk 13:47, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Something being controversial and disputed is no reason to pretend it doesn't exist. -- Frotz(talk) 14:06, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia is based on verifiability only. If something is disputed amongst reliable sources, its existence is far from certain, as far as wikipedia is concerned.VR _talk 16:11, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

It's also worth noting that "Islamophobia", which Vice regent added to the article, is just as controversial a "political neologism" as Dhimmitude. Shrigley (talk) 20:38, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that point was made quite some time ago when the criticism section was added. -- Frotz(talk) 21:03, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

I don't mind adding discrimination in the See Also section, like I added Islamophobia there.VR _talk 16:11, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

by the same logic there wasn't any racism in the United States, it's all in the past and can't be verified today and shouldn't be in Wikipedia. Nor is there any such thing as Islamophobia, it just happens that 90% of all terriorist are of the Islamic religion, again it can't be verified can it. Or does just publishing a book act as that verifiable fact. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 147.79.224.1 (talk) 02:49, 2 September 2012 (UTC)

Please, be serious, people! "Dhimmitude" is found straight in the Quran and says something like this "We, the Muslims "admit" religious brotherhood to those of "the Gospels/Bible" and "the Torah/Taurat"." Dhimmitude in practice is to say Ecumenical understanding to the Jews and the Christians and that this larger group is, as we know, from the people of Abraham in the Bible. Please, see the authoritative Quran, http://quran.com/ , with official support from the home of the Holiest sites of Islam, the Mecca and the Medina. Cheers! 85.166.63.12 (talk) 17:31, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Merge discussion

This neologism hasn't caught on outside discussion of Bat Ye'or's ideas, and some extremists who claim to be inspired by her. Therefore, redirect to her biography, explain the concept there - there is space enough. Itsmejudith (talk) 11:19, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

OpposeThis not true its used by scholars and other encyclopedias.For example

• Tibi, Bassam (April 2008). "The Return of the Sacred to Politics as a Constitutional Law The Case of the Shari'atization of Politics in Islamic Civilization". Theoria.
• "Anti-Semitism in the Arab World". Encyclopedia of Race and Racism. Gale Group.
• Sidney H. Griffith (2010). The Church in the Shadow of the Mosque: Christians and Muslims in the World of Islam. Princeton University Press. ISBN 0691146284.

--Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 11:26, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

griffith's and tibi's definitions could easily be mentioned on bat ye'or's page as well. the encyclopedia is a tertiary source that uses someone else's definition. that's the reason why we should avoid the use of tertiary sources (it also failed at the rs/n [1]). in addition, there are not enough reliable secondary sources on this issue to justify this article. i think a merge is a good idea. clearly, the fact that the term has several distinct meaning makes this page susceptible to disputes about what bars to use and so on. this neologism is bat ye'or's invention and it belongs on her page. the ongoing development of her neologism, away from her use, should be included there as well.-- altetendekrabbe  11:33, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Grifith have the whole section in her book titled "Dhimmitude"--Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 11:41, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I don't understand your post: the English is too poor. Itsmejudith (talk) 11:49, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Let me take a "wild" guess and suggest that Shrike means "Griffith has a whole section in her book titled 'Dhimmitude'". __meco (talk) 11:58, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

This concept has been discussed by sources other than bat ye'or. Why do you state that "This neologism hasn't caught on outside discussion of Bat Ye'or's ideas" when this does not appear to be the case? Ankh.Morpork 11:56, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Griffith, who appears to be male, only has one brief mention in the introduction of The Church in the Shadow of the Mosque, not a section. We need a bit more than this to show that a neologism has entered the language. Itsmejudith (talk) 12:09, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Kindly look at P.17.--Shrike (talk)/WP:RX 12:12, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

if you search the term "dhimmitude" on isiknowledge.com you'll get 12 matches only. isiknowledge is one of the world's most prominent scientific search engines. all of them discuss "dhimmitude" in relation to bat ye'or. not griffith, not tibi but bat ye'or.-- altetendekrabbe  12:29, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Merging the articles is probably a good idea. It might cut down on some of the POV and COATRACKING. And it is true that the usage of the term is mostly limited to Bat Ye'or and the circle around her.VolunteerMarek 15:15, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

• support, there are several criteria in the merging process [2], and this page passes all of them. the "dhimmitude"-search results on isiknowledge.com completely link "dhimmitude" to bat ye'or. "dhimmitude" is amply discussed at the bat ye'or page (with the criticism in the reception-section) [3]. hence, there is a considerable amount of duplicates and overlap between the pages. in addition, the dhimmitude-page is short enough for a merger, and it won't expand unless more duplicates are added to it. finally, the bat ye'or-page provides the context which the dhimmitude-page misses.-- altetendekrabbe  16:43, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

• oppose This term is used by scholars other than Bat Ye'or. -- Frotz(talk) 00:56, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose. One person, Bat Ye'or, has coined the term "Dhimmitude", but this is no different than the many other social science terms that were coined by one scholar and then adopted in the scholarly and popular discourse. As Shrike has pointed out, the term is used or referenced in the works of Bassam Tibi, Sidney Griffith, Adam DeVille, Liz Fekete, Philip Perlmutter, Matt Carr, the Encyclopedia of Race and Racism, ad nauseam. The term no longer belongs to the coiner. Altetendekrabbe cites "that the term has several distinct meaning" as a reason to merge. But this is true of many, many other social science terms, not least the ultra-controversial term "Islamophobia", which seems to be promoted by those who dismiss the term "Dhimmitude". Shrigley (talk) 01:00, 1 August 2012 (UTC)

• oppose This seems to have been talked out and after identifying other RS that use the term, should clearly not be limited to Bat Ye'or biographical page. I'm surprised that nobody's pulled the tag after a month and a half. I'll remedy that. TMLutas (talk) 01:00, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

• Oppose. Clearly the term is not limited to Bat Ye'or's use. -- Frotz(talk) 04:24, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

"which literally means protected"

In the lede I find the assertion that dhimmi "literally means protected". It doesn't. First of all, it's a noun: It describes a person being in some specific condition, state or cicumstance. Many Arabic words ending in -i do this, e.g. a Hajji is somebody having performed Hajj, or a Takfiri is sombody who committed Takfir, etc.

For the translation let's turn to the large standard scientific dictionary of Arabic, the Hans Wehr, 4th. ed.: - dhimmi: subject of a pact of protection, free non-muslim subject in Muslim states (see dhimma, ahl al-dhimma) - dhimma: tutelage, protection; pact of protection, treaty; responsibility, obligation (to pay), debt; inviolability, protection for life and limb; protection, guarantee, security; conscience; rebuke, disapproval

There is no literal English translation. I tried to fix this, but was reverted.

88.75.8.48 (talk) 01:04, 6 October 2012 (UTC)