Chapter 35

Those pertaining to non-Muslims are subject to obtaining prior permission from the Islamic State—which is committed to Islam in both word and deed—and must remain under its constant supervision (1). This view aligns in its implications with the position held by the majority of scholars, as the requirement for the Islamic State’s permission and its complete and permanent supervision ensures that the curricula of study do not contain any offense against Islam and Muslims. (1) See: 'Khatwah ila al-Amam 'ala Tariq al-Jihad al-Mubarak' (A Step Forward on the Path of Blessed Jihad) by Sa'id Hawwa, p. 23. ¶

Third Example: Permitting the manifestation of forbidden acts (muharramat) among Muslims to appease disbelievers and those like them. ¶

It is among the fundamental duties and primary prerogatives of the one holding Shar'i authority to prevent the spread of any forbidden act among Muslims and within the Muslim society. Therefore, although Islam permits the people of the covenant (Ahl al-Dhimma) to consume wine, eat pork, and break the fast during the day in Ramadan within the Muslim society, this is conditional upon it not extending to others in any form. Thus, it is not permissible for the Ahl al-Dhimma to sell wine to Muslims, gift it to them, assist them in its production, press it for a Muslim, or transport it to him. Furthermore, a Dhimmi may not sell it to another Dhimmi publicly. If a Dhimmi consumes it, becomes intoxicated, and then appears among Muslims, he must be punished (ta'zir) for making his consumption public. As for what they do in private within their homes without causing any harm to Muslims in any way, they are not to be interfered with. However, if they do not desist from making wine public or assisting Muslims in obtaining it, they shall be punished in a manner that ensures this evil is not made public and does not reach the hands of Muslims (1). It is permissible for them to enter the Abode of Islam (Dar al-Islam) with wine and pork, provided that... ¶

When the Muslim ruler ensures with justice that they [the Dhimmis] have purchased it for their own private use or among themselves, he must impose restrictions and conditions that guarantee these individuals will not transgress or cause harm to the Muslims (1). ¶

However, if there is a fear that it might be sold to a Muslim, thereby corrupting their religion, or if such instances are documented, it becomes mandatory to prevent the entry of alcohol and swine. This is because one of the established legal maxims of Shariah is that 'averting harm takes precedence over bringing about benefit.' If a non-Muslim trades in alcohol, swine, or anything forbidden among Muslims, or does so in a place where no Dhimmis reside, some jurists have ruled that the alcohol must be spilled, the swine killed, and the individual deported if they are not a Dhimmi; if they are a Dhimmi, they should be punished (ta’zir) (2). ¶

Given the allegiance that most rulers in our current era have toward the enemies of Islam and the Muslims, these governments have legalized the sale and promotion of alcohol within the Muslim society, especially in airlines and private and public hotels. They have also permitted eating and drinking during the daytime in Ramadan for the general public under the pretext that these places are frequented by non-Muslims. In doing this, they have not asked themselves about the position of Islam on the matter, nor have they shown any consideration for the Muslim society they govern by questioning this reckless behavior. They know that society does not hold them accountable for even greater matters, so it is even more unlikely that they would be held accountable for this crime, which is added to the various other types of crimes that have crowded the minds and thoughts of the people to the point that some have begun to make them forget others. ¶

Among the instances of allegiance to the disbelievers is allowing their men and women to be [immodestly dressed/naked] among the Muslims. This Ummah has been afflicted—among other things—with the migration of many disbelievers into its lands for various purposes and diverse objectives, whom the Muslims initially welcomed with good intentions. ¶

With extreme naivety and superficiality, they were deceived by their pleasant appearance and gentle demeanor, failing to realize that this was merely a tactic of deception and a means of trickery. Subsequently, the disbelievers gradually began to reveal their true nature. Their women started appearing in markets and public spaces in a manner that invited indecency and vice. Weak-willed individuals swarmed toward these sights just as flies swarm toward filth. Some Muslim women, perceiving these displays as a way to gain fame and attention, ignorantly and foolishly attempted to imitate these disbelieving women. They cast off the mantle of modesty and purity, mimicking the disbelieving women in every detail, until most Islamic lands were overcome by a moral apostasy and manifestations of permissiveness that would make one blush with shame. ¶

This would not have occurred had Muslims maintained a firm stance toward the disbelievers and dealt with them in accordance with the requirements of Allah’s Shariah, which protects society from all vices and preserves all virtues. ¶

One might ask: what is the Islamic position regarding the dress of disbelievers within the Dar al-Islam (Abode of Islam)? ¶

The answer is that Islam forbids all people—whether Muslim or disbeliever, men or women—from exposing their 'awrah (private parts). This is the foundational principle in the Dar al-Islam, as looking at a woman's hair or her charms without a legal Shariah necessity is prohibited, regardless of whether the woman is Muslim or a woman of the Book (Kitabiyyah); the ruling is the same for both. (1) ¶

In the time of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ), there was no specific dress for the disbelievers. The reason, and Allah knows best, is that even the disbelievers of that time did not possess the degree of lack of protective jealousy (dayyuthah), lewdness, and nudity present in later eras, where most disbelieving and semi-disbelieving women appear with their 'awrah exposed. ¶

Therefore, a disbelieving woman in a Muslim society is not required to observe the Shariah-compliant hijab. ¶

(1) See: Fath al-Bari, Vol. 6, p. 191. ¶

that which Islam has obligated upon the Muslim woman; she is merely required to cover her 'awrah (intimate parts), which is everything except the face and hands—that is, what a Muslim man is not permitted to look at from among his mahram (unmarriageable) relatives, with the exception of the wife, who is exempted from this. ¶

The obligation of distinction (al-ghiyar) between Muslims and disbelievers began during the era of Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him). A Christian woman came to Khalid bin 'Arfatah, the governor of Kufa, and embraced Islam. She mentioned that her husband was beating her to force her to remain a Christian, and she provided proof of this. Khalid punished the husband, shaved his forelock (nasiya), and separated the two of them. ¶

The Christian complained to the Commander of the Faithful, Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him), who summoned Khalid and asked him about the matter. When Khalid related the story to him, he said, 'The judgment is what you have already judged.' ¶

He wrote to the provinces that they (the non-Muslims) should have their forelocks trimmed and should not wear the attire of Muslims so that they might be recognized among them. ¶

Among the conditions Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) imposed upon the People of the Covenant (Ahl al-Dhimmah) was their commitment to attire distinct from that of the Muslims, especially for their men. It is mentioned in the Umari Conditions: 'And that we adhere to our own attire wherever we may be, and that we do not resemble the Muslims in our mounts, clothing, and the like.' This is a practice established by one whose sunnah the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) commanded us to follow. ¶

From a long hadith: (The Prophet ﷺ said): 'You must follow my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the rightly-guided Caliphs after me; hold fast to it with your molars' (the Hadith). ¶

Thus, a Muslim, whether male or female, should imitate and follow those whom Allah has commanded us to follow: the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ), his Companions, and the Mothers of the Believers. As for the disbeliever (kafir) who lives among Muslims, it is mandatory for him to wear the dress of his fellow disbelievers, provided he does not expose any part of his awrah (intimate parts), and that his attire is distinguishable from that of the Muslims so that he is known to be a disbeliever. Consequently, he should not be subject to the same demands as a Muslim, and those who see him should not imitate his actions, knowing that he is a disbeliever. ¶

As for the non-Muslim woman in the Abode of Islam (Dar al-Islam), the same requirements of covering (satr) apply to her as apply to a Muslim woman. It is not permissible for her to display her adornments (tabarruj), nor to mingle with unrelated men in a manner that invites indecency and vice. ¶

For this reason, Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya did not mention a specific form of distinction (ghiyar) for women regarding the distinction between Muslims and the People of the Covenant (Ahl al-Dhimmah); most of what he mentioned relates to the distinction for men. Although some writers have pointed to the distinction for women being the wearing of a yellow garment or tying a belt around the waist, the conditions imposed by Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) upon the People of the Covenant did not include any of that. ¶

The reason, and Allah knows best, is that women rarely went out, and this does not necessitate discrimination or an alteration [of their status]. It has been narrated that Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz (may Allah be pleased with him) forbade Christian women from visiting public bathhouses in the markets. This indicates that the women of the People of the Covenant (Ahl al-Dhimmah) are obligated within the Muslim society not to display adornment and to cover every part of their body that invites desire or awakens temptation. It is not permissible to use the saying of the Almighty, 'There is no compulsion in religion,' as an argument against this, because obligating them to cover their private parts, chests, and similar areas is not a compulsion to convert to Islam; rather, it is submission to the general public order of life, even if they remain in a state of disbelief. ¶

Al-Tabari mentioned that during the era of al-Mutawakkil, women of the Ahl al-Dhimmah were required, whenever one of them wished to leave her house, to cover herself with a yellow outer garment (dithar) and wear a belt (mintaqah) around her waist. In the year 734 AH, the Caliph in Baghdad, Cairo, and their surrounding areas obligated the Dhimmis to wear yellow and blue outer garments (izar). In the year 755 AH, the Caliph mandated that Christian women wear blue izars and Jewish women wear red izars, while allowing them to consume wine and eat swine flesh. ¶

It is not permissible for them to openly display such things in Muslim lands, nor to introduce them in a manner that seeks publicity, because this constitutes the manifestation of the rites of disbelief (kufr) within the Abode of Islam (Dar al-Islam), which is prohibited in Islamic Shariah as previously clarified. If this is prohibited, then it is even more imperative to prevent non-Muslim women who are 'clothed yet naked' from appearing in the midst of the Muslim community, for their danger is more severe than the danger of displaying alcohol or pork. The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: 'I have not left behind any trial more harmful to men than women.' ¶

If Islam has obligated believing Muslim women to the sanctity of faith, then it is all the more obligatory to impose this upon non-Muslim women, who are closer to every vice and further from every virtue. Dr. Abd al-Karim Zaidan mentioned that the People of the Covenant (Ahl al-Dhimmah) and those in a similar status under a covenant (Ahl al-'Ahd) are forbidden from openly displaying immorality, even if it pertains to matters they consider prohibited themselves, such as lewdness and similar acts, just as a Muslim is strictly forbidden from them. ¶

It is reported in the Hadith: 'The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) cursed men who imitate women and women who imitate men.' ¶

This Hadith is general in its condemnation of any woman who imitates men or vice versa, whether they are Muslim or non-Muslim. Since this act is an abomination (munkar) and its display in the Islamic society is the manifestation of vice, it is required by the conditions of the dhimma and covenant that these individuals do not manifest any form of vice if they wish to live with the Muslim community in honesty and peace. The appearance of non-Muslim women in the midst of the Muslim community in clothing that incites provocation and temptation—whether viewed under civil law or the sphere of personal rights—is, in both cases, not permissible for non-Muslim women to be uncovered in the Muslim society. ¶

The civil law is founded upon the obligation to respect the sentiments of all people, and it is not permissible for anyone to provoke their feelings and instincts, or to cause them distress. The manifestations displayed by non-Muslim (infidel) women in the Abode of Islam (Dar al-Islam) constitute an assault on people's sentiments and harm to their souls, whether the observer is a Muslim or a non-Muslim. This is due to two reasons: ¶

The first reason: If the person observing these non-Muslim women, who are devoid of the clothing of modesty and virtue, is a Muslim, he finds in these manifestations something that triggers his religious zeal against this manifest evil and against images that contradict the rulings of Islam. Even if he is weak in faith, he may experience sexual arousal that causes him pain, embarrassment, and distress; for regardless, he is a sensitive human being of flesh and blood, feeling what he sees and hears, and is thus affected by it negatively or positively. ¶

The second reason: If we were to assume that Muslims avert their gaze from these exposed scenes and indecent images, the non-Muslim men themselves would still be affected by these manifestations in a way that ignites the fire of carnal desire and a sense of deprivation within them. This drives them to commit various types and forms of crimes in order to extinguish that flaming fire within themselves, which finds nothing to limit its intensity or redirect it properly, given their distance from faith and Islam. ¶

Thus, in the civil law based on Islamic Shariah, there is a text indicating the equality of Muslims and the Dhimmi (protected non-Muslim subjects) in public obligations regarding moral aspects. Nothing has been exempted from this for the Dhimmis except for wine and swine; they are permitted to produce wine and consume it privately, provided that nothing of it or its harm reaches the Muslims, and they are permitted to raise swine, consume them, and sell them among themselves.(1) ¶

(1) See: Al-Mabsut by Al-Sarakhsi, Vol. 13, pp. 137-138. ¶

[blank page] ¶

Their (non-Muslim women) going out unveiled and displaying their adornment. Added to these evidences is the report that Talhah ibn Ubayd Allah married a Jewish woman, and Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman married a Christian woman, and Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) became intensely angry over the marriage to these infidel women. It is known with certainty that Talhah and Hudhayfah would never marry women who were immodest, vulgar, seductive, or uncommitted to the appearance of chastity and virtue, even if they were non-Muslims. This is because it was the custom of the Arabs in the Peninsula previously to protect their honor and chastity, to distance themselves from the causes of vice, and to treat this matter with such gravity that their zeal for honor reached the extent of burying their daughters alive before they reached the age of puberty. ¶

Based on this, those who have become morally apostate have no excuse for leaving women 'clothed yet naked' and seductive within the lands of the Muslims. ¶

Indeed, if there were a true Islamic state, it would not have permitted the spread of this moral apostasy in the lands of the Muslims. And if there were a Muslim public that held allegiance to Islam and enmity toward its enemies, it would not have accepted this moral apostasy, nor would it have remained in humiliation and ignominy beneath the feet of the oppressors, from among the manifest disbelievers and the agent hypocrites. The corruption, nudity, indecency, and debauchery that permeate the lands of the Muslims have no justification, regardless of whether the perpetrator is a female disbeliever or Muslim, or a male disbeliever or Muslim, because Islam fights indecency and evil in the Abode of Islam, regardless of its source. However, due to the allegiance of many authorities to the disbelievers—including moral allegiance—the Muslim in his own home has come to feel as if he is in the Abode of Disbelief, because of the manifestations of disbelief he sees that cause every zealous Muslim to hang their head in shame. ¶

Thus, the laws of the disbelievers run with their depravity, and their order appears to be exalted. There is no power nor strength except in Allah, the Most High, the Almighty. ¶

[blank page] ¶

Neither a bi'ah (church), nor a dayr (monastery), nor a sawma'ah (hermitage) shall be established, because they were built during the Islamic era and they represent Islam and its people. ¶

Second Category: Lands conquered by Muslims by force ('anwatan), such as Alexandria in Egypt, Constantinople in Turkey, and other such cities and villages. It is not permissible to establish any new churches or synagogues there, although according to the preferred opinion among the jurists, it is permissible to leave those already existing; some scholars have stated that their demolition is obligatory because these are lands owned by Muslims. However, the most appropriate course is to maintain them and not to renovate whatever has fallen into ruin. ¶

Third Category: Lands conquered through a peace treaty between the Muslims and their inhabitants. The preferred opinion in this regard is to leave the churches and synagogues that existed there at the time of the conquest as they are, and to prohibit the building or restoration of those that have been demolished. This is the opinion of Imam al-Shafi'i and Imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy on them), unless the dhimmis stipulated their maintenance in the peace treaty with the Imam, in which case their covenant must be fulfilled. When the dhimmis violate the conditions of the peace treaty, then it becomes permissible to demolish what remains of them based on their breach of the covenant. ¶

According to the rulings on this matter, Islam does not permit the establishment of new churches in Dar al-Islam (the Abode of Islam). The goal of Siyasah Shar'iyyah (Islamic political policy) is to gradually reduce them whenever the opportunity arises, as they represent falsehood that must be removed from Dar al-Islam. Thus, it is stated in the Hadith: 'No church shall be built in Islam, and those that fall into ruin shall not be renovated' (1). ¶

However, many contemporary rulers have transgressed this matter just as they have transgressed other Islamic laws. Instead of maintaining mosques and assisting Muslims in doing so, these rulers have begun to view mosques with hostility. Countless mosques have been demolished upon their worshippers in Syria and other Muslim lands, while we find negligence and turning a blind eye toward the construction of churches and the spread of their custodians—the disbelievers and corrupters on earth. It has reached a point where some leaders, who are counted among the Muslims, are taking the lead in building churches using the public treasury of the Muslims (Bayt al-Mal), to perform the rituals of disbelief fourteen centuries after they were abolished. As an example, we mention the statement made by the President of Egypt (Sadat) when he signed the treaty of surrender (reconciliation) with the Jews and Christians. (William Mitten-Dorf), the head of a very famous American company called 'Tiffany,' invited him and presented the Egyptian president with an award from the Christians for Sadat's reconciliation with the Jews. Upon that, Sadat thought, how could he return the favor? ¶

He realized that the most precious thing to them would be for him to build churches for them in Egypt, at a time when the Egyptian president was handing over Jerusalem (al-Quds) to the Jews. Sadat asked (William Mitten) to accompany him to Egypt to lay the foundation for a grand church on Mount Sinai together. He accepted this offer, and it was on its way to implementation (2), except that Allah willed otherwise. ¶

(1) Narrated by Kathir bin Murrah from Ali bin Abi Talib, from Umar bin al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with them both), from the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). See: Al-Mughni wal-Sharh al-Kabir, Vol. 10, p. 620. (2) See: Al-Mujtama Magazine (Kuwait), Issue (479), 11th Year, dated 28/6/1400 AH, p. 15. ¶

Sadat did not stop there, but issued a presidential decree authorizing the construction of fifty churches every year (1). Accordingly, the number of new churches built within ten years would reach five hundred. When the Sadat government was forced to demolish a church located in the middle of a new street, it built eleven churches in place of the one. Municipal law in Egypt during the Sadat era stated that it is mandatory to obtain a permit to build mosques at any level, whereas churches are built without any permit (2). This matter is not limited to Egypt alone, but has extended to Dubai, Fujairah, and Abu Dhabi. The magazine 'Al-Islah', published in Dubai in the UAE, published a picture of a huge church in Dubai, stating in its caption: 'This is one of the churches in Dubai, which has matched the height of the minarets of the mosques in this Muslim country.' In Abu Dhabi, a plan was laid out for the oil city of Ruwais, which included a design for a large church to be built there. Missionary societies in Dubai distributed leaflets to raise funds for this church, which is considered the second of its kind in Abu Dhabi (3). In Fujairah, high-level contacts are taking place to obtain a permit from the Fujairah government to establish a complex that includes some churches, schools, and missionary centers (4). All this is happening in Muslim lands, especially in the Arabian Peninsula, about which the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: 'I will surely expel the Jews and the Christians from the Arabian Peninsula until I leave nothing in it but a Muslim' (5). ¶

Are these not the people who permit the construction of churches in Muslim lands, particularly in the Arabian Peninsula, or who turn a blind eye to those already existing, having thereby magnified the enemies of God more than they have magnified God, His Messenger, and the religion of Islam? Have they not loved them more than they love God and His Messenger? Were it not for this, they would not have disobeyed the command of God and His Messenger to obey the command of the polytheists, nor would they have sought their pleasure by establishing those churches, which represent the manifestation of kufr (disbelief) over Islam. ¶

How could it be otherwise? When God Almighty has demanded from them the opposite—which is the manifestation of Islam over kufr—as per His saying: "It is He who sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth to manifest it over all religion, although the polytheists dislike it." And He commanded us to follow the example of the Messenger (ﷺ) in His saying: "There has certainly been for you in the Messenger of God an excellent pattern." Furthermore, in the hadith from Ibn Abbas (may God be pleased with them both), the Messenger of God (ﷺ) said: "Two qiblas cannot coexist in one land, and there is no jizya upon a Muslim." ¶

So, what answer will those who proliferate churches and places of worship in the lands of the Muslims provide? Has their love for the Jews and the Christians become greater than their love for God, His Messenger, and the believers? ¶

O God, we disavow before You what those who have imposed themselves upon the necks of the Muslims are doing in their allegiance to Your enemies and their hostility toward Your allies. Verily, You are sufficient for us, and the best Disposer of affairs. ¶

The Fifth Example: Granting disbelievers freedom of movement and residence among Muslims. The tolerance of Islam toward non-Muslims who differ in creed has reached the extent of permitting them permanent residence as Ahl al-Dhimma (protected people) or temporary residence as Ahl al-'Ahd (covenanted people), with freedom of movement and residence, provided they do not violate the requirements of the contract and covenant. However, there is an exception to this, as the jurists (fuqaha) have divided the Abode of Islam (Dar al-Islam) into four categories, which are as follows: First: The Sacred Mosque (al-Masjid al-Haram). The jurists unanimously agree that it is not permissible for the foot of a polytheist (mushrik) to tread within the Sacred Mosque, whether they are an original disbeliever or an apostate, such as those who profess communist or Ba'athist ideologies and the like, due to the generality of the Almighty's saying: 'Indeed, the polytheists are unclean, so let them not approach al-Masjid al-Haram after this year of theirs' (Surah At-Tawbah: 28). The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) sent Ali after the revelation of this verse to announce to the people... ¶

Hajj (that no kafir shall enter Paradise, no mushrik shall perform Hajj after this year, and no one shall circumambulate the House while naked)(1). ¶

Second: The Sacred Precinct (Haram) region, which is Makkah and the areas surrounding it that constitute its sacred boundaries: A non-Muslim, regardless of the nature of their disbelief, is not permitted to enter it, neither as a resident nor as a passerby. This is the school of thought of the Shafi'is and the Hanbalis. Abu Hanifa disagreed on this, as he viewed it permissible to pass through the Haram region without residing therein, with the exception of the Masjid al-Haram, which a mushrik is not permitted to approach. His argument for this is that the verse specified the Masjid al-Haram; therefore, it does not extend to other areas not covered by the evidence. ¶

Those who uphold the prohibition of entering the entire Haram region responded that the Holy Qur'an forbade non-Muslims from approaching the Masjid al-Haram, and the intended meaning is the entire Haram, not just the Masjid al-Haram alone, as it expressed the whole by mentioning its most significant part(2). ¶

The preferred (rajih) opinion on this issue is the prohibition of entering the entire Haram region, for the following reasons: 1. Allah mentioned the prohibition of entering the Masjid al-Haram and explicitly stated it, and the Masjid al-Haram is a small part of the entire Haram. Therefore, 'Ata held the view that it is forbidden to allow a mushrik to enter the entire Haram(3). 2. Authentic hadiths were reported regarding the expulsion of the Jews and the Christians from the entire Peninsula; thus, a fortiori, this includes the Haram region, as confirmed by narrations in Sahih Muslim(4). (Footnotes): (1) See: Suwar min Hayat al-Rasul, Amin Duwaidar, p. 582. (2) See: Ahkam al-Dhimmiyin wa al-Musta'minin fi Dar al-Islam, Dr. Abd al-Karim Zaidan, p. 42. (3) See: Tafsir al-Qurtubi, Vol. 8, p. 104. (4) See: Nayl al-Awtar by Al-Shawkani, Vol. 8, p. 222; and Al-Ahkam al-Sultaniyya by Al-Mawardi, p. 167. ¶

Third: Non-Muslims Residing in the Arabian Peninsula and Hejaz: ¶

The primary principle regarding this matter is derived from the Hadiths that indicate the prohibition of non-Muslims residing in the Arabian Peninsula and Hejaz. It is narrated from Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) that he said: 'The Prophet’s (ﷺ) illness became severe on a Thursday, and at the time of his death, he commanded three things: Expel the polytheists from the Arabian Peninsula, give gifts to the delegations in the same way I used to, and I forgot the third.' It is narrated from Ibn Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) that he heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) say: 'I will surely expel the Jews and the Christians from the Arabian Peninsula until I leave nothing in it but Muslims.' Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) said: 'The last instruction of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) was: Let there not be two religions in the Arabian Peninsula.' Abu Ubaidah ibn al-Jarrah (may Allah be pleased with him) said: 'The last words spoken by the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) were: Expel the Jews of the Hejaz and the people of Najran from the Arabian Peninsula.' From Ibn Umar (may Allah be pleased with him), it is reported that 'Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) expelled the Jews and Christians from the land of Hejaz, and he mentioned the Jews of Khaybar, adding that Umar exiled them to Tayma and Jericho.' ¶

The apparent meaning of these Hadiths and the actions of Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) is that it is obligatory to expel the polytheists from every place that falls under the name of the 'Arabian Peninsula.' Al-Khalil ibn Ahmad defined the Arabian Peninsula as extending from the Abyssinian Sea (Red Sea) in the west to the sea... ¶

From Fars in the east to the Euphrates in the north and the Indian Ocean in the south. This conforms to our contemporary geographical concept stretching from the Red Sea in the west to the Gulf in the east, and from the land of Iraq in the north to Hadhramaut in the south, which is consistent with the texts of the Hadith (1). ¶

Al-Asma'i defined the Arabian Peninsula as extending from the furthest reaches of Aden to the rural areas of Iraq in length, and from Jeddah and its adjacent areas to the outskirts of Syria in width. It was called 'Jazirat al-Arab' (Island of the Arabs) because it is surrounded by seas, namely the Indian Ocean, the Sea of Qulzum (Red Sea), the Persian Sea, and the Abyssinian Sea; and it was attributed to the Arabs because it had been in their possession since ancient times (2). ¶

Scholars have differed on the issue of prohibiting residence in the Peninsula and the Hijaz. Some have applied the prohibiting Hadiths only to the Hijaz, excluding the rest of the Arabian Peninsula, while others have applied the prohibiting Hadiths to the entire Peninsula, including the Hijaz. ¶

The summary of the two opinions is as follows: First Opinion: This is the view of a group of jurists who stated that the land where polytheists are prohibited from residing is specifically the land of the Hijaz, namely Makkah, Madinah, Yamamah, and their adjacent villages and districts, for several reasons: 1. Most jurists have agreed that the people of the Dhimmah (non-Muslim citizens) are not prohibited from residing in Yemen, even though it is part of the Arabian Peninsula. This is the position of the majority of the Shafi'is, Hanafis, Hanbalis, and Imamiyyah Shi'a (3). 2. Those who argued for prohibiting polytheists from residing only in the Hijaz relied on the Hadith of Abi... (footnotes) ¶

Footnotes: (1) See Fath al-Bari, Vol. 6, p. 171, and pp. 270-272 of the same volume and book. (2) See Al-Ahkam al-Sultaniyyah by Qadi Abu Ya'la al-Hanbali, pp. 179-181. (3) See Ahkam al-Dhimmiyin wa al-Musta'minin fi Dar al-Islam by Dr. Abdul Karim Zaidan, p. 92. ¶