Chapter 39

Third Topic: Allegiance (Muwalat) to Disbelievers in Economic Affairs ¶

Under this are five examples as follows: ¶

1. First Example: Permitting usurious transactions (riba) with disbelievers and for their sake. 2. Second Example: Providing financial aid to disbelievers. 3. Third Example: Enabling disbelievers to exploit the wealth of Muslims. 4. Fourth Example: Placing disbelievers in important positions within Islamic lands. 5. Fifth Example: Granting inheritance to disbelievers and providing them with maintenance (nafaqah) from the people of Islam. ¶

Answer: In a situation where no explicit (sarih) or implicit (kinayah) word of divorce (talaq) has been used towards your wife, and you merely said in a state of anger, "I hate you" or "You are not my wife" (without the intention of divorce), then from a Shariah perspective, divorce does not occur. However, if you uttered these words with the intention of divorce or if your intention included divorcing her, then the divorce does take place. If the matter is doubtful or you are not certain of what your intention was, you should consult a local Mufti or Dar al-Ifta and explain your case in detail so that they may issue a Shariah fatwa after hearing your full statement. It is better to avoid such conversations in the future and to treat each other with good character (husn al-akhlaq). May Allah bring about reconciliation, peace, and blessings between you. And Allah knows best. ¶

First Example: The permissibility of dealing in Riba (usury) with the disbelievers and for their sake. ¶

Islam has permitted commercial dealings with the disbelievers, whether they reside within the Islamic state or outside it. However, such dealings are subject to specific conditions and restrictions that ensure these interactions remain within defined boundaries, thereby securing the interests of the Muslims without becoming a source of harm to them. An example of such commercial dealings with disbelievers within the Islamic state is the trade that took place in Medina between the Muslims and the Jews and other polytheists. The cause of the expulsion of the Banu Qaynuqa’ was that a Muslim woman brought some goods and sold them in the market of Banu Qaynuqa’. She sat by a Jewish goldsmith to make a purchase, and the Jew tied the edge of her garment to her back. When she stood up, her private parts were exposed. They laughed at her, and she cried out for help. A Muslim man rushed to the Jewish goldsmith and killed him. The Jews then turned against the Muslim and killed him. The situation escalated, leading the Messenger of Allah ﷺ to besiege them and expel them from Medina.(1) ¶

(1) See: Tahdhib Sirat Ibn Hisham, ‘Abd al-Salam Harun, pp. 174-175. ¶

Muhanna ibn Yahya al-Shami, a jurist and scholar, asked Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal about buying and selling with the disbelievers (kuffar), and he replied that there is no harm in it. There were markets in Mecca which Muslims would attend, and the Prophet (ﷺ) himself attended some of these markets, which included various types of trade during the Hajj season. This pertains to commercial dealings with the disbelievers within the Dar al-Islam (Abode of Islam). As for commercial dealings with the disbelievers in the Dar al-Harb (Abode of War), it is permissible, as this was established during the time of the Messenger (ﷺ). The trade of Uthman ibn Affan and Abd al-Rahman ibn Awf (may Allah be pleased with them) used to travel to and from Sham (the Levant) and Medina, even though Sham was at that time a Dar al-Harb against Islam and the Muslims. Therefore, traveling to the lands of the disbelievers for the purpose of trade—provided the individual preserves his religion and is able to manifest his faith—is permissible when the necessary motives exist and the obstacles that pose a risk to one's religion, life, and wealth are absent. There is no doubt that the markets of the disbelievers contain sinful elements or things that aid in sin. If an individual finds within himself the ability to refrain from their corruption and avoid their falsehood, then travel is permissible for him. Otherwise, if he lacks the strength to resist the temptations and means of corruption in the disbelieving society, the travel is prohibited for him, in accordance with the noble Hadith: 'Leave that which makes you doubt for that which does not make you doubt.' Whoever enters the Dar al-Harb from among the Muslims as an envoy, merchant, or student of knowledge under a guarantee of safety (aman) from them, then betraying them is forbidden for him, because they only granted him the aman on the condition that he would not betray them or assault their lives, wealth, or honor. ¶

It is not permissible for a Muslim who carries merchandise to Dar al-Harb (the land of war) to transport to them items that aid them in performing prohibited acts. Thus, it is not permissible to carry grapes, dates, or barley that they use to produce alcohol; likewise, it is not permissible to sell them weapons with which they fight Muslims. However, selling them goods that are for food, clothing, or transportation—which are permissible for both us and them—is lawful. ¶

As for the Ahl al-Dhimmah (protected non-Muslim subjects) and the Ahl al-'Ahd (those with a treaty), when they engage in trade within Dar al-Islam (the land of Islam), the Muslim ruler has the choice to collect the tithe (ushr), half the tithe, more, or less, or to allow them and exempt them from any financial obligation, or to exempt some goods and not others. This is based on what the ruler deems to be in the interest of Islam and the Muslims. These matters are founded on safeguarding the general interest of the Muslims in Dar al-Islam and are subject to a Shariah-based policy (Siyasa Shar'iyya) that aligns with the interest and safety of the Ummah. ¶

Regarding dealing with them and accepting their money—even if they might earn it through usury (riba), gambling, indecency, or similar means—the majority of scholars hold that it is permissible to transact with them, even if their sources of wealth are illicit due to their involvement in what Allah has forbidden. There is evidence for this from the Quran and Sunnah. The Almighty says: 'And the food of those who were given the Scripture is lawful for you.' This is a clear text regarding the lawfulness of their food, even though it may reach them through forbidden methods. The Prophet (peace be upon him) interacted with the People of the Scripture and sanctioned dealings with them on various occasions, a view which Al-Qurtubi favored. ¶

As for dealing with them through usury (riba) outside Dar al-Islam, or allowing them to engage in usury with Muslims or among themselves within Dar al-Islam, this is impermissible by unanimous consensus due to the definitive and mutawatir (widely transmitted) evidences from the Quran and Sunnah. ¶

When Allah the Almighty has declared something forbidden for a Muslim, it is not permissible to deem that forbidden act as lawful at any time or in any place, except for that which the Shariah has specifically exempted, such as dead meat and the like. This is because the prohibition of these forbidden acts is absolute. Therefore, it is not permissible for a person to excuse their involvement in forbidden acts by claiming they are in a non-believer's society that holds no sanctity. The Muslims lived among the disbelieving Quraish in Makkah and the Jews in Madinah, yet they did not engage in usury (riba), gambling, or similar acts with these disbelievers. ¶

The ruling on usury and gambling is akin to the ruling on adultery (zina). The verses indicating the prohibition of adultery are absolute and are not specified or restricted to adultery with Muslim women only. Imam al-Shafi'i (may Allah have mercy on him) says: 'Islam obligates the Muslim, wherever they may be, to implement its rulings and perform its obligatory acts of worship and duties. These duties do not lapse as long as one is alive, sane, and of free will.' ¶

The Messenger of Allah ﷺ wrote to the Magians of Hajar: 'Either you abandon usury, or you shall be notified of a war from Allah and His Messenger.' This warning contains evidence that it is not permissible for the People of the Covenant (Ahl al-Dhimmah) or those under a treaty to engage in usury and similar forbidden acts in all divine laws. Thus, there is no validity to the excuses offered by those defeated in their creed and morals, who claim that the permission for certain forbidden acts is only due to the presence of a group of non-Muslims under a treaty. This is exactly what some financial institutions operating in certain Muslim countries do; they engage in usury openly and secretly, thereby declaring war against Allah, His Messenger, and the believers. By doing so, they deviate from the Shariah of Allah and violate His command. Whoever wages war against Allah is indeed defeated. Allah the Almighty says: 'O you who have believed, fear Allah and give up what remains [due to you] of interest, if you should be believers. And if you do not, then be informed of a war [against you] from Allah and His Messenger.' ¶

Allah and His Messenger; but if you repent, you shall have your principal sums, neither dealing unjustly, nor being dealt with unjustly (1). ¶

Thus, the presence of non-Muslims in the lands of Islam does not justify the permissibility of usury (riba) in any way within Islamic countries. ¶

As for a Muslim entering into a partnership with a non-Muslim in trade or similar matters, the Shafi'is consider it makruh (disliked) for a Muslim to partner with a non-Muslim in financial transactions, based on what was narrated from Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both), who said: "Do not enter into a partnership with a Jew, a Christian, or a Magian, for they deal in usury, and usury is not lawful" (2). ¶

The Hanbalis state that partnership is permissible on the condition that the non-Muslim is not left in exclusive control of the capital without the Muslim, because the non-Muslim engages in usury. If the Muslim himself manages the company's dealings, the impediment is removed, and the partnership becomes permissible under this condition (3). ¶

Belligerent disbelievers (kafir harbi) support one another, acting as a single entity. Therefore, it is permissible for the ruler, when they enter the lands of Islam, to stipulate that they shall not take anything from the Muslims, and for whatever they take unlawfully, they shall be held liable. The liability is to be exacted from the general wealth of the belligerents, as the Prophet (peace be upon him) did with the Uqayli captive when he asked: "O Muhammad, for what crime have I been seized?" He replied: "For the crimes of your allies from Thaqif." The Prophet (peace be upon him) kept him imprisoned to achieve his objective from his allies. ¶

If we capture a belligerent entering the Dar al-Islam for any purpose, with the intent of freeing one of our own whom they have captured, this is permissible by the consensus of the Muslims (4). It is our right to detain him until they return our captive. Similarly, if we seize the property of a belligerent until they return what they have taken from a Muslim, this is permissible if the Imam stipulated such in the treaty of safe conduct (ahd al-aman) upon their entry (5). ¶

(1) Surah Al-Baqarah, verses (278-279). (2) Previous source, p. 555, no. (2). (3) See Al-Mughni, Vol. 5, pp. 3-4. (4) See Mukhtasar al-Fatawa al-Masriyya / Ibn Taymiyyah, p. 516. (5) Previous source, same location. ¶

Based on this, if belligerent disbelievers (kuffar muharibun) impose hardships on the Muslims residing among them, it is permissible for the Muslims to treat the musta'min disbelievers (those granted safety/asylum) in the same manner as Muslims are treated in the lands of the disbelievers, acting upon the saying of Allah Almighty: "And if you punish, punish with an equivalent of that with which you were harmed." However, this reciprocal treatment is not absolute in every respect; for disbelievers in the Abode of Disbelief (dar al-kufr) may treat Muslims with various forms of injustice, and there is no equivalence in injustice. This confirms that the source of an alien's rights in the Abode of Islam (dar al-islam) is the Islamic Shariah and the noble morals and high ideals it represents. ¶

As for the dhimmi (protected non-Muslims), they may not be held accountable for the sins of other disbelievers unless they conspire with the belligerents and their treachery is proven. In that case, it is permissible to punish them for their crime of treason, just as the Prophet (peace be upon him) did with the Banu Qurayzah when they sided with the Confederates (al-Ahzab) and supported them against the Muslims. Allah Almighty says: "And He brought down those who supported them among the People of the Scripture from their fortresses and cast terror into their hearts [so that] a party you killed, and you took captive a party." ¶

We conclude from the above that it is forbidden for Muslims, whether as individuals or governments, to deal in usury (riba), whether among themselves or with foreign banks within their own countries, since the fundamental rule is that no bank in Islamic countries is permitted to engage in usury in any form. Furthermore, for individuals or states to engage in usury with usurious banks outside Islamic lands is also forbidden and impermissible, because obligations and prohibitions do not cease for a Muslim in any place, as long as they are sane and acting by choice. ¶

Accordingly, those who grant numerous permits to usurious banks that... ¶

Every city, village, every turning, and street has become filled with those who are loyal to the enemies of Allah, waging war against Allah, His Messenger, and the believers through their actions, even if they feign otherwise with their words and claim to be Muslims. For the true Muslim is the one who adheres to the limits of Allah and does not deem lawful what Allah has forbidden, such as the various forms of usury (riba). Whoever deems the practice of usury lawful has departed from Islam. The Almighty says: 'And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed – then it is those who are the disbelievers' (Surah Al-Ma'idah: 44). ¶

The Second Example: Providing Financial Aid to Disbelievers ¶

The relationship between Muslims and disbelievers varies according to their stance toward Islam and their place of residence in relation to the Muslims. If they are among the Dhimmis (protected subjects) or the Mu'ahidin (those under a treaty), they possess specific rights over the Muslims. If they are Harbi disbelievers (combatants) residing outside the Dar al-Islam (Abode of Islam), there is a specific manner of treatment that corresponds to their condition. If they are disbelievers residing outside the Dar al-Islam, they are treated in a specific way. Based on this classification, the types of aid can vary depending on the categories of disbelievers with whom the Islamic State interacts. ¶

The fundamental principle to which the Islamic State must attend regarding financial aid is the people of Islam. The mandatory charity (Sadaqah) incumbent upon individual Muslims, such as Zakat al-Amwal (tax on wealth) and Zakat al-Badan (fitrana/charity on the person) and similar forms, is only obligatory for the poor Muslims at the expense of their wealthy ones, as stated in the Hadith of Mu'adh (may Allah be pleased with him), in which it was recorded: 'Inform them that Allah the Almighty has enjoined upon them a Sadaqah to be taken from their wealthy and returned to their poor.' ¶

their poor. It has been narrated from Jarir ibn Abd al-Hamid, from al-Layth, from Mujahid, who said: 'Do not give charity to a Jew or a Christian, unless you cannot find a Muslim.' ¶

Based on this, it is not permissible to give any form of charity or acts of kindness to disbelievers until the needs of the Muslims are satisfied. Disbelievers can be divided into three categories: (a) People of the Covenant (Ahl al-Dhimma). (b) Peaceful disbelievers (Mu’alimin). (c) Belligerent disbelievers (Muharibun). ¶

As for whether giving money to disbelievers is from Zakat or from other sources, these issues require detailed clarification, explaining each one separately as follows: ¶

First Issue: The ruling on giving money to the people of the Dhimma and the Covenant. It is permissible to give to a Dhimmi or a Musta’man (one granted safe passage) from the Muslim treasury (Bayt al-Mal) if the Shariah-compliant ruler deems it to be in the interest of Islam and the Muslims, and if it is required by Islamic duty under the terms of the Dhimma and the covenant. Similarly, it is permissible for individuals to provide for their disbelieving relatives when the need arises. ¶

It is narrated from Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both) that Muslims would not give (charity) to their relatives among the polytheists. Then this verse was revealed: 'Guidance of them is not upon you, but Allah guides whom He wills. And whatever good you spend is for yourselves, and you do not spend except seeking the Face of Allah. And whatever you spend of good - it will be fully repaid to you, and you will not be wronged.' And this is the path that was followed... ¶

Regarding the Prophet ﷺ, Al-Naqqash mentioned that when charity (sadaqat) was brought to the Prophet ﷺ, a Jew came to him and said, 'Give me.' The Prophet ﷺ replied, 'You have no share in the charity of the Muslims.' The man had not gone far when this verse was revealed, so the Prophet ﷺ called him and gave him from it (1). ¶

Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) once found an elderly Jew begging from people and said, 'We have not been fair to you; we took jizya from you in your youth and abandoned you in your old age!' He then allocated a stipend for him from the public treasury (Bayt al-Mal) that sufficed for his needs (2). Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz (may Allah be pleased with him) acted similarly (3). For this reason, Abu Ubayd stated in Kitab al-Amwal: 'Had Umar known of a specific established Sunnah from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ regarding this, he would not have deviated from it to anything else' (4). In the treaty of Khalid ibn al-Walid with the people of al-Hira during the time of Abu Bakr al-Siddiq (may Allah be pleased with him), it was recorded: ¶

'I have stipulated for them that whoever is too old to work, or is afflicted with an ailment, or was rich and became poor, and his coreligionists begin to give him charity, then his jizya shall be waived, and he shall be supported by the treasury of the Muslims as long as he resides in the Abode of Migration and Islam' (5). ¶

The Malikis have explicitly stated that repelling harm from Muslims and those under the same status—such as the People of the Covenant (Ahl al-Dhimmah) and those granted safe conduct (musta'min)—is a communal obligation (fard kifaya), as they considered it mandatory to treat everyone living under the banner of Islam with kindness and justice, whether they are Muslim or those who have submitted to the laws of Islam within the Islamic state (6). ¶

Second Issue: The ruling on providing financial aid to non-Muslims outside the Islamic state. ¶

The fundamental principle regarding this matter is that it is not permissible to provide financial or material assistance to the 'ahl al-harb' (combatants) and those in a similar category among the disbelievers, except for a purpose that serves the benefit of Islam and the Muslims. Bestowing wealth upon disbelievers without a noble goal or purpose is impermissible, as it would, at the very least, fall under the category of extravagance (tabdhir). Allah Almighty has condemned the extravagant and counted them as brothers of the devils. By referring to the Book and the Sunnah, we find evidence permitting the expenditure of wealth on disbelievers for the purpose of reconciling their hearts (ta'lif al-qulub) toward Islam. Allah the Almighty says: {Alms are only for the poor, the needy, the collectors of them, and those whose hearts are to be reconciled...} (Surah At-Tawbah: 60). The term 'those whose hearts are to be reconciled' (al-mu'allafati qulubuhum) is not mentioned anywhere else in the Quran. Mufassirun (exegetes) have differed regarding their identity, among which are the following views: First: They are people who, in the early days of Islam, would manifest Islam, and they were given a share of Zakat due to the weakness of their conviction. Second: Al-Zuhri stated that they are those who converted to Islam from among the Jews or Christians, even if they were wealthy. Third: Some later scholars stated that they are a category of disbelievers who are given wealth to incline them toward Islam; they would not accept Islam through force or the sword, but would accept it through giving and benevolence. Fourth: Some scholars stated that they are people who outwardly embraced Islam but whose hearts were not yet certain, so they are given [wealth] so that Islam may take root in their hearts. Fifth: A group stated that they are individuals from among the leaders of the polytheists. ¶

They have followers, and they are given [gifts] so that they, along with their followers, might be inclined towards Islam. These opinions are similar, and the intent behind all of them is that the gift should be given to one whose conversion to Islam is not truly possible without it; thus, it is a form of Jihad. The Prophet (peace be upon him) gave a number of those who had recently embraced Islam one hundred camels each. They were the notables among them: Abu Sufyan, Hakim bin Hizam, Harith bin Hisham, Suhayl bin Amr, Huwaytib bin Abd al-Uzza, Safwan bin Umayya, Malik bin Awf, and Al-Ala bin Jariyah. Hence, they were called 'Ashab al-Mi'in' (the companions of the hundreds). ¶

It is stated in a Sahih Hadith: 'I give to a man, while another is dearer to me than him, for fear that he might be cast into the Fire on his face.' ¶

In the book 'Al-Amwal', it is narrated from Sa'id ibn al-Musayyib (may Allah have mercy on him) that he said: 'The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) gave charity to a family of Jews, and it continued to be given to them.' Imam Muhammad bin al-Hasan, a student of Abu Hanifah, narrated that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) sent five hundred dinars to the people of Mecca when they were suffering from famine, and ordered that it be handed to Abu Sufyan bin Harb and Safwan bin Umayya—before their conversion to Islam—to distribute among the poor of Mecca. Abu Sufyan accepted it, while Safwan bin Umayya refused. At that time, the people of Mecca were warring polytheists (harbi). If this is established as correct in their case, then it is a fortiori (more appropriately) correct to give charity to peaceful non-Muslims (mu salimin), the dhimmi, and the mu'ahid (those under treaty), as they are more deserving of care and benevolence, especially those who fall under the responsibility of the Islamic state. ¶

Scholars have differed regarding whether the practice of giving to non-Muslims for the purpose of softening their hearts towards Islam remains valid; there are three opinions on this: ¶

The First Opinion: That this category of people (Mu'allafatu Qulubuhum - those whose hearts are to be reconciled) is no longer applicable due to the honor and dominance of Islam, as Allah has honored Islam and its people and cut off the roots of the disbelievers. Therefore, they are not given anything, unless they accept Islam, pay the Jizya, or face combat. This was stated by Umar ibn al-Khattab, al-Hasan al-Basri, and al-Sha'bi (1), and it is the famous position in the school of Malik ibn Anas and the Ashab al-Ra'y (the Jurists of Opinion). Some Hanafi scholars also held this view, stating that the Sahaba (may Allah be pleased with them) reached a consensus during the caliphate of Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) that the share of those whose hearts are to be reconciled has been rescinded. ¶

The Second Opinion: A group of scholars maintain that giving to those whose hearts are to be reconciled remains valid, because the Imam may sometimes need to reconcile the hearts of certain people towards Islam. Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) only withheld it when he witnessed the honor of Islam. Yunus said: I asked al-Zuhri (Muhammad ibn Shihab) about them, and he replied: 'I know of no abrogation regarding this.' Abu Ja'far al-Nahhas said: This ruling is established when the need for it arises. If the just Muslim ruler perceives that someone needs to be reconciled, or fears harm from them to the Muslims, or hopes that their Islam will improve after receiving the gift, he may provide it to them. Shaykh Abd al-Aziz ibn Baz, the General President of the Departments of Scholarly Research, Ifta, and Da'wah, also held the view that it is permissible to assist poor men, women, and children regardless of their nationalities or beliefs, provided they do not belong to a state that is hostile towards Islam and the Muslims (2). ¶

The Third Opinion: That disbelievers and those who have recently embraced Islam may be given assistance when the need arises at certain times. This is the opinion of Qadi Abd al-Wahhab (3). ¶

Ibn al-Arabi states: If Islam is strong, then the giving of alms (ata) to them shall cease, and if there is a need for them, they shall be given their share just as the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) used to give them, for the Hadith says: 'Islam began as a stranger and will return to being a stranger as it began, so glad tidings to the strangers.' ¶

When Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) arrived at al-Jabiya in the land of Damascus, he passed by some leper Christians and ordered that they be given from the sadaqat (charity) and that their sustenance be provided for them. ¶

These reports indicate the permissibility of giving financial assistance to disbelievers when the just Muslim ruler deems it to be in the interest of Islam and the Muslims and in accordance with the requirements of the Shariah-based policy (Siyasah Shar'iyya) of the Islamic state. However, scholars have differed on whether it is permissible to give to them from Zakat or from other sources in the Bayt al-Mal (public treasury), if the assistance is at the state level rather than to individuals. ¶

The summary of the disagreement on this issue is as follows: ¶

First Opinion: The view of those who say it is permissible to give them from Zakat, because they are included under the definition of 'the poor and the needy' (al-fuqara' wal-masakin), or on the basis that they are a group whose hearts are to be reconciled (al-mu'allafati qulubuhum). This was held by Zufar and the Ibadis, but they imposed conditions for this: 1. That there is no Muslim deserving of it. 2. That it is impossible to send it to the rightful Imam. ¶

Second Opinion: This is the view of the majority of scholars, that neither form of Zakat—Zakat al-Mal (wealth) or Zakat al-Badan (fitr)—is permitted to be paid to a disbeliever, whether they are a Dhimmi (protected citizen) or a Musta'man (one granted temporary asylum). ¶

Whether they are peaceful or at war, the evidence for those [scholars who forbid it] is the hadith of Mu'adh (may Allah be pleased with him): 'Inform them that Allah has obligated upon them a charity (zakat) that is to be taken from their wealthy and given back to their poor.' It is narrated from Yahya bin Sa'id, from Ash'ath, from al-Hasan, who said: 'Neither a Christian, nor a Jew, nor a Zoroastrian is to be given anything from Zakat.' From 'Abd al-Rahman bin Sufyan, from Ibrahim bin Muhajir, who said: I asked Ibrahim al-Nakha'i, 'We have foster relatives among the Jews and Christians; should I give charity to them?' He replied, 'Not from Zakat, for it is the exclusive wealth of the Muslims and should not be spent except upon a Muslim.' From Yazid, from Hisham, from al-Hasan, who said: 'The people of the dhimma have no right in that which is mandatory [i.e., Zakat].' However, if a man wishes to give them charity from other sources, he may do so, meaning they may be given voluntary charity (sadaqat al-tatawwu') but not mandatory charity (sadaqat al-farida). ¶

Abu Ubayd stated in Kitab al-Amwal: 'The scholars disliked giving them Zakat specifically due to the aforementioned hadith of Mu'adh, as it is the foundational text regarding this issue.' All these reports indicate prohibition, which is the position held by the majority of scholars, except for a small minority who said it is permissible to give Zakat to disbelievers if two conditions are met: the absence of a deserving Muslim and the impossibility of sending the Zakat to the Bayt al-Mal (public treasury). ¶

The position I consider most accurate regarding this issue is that it is not permissible to give Zakat to disbelievers, especially those who are combatants (muharibin). It is not permissible to give it to them even if one cannot find a Muslim who is entitled to receive it. ¶

If one is unable to deliver it to the Muslim treasury (Bayt al-Mal) in a timely manner, it is best to hold it in trust until the first opportunity arises to pay it to those entitled to it. This is because paying it to an enemy combatant (harbi) results in harm to the interests of Islam and the Muslims, unlike keeping it in one's possession, which does not cause harm comparable to giving it to someone not entitled to it. As for non-combatants—such as those who are peaceful, dhimmis, or under a covenant—if zakat becomes obligatory upon a Muslim and he finds no deserving Muslim recipient, and delivering it to the treasury involves hardship beyond what is customary or reasonable, it is permissible for him to give it to the poor among them, though he is not obligated to do so. If a Muslim resides in a non-Muslim country, such as a student studying abroad, and the time for paying zakat on his wealth or body (sadaqat al-fitr) arrives, sending the funds to a trusted person in a Muslim country to distribute among the Muslim poor is more preferable and superior to distributing it to non-Muslim poor. Similarly, for sadaqat al-fitr, if he sends money to purchase food in Muslim lands to be distributed to the Muslim poor, it is more fitting, as the rationale (illah) for sadaqat al-fitr is to spare the poor from begging on the day of Eid. The poor whom we are urged to please and benefit are the Muslim poor, not the non-Muslim poor. Therefore, if a traveler in a non-Muslim land makes a bequest or appoints a proxy to distribute his obligatory zakat at the proper time, it is permissible in my view, as it aligns with the Islamic methodology of ease and convenience for Muslims. Allah the Almighty says: 'Allah does not intend to place you in difficulty, but He intends to purify you.' As for giving money to non-Muslims other than zakat, the traditions indicate its permissibility, and some evidence regarding this has already been mentioned. Among the additional proofs, it is stated in Al-Siyar al-Kabir and its commentary that there is no harm in a Muslim maintaining ties with his polytheist relative. ¶

Regarding the hadith of Salama bin al-Akwa (may Allah be pleased with him), he said: I performed the Morning Prayer with the Prophet (peace be upon him). He said: 'Will you gift me Umm Furqa?' I said: 'Yes.' So I gifted her to him, and he sent her to her maternal uncle, Hazn bin Abi Wahb, who was a polytheist, and she was also a polytheist at that time. Imam al-Bukhari established a chapter in his Sahih titled 'The Chapter on Giving Gifts to Polytheists.' He cited the saying of Allah the Almighty: 'Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you because of religion and do not expel you from your homes - from being righteous toward them and acting justly toward them. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly' (Surah al-Mumtahanah: 8). And His saying: 'But if they endeavor to make you associate with Me that of which you have no knowledge, do not obey them but accompany them in [this] world with appropriate kindness' (Surah Luqman: 15). Furthermore, the hadith of Ibn Umar (may Allah be pleased with them both) states that Umar saw a garment on a man being sold and said to the Prophet (peace be upon him): 'Buy this garment to wear on Friday and when delegations come to you.' The Prophet (peace be upon him) replied: 'Only one who has no share in the Hereafter would wear this.' Later, some garments were brought to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), and he sent one to Umar. Umar said: 'How can I wear it when you said what you said about it?' He replied: 'I did not give it to you to wear, but for you to sell it or give it away.' So, Umar sent it to a brother of his in Mecca before he had embraced Islam. Similar to this is the hadith of Asma bint Abi Bakr (may Allah be pleased with them both), who said: 'My mother came to me while she was a polytheist during the time of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). I asked the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) for a fatwa (ruling), saying: 'My mother has come and she is desirous (of maintaining ties). Should I maintain ties with my mother?' He said: 'Yes, maintain ties with your mother.' The conclusion drawn from the aforementioned verses and ahadith is that righteousness and maintaining kinship ties with relatives (is permissible). ¶

Kind treatment of the polytheists (mushrikin) does not necessitate the love, affection, and alliance (muwalat) that is prohibited regarding the disbelievers, as per the Almighty’s saying: 'You will not find a people who believe in Allah and the Last Day having affection for those who oppose Allah and His Messenger' (Al-Mujadilah: 22). This verse is general, applying both to those who have fought and those who have not. ¶

Al-Khattabi stated in this regard that maintaining ties with disbelieving kin is done through financial aid and the like, just as one maintains ties with Muslim kin. However, Muslim kin are distinguished by love, heart-felt affection, and approval, because the Muslim has been purified of the ugliest trait a human on earth can possess: the trait of disbelief (kufr). (End quote) ¶

A group of scholars has said that maintaining ties of kinship with disbelievers was permissible in the early stage of the call (da'wah), but was later abrogated by the Almighty’s saying: 'And kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush' (At-Tawbah: 5). (End quote) ¶

My view on this matter is that Allah Almighty has permitted a Muslim to show kindness (birr), maintain ties, reciprocate favors, and practice justice in dealings with the polytheists, especially if they are blood relatives, provided they are not warring against us in our religion and are not aiding in our warfare or our expulsion from our homes through any form of condemned cooperation. However, if they are warring against Allah, His Messenger, and the believers, then maintaining ties with them is prohibited and aiding them is a crime, even if they are among the closest of kin by lineage. The Almighty says: 'Allah only forbids you from those who fight you because of religion and expel you from your homes and aid in your expulsion - [forbids] that you make allies of them. And whoever makes allies of them, then it is those who are the wrongdoers' (Al-Mumtahanah: 9). ¶