1705. Introduction

The non-Muslims in a Muslim state were not required to partake in the military effort. In return for their protection, and as a show of the sovereignty of the Muslim state, this tax was levied on them; it is somewhat comparable to contemporary defense taxes. When Abu ‘Ubaydah (RA) heard that the Romans were preparing to retake Syria, he returned the jizyah to the inhabitants; he explained that he had been informed that enemy troops were gathering, and since the people had paid this tax in return for protection, the Muslims were morally bound to return the money now that they could not fulfill that condition. (Abu Yoosuf, Kitâb al-Kharâj) It is known that bayt ul-mâl used to look after the needs of the non-Muslim subjects of the Muslim state, so a portion of this jizyah was thus spent back on them. It must also be mentioned that this matter is subject to treaties and agreements entered into by the head of state, who may make peace with any nation or people without collecting jizyah. In this case, the treaty governs the relationship between the two states or between the Muslim state and its new subjects. Ibn Qudâmah mentioned in al-Mughni that Banu Taghlib ibn Wâ’il refused to give the jizyah, insisting on calling their contribution to the state ‘zakat’ instead, so ‘Umar – after some negotiations – agreed to that, and none of the Companions opposed him. (The story was first recorded in Kitâb al-Kharâj by Abi Yoosuf and Kitâb ul-Amwâl by Abi ‘Ubayd.) Ibn Rushd al-Mâliki said that the specifics of the jizyah (e.g., amount due, date due, and who must pay) agreed upon between the Muslims and the people of treaty are “referred back to the terms of the agreement.” (Bidâyat ul-Mujtahid)

Because of the above, some contemporary scholars, such as Shaykh Muhammad Abu Zahrah, suggested that zakat be made obligatory for non-Muslims in the same way that it is obligatory for Muslims, as a substitute for the jizyah.