to be Muslim, because the basic principle is that every newborn is born upon the fiṭrah (natural disposition). This is subject, however, to the condition that he be found in a purely Muslim land, or one with a Muslim majority. If he is found in a land of disbelievers—for example, if a man travels to a disbelieving country for trade, a visit, or medical treatment and finds a foundling there, while all the inhabitants are disbelievers—then we judge him to be a disbeliever by virtue of the land, since it is a land of disbelief, and by virtue of the contextual indication: for it is most likely that one found in a country whose inhabitants are all, or mostly, disbelievers is one of them.

It was also said: rather, he is unconditionally Muslim. This is the apparent meaning of the author’s words, and it is the correct view, even if he is found in a land of disbelief. That is because his lineage is unknown. If he has no father to whom he may be ascribed in terms of kinship, then, all the more so, he has no father to whom he may be ascribed in religion. Thus, his dependent affiliation has ceased; and when it has ceased, every newborn is born upon the fiṭrah. A child follows his parents in disbelief only when his parents are disbelievers.

Accordingly, the preponderant view is that he is Muslim and is judged to be so, even if he is found in a land of disbelief. It is true that, if he is found in a land of disbelief, it is most likely that he is one of those disbelievers. Yet we say that the cessation of his dependent affiliation in lineage necessitates the cessation of his dependent affiliation in religion. For the Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him, said: “It is his parents who make him a Jew or a Christian” (1). This child has no parents. Therefore, once his dependent affiliation with parents has ceased in terms of lineage, it should likewise cease in terms of religion, and we return to the original principle: the fiṭrah.

Once we judge him to be Muslim, legal rulings follow from that, and he has what