(1) Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyya states in al-Jawab al-Sahih, after quoting the opening verse of Surat Bara’a (1/175): “The polytheists (mushrikun) fell into two categories. One group had an open-ended covenant with the Muslims; this is a revocable, non-binding contract. The other group had a covenant for a fixed term. Allah therefore instructed His Messenger to repudiate the polytheists who possessed the open-ended covenant, because such a pact is discretionary and not obligatory, and He ordered him to grant them a four-month period of safe passage. As for those who had a time-limited covenant, that pact is binding, and Allah commanded him to keep it for its specified duration. Some jurists held that a truce (hudna) is valid only when it is time-limited, while others maintained that the Imam may cancel a truce even when the other party is observing its terms. The correct view is a third position: a truce may be either open-ended or time-limited. The open-ended form is permissible but not binding— the Imam may choose to uphold it or annul it—whereas the time-limited form is binding.” He likewise says in Majmu‘ al-Fatawa (29/140): “Regarding the divine words, ‘A declaration of disavowal from Allah and His Messenger to those polytheists with whom you made treaties’ (Quran 9:1), these concern revocable, non-binding treaties, for they were open-ended and the Prophet had the choice either to maintain them or to annul them, just as one may do with an agency contract and the like. Whoever says that…"