becomes due at the beginning of the year, when the covenant of protection is concluded with them, and thereafter at the beginning of each year. This is Abū Hanīfah’s position. Another view is that it becomes due only at the end of the year; this is al-Shāfiʿī’s position. There is no explicit statement on this matter from Mālik or his companions, may Allah Most High have mercy on them. The apparent implication of Mālik’s position and his statement in al-Mudawwanah is that it becomes due at the end of the year. This accords with analogy, since it is collected from them year by year in return for granting them security and allowing them to retain their religion, conducting their affairs safely under the Muslims’ protection and covenant. Their enemies are fought on their behalf, and they are not bound by the obligations incumbent upon Muslims. Thus, jizyah is their counterpart to the zakat incumbent upon Muslims, except that it is collected from them in humiliation and subjection, whereas zakat is collected from Muslims to purify and cleanse them. Do you not see that ʿUmar ibn al-Khattāb, may Allah Most High be pleased with him, used to collect double zakat from the Arab Christians in place of their jizyah, as a mark of honour to them? It must therefore become due upon the passage of a year, like zakat. The precise formulation of this analogy is that jizyah is an obligation upon wealth whose liability is linked to the year; it must therefore be collected at its end, like zakat.

Section

The same ruling applies to jizyah established by treaty when it is stipulated in general terms without further specification, as we have mentioned. Some scholars of our school have held that this disagreement concerns only jizyah established by treaty, and that the correct one of the two opinions is that it should be collected in advance at the beginning of the year. This is because it is payment in return for granting them security, sparing their lives and refraining from fighting them. Their entitlement to these things becomes binding and established through the treaty, so the payment in return must be collected immediately, by analogy with other contracts of exchange.

He also cited as evidence the words of Allah, Mighty and Majestic:

“Until they pay the jizyah by hand” [al-Tawbah: 29].

He stated that when the term “giving” is used without qualification, its apparent meaning is the receipt of what is given, rather than merely making it obligatory. Even if it were equally open to both meanings, the words of Allah Most High, “by hand,” would indicate that receipt is intended. For when someone says, “I gave so-and-so something by hand,” this is understood to mean that he gave it immediately and delivered it to the recipient. He stated that this accords with Mālik’s position, since Mālik said concerning merchants from enemy territory that the agreed payment should be collected from them whether or not they make any sales. Thus, the agreed payment must be collected from them once they have been granted security, even if they do not obtain the benefit they hoped to gain from buying and selling. He further held that jizyah