in their hands. When he was asked, “Through a peace settlement?” he replied, “Rather, the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and grant him peace) allowed it to remain in the hands of its inhabitants, saying: ‘Whoever enters his house is safe.’”

In the report of Ḥanbal, he said: “The only reason he disliked leasing the houses of Makkah was that it had been conquered by force. The Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) entered it by the sword. Those who disliked this did so because of its conquest by force. Since it had been conquered by force, all Muslims had equal rights there. ʿUmar said: ‘Do not prevent anyone from lodging there, by night or by day, for its inhabitants were not granted ownership of it to the exclusion of others.’”

There is another report stating that he entered it under a peace agreement concluded with Abū Sufyān. Its terms stipulated: “Whoever shuts his door is safe; whoever takes hold of the coverings of the Kaʿbah is safe; and whoever enters the house of Abū Sufyān is safe”—except for six men whom he excluded from the amnesty and ordered killed. Because of the peace agreement, he neither took booty nor took captives.

In the report of Ḥarb ibn Ismāʿīl, he said: “Land subject to the ʿushr (agricultural tithe) is land whose owner surrenders without fighting while it remains in his possession; it is therefore subject to the tithe, as in Madinah and Makkah.” In the report of Saʿīd ibn Muḥammad al-Raffāʾ—when he was asked about Makkah—he said: “It was entered under a peace settlement,” citing the Prophet’s statement: “Did ʿAqīl leave any houses for us?”

In the report of Abū Ṭālib, he said: “If it is freehold land, such as Makkah and Khurāsān, then they owe only the alms-tax, because they own the land itself.” Abū Isḥāq said: “This matter is based on two reports.”