third view, held by the majority, including Abū Hanīfah and his followers, al-Thawrī, and Abū ‘Ubayd: the ruler should adopt whichever course best serves the Muslims’ interests, whether dividing the land or retaining it undivided. If he considers it best to divide it, as the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, divided Khaybar, he may do so. If he considers it best to leave it as fay (communal property) for the Muslims, he may do so, as ‘Umar did. It is also reported that the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, did this with half of Khaybar: he divided one half and retained the other to meet contingencies. He also conquered Mecca by force without dividing it among those entitled to the spoils. Thus, land conquered by force may either be divided or left undivided. A substantial work has been written on this subject.

With this understood, Egypt was among the territories conquered by force, and ‘Umar did not divide it among those entitled to the spoils, as the leading scholars of the Hanafī, Mālikī, Hanbalī, and Shāfi‘ī schools explicitly stated. Its circumstances subsequently changed, however, just as those of Iraq changed. The Abbasid caliphs changed Iraq’s taxation from a fixed land-tax assessment to a share of its produce. This is permissible according to one of the two scholarly views. Likewise, the land tax was lifted from Egypt some time ago—I do not know when this began—and ownership of the land became vested in the Muslims. This is permissible according to one of the two scholarly views.

As for ‘Umar’s policy regarding fay, he recognized every Muslim’s right to a share in it, but gave priority to the poor and those who benefited the Muslims. As ‘Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, said: “No one is more entitled to this wealth than anyone else. Rather, account is taken of a man’s proven service, and a man’s contribution,