Likewise, in the year of the conquest, they initially neither embraced Islam nor were fought, but afterward they embraced Islam.

These peoples are the Byzantines, the Persians, and others like them, for they must be fought if they do not embrace Islam. The first calls to fight them came in the years of Mu’tah and Tabūk. In the year of Tabūk, they neither fought the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, nor embraced Islam. However, in the time of Abū Bakr al-Siddīq and ʿUmar al-Fārūq, one of two things had to occur: either they embraced Islam or fighting took place. After the fighting, they paid the jizyah; they did not conclude a peace agreement at the outset, as the polytheists had done in the year of al-Hudaybiyyah. Thus, Abū Bakr’s and ʿUmar’s calls to fight these peoples fall within the scope of the verse, which is the point to be established.

The verse itself indicates that ʿAlī’s fighting was not included within its scope (1), for those he fought were not people whose great fighting strength exceeded that of his companions. Rather, they were of the same kind, and his companions had greater fighting strength. Moreover, theirs was not a case of either fighting or embracing Islam, for they were already Muslims.

As for the words (2) he cites in the hadith, “Your war is my war,” he provides no chain of transmission for them, so they cannot serve as proof. How could they, when they are a fabricated lie, according to the consensus of hadith scholars?

What further clarifies the matter is that, before the revelation of “Barā’ah” (Disavowal) and the verse concerning jizyah, the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, would sometimes fight the disbelievers among the polytheists and the People of the Book, and sometimes conclude treaties with them, in which case he would not fight them and they would not embrace Islam. But when Allah revealed “Barā’ah” and commanded him therein to repudiate