This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
114
THE ORIGINS OF THE ISLAMIC STATE

remains always subject to the kharâj on his land, as it is the case in as-Sawâd. The same view is held by ibn-abi-Laila. According to ibn-Shubrumah and abu-Yûsuf, tax is levied on their heads, and they should pay double what the Moslems pay on their lands, which would be a fifth or a tenth. This they said on the analogy of the case of the Christian banu-Taghlib. Abu-Yûsuf added that whatever is taken from them should follow the course of the money received as kharâj. In case a dhimmi becomes Moslem or his land goes to a Moslem, then it becomes tithe-land. The same view is reported to have been held by 'Aṭâʾ and al-Ḥasan.

According to ibn-abi-Dhiʾb, ibn-abi-Sabrah, Sharîk ibn-ʿAbdallâh an-Nakhaʿi, and ash-Shâfiʿi, there is tax on their heads, but no kharâj or tithe on their land, because they are not included in those on whom zakât is binding, nor is their land a kharâj-land. The same opinion is held by al-Ḥasan ibn-Ṣâlih ibn-Ḥai-l-Mamdâni.

According to Sufyân ath-Thauri and Muḥammad ibn-al-Ḥasan, there is tithe on them but not in a doubled form, because that which counts is the land, and the possessor is not to be taken into consideration. According to al-Auzâʿi and Sharîk ibn-ʿAbdallâh, if they are dhimmis like the Jews of al-Yaman, whose people became Moslem while they were still in the land, then nothing is taken but the poll-tax, and you should not let the dhimmi buy the tithe-land or possess it.

The case of a Jew who holds tithe-land. Al-Wâḳidi said, "I once asked Mâlik about the case of a Jew from al-Ḥijâz who buys land in al-Jurf and plants it. Mâlik said, 'The tithe is taken from him'. I then replied, 'Didst thou not claim that there is no tithe on the land of a dhimmi if he acquires it from the tithe-land?' 'That', said Mâlik, 'holds