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
