that, so that it does not lead to alienation from Islam, is more fitting; for when they possess strength, they become infidels who are entrenched in their territory, thus they resemble the people of war. The statement of Abu Bakr is interpreted as referring to what remains of the wealth in their hands; in this way, the school of Ahmad and the school of al-Shafi'i are the same on this matter. This is more equitable and correct, God Almighty willing. As for one who has no position of strength, he is liable for what he destroyed of life and wealth, just like an individual among the Muslims or the people of the covenant; because he has no position of strength, and such [destruction] would not be widespread from him, so the wealth and life remain with respect to him under their [original] protection and the obligation of liability for them. And Allah knows best.
(18) In the original: "fi" (in).
ذلك كيلا يُؤَدِّيَ إلى التَّنْفِيرِ عَنِ الإِسلامِ أَولَى، لأنَّهم إذا امْتَنَعُوا صارُوا كُفارًا مُمْتَنِعِينَ بِدارِهِم، فَأشْبَهُوا أهلَ الْحَرْبِ. ويُحْمَلُ قَوْلُ أبي بكرٍ على ما بَقِيَ في أيدِيهم مِن المالِ، فيكونُ مذهبُ أحمدَ ومذهبُ الشَّافِعِيِّ في هذا سواءً. وهذا أعْدَلُ وأَصَحُّ. إنْ شاء اللهُ تعالى. فأمَّا مَنْ لا مَنَعَةَ له فيَضْمَنُ ما أَتْلَفَ مِن نفْسٍ ومالٍ، كالواحِدِ مِن المسلمينَ، أو أَهْلِ الذِّمَّةِ؛ لأنَّه لا مَنَعَةَ له، ولا يَكْثُرُ ذلك منه، فَبَقِىَ المالُ والنَّفْسُ بالنِّسْبَةِ إليه على (١٨) عِصْمَتِه، ووُجُوبِ ضَمانِه. واللهُ أعلمُ.
(١٨) في الأصل: "في".
