Is it permissible to stipulate hospitality for passing Muslims in the contract of Dhimma?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Jizya
Primary text
It is permissible to stipulate hospitality for those Muslims who pass by the people of Dhimma in their contract. Imam Ahmad narrated from Al-Ahnaf ibn Qays that 'Umar stipulated hospitality for them for one day and one night, and that they repair bridges, and that if a Muslim is killed in their land, they must pay his blood money. Ibn al-Mundhir narrated that 'Umar ruled that the people of Dhimma must provide hospitality to passing Muslims for three days and fodder for their animals, and whatever serves their needs. This is supported by the report that the Prophet, peace be upon him, imposed three hundred dinars annually upon the Christians of Ayla (who numbered three hundred souls) and required them to host Muslims who passed by for three days. This stipulation serves a public interest, preventing them from refusing trade with Muslims out of malice. If hospitality is not stipulated, it is not obligatory.
Supporting text
Some scholars hold that hospitality is obligatory upon the people of Dhimma without stipulation, just as it is obligatory upon Muslims. However, the preferred view is that since it involves the payment of wealth, it cannot be obligatory without their consent, similar to the Jizya. If they refuse to accept the stipulated hospitality, the contract of Dhimma is not concluded. Al-Shafi'i states that they cannot be fought over it, but our position is that it is a valid stipulation, and if refused, they may be fought over it, just as with the Jizya.