The Islamic Personality by Sheikh Taqīuddīn An-Nabahānī

It is permitted to seek assistance from the disbelievers in their capacity as individuals on condition that they are under the Islamic flag irrespective of whether they are dhimmis or not, or whether they are citizens of the Islamic State or not. As for seeking assistance from them as a specific nation with an entity independent from the Islamic State, this is absolutely not allowed. So it is forbidden to seek their assistance in their capacity as an independent State. The evidence for permitting the seeking of assistance of disbelievers as individuals is

And the tribe of Khuza’ah went out with the Prophet (saw) in the year of the conquest to fight the Quraysh, and Khuza’ah at that point remained polytheist until the Messenger of Allah (saw) said to them:

All these ahadith are authentic, indicating explicitly the permission of seeking of assistance of disbelievers as individuals i.e. the permissibility of a disbeliever being in the Muslims’ army fighting the enemy together with Muslims. However, the disbeliever is not compelled to be in the army nor compelled to fight since jihad is not obligatory upon him. He is not given from the booty but an insignificant gift is given to him i.e. he is given a measure of money. If the disbeliever requests to fight together with Muslims i.e. that he be in the Muslims’ army, it is allowed in all types of services in the army if he is trusted and betrayal is not feared from him. As for what came from Aisha (ra) when she said:

This hadith does not contradict what is established that he (saw) sought the help of the polytheists. This is because this man made it a condition that he fights and takes the booty for he said:

Booty is not given except to the Muslims, so the Prophet’s refusal to seek assistance from him is taken to mean that seeking of assistance from individual disbelievers is delegated to the Khalifah’s command. If he wills, he seeks assistance; and if he wills, he refuses.

As for what was narrated from Khubayb bin Abdurrahman from his father from his grandfather:

This hadith is is taken to mean that seeking of assistance of disbelievers is delegated to the Khalifah’s opinion; if he wills, he seeks assistance and if he so wills, he refuses. The Messenger (saw) sought assistance in Uhud and the conquest of Makkah and refused to seek assistance in Badr and from Khubayb and the man together with him until they embraced Islam. Since it is established that the Messenger (saw) sought assistance from individual disbelievers while they were upon disbelief, and it is (also) established that he rejected assistance from individuals until they embraced Islam and this is evidence that seeking assistance of individual disbelievers in fighting is allowed and that it is delegated to the opinion of the Khalifah. If he wills he can accept assistance and if he so wills he will refuse it. Al-Baihaqi mentioned the text of Ash-Shafi’: Verily the Prophet (saw) intuitively perceived into the character of those he returned so he returned them expecting their Islam. And Allah (swt) verified his belief.

As for the evidence that it is not allowed to seek assistance from the disbelievers in their capacity as an independent State, this is due to what Ahmad and An-Nasai narrated from Anas who said: The Messenger of Allah (saw) said:

The fire of a people is a metaphoric expression for their entity in war as an independent tribe or State. Al-Baihaqi said: The authentic is what Al-Hafidh Abu Abdullah informed us via a chain leading to Abu Hameed as-Sa’idi who said:

The Messenger (saw) returned the company of Abdullah bin Salam of Banu Qaynuqa since they came as a nation united in a Kafir squadron, and they came under their flag in their capacity as being from Banu Qaynuqa between whom and the Messenger (saw) were treaties; they were like a State. Due to this, he rejected them. Their rejection was due to their coming under their flag and with their State, by the evidence of his (saw) accepting the assistance of the Jews in Khayber when they came as individuals. This hadith of Abu Hameed As-Sa’idi includes the Shari’ah reason (illah), so if it exists the rule exists and if it is absent the rule is absent. The reason in the hadith is clear in the hadith’s text where it says:

The meaning of their being a squadron is that they are an independent army with an independent flag, since for every squadron there is flag. So they were a Kafir squadron with an independent flag and from the Jewish Banu Qaynuqa who were from the ranks of a State between whom and the Messenger (saw) were treaties. This was the reason for rejecting them, not merely because they were disbelievers with the evidence that he commanded them to return based upon this and their rejection of Islam not due to their rejection of Islam alone. This is strengthened by the hadith of Anas:

Since it has control over the entity and it is strengthened by the Messenger’s accepting assistance from Quzman in the same place of the event of Uhud although he was a polytheist. The meaning of this is rejecting the assistance of disbelievers in their capacity as an entity, and accepting their assistance in their capacity as individuals. Therefore seeking assistance of disbelievers as a Kafir nation or tribe or State, and under their own flag as a part of their State is absolutely not allowed in any case. As for Khuza’ah going out together with the Prophet (saw) against the Quraysh the year of conquest and it was an independent tribe, this does not indicate the permissibility of seeking assistance of a nation with an independent entity because Khuza’ah was present in the year of Hudaybiyya when the peace treaty between the Quraysh and the Muslims was written. When it came in the text of the treaty:

Based upon this text, Khuza’ah leaped and said: We are in the contract of Muhammad and his pledge, and Banu Bakr leaped and said: We are in the contract of Quraysh and their pledge. So Khuza’ah came together with the Muslims in this treaty which was between Quraysh and the Muslims, and the Messenger (saw) entered them under his protection as a group in his State according to the contract. Therefore it fought as a tribe under the Muslims’ flag and as a part of the Islamic State, not like an independent State so they were like individuals not like an entity. As for what some imagine of Khuza’ah having an alliance or treaty with the Messenger (saw), this is not correct. Based upon this treaty, the tribe of Banu Bakr entered together with Quraysh as a part of them. The tribe of Khuza’ah entered together with Muslims as a part of them. Accordingly the war of Khuza’ah together with the Messenger (saw) was not a war of a disbelieving tribe together with Muslims; rather it was a war of individual disbelievers in a disbelieving tribe together with Muslims under the flag of Muslims. This is allowed without any problem in it. As for what was narrated by Ahmad and Abu Dawud from Dhu Makhmar who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (saw) saying:

And his saying

Is taken to mean individual Romans and not their State. This is because he said:

And the peace between Muslims and disbelievers is only when they accept to pay the jizyah and their entering under the rule of Muslims. Islam has commanded Muslims to offer the disbelievers whom they fight between three (matters): Islam or jizyah or war. When peace occurs and they are disbelievers, it cannot be except in the situation of paying the jizyah and their entering under the Islamic flag. His statement:

Is a connotation (qareena) that they are under the Muslims’ flag so they would then be individuals. This is strengthened by the reality of what occurred with the Romans. Muslims fought them, defeated them and occupied their land. Some Romans fought together with Muslims as individuals. It never occurred that Romans fought in their capacity as a State with the Islamic State enemies beyond them. This never occurred at any time which emphasizes that the meaning of the hadith of Romans is individuals and not as a State, and it is obligatory to take it as such. This clarifies that there is no evidence indicating the permissibility of seeking assistance of polytheists as a State; rather the explicit texts are about the absolute impermissibility of this.

All this is in relation to seeking assistance of the disbelievers to fight by himself together with Muslims. As for seeking assistance of the disbeliever by taking weapons from him; this is allowed whether the weapons are from an individual or a State based on this being a guaranteed loan. This is due to what was narrated that when the Messenger of Allah (saw) decided to travel to meet Hawazin, it was mentioned to him that there were shields and weapons with Safwan bin Umayyah. He sent to him, while he was still a polytheist on that day, and said:

It is clear herein that the Messenger (saw) sought help from a disbeliever by taking weapons from him, even if he was an individual; he was the head of a tribe. The mere taking of weapons from a disbeliever is an indication upon the permissibility of seeking assistance from a disbeliever by taking weapons from him without restriction as long as there came no evidence specifying not seeking assistance from them as a State just like in seeking assistance in fighting. However, there came no such evidence preventing taking weapons from a State so it remains unrestricted in permitting taking them from the disbeliever absolutely whether by loan or purchase. Usually, the taking of weapons by a State usually occurs from a State, so it is allowed to seek assistance by taking weapons from a disbeliever State.