“al-hilf”在语言上指盟约与友谊。人们说“halifuhu”，源自“’ahiduhu”（他与他立约）。不过，“al-hilf”一词之所以被使用，是因为它有一个专门的术语含义，即主要用于指军事同盟。军事同盟是两个或多个国家之间缔结的联盟，使其军队共同对抗一个共同的敌人，或在它们之间交换军事情报或战争装备；或者，若其中一国进入战争状态，各方将相互协商，根据各自所见的利益决定是否共同参战。这些同盟可以是两个、三个或更多国家之间缔结的双边条约，但它们并不将对其中一国的侵略视为对所有各方的侵略；相反，若某一条约国遭受侵略，遭受侵略的国家、与其有军事同盟关系的国家便会根据自身利益，决定是否与遭受侵略的国家一道向侵略国宣战。此外，这些同盟也可以是集体同盟，其中被视为对其中一个条约国的侵略即是对所有条约国的侵略，因此，若其中某一国与任何国家发生战争，则其他所有条约国都将进入与该国的战争状态。所有这些同盟，无论是双边的、集体的还是其他形式的，都要求军队与其盟友并肩作战，以保护盟友及其实体，无论其领导者是多人还是一人。

“Al-hilf” in the language is the covenant and friendship. It is said “halifuhu” from “’ahiduhu” (he covenanted with him). Except that the word “al-hilf” is used because a technical definition as it is mostly used for military alliance specifically. Military alliances are the alliances contracted between two or more States which make their armies fight together with a common enemy, or make military information or war tools exchangeable between them, or if one of them enters into war they will consult with each other to enter war together or not according to the interests they see. These alliances could be dual treaties contracted between two or three or more States, but they do not consider aggression upon one of the States an aggression against all of them; rather if aggression occurs upon one of the treaty States, the State upon which aggression occurrs, the States with which it has a military alliance and in the light of their benefit they would announce war together with the State facing aggression against the aggressor State or not. And these alliances could be collective alliances in which it is considered that aggression against one of the treaty States an aggression against all of them, so that if there occurs war between one of them with any State then all other treaty States will enter into the situation of war with this State. All of these alliances, whether they were dual or collective or other than that, necessitate that the army fights with its ally to protect it and its entity whether there were numerous leaders or a single leader.

这些同盟从根本上就是无效的，并非合法缔结。因此，即使穆斯林的哈里发缔结了这些同盟，乌玛也不受其约束，因为这与伊斯兰教法相违背：这会使穆斯林在异教徒的权威之下、在kufr（不信）的旗帜之下作战，并使他为维护一个kufr实体而战斗；所有这些都是哈拉姆（禁止的）。穆斯林不得为之作战，除非在穆斯林的领导之下、在伊斯兰的旗帜之下。圣训（sahih hadith）中有禁止在异教徒的旗帜和权威之下作战的明文，艾哈迈德和奈萨仪从安纳斯处传述，他说：安拉的使者ﷺ说：

These alliances are void from their basis and are not contracted legitimately. So the Ummah is not obliged with them even if the Muslims’ Khalifah contracted them as it contradicts the Shar’a since it would make the Muslim fight under a Kafir authority and under a kufr banner, and makes him fight in order to preserve a kufr entity; all this is haram. It is not allowed for a Muslim to fight except under Muslim leadership and under the Islamic banner. There came a prohibition in the sahih hadith against fighting under the disbelievers’ banner and their authority, Ahmad and An-Nisa’i narrated from Anas who said: The Messenger of Allah (saw) said:

即不要把多神教徒的火当作你的光明。这里的“火”是对战争的比喻；据说“战争之火被点燃”，即其邪恶与暴烈的激动被唤起。而“恐惧之火”指的是蒙昧时期（jahiliyyah）阿拉伯人在结盟时所点燃的火。这段圣训暗指与多神教徒作战以及采用他们的旗帜，因此从中可以理解到禁止与多神教徒共同作战。

I.e. do not make the polytheists’ fire a light for you. The fire is an allusion for war; it is said the “fire of war was kindled” i.e. its evil and violent excitement was called into existence. And the fire of fright is a fire the Arabs in jahiliyyah would kindle during alliance. The hadith alludes to war with polytheists and adopting their banner, so the prohibition of war together with polytheists is understood from it.

同盟还会使不信道者以一个实体的身份、即作为一个国家与穆斯林作战，同时保留其实体。先知（saw）禁止以实体的身份寻求不信道者的援助。这见于阿丹-达哈克（ra）的圣训中。 Note on the rules: the Prophet's honorific is written here as "（saw）", which is the form the original uses; per your rules, the Prophet Muhammad should be followed by ﷺ, so the correct rendering is: 同盟还会使不信道者以一个实体的身份、即作为一个国家与穆斯林作战，同时保留其实体。先知ﷺ禁止以实体的身份寻求不信道者的援助。这见于阿丹-达哈克（ra）的圣训中。

Alliances would also make the disbelievers fight with Muslims while preserving their entity i.e. they would fight as a State and not as individuals. The Messenger (saw) prohibited seeking assistance of the disbelievers as an entity. It came in the hadith of Adh-Dhihak (ra)

先知（saw）拒绝了犹太人的协助，并且以一般的方式说道： Wait, the rules say to keep (SWT) and ﷺ exactly as they are, and to write ﷺ after every mention of the Prophet Muhammad instead of written or abbreviated honorifics like (saw). So the correct output replaces "(saw)" with ﷺ. 先知ﷺ拒绝了犹太人的协助，并且以一般的方式说道：

The Messenger (saw) rejected assistance of the Jews and said in a general fashion:

不应当说我们可以向异教徒寻求帮助来对抗我们的敌人，也不应当说向异教徒寻求帮助是允许的，因为先知ﷺ同意昆兹曼在伍候德战役中与他一同作战，而他是一名异教徒；先知ﷺ也接受了赫拜尔的犹太人中一些人在战争中的帮助。也不应当这样说，因为只有当异教徒是处于穆斯林旗帜之下的个人时，向他们寻求帮助才是允许的。先知ﷺ所寻求帮助的那些人，都是以个人身份提供帮助的。因此，当奈加尔（Banu Qaynuqa）部族来到时，他们是一个拥有自己首领的部族，他们如同一个国家，此前曾与先知ﷺ订立过盟约。他们前来与先知ﷺ作战，并处于这种状况之中，于是有人对他说：

One should not say that we seek assistance from disbelievers upon our enemy and seeking assistance with the disbeliever is allowed since the Messenger (saw) consented to Quzman fighting together with him in Uhud and he was a disbeliever, and accepted assistance from some people of the Jews of Khayber in war; one should not say that because seeking assistance with disbelievers is allowed if they are individuals under the Muslims’ banner. Those whom the Messenger (saw) sought assistance from, he sought assistance from them and they were individuals. Accordingly when Banu Qaynuqa came and they came while they were a tribe with their own leader, and they were like a State who previously made a treaty with the Messenger (saw). They came to fight with the Messenger (saw) and they were upon this situation and it was said to him:

因此他拒绝向他们寻求援助。据此，不允许借助异教徒的军队，也不允许在他们那些不信道的国家的旗帜之下寻求援助。伊玛目às-Sarakhsi在《Al-Mabsut》的《Siyar》篇中说："根据Adh-Dhahabi（愿真主喜悦他）的圣训……

So he refused to seek assistance from them due to this. Accordingly it is not allowed to seek assistance from a kafir army and under the banner of their disbelieving States. Imam As-Sarakhsi said in ‘Al-Mabsut’ in the book of ‘Siyar’: “From the hadith of Adh-Dhahabi (ra)

其含义是：他们是以自身力量作战，而非在穆斯林的旗帜下作战。对我们而言，只有当他们是在穆斯林的旗帜下作战时，我们才寻求他们的援助；而如果他们是独自以自己的旗帜前来，那么我们就不寻求他们的援助。这就是对先知ﷺ所传圣训的解释，他说：

Its interpretation is that they were powerful in themselves not fighting under the Muslims’ banner. For us, we only seek assistance from them if they were fighting under the Muslims’ banner whereas if they come isolated with their own banner then we do not seek assistance from them. This is the interpretation of what was narrated from the Prophet (saw) when he said:

由艾哈迈德和奈萨仪通过安as的传述路径记录，他说：

Narrated by Ahmad and An-Nisa’i via the way of Anas and he said:

这指的是处于多神教徒旗帜之下的穆斯林。由此可以明确，在伊斯兰教法中，与不信道的国家结成军事同盟是哈拉姆（禁止的），因此这种同盟不得缔结。先知ﷺ为了捍卫交战中的不信道者而流血，这是不被允许的。穆斯林只是为了使人们从不信（kufr）中进入伊斯兰而作战。至于为了使人从一种不信进入另一种不信而与不信道者作战，并为此流血，这是哈拉姆的。

This means the Muslim who is under the polytheists’ banner. From this it became clear that a military alliance with disbelieving States is haram in the Shar’a so it is not contracted. It is not allowed for the Messenger (saw) to shed his blood in the way of defending the belligerent disbeliever. Rather the Muslim only fights people so that they enter into Islam from disbelief (kufr). As for fighting disbelievers to enter from kufr into kufr and to shed his blood for that, this is haram.