Abstract

This article examines the Islamic legal ruling on Muslims taking up permanent residence in non-Muslim countries, a question of growing relevance given the scale of contemporary Afghan and Muslim migration. Using a qualitative, library-based doctrinal method, the study analyzes Qur’anic verses, prophetic Hadith, classical juristic positions, and contemporary fatwas addressing residence, citizenship, and hijra. The analysis first defines Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Kufr and distinguishes the technical, religious meaning of hijra from migration in the general, modern sense. It then examines the textual and consensus-based evidence generally cited to prohibit voluntary residence in non-Muslim lands, alongside the juristic conditions under which residence based on necessity is permitted. The study finds that the operative criterion in the classical sources is not residence in a non-Muslim country as such, but a Muslim’s capacity to practice their religion openly and their safety from persecution, a distinction with direct bearing on how the ruling should apply to Muslims living under modern constitutional protections for religious freedom. The article’s contribution is to reframe this question away from a blanket prohibition and toward a conditions-based framework capable of accommodating contemporary realities such as asylum, labor migration, and citizenship in non-Muslim states, while still identifying the harms scholars associate with unrestricted residence.

Keywords

Muslim Ruling Definition of Hijra Residence Non-Muslim Countries Contemporary Migration