Is there a difference between a Muslim living in a disbeliever state and a Muslim living in a Muslim state?

The questioner : And we return to migration as well. We understood that there is a difference between a disbeliever state governed by a disbeliever system, and a Muslim state governed by a disbeliever system. Let us divide this: Can we understand from this statement or this distinction that there is also a difference in the ruling on migration between a disbeliever state from which migration is obligatory for any Muslim who enters Islam, or any person who enters Islam, or a Muslim living in lands of disbelief, and a Muslim living in a Muslim state or in Islamic lands governed by a disbeliever system, with a mitigated ruling on migration? For example, we might say from a city to a village where the effect of this system on that village is less, and thus there is a slight distinction between these two migrations?

The Shaykh : This is what we have also said in more than one answer. We said that regarding those who reside in Palestine, the one who resides in Tel Aviv is not like the one who resides in, for example, Haifa and Jaffa, even though they are close to Tel Aviv. No, the one who resides in Haifa and Jaffa is not like the one who resides in, for example, other lands, let us go further, like Gaza. And I said on this occasion as well: that the land, even in these aspects related to legal meanings, differs by the inch, as it does in commercial matters; land differs by the inch. A question came to me about a month ago, or more, I no longer remember well, from Algeria. They were informed of the fatwa of the obligation of migration, so they inquired if this is correct? We said: Yes. He said: Okay, is it obligatory for us to migrate? I asked him the following question, and I had been asked about it and understood it: that there is a curfew between such-and-such an hour—I no longer remember—until five in the morning. So I was asked more than once about the time between five and the sunrise, which is only a quarter of an hour. This means that we cannot pray the Fajr prayer in the dim light as is the recommended practice. So we are between two things: either we pray according to the recommended practice in the dim light in our homes, or we delay the prayer to the mosque until after five, because five is the end of the curfew, leaving a quarter of an hour. So I answered that no, it is better that you delay and pray with the congregation. It is better for you that you pray alone in your homes. A question came after that about migration. I said to him: I was informed of such-and-such and asked such-and-such, is this correct with you? He said: Yes. I said: Is this curfew in all of Algeria or only in the capital? He said: No, in the capital. I said: Then it is obligatory to migrate from the capital to another town where there is no such prevention of performing this obligation. The matter differs, of course, as it differs, for example, traveling from a disbeliever country to a disbeliever country. Because now, for example, one of the Belgians or the Muslims residing in Belgium visited me. He mentioned that in fact, Belgium has recognized the Islamic religion.

The questioner : Yes, and the Netherlands as well.

The Shaykh : Yes?

The questioner : And the Netherlands.

The Shaykh : And the Netherlands. Ah, the point is that Muslims have rights there like non-Muslims, and they help them in opening schools and teaching religious lessons as if they were in a Muslim country. Of course, this is not the case in other lands. In lands of disbelief, Islam was not recognized. Also, lands of disbelief differ. Therefore, the first and second migrations from Makkah to Abyssinia occurred before the migration from Makkah to Madinah. So the Muslim always proceeds under the principle: "Taking the lesser of two evils." Let us pray.

The questioner : Can people migrate to Belgium, my Shaykh?

The Shaykh : How?

The questioner : People migrate to...