What is the Shariah evidence relied upon by the Fiqh Council of North America to determine that the criterion for cooperation in sin and aggression is direct involvement, and that indirect involvement is permissible? Is there a preference among Fiqh Councils, and are the decisions of the Jeddah Fiqh Council more authoritative to follow?

We have previously discussed the meaning and nature of cooperation in sin and transgression, and clarified the permissibility of indirect and unintended assistance. For example, if someone sells an item that can be used for both lawful and unlawful purposes, and does not intend to assist its users in unlawful acts, or if someone gives another a dirham not for the purpose of buying wine, then if that person buys wine with it and drinks it, there is no sin upon the one who gave the dirham, as long as they did not intend to assist them in a forbidden act. This is supported by the Prophet's (peace be upon him) and his companions' dealings with disbelievers; they would buy from them and borrow from them. Some companions would hire themselves out, and this might sometimes lead to assisting them in some sins, but it was not direct assistance. Therefore, it was not prohibited, unlike selling grapes to someone who will press them into wine, or selling weapons to someone who will use them for unlawful purposes. It was narrated from Ata' that he said: "Do not sell grapes to someone who will make wine from them." Scholars have mentioned that blocking the means (sadd al-dhara'i') does not mean prohibiting everything that might possibly lead to something unlawful. They clarified that means are of three types: one type that the Ummah has unanimously agreed to block, one type that the Ummah has unanimously agreed not to prohibit, and one type about which scholars differed whether it should be blocked or not. As for the Islamic jurisprudence councils, the Fiqh Academy in Jeddah is considered one of the most reliable due to the presence of prominent scholars within it.