9. Surah at-Tawbah, Medina 113 [9H]

The Quranic Text & Ali’s Version:

قَاتِلُواْ الَّذِينَ لاَ يُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللّهِ وَلاَ بِالْيَوْمِ الآخِرِ...   

9: 29.  Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day,

...وَلاَ يُحَرِّمُونَ مَا حَرَّمَ اللّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ...

nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger,

...وَلاَ يَدِينُونَ دِينَ الْحَقِّ مِنَ الَّذِينَ أُوتُواْ الْكِتَابَ...

nor acknowledge the religion of truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book,

...حَتَّى يُعْطُواْ الْجِزْيَةَ ...

until they pay the Jizyah

... عَن يَدٍ وَهُمْ صَاغِرُونَ ﴿٢٩﴾  

with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

Other Versions:

9: 29

Asad [And] fight against those who – despite having been vouchsafed revelation [aforetime] (note 40) – do not [truly] believe either in God or the Last Day, and do not consider forbidden that which God and His Apostle have forbidden [note 41], and do not follow the religion of truth [which God has enjoined upon them], (note 42), till they [agree to] pay the exemption tax with a willing hand, after having been humbled [in war] (note 43).

Pickthall Fight against such of those who have been given the Scripture as believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, and forbid not that which Allah hath forbidden by His messenger, and follow not the religion of truth, until they pay the tribute readily, being brought low.

Transliteration Qa_tilul lazina la_ yu'minu_na billa_hi wa la_ bil yaumil a_khiri wa yuharrimu_na ma_ harramalla_hu wa rasu_luhu_ wa la_ yadinu_na dinal haqqi minal lazina u_tul kita_ba hatta_ yu'tul jizyata 'ay yadiw wa hum sa_giru_n(a).

[[ Asad’s note 40 - ……………In accordance with the fundamental principle – observed throughout my interpretation of the Quran – that all of its statements and ordinances are mutually complementary and cannot, therefore, be correctly understood unless they are considered as parts of one integral whole, this verse, too must be read in the context of the clear-cut Quranic rule that war is permitted only in self-defense (see2:190-194, and the corresponding notes). In other words, the above injunction to fight is relevant only in the event of aggression committed against the Muslim community or state, or in the presence of an unmistakable threat to its security: a view which has been shared by that great Islamic thinker, Muhammad Abduh. Commenting on the verse, he declared: “Fight has been made obligatory in Islam only for the sake of defending the truth and its followers……All the campaigns of the Prophet were defensive in character; and so were the wars undertaken by the Companions in the earlier period [of Islam]” (Manar X, 332). ]]

Note 41 – This, to my mind, is the key-phrase of the above ordinance. The term “apostle” is obviously used here in its generic sense and applies to all the prophets on whose teachings the beliefs of the Jews and the Christians are supposed to be based – in particular, to Moses and (in the case of the Christians) to Jesus as well (Manar C, 333 and 337). Since, earlier in this sentence, the people alluded to are accused of so grave a sin as willfully refusing to believe in God and the Last Day ……….it is inconceivable that they should subsequently be blamed for comparatively minor offences against their religious law: consequently, the stress on their “not forbidding that which God and His apostle have forbidden” must refer to something which is as grave, or almost as grave, as disbelief in God. In the context of an ordinance enjoining war against them, this “something” can mean only one thing – namely, unprovoked aggression:

for it is this that has been forbidden by God through all the apostles who were entrusted with conveying His message to man. Thus, the above verse must be understood as a call to the believers to fight against such – and only such – of the nominal followers of earlier revelation as deny their own professed beliefs by committing aggression against the followers of the Quran (cf.Manar C, 338).]]

[[ Ruby’s note 9: 29 – I totally agree with Asad’s interpretation otherwise the Quran would contradict itself and would become inconsistent and invalid. The only interpretation of this verse that makes it consistent with other injunctions of the Quran at other places is this and only this interpretation.

Furthermore, the timing is in the year 9H after many wars and dissentions in which many tribes of the ‘people of the Book’ and pagans have done many conspiracy, hypocrisy and belligerence against the Muslim community and at times became severe threat to the existence of the community. The parties indicated here are the remnants after all these collective experiences of such tenacious difficult, belligerent, confronting and posing threat to the community. ]]

[[ Asad’s note 42- See in this connection the statement (in 5:13-14) that the Jews and the Christians “having forgotten much of what they had been told to bear in mind”.]]

[[ Alis notes - 1281 Jizya: the root meaning is compensation. The derived meaning, which became the technical meaning, was a poll-tax levied from those who did not accept Islam, but were willing to live under the protection of Islam, and were thus tacitly willing to submit to its ideals being enforced in the Muslim State. There was no amount permanently fixed for it. It was in acknowledgment that those whose religion was tolerated would in their turn not interfere with the preaching and progress of Islam. Imam Shafi'i suggests one dinar per year, which would be the Arabian gold dinar of the Muslim States. The tax varied in amount, and there were exemptions for the poor, for females and children (according to Abu Hanifa), for slaves, and for monks and hermits. Being a tax on able-bodied males of military age, it was in a sense a commutation for military service. But see the next note. (9.29)

1282 'An Yadin (literally, from the hand) has been variously interpreted. The hand being the symbol of power and authority. I accept the interpretation "in token of willing submission." The Jizya was thus partly symbolic and partly a commutation for military service, but as the amount was insignificant and the exemptions numerous, its symbolic character predominated. See the last note. (9.29) ]]