New Age Islam
Sat Jul 13 2024, 04:41 AM

Muslims and Islamophobia ( 1 Jul 2021, NewAgeIslam.Com)

Comment | Comment

Refuting Islamophobic Claims That Jihadists Represent Traditional and Mainstream Interpretations of Islam: Part 8 On Killing Mushrikin and Kuffar

The Quranic Verse 9:5 Commanding the Killing of Mushrikin Can’t Be Applied to the Present World

Main Points discussed in part 8  

1. Jihadist Use of the Quranic Verse 9:5 To Justify the Killing of Mushrikin of the  Present World is a violation of the Quran and rejection of the traditional interpretation of Islam

2. Difference between the Creeds and Acts of Mushrikin of Makkah and those of today’s Mushrikin

3. Interpretive rules of Traditional Islamic Jurisprudence and Verse 9:5

4. Linguistic analysis of the word Mushrikin mentioned in verse 9:5

5. The Jurisprudential Principle of Zahir and Nass and Interpretation of verse 9:5

6. The Principle of ‘Dalalat Siyaaq al-Kalam’ and Verse 9:5

7. Mushrikin mentioned in Verse 9:5 are specifically meant for the religious persecutors and Nakithin of Makkah who violated the peace treaty

8. The Cause of Revelation [shaane nuzul] of Verse 9:5

9. The Quranic verse 9:5 can’t be applied to the civilians living in the present world

10. Muslims and Non-Muslims must be equally beware of Islamophobes and Jihadists


By New Age Islam Special Correspondent

1 July 2021

Another argument that Islamophobes and Jihadists have learnt by heart to draw favour from the common naïve non-Muslims and Muslims – with each having its respective agenda; Islamophobes incite non-Muslims against Islam and Muslims whereas Jihadists do so the Muslims against the non-Muslims under the usage of Kuffar and Mushrikin, is aired around the human ears with the will-filled use of a Quranic verse “Kill the Mushrikin wherever you find them…” (9:5). This is the synergy between both the groups, that we talked about earlier; both encourage the common and naïve civilians to construct the path of violent extremism. Jihadists quote this verse to justify the killing of Mushrikin and Kuffar whereas the Islamophobes quote it to claim that the Jihadists are based on real traditional and classical Islam to apparently express that it is time now for the non-Muslims to increase their strength to fight against Islam and Muslims. Bull-headed as both of them are, don’t want to meditate the dream of becoming pious slaves of God Almighty even while committing the pursuits of their worldly pleasure, as they are causing the disorder in the land – an act strictly prohibited in the Qur'an; and therefore this Refutation of Islamophobic claims is going on: now take this part on the subject of “Killing Mushrikin and Kuffar”. 

The militant Jihadists often quote the Quranic verse 9:5 to justify their unjust acts of violence. In its magazine called ‘Dabiq’, the ISIS Jihadists have quoted this verse to justify their claim that “Islam is the religion of the sword, not pacifism” (Dabiq, 7th issue, p.20). The magazine says with reference to Tafsir-e-Ibn Kathir as follows:   

“‘Alī Ibn Abī Tālib (radiyallāhu ‘anhu) said, “Allah’s Messenger (sallallāhu ‘alayhi wa sallam) was sent with four swords: a sword for the Mushrikin, {And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the Mushrikin wherever you find them} [At-Tawbah: 5], a sword for Ahlul-Kitāb, {Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Book – [fight them] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled} [At-Tawbah: 29], a sword for the munāfiqīn, {O Prophet, fight against the Kuffar and the Munāfiqīn} [At-Tawbah: 73], and a sword for the bughāt (rebellious aggressors), {Then fight against the group that commits baghy (aggression) until it returns to the ordinance of Allah} [Al-Hujurāt: 9]” [Tafsīr Ibn Kathīr]. (Quoted from ISIS’ magazine ‘Dabiq’, 7th issue, p.20)

All the modern Jihadists approximately think it necessary to quote this verse to justify their Jihadism by the killing of Kuffar and Mushrikin including “Sufi-Sunni and Shia Muslims” in particular. They also misinterpret in this regard the classical interpretation of this verse. Sadly the Islamophobes have learnt this Jihadist lesson by rote to help build the two roads to extremism in the name of Muslims versus non-Muslims. In this write up we will present the classical interpretation of the afore-mentioned Quranic verse, utilizing the mainstream jurisprudential rules of interpreting the Quran and Sunnah. The refuting arguments employed in this part are based on excerpts from and sometimes a briefing of Mr Ghulam Ghaus Siddiqi’s writing published on the website in 5 parts on the same subject (referenced below).

The study of traditional books of Tafasir [pl. of Tafsir meaning exegesis or commentary of the Quran] builds the idea that this verse 9:5 is contextual, as it was revealed in the war-time situation. This way they propose that this verse can’t be applied under all situations. We can further elaborate it by saying that this verse can’t be applied to our circumstances of the present situation. As for the Jihadists using this verse to justify the indiscriminate killing, suicide attacks, destruction of public places and the so-called ‘Istishhadi’ operation, they are merely promoting a great disorder in the land of God Almighty – God knows the best! Removing fasad or disorder from the land is the purpose of Islamic teachings, only if we understand this message by heart and soul.  Having studied all the war-and-peace related verses on the basis of traditional rules of jurisprudence for interpreting the Quran, we are sure enough that the Jihadists are misusing Islam and its war-related narratives for the wrong purposes – as if it were a hidden agenda of enemies of Islam to make the people lose trust in Islam or not let the world know the Truth of Islam.

Interpretive rules of Traditional Islamic Jurisprudence and Verse 9:5

The traditional jurists of all ages have unanimously agreed in the interpretive rule of Islamic jurisprudence that the apparent [zaahir] words of the Quran and Sunnah are sometimes specific and have the possibility of further interpretation. The word Mushrikin mentioned in verse 9:5, as per this jurisprudential rule, is though an apparent [zaahir] word; it is specific for a group or some individuals of Mushrikin. This makes it clear that this verse can’t be used as definitive proof to argue that the word “Mushrikin” mentioned in the Quran refers to all Mushrikin of the world or those of all ages. “On the contrary, we find here not only the possibility of further interpretation (Taweel) or specification (Takhsees) but also the solid pieces of evidence […….] that enable us to accept that the word ‘Mushrikin’ mentioned in verse 9:5 is specific for those Mushrikin of Makka who were religious persecutors and were in the state of war”.


See the Related Article:

Refutation of ISIS That Uses the Verse, ‘Kill the Mushrikin Wherever You Find Them’ To Justify Terrorism in 21st Century: Linguistic Analysis of the Word ‘Mushrikin’ Part-1


Difference Between The Mushrikin Of Makka And Mushrikin Of The Present Century

The Creeds (aqaid) and actions [aamaal] of the Mushrikin of Makkah mentioned in The Quranic Verse 9:5 are different from those of Mushrikin living in the present century. The following excerpts from the article of Mr Ghulam Ghaus Siddiqi discusses the creeds and actions of the Mushrikin of Makkah to prove that this verse 9:5 is contextual and can’t be applied to the present circumstances:

“Briefly speaking of their creeds, the Mushrikin of Makkah made the creed of Tashbih (anthropomorphism) and did Tahrif (change). They would say that angels were God’s daughters and claimed the presence of human attributes in God. When they could not comprehend the true attributes of God such as Knowledge (‘ilm) and power of hearing and seeing, they started judging these attributes in the context of their own knowledge and capability of hearing and seeing. This is how they went astray, taking God as corporal and boundable. The story of change (Tahrif), in the words of Shah Waliullah, is that “the children of Prophet of Ismail followed their grandfather Abrahim’s Sharia or Religion of Abraham (Millat-e-Ibrahimi) till ‘Amr bin Lauhaay appeared. He carved idols and made their worship compulsory for them. He also instituted superstitions, such as ‘Bahira’, Sai’ba’, ‘Wasila’ and ‘Ham’, ‘Al-Iqtisam lil Azlam’ and many others! This change took place three hundred years before the birth of the Holy Prophet. In addition to these evil practices, they adhered to the traditions of their forefathers and considered it as a decisive argument in their favour. The Prophets who had gone before had spoken about the Resurrection and the Gathering, but they had given no details, nor stated it as distinctly with all particulars as given in the Quran (though rather very summarily). Since the Arab Mushrikin were not given a detailed account of life after death, they considered the happening of Resurrection as impossible and far remote. Even though these Mushrikin acknowledged the prophethood of Prophets Abraham, Ismail and also that of Prophet Moses, they felt confused about the existence of human qualities in these prophets, which constitute a veil on their perfect beauty and thus entertained doubts about them... They considered prophets in human forms something very remote and unbelievable” (Shah Waliullah, Al-Fauz al-Kabir, trans. by G. N. Jalbani)

“Among other differentiating things between the Mushrikin of Makkah and the Mushrikin living in the present century are that the “Polytheists (of Arab) described themselves as “Ahnaf” (seekers of truth), claiming to follow the religion of Abraham (Millat-e-Ibrahim). In fact, Hanafi (not to be confused with the Hanafi who follows Imam Abu Hanifa) is one who follows the creed of Abraham and observes the rituals prescribed by him. These rituals include a pilgrimage to Ka’aba, keeping one’s face towards it while saying prayers, bath after ceremonious uncleanliness, circumcision etc”.....The Mushrikin of Arab abandoned the creeds of Abraham and “indulged in evil practices such as unlawful murder, theft, adultery, usury and usurpation.” In matters of the creeds of Abraham (peace be upon him), these Mushrikin “had, in general, the created doubts, describing them improbable and showing no interest in comprehending them. Polytheism, belief in anthropomorphism, modification of Abraham’s scroll, denial of the Hereafter, and terming the Holy Prophet’s mission unbelievable constituted the main features of their deviation from the true Religion of Abraham. In addition, they performed shameful deeds, indulged in injustice, wrongdoing and corrupt practices and wiped out every semblance of God’s worship” (Shah Waliullah, Al-Fauz al-Kabir, trans. by G. N. Jalbani, p.3-4)”

“According to the several verses of the Quran, the act of Shirk is an unforgivable sin and the perpetrators of this sin will face the torment of God Almighty on the Day of Judgment. However, the Quranic verses do not stop the believers from living in peace and harmony in this 21st century where human beings have promised to live under the law of peaceful coexistence. As for verse 9:5, though it mentions the word ‘Mushrikin’, it does not imply that they were fought on the basis of their Shirk or creeds. Instead, they were fought because they were religious persecutors. In other words, they were fought on account of their violent actions.

The Actions (Aamaal) Of the Mushrikin Mentioned In the Quranic Verse 9:5

“As for the actions (Aamaal) of the Mushrikin mentioned in the Quran, the Mushrikin had persecuted the Prophet and his followers for as long as 14 or 15 years in the city of Makkah. They inflicted all sorts of indignities upon those who embraced Islam chosen for them by Allah Almighty. They raised baseless objections to the verses revealed by Allah, derided the injunctions of Shariat and committed heartless oppression for thirteen years until the Muslims were allowed to exact a measure of retaliation.

“During the thirteenth year after the declaration of his Prophet-hood, Allah commanded the Prophet (peace be upon him) and his companions to migrate. They carried out Allah’s command worshipfully and migrated to Madina –nearly 300 miles away from Makkah. Still, the animosity of the inveterate Mushrikin had not subsided. They inflicted fresh injuries on the Muslims; robbed them of peace of mind and heart. A band of Arab Mushrikin would raid the pastures of the Muslims and take away their cattle. If they encounter a lonely Muslim, they would not hesitate in killing him mercilessly.

“For as long as 14 or 15 years, the Muslims suffered insults, outrages and injuries at the hands of these Mushrik persecutors. The Muslims bore all these indignities with the utmost humility and patience. When the aggression and ruthlessness of the Arab Mushrikin grew more hotly than ever, Allah granted permission to the believers to take up arms in their own defence and make the violence-loving Mushrikun believe that the torch of Islam – that lights up the darkness – would never be allowed to be blown out. Likewise, the flag held aloft for the dissemination of the truth will never be let down, however hot they might grow. This torch will remain lit until the doomsday. And the flag of the truth will continue to flutter so long as the world exists. (Zia-ul-Quran, Vol: 3; p.218-/ The Enlightening Commentary on the War Related Quranic Verses- Part 2)

“Initially the Muslims were not given permission to fight back even in defence. Later on, they were allowed to fight back and there was a situation that the verse “kill the Mushrikin wherever you find them [in the state of war]” was revealed.

“The ‘Mushrikin’ Were Fought As Violators of Peace-Treaty Not Because They Had Committed Shirk

“From the cause of the revelation, it is well-known that they were permitted to fight back against the Mushrikin of Makka who were the religious persecutors and had violated the peace-treaty after signing it. It would not be appropriate to deduce from verse 9:5 that they were fought because of their committing Shirk. This is also supported by the following interpretations made by classical scholars.

Al-Baydawi (d.685H) in his book “Anwar al-Tanzeel wa Asrar al-Taweel (The Lights of Revelation and the Secrets of Interpretation, V. 3, p. 71, 9:5- Arabic version)”, a classical tafsir which is included in Madrasa-syllabus of the Indian subcontinent, writes while interpreting the verse, "فاقتلوا المشركين (أي) الناكثين", which means that the word Mushrikin mentioned in the Ayah 9:5 refers to Nakithin- those who violated peace treaties by waging war against the Muslims.

“Al-Alusi (d.1270H) in his “Rooh al-Ma’ani (v. 10, p. 50, - 9:5, Arabic version), another classical book of Tafsir, writes,

على هذا فالمراد بالمشركين في قوله سبحانه: (فاقتلوا المشركين) الناكثون

“Translation: “Therefore the word Mushrikin in the statement of God Almighty “so kill the Mushrikin...” means Nakitheen, i.e. those who violated the peace treaties by initiating war against the Muslims.

Abu Bakr al-Jassas, a classical scholar, (d.370H) writes,

"صار قوله تعالى: {فَاقْتُلُوا المُشْرِكِينَ حَيْثُ وَجَدْتُمُوهُمْ} خاصّاً في مشركي العرب دون غيرهم"

“Translation: “The verse (Kill the Mushrikin wherever you find them) was particular to the Mushrikin of Arab and does not apply to anyone else” (Ahkam al-Quran lil Jassas, V. 5, p. 270, Arabic edition- English translation mine)

Imam Jalaluddin Suyuti writes,

“In his commentary on the above mentioned Quranic Ayah 9:5, Imam Ibn Hatim quotes Hazrat Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him, who was the companion and cousin of the beloved Prophet peace be upon him) as saying: ‘The Mushrikin mentioned in this Ayah refer to those Mushrikin of Quraish with whom the Prophet –peace be upon him- had made treaty [of peace]” (Durr-e-Manthoor, V.3, p.655- Urdu version)

“He also reports, “Imam Ibn Munzir, Ibn Abi Hatim and Abu Shaikh (may Allah be pleased with them) have quoted Hazrat Muhammad bin Ibad b. Jafar as saying “These Mushrikin are Banu Khuzaima b. Amir who belongs to  Bani Bakr b. Kananah”  (Durr-e-Manthoor, V.3, p.655- Urdu version)

“Such commentaries, according to other Islamic scholars, are substantiated by what the Qur’an itself says in the Ayah 13 of the same chapter,

“Will you not fight against those who violated their oaths (of peace-treaties), plotted the expulsion of the messenger and initiated the fighting against you?” (9:13)

 And the Ayah 36 of Surah Taubah says,

“and fight against the Mushrikin collectively as they fight against you collectively, and know well that Allah is with the pious.” (9:36)

“Implication of these two verses (9:13) and (9:36) and comments of classical jurists as mentioned above is that the Mushrikin mentioned in verse 9:5 were not all the Mushrikin but those who were the religious persecutors and had violated peace-treaties by waging war against the early Muslims. Hence it is not appropriate to deduce that the Mushrikin were fought because of their Shirk.

“We need to consider two things here; firstly if the act of Shirk (polytheism) had been the cause of the fighting, the peace treaty would not have been signed between the Prophet (peace be upon him) and the Mushrikin of Makkah. Secondly, if those Mushrikin had not been the religious persecutors or the violators of the peace treaty, the fighting would not have occurred. This can also be understood from the Ahadith (to be referenced in the forthcoming parts) which do not grant permission to kill the women, children, disabled or old from among the Mushrikin.”

Excerpts quoted from the Article:

Refutation of ISIS: Who Are The Mushrikin Mentioned In The Quranic Verse 9:5? - Part 2


In the principles of Islamic jurisprudence and law, the principle of Zahir and Nass is very famous. Mr Ghulam Ghaus Siddiqi writes in the third part of his article:

 “Linguistically the term Zahir means ‘apparent’, ‘plain’, manifest and ‘clear’ etc. Technically, Zahir means “whatever becomes apparent to a listener from his hearing only” or in the words of Imam Bazdawi “It (Zahir) is a name for every speech the aim of which became apparent to the listener by its wording” whereas Imam Sarakhsi defines “what can be understood by pure hearing without thinking..” Zahir has a clear meaning and yet is susceptible and open to the possibility of an alternative interpretation. The main reason for this is that its apparent meaning is not always in harmony with the context in which it takes place because Zahir is not the principal theme of the text.  Nass denotes a clear text which clarifies the reason why a sentence is expressed. The implication of Nass is that which is aimed by the speaker, while the meaning of Zahir is not meant by the speaker.”

“Let us ponder over the Zahir and Nass related to the verse 9:5 “kill the Mushrikin wherever you find them”. This verse is Zahir in its commanding the believers to kill the Mushrikin wherever they are found, whereas this verse is Nass in its commanding the believers to fight against the religious persecutors and violators of peace-treaty in the state of war. The purpose of this verse being revealed was to grant permission of killing the religious persecutors and the militants in the state of war; as this was the situation of “kill or be killed”. The very purpose can be understood easily if all the war-related verses are taken into account, such as the verses “And if any one of the Mushrikin seeks your protection, then grant him protection so that he may hear the words of Allah. Then deliver him to his place of safety. That is because they are a people who do not know” (9:6), “And fight in God's cause against those who wage war against you, but do not commit aggression; for, verily, God does not love aggressors” (2:190).

“Thus we find that verse 9:5 is Nass to involve several points; 1) fighting should be on the basis of persecution and not account of religious belief, 2) fighting should take place after the peace treaty is dismissed and the war is declared, 3) fighting should take place in the state of war. These three points were the main purpose of this verse being revealed. On the contrary, the Zahir of this verse demands that since the word mentioned in this verse is Mushrikin and that is in plural form, so all of them should be killed everywhere. However, the Nass (the purpose of the revelation of this verse) goes against the Zahir (apparent meaning) of this verse. And this is a very popular principle also taught in the textbooks of Madrasas that when the Nass and Zahir conflict with each other, the Nass is always preferred.

“In other words, let me repeat that the command of fighting against the Mushrikin of Arab was revealed because they had persecuted the Muslims and violated the peace-treaty, and not because they had committed Shirk or Kufr. And it is in this sense that this verse is Nass. As for the Zahir of this verse, this is not in harmony with the Nass of this verse and there is consensus among the scholars of the past (Salaf) and of the present that when Zahir and Nass oppose each other, a preference is always given to Nass and not to the Zahir, so as to get a better understanding of the Quran.”

See the article:

Refutation of ISIS Through the Principle of Zahir and Nass Related to the Quranic verse 9:5 Quoted To Justify Acts of Violence In 21st Century-Part 3


After applying the principle of Zahir and Nass to the Quranic verse 9:5, we believe that it is wrong to justify “the killing of Mushrikin in the present circumstances”, also for the reasons discussed below.

The jurisprudential principle of Hanafis ‘Dalalat Siyaaq al-Kalam’ refers to the situation where the literal meaning of any word is dropped due to the context and structure (Siyaaq) of the speech (Kalam). Take the following excerpt for example:

“Imam Baydawi says, “The word “Mushrikin” in verse 9:5 refers to “Nakithin” which means those who breached the peace treaty and restored the state of war. (Baydawi, “Anwar al-Tanzeel wa Asrar al-Taweel (The Lights of Revelation and the Secrets of Interpretation, V. 3, p. 71, 9:5- trans. from Arabic edition). In the same way, Allama Alusi also dropped the literal meaning of the word Mushrikin due to the context and structure of the divine speech and thus they interpreted the word “Mushrikin” as “Nakithin” (Alusi, Rooh al-Ma’ani, v. 10, p. 50, - 9:5, trans. from Arabic edition). Imam Suyuti writes, “Imam Ibn Munzir, Ibn Abi Hatim and Abu Shaikh (may Allah be pleased with them) have quoted Hazrat Muhammad bin Ibad b. Jafar as saying “These Mushrikin are Banu Khuzaima b. Amir who belong to  Bani Bakr b. Kananah”  (see Suyuti, Durr-e-Manthoor, V.3, p.655- translation from Urdu version). In the words of Allama Abu Bakr al-Jassas, “The verse (Kill the Mushrikin wherever you find them) was particular to the Mushrikin of Arab and does not apply to anyone else” (Ahkam al-Quran lil Jassas, V. 5, p. 270, translation from Arabic edition)”


See the related article: Refutation of ISIS In The Context and Structure of the Quranic Verse ‘Kill the Mushrikin wherever you Find them’ (9:5)- Part 4


Another argument made by Jihadists and Islamophobes is that the verse has abrogated the peace-related verses and therefore this needs to be applied to the present circumstances. This is simply the conclusion of a wrong understanding of the meaning and application of Naskh. Mr Ghulam Ghaus Siddiqi in the fifth part of his article deals with this subject in some detail. The following are some excerpts from his article:

“As per the later classical jurists (Mutakhkhirin), who associated an extremely confined definition with the word ‘Naskh’, the war-related verses did not abrogate the verses of peace and forbearance. Imam Jalaluddin Suyuti, Zarkashi etc substantiated the very idea in their respective masterful works on the Sciences of the Quran.

“In his book “Al-Itqan fi Ulum al-Quran” which is regarded as one of the masterful works on Sciences of the Quran, Imam Suyuti explains that contrary to what some jurists believed, this verse 9:5 is not a case of abrogation but rather of context. In certain situations, verses of patience and forgiveness apply, while in others, fighting is necessary. He implies that no verse was totally terminated by another, but rather each has a specific context and applicability. Since Imam Suyuti had adopted a limited definition of abrogation different from those made by early jurists, he did not use the word ‘abrogation’ to express the case of context or temporary abrogation. In essence, this view is not different from what was actually meant by the early jurists. The only difference is that the early jurists included meaning “case of context or temporary abrogation” in the general sense of the word ‘abrogation’.

Imam Suyuti also quotes Allama Makki as saying “a group of jurists believe that the verse, “But pardon them and overlook [their misdeeds]. Indeed, Allah loves the doers of good” (5:13) is Muhkam and not abrogated because in such a divine statement there is a case of context and applicability” (Al-Itqan fi Ulum al-Quran, vol-2, pp.70-71). We have seen earlier that the case of context and applicability was expressed also by the early jurists but with the general sense of the word ‘naskh’.

“The same understanding is reinforced by the prominent jurist and legal theorist Imam Zarkashi in his masterful work on the Sciences of Quran, “Al-Burhan fi Ulum al-Quran”. Referring to a number of Mufassirin, Imam Zarkashi holds the view that many commentators (Mufassirin) took the wrong understanding that the sword verse (9: 5) abrogated verses of patience and forbearance in early Makkan verses. The reason is that the “abrogation” entails a complete termination of a legal ruling, never to be implemented again. This, he avers, is not the case with such verses [of war and peace]. Instead, each verse entails a particular ruling specific to a particular context. As circumstances change, different verses are to be applied instead of others. What is truly entailed by abrogation is that no ruling is eternally terminated. To substantiate his argument, Imam Zarkashi also gives an example from Imam Shafi’s “al-Risala” which can be seen in the referenced book.”

“Here Imam Zarkashi suggests that the war and peace-related verses are applied as per the situation and context and therefore can’t be called abrogating or abrogated verses.

“The conclusion of the above mentioned two masters of Quranic Sciences, Imam Zarkashi and Suyuti is that the verse 9:5 by no means abrogated the verses of peace and forbearance – rather, each verse needs to be implemented in its appropriate context. The ruling of verse 9:5 is a case of context and specification and not of ‘abrogation’ as defined by later jurists.”

See the Article:

Refutation of ISIS That Justifies Terrorism in 21st Century: Did the ‘Sword Verse’ 9:5 Really Abrogate Verses of Peace and Forbearance? Part -5

That is why the classical scholars popular among mainstream Muslims, Imam Baydawi, Allama Alusi, Imam Abu Bakr Jassas and many others have interpreted the Mushrikin as “Nakithin, those who violated peace treaties by violating war against the Muslims” as seen above.


Maulana Badruddoja Razvi Misbahi, Principal of Madrasa Arabia Ashrafia Zia-ul-Uloom Khairabad, District Mau, UP (India), a Sufi-minded classical Islamic scholar writes in his article:

“The polytheists who are commanded in verse 5 to be killed or fought after the passing of holy months do not refer to the common infidels and polytheists, but only to the Arab polytheists who not only broke the covenant with the Muslims but also spent their filthy efforts to violate the call of Islam, as the commentator Abi Saud in his commentary on the verse “فاقتلوا المشرکین” says, “الناكثين خاصة فلا يكون قتال الباقين مفهما عن عبارة النص بل من دلالته”, that is, “the word Mushrikin in verse 9:5 specifically refers to Nakithin, those who violated peace treaties by violating war against the Muslims. So other Mushrikin will not be fought as it is clear from the direct meaning of the text of the verse, as well as from the Dalalat al-Nass’ (i.e. a situation where the literal meaning of any word is dropped due to the context and structure of the text)  [Tafsir Abi Saud vol. 4, p. 43]

“From these authentic and reliable commentaries, it becomes clear that the command to kill the polytheists and infidels, mentioned in the verse 9:5 does not refer to the common infidels, polytheists, and fellow citizens and brothers of India, as Wasim Rizvi and anti-Islamic elements are propagating, but it refers to the polytheists of Makkah and the Arab tribes of the Covenant who committed heinous crimes such as murder, betrayal, and breach of covenant with the Muslims. The Qur'an does not advocate shooting with AK-47 at innocent people or other people while walking for no reason, making hundreds of children orphaned and snatching honeycomb from the heads of hundreds of women. The Qur'an claims that if a human being took the life of any human being for no reason, regardless of his religion, as if he was the killer of all human beings on earth, and if anyone saved the life of any oppressed, weak and feeble human being, so it is as if he worked to save the lives of all human beings on earth. The Qur'an says مَن قَتَلَ نَفْسًا بِغَيْرِ نَفْسٍ أَوْ فَسَادٍ فِيَ الْأَرْضِ فَكَأَنَّمَا قَتَلَ النَّاسَ جَمِيعًا وَمَنْ َأحْيَاهَا فَكَأَنَّمَا أَحْيَا النَّاسَ جَمِيعًا , Whoever kills a soul without exchange for life or causes corruption on the earth, it is as if he has killed all the people, and whoever burns one soul, it is as if he has burnt all the people (Kanzul-Iman). If the Islamic system of governance is in any place, the lives, property, and rights of the non-Muslim minority are as secure as the lives, property, and rights of the Muslim majority. They also have the same right to practice their religion and build a place of worship as the Muslim majority do have, as the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: " مَنْ قَتَلَ مُعَاهِدًا فِي غَيْرِ كُنْهِهِ حَرَّمَ اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ الْجَنَّةَ" (Al-Mustadrak Lil-Hakim, V: 2, p .: 142, Book of the Al Fai, Dar Al-Maarif, Beirut, Lebanon) Whoever kills a person of treaty other than his own, God forbids Paradise for him.

“In another place, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said:" مَنْ قَتَلَ نفسا مُعَاهَدۃ لَمْ يَرَحْ رَائِحَةَ الْجَنَّةِ، وَإِنَّ رِيحَهَا لیوجَدُ مِنْ مَسِيرَةِ خمسمائۃ عام ‏"‏‏ He who kills a person with whom there is an agreement of peace will not take the smell of paradise, and the smell of it is found from the journey of five hundred years. (Collection of Al-Jawami` Lil-Suyuti, V: 9, p. 721, Dar Al-Sa`adah,)

“The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) is reprimanding the one who breaks covenant after making it, in the following way:  " اِن الغادِر یُنصب لہ لواء یوم القیامۃ فیقول ھذہ غدرۃ فلان بن فلان" , (Collection of Al Jawami` Lil-Suyuti, V: 8, p. 370, Dar al-Sa`adah,) Indeed, a sign will be raised on the Day of Resurrection for the one who broke the covenant and it will be said that he betrayed such and such a person.

“Once a Muslim who had killed a non-Muslim with whom there was an agreement of peace, was presented before Hazrat Ali (May Allah be pleased with him). When the evidence of killing was presented, Hazrat Ali commanded this Muslim to be executed. Then the victim’s brother came and said, “Don’t kill him! I have forgiven him”. On this Hazrat Ali said, “Maybe that these people have threatened and terrorized you?. He said, No. they have murdered my brother and now I can’t get my brother back. They have offered me blood money and I have accepted it. Then Hazrat Ali told the non-Muslim, “You know very well that " من كان له ذمتنا فدمه كدمنا وديته كديتنا” that is, for a person who is under our protection, his life also has the same sanctity that ours has and his blood money is equal to our blood money” [Al-Sunan Al-Kubra Lil-Baihqi, V: 8, p .: 63, Al-Jarrah Al-Hadith Book: 15934, Dar Al-Kotob Al-Ilmiyah, Beirut, Lebanon]. The Arabic version of this narration is: من كان له ذمتنا فدمه كدمنا وديته كديتنا

Read the Article:

The Verses of Jihad: Meaning, Denotation, Reason of Revelation and Background- Part 2


The above discussion has proved this point of view very clearly that the Jihadists are misinterpreting the Quranic verse 9:5 to achieve their nefarious agenda. The Islamophobic claim that the Jihadist narratives are based on the classical interpretation of Islam is thereby refuted. All the civilians, be they Muslims or non-Muslims, must be equally beware of Islamophobes and Jihadists and accept the traditional and mainstream interpretation of the Quranic verse 9:5 that the Mushrikin mentioned in this verse are specifically meant for the violators of peace-treaty and religious persecutors of Makkah living in the early period of Islam and hence this verse can’t be applied to the present world.     


Related Article:

Refuting Islamophobic Claims That Jihadists Represent Traditional and Mainstream Interpretations of Islam: Part 1- On the Hakimiyyah

Refuting Islamophobic Claim That Jihadists Represent Traditional and Mainstream Interpretations of Islam: Part 2 on Imperativeness of Reclaiming ‘Muslim Land’

Refuting Islamophobic Claims That Jihadists Represent Traditional and Mainstream Interpretations of Islam: Part 3 on the Jihadist Narrative Inciting Treachery towards One’s Country

Refuting Islamophobic Claim That Jihadists Represent Traditional and Mainstream Interpretations of Islam - Part 4 on the Jihadist Narrative Justifying Suicide Bombings or Martyrdom Operations

Refuting Islamophobic Claims That Jihadists Represent Traditional and Mainstream Interpretations of Islam: Part 5- On The Concept of Darul Islam and Darul Harb

Refuting Islamophobic Claim That Jihadists Represent Islam- Part 6 On the Killing of Mushrikin and Kuffar

Refuting Islamophobic Claims That Jihadists Represent Traditional and Mainstream Interpretations of Islam: Part 7 On Takfirism


New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism