In answer to the video "The Most Violent Quran Verse (Sword Verse)"
2:106 speaks of N-S-KH meaning a) to write an exact copy, or b) to write over as in replace. 16:101 says baddalna aya makan aya/we replace an aya in the place of an aya. Sura 16 by the way is Meccan and according to the proponents of the idea, the first case of abrogation occurred in Medina. Both verses speak of the physical replacement of the abrogated, with the abrogating and this is not the case of Quranic abrogation according to which both types of verses are still present within the Quran. It is talking of the Quran's ayat superseding the ayat of previous scriptures, replacing them, which precisely is one of the oft repeated functions of the Quran. Another verse misused by the proponents of Quranic abrogation is 13:39. It speaks of "mahw" which means effacement and total removal; this again disagrees with the advocates of that theory according to which both the abrogating and the abrogated verse remain in the Quran.
No consensus exists on whether the doctrine is a reality. The identification of abrogated rulings in the Quran has been in the past and still is an act of biased interpretation. We see cases of companions, even after the prophet's death giving different opinions on whether a verse is abrogated or not, as is the case for 2:184 with ibn Umar arguing for and ibn Abbas against its abrogation. Scholars of abrogation, fuqaha’ havent been able to refine the principles of abrogation so as to give them universal shape. Different scholars have come up with their own standards of abrogation. This doctrine was introduced decades after the Prophet and was developed in full over three centuries by many scholars. In other words, abrogation is not a genuine Islamic doctrine. Most verses proposed as subject to abrogation do not even conform with the rule of an aya replacing another aya; for example scholars on the subject argue that the "verse of the sword" 9:5 abrogates 2:256 yet they conveniently omit that 2:256 contains information that cannot be replaced and so they are forced to select even within an aya what is abrogated and what is not. Further the verse of no compulsion was revealed in Medina after the first command to perform jihad 2:190-5. It is a reiteration of an Islamic principle present long before in Meccan verses, including in 18:29. This means the application of that principle of freedom of religious choice, and its validity, are unaffected by the political superiority of the Muslims.
No authentic report of the prophet mentions the theory or the existence of abrogated verses within the Quran. Not a single verse of the Quran indicates that a ruling has been overruled by another. Something else to note is that even the traditional adherents to the notion agree that there are no abrogated verses present in the Quran. This is seen from the various ahadith which speak of passages people used to recite and that were absent from the prophet's final recital of the Quran. People explained that phenomenon through the theory of abrogation. Even when some scholars speak of abrogated verse still present in the Quran, they dont argue that these verses become obsolete, rather they carry a new meaning.
In answer to the video "The Most Violent Quran Verse (Sword Verse)"
Jesus in the NT makes use of such metaphors as well when he compares the spiritually unclean to dogs and swine Matt7:6. The main thing distinguishing man from animals is his spirituality and sense of morality. This aptitude is what raised him to be God's vicegerent on earth, a honored creature excelling most of God's creation 14:32-33,17:70. So when anyone corrupts and forsakes that aspect of his being, and in addition rejects Divine guidance only to follow his low desires then he loses that distinction. He becomes the lowest of the lows although having been made in such a mould that could raise him up to moral and spiritual heights, with the highest rank being that of a prophet of God. That reality is captured through four oaths in 95:1-5.
The oath taken by the 2 of the choicest and noblest fruits, the fig and the olive, followed by an oath by the 2 locations most blessed in terms of revelation, mount Sinai and Mecca, serve as argument to the positive potential of the human being. Like the above mentioned fruits, he may become among the most select by rising spiritually, the highest humans in terms of spiritual nobility being the prophets, hence the oaths taken by 2 locations associated with 2 of the most eminent of them, Moses and Muhammad. The comparison of the spiritually dead to animals, and even lower in value, as inert and senseless as a stone 2:74, is very apt in that an animal such as sheep or cattle, despite being of very weak intellect can still properly process what it hears (voice of the herdsman) or sees (location of the herdsman and the rest of the flock) in order to find guidance.
The spiritually dead cannot make use of any of his senses and so is unable to properly process the perceived information to find guidance and rise to ultimate success. A sheep becomes more apt in finding its correct direction and thus thriving through its life. Dumbness (muteness) illustrates how the inability to listen leads to lack of interest, which would naturally be expressed through further verbal inquiry, reflexion, exchanges etc.
2:18"Deaf, dumb (and) blind, so they will not turn back"
25:44"They are nothing but as cattle; nay, they are straying farther off from the path".
In answer to the video "The Most Violent Quran Verse (Sword Verse)"
The Quran refers with very degrading terms, not only to non-Muslims, but also Muslims whenever they neglect their spiritual potential and steep to the level of animals. This is because the value of a human being in God's eyes, regardless of race, gender, ethnicity or social class, rests only in his God-consciousness 49:13. Stripped of that quality, a human being is worthless. This is a major Quranic theme.
When all has been created with an inner truth, for a higher purpose and for an appointed term in a universe whose phenomena all testify to a higher reality 30:8,14:19,10:3-6 by Allah who is Truth in essence 22:6,62 it necessitates that everything false or based on falsehood, ie devoid of its higher purpose ultimately perishes. That reality many times manifested in this very world with the uprooting of transgressing nations altogether.
The Jews for instance, when they neglect the Torah which they claim to uphold and practice 62:5, they are compared to donkeys that carry a load while totally unaware of its contents. Donkeys merely feel the burden. It is not different for them to carry rocks and wood or books containing the most precise secrets of Creation and the most fruitful lessons for a better life, as the Quran often describes the previous revelations. The Hebrew Bible itself, quoting the prophet Isaiah, reduces them to lower than donkeys in the times when the nation had almost reached total spiritual collapse Isa1:3 and Malachi echoes how lowly and contemptible they were made to be in the eyes of the whole world for having forsaken the Torah Malachi2:8-9.
To Hosea they are a "useless ustensil" as they lost the divine immunity that was granted to them as long as they remained faithful to the covenant. HE also calls them wandering wild donkeys in foreign land, in search of alliances with the pagans Hos8:8-9. Their leaders and elders are blind and slumbering, compared to dumb dogs for their failure to warn and avert spiritual disaster despite the presence of prophets among them Isa56:10.
The unrighteous foreigners that persecuted the Jews are spoken of in similar debasing terms and with such aversion that they should not be touched Isa52:1,11,Ps94:8. All these parallels humans/animals have one common denominator, the loss of all morality and spirituality. In reference to such loss, God in Ps32:9 warns David not to become
"like a mule that does not discern; whose mouth must be held with bit and bridle, so that when he is being groomed, he does not come near you".
To avoid that outcome, David is to be careful to follow God's guidance
Ps32:8"I will enlighten you and instruct you which way [to go]; I will wink My eye to you".
The Quran uses such metaphors for all people, not only the Jews, who blindly turn away and reject divine guidance
7:175,179,8:22,25:44,74:49-51"Then, why do they turn away from the reminder? As if they were frightened wild donkeys, Fleeting from lions".
Again, the metaphor applies to those who behave in this life without spiritual awareness and God-consciousness
47:12"and those who disbelieve enjoy themselves and eat as the beasts eat".
The idolaters, because of their sacraligious practices are najis/ritually impure 9:28 just as in Judaism those of "uncirumcised flesh or hearts" shouldnt be allowed anywhere near a ritualy pure entity, whether a human or else, such as the Temple.
As a side note, recently two copies of inscriptions prohibiting the entry of nonbelievers to the Temple have been found on Temple Mount, which Josephus wrote about. These inscriptions were on the dividing wall that surrounded the Second Temple, which prevented non-Jews from accessing the interior of the Temple courtyard. The "warning" stone, which is at the Istanbul Archaeological Museum, warns non-Jews of the perils of entering the sacred Temple.
In the HB and throughout the books of the Prophets, and down to the book of "writings", non-Jewish ways are paralleled with the images of lewdness, harlotry, foolishness, lurking around to lure the weak of heart.
As a side note, it is interesting to note that this evil path is symbolized in the HB by a woman, ensaring the man, thus perpetrating the mysoginist representation of females, going back to the convoluted and corrupted story of creation. This symbolizm is well depicted in Prov7 or Ecc7:26 where apostasy, sinfulness are personified by the female sex, and the way it lures man to her
"And i find more bitter than death the woman whose heart is snares and nets, her hands are bonds; whoever is good in God's sight will escape from her, and a sinner will be taken by her".
This is because even though it is hard enough to find a truly righteous man, it is even moreso difficult in the case of women
Ecc7:28"While i was still searching but not finding-- I found one upright man among a thousand, but not one upright woman among them all".
In answer to the video "The Most Violent Quran Verse (Sword Verse)"
Until 9:29, the sura Tawba prescribed divine punishment upon 3 groups; the hypocrites among the Muslims, the treacherous warmongers among the idolaters, and those idolaters insisting on their pagan practices within the sacred precincts of Mecca.
No punishement is prescribed on the peaceful idolaters beyond Mecca, as well as those in Mecca that refrain from their rituals at the sacred sites re-dedicated strictly to the Islamic religion. They are to be left unharmed as mentionned earlier.
Nor is there until now any legal directive towards the remaining non-Muslims living under Muslim rule, whether in Mecca or beyond. This included the people of the book (Jews and Christians) or the followers of other belief systems, or even atheists
9:29"Fight those who believe not in God and nor in the Last Day and nor do they forbid what God and His Messenger have forbidden and nor do they follow the religion/DEEN of truth from among the people of the book, till they give the compensation with a willing hand, while they are humble".
This verse, as attested by the prophetic practice, is not restricted to the people of the book. It covers any religion that was and could potentially fall under Muslim rule as a result of provoked warfare. The verse mentions 4 categories;
1- Those who do not believe in God
2- Those who reject the resurrection
3- Those who regard as lawful what Allah and the prophet have forbidden. Belief in God and the concept of resurrection leaves one with no other reasonable spiritual choice than to adhere to Islam. Those that make the choice not to, then they are believers in one of the many man made religions that does not forbid what Allah has forbidden through His prophet in the Quran and sunna. Or they might be adherants to a truly revealed religion, such as the Jews and Christians, but reject what Allah and His prophet forbade.
4- Those who do not follow the DEEN of truth from among the people of the book. The root D-Y-N means rule or debt or any obligation. It may be summarized as "system". It is used this way in the Quran 9:36,12:76 classical literature and even in common Arabic speak. Whenever the preposition "mina" is used before a composite entity, or a group, and that this entity is given a qualification, then "mina" carries the meaning of "among", pointing to a portion from among that composite entity 4:46,160,5:5,23,41,57,107,8:65,57:10. Among the Jews and Christians there are those whom the Quran condemns as sinful, unsincere to the truth of their own books. There are others from among them who follow the DEEN of truth. They remained truthful to the scriptures in anyway, shape or form it reached them, trying to follow it to the best of their ability. Their sincerity, unprejudiced, praiseworthy reading and understanding of their books led many of them to eventually believe in the revelation bestowed on the prophet Muhammad 2:121,83,3:113-115,199,4:162,5:13,66,69,83,7:159-170,17:107-9,28:52-4. "The Deen of truth" in that phrase cannot refer to Islam as a religion. One cannot speak of a portion from among the people of the book as being followers of Islam while others reject it.
None of the groups above are to be fought until they become Muslims. Rather until they pay the jizya in submission to the Islamic rule. That subjection is in relation to the Islamic system which they are now bound to, being permanent non Muslim residents under protection of the Muslim state. The majority of Muslim scholars have understood the passage in that way. See for example al-Shafi'i, Al-Umm, Vol. 4, Ahmad Mustafa al-Maraghi's Tafsir Vol. 10 or Fatani, Ikhtilaf al-Darin p48. This is also seen by the fact that the musta'min (a non Muslim temporary resident) is not subjected to the Islamic legal system nor the jizya, according to the Hanafi school. That subjection has thus nothing to do with humiliation, as some have interpreted, and without any evidence in the prophetic practice nor that of the first caliphs. Humiliation does occur however, when those non-Muslim residents of the Islamic state refuse to pay government taxes to the point they have to be forcefully made to. Just as Muslims, shortly after the prophet's death had to be fought, humbled, and forced to pay the government taxes under Abu Bakr's caliphate.
The order to fight therefore isnt motivated by a choice of creed otherwise the mere paying of a tax would not have been enough to end the fighting, rather a forceful conversion would. Yet that option is never proposed in the verse. The only issue for them is explicitly spelled out; Payment of taxes and submission to the laws of the religious state they live in as members of a different religion on whom different rights and obligations apply. The governement has actually more to gain in wealth and manpower if they convert, especially in early times when Muslims were a minority in these newly conquered lands. Yet they are told to keep their religion and autonomy instead.
Converting to Islam, something that isnt incumbent upon them, would end the command to fight them should they insist on not paying the jizya. But they will not escape being fought should they refuse honoring the duties that fall upon them as Muslims, including contributing financially to the functioning of the Islamic state, as well as obligations that did not apply to their former religious communities, like military service. There really is no true incentive for them to leave their religion which is why the option is never proposed in the verse.
The verses that follow illustrate some of the transgressions of the people of the book, and their causes, such as deification of prominent personalities, blind following of their religious leaders etc, while no blame is placed on them for not following Islam. These dark deviations in religion will never extinguish the light of guidance, no matter how much the disbelievers among the people of the book dislike it 9:32. The verse employs the image of a person attempting to extinguish a strong light with a blow from the mouth, to illustrate the relative feebleness of his position.
The passage ends with the reiteration of a prophecy made long before 48:28,61:9 regarding the prevailing of the deen/way of truth sent by the One true God over all other ways no matter how much the polytheists dislike it 9:33. The wording of this verse is very appropriate since it specifically mentions the polytheists, followers of non-divine religions, as disliking the establishment of the deen of truth. The people of the book, sincere to their scriptures as pointed earlier, will not dislike the establishment of a Godly system, since it does not only mean establishing Islam, but also exposing and establishing the truth of their own religion
5:83"And when they hear what has been revealed to the messenger you will see their eyes overflowing with tears on account of the truth that they recognize".
In answer to the video "The Most Violent Quran Verse (Sword Verse)"
After the warmongerers among the Idolaters were dealt with, the sura turned to the hypocrites, plotting and sowing dissension among the Muslims, recognizable through various traits such as sluggishness in rising for prayer, stinginess or reluctancy to take up arms to the point
9:57"If they could find a refuge or cave or a place to enter into, they would certainly have turned thereto, running away in all haste".
Refusing to defend the larger community in times of war is the central blame attached to this group throughout the sura, living and benefiting from the selfless sacrifices and martyrdom of others. When they were pointed out they would swear that they are faithful and sincere, fearing for the repercussions of their treacheries and sabotaging efforts of a community in times of war
9:56,95"They will swear to you by Allah when you return to them so that you may turn aside from them; so do turn aside from them; surely they are unclean and their abode is hell; a recompense for what they earned".
God tells the prophet to let them be, they are exposed and wont delude or deceive anybody but their own selves.
Together with the idolaters and the hypocrites, the third group exposed and dealt with in the sura tawba were the people of the book. Their persistence in disbelief and uttering of falsehood is forcefully condemned as worthy of divine wrath but never is this attitude given as a reason to fight them. When the prophet arrived at Medina he invited the peaceful Jews of Khaybar to Islam with a letter, which after reminding them of the prophetic history and how he fits in it, does not put any blame on them if they sincerely reject his call
"I adjure you to tell me if you find in that revelation which Allah sent down to You, that you should believe in Muhammad. If you cannot find that in your scripture, no displeasure will fall on you. Guidance will be distinguishable from error, and I invite you to Allah and to His prophet".
This call, from which they arent liable in case of rejection after sincerely and objectively considering the prophet's message in light of their own scriptures, was made at a time where they had not yet displayed the machinations, war incitements and enemy alliances they would actively participate in a few years later against the Muslims. Thus, the clear reason given to fight them in that sura tawba is that, now that the climax of the prophetic mission has been reached and the punishement of God has initiated as prophecied, this group that had started hostilities with the aim of uprooting and subjugating the Muslims, did not spare any stratagem to try and reach their obectives, had to be fought, defeated and subjugated in a humiliating fashion. Despite the warnings and the signs unfolding before them they chose to remain in Muslim land without giving up their warmongering 9:29.
For example the Abyssinian Christians werent bothered by the prophet nor his successors because they never showed any hostility towards the Muslims at any point. Also those of Taghlib to the north of Medina or of Najran in Yemen were never fought as they pledged full allegiance to the Muslim state as minorities with their rights and obligations.
In answer to the video "The Most Violent Quran Verse (Sword Verse)"
Sura Tawba stipulated that all idolators were forbidden custody and entry to the precincts of the Sacred Mosque after its restauration to its original purpose, as instituted by Abraham, of being the prime symbol of monotheism for all visitors 9:17-22.
With their sacraligious practices 8:34-5 which had disfigured the legacy of Ibrahim and Ismail, they had become spiritualy unclean 9:28 and unworthy of being the custodians of the sacred house, let alone perform their idolatrous rituals in it.
They could not claim legitimacy over the House of God instead of the righteous monotheists such as the hanif remnants who had tried preserving the way of their father Ibrahim. The pagan Ishmaelites could not claim authority over the Kaaba for the sole reason that they inherited it and maintained it
"do you make (one who undertakes) the giving of drink to the pilgrims and the guarding of the Sacred Mosque like him who believes in Allah and the latter day and strives hard in Allah's way? They are not equal with Allah; and Allah does not guide the unjust people".
They were unclean spiritually because of their sins, just like the hypocrites are said to be unclean 9:95 and like the sinful nations who had to be uprooted by the Israelites under divine order from a land declared sacred by God Deut9. This principle would ironicaly later on be applied upon the Israelites themselves. Under Ahab's rule they progressively returned to idol worship. King Jehu later massacred them as he tried erradicating the land from Baal worship, tearing down pagan temples 2Kings10.
As regards to Quranic principle of spiritual uncleanness of the sinners, it is a concept present throughout the Bible too.
The Sacred House dedicated to the worship of the One God since its raising by Ibrahim and his son Ismail, could not remain therefore in the custody of the spiritual degenerate and those that corrupted its purpose, because their authority over it and their divine protection 105:1-5 was granted conditionaly to the keeping of the way of Ibrahim 106:1-4. Just as the the Jews had to be removed from their control over God's temple once they reverted to their sinful ways, now the Ishmaelites, because of their failure, the Kaaba had now to be cleansed from all traces of polytheism and return to its monotheistic purpose, in answer to Ibrahim's prayers, until the Day of Resurrection 2:125-130. The Quran would admonish the Quraysh indirectly for following the erring ways of their forefathers and failing to maintain the Kaaba's purpose, through the story of Ibrahim whom they prouded themselves to be the direct descendants of.
This ordinance, the banning of idolaters from practicing their religion in the sacred precincts of the Kaaba, had naturally disturbed those among the Muslims whose entire livelihood depended on trade during the pilgrimage season 9:28. This meant the town would lose its position as a comercial center and most trade would cease. However these worldly considerations could not interfer with the carrying out of higher objectives and further
"if you fear poverty then Allah will enrich you out of His grace if He please; surely Allah is Knowing Wise".
That enrichment came as the entire land of Arabia entered the fold of Islam like waves upon waves as prophecied in a time when none could have imagined for such an outcome to come true 110:1-3. Trade resumed ever since, on a scale they would have never fathomed, and the Meccans regained their prestige in the region and beyond.
The jizya, which some critics argue was meant at counterbalancing the loss of trade, isnt what caused that "enrichment", neither back in the time of the prophet nor in our times. How is the jizya relevant today in "enriching" the Muslims of Mecca or Medina? Jizya did not fill the private pockets of Meccan businessmen, nor financed private projects, neither in the past nor today. It was the prerogative of the government, used in exchange of concrete state services and exemptions as will be shown below. The caliph Umar, towards the end of his life urged to
"abide by the rules and regulations concerning the Dhimmis of Allah and His Apostle, to fulfill their contracts completely and fight for them and not to tax them beyond their capabilities".
He added elsewhere
"as it is the Dhimma/covenant/protection of your Prophet and the source of the livelihood of your dependents".
So there clearly is an exchange in benefits. The Muslim governement is to fight and protect those with whom it made a covenant. This is just one among the many services enjoyed by the people of dhimma, as will be shown below. They in exchange compensate the Muslims for their sacrifices and services, without being overburdened financially. This is nothing unusual under any modern day government.
In answer to the video "The Most Violent Quran Verse (Sword Verse)"
As the surrounding verses make it clear 9:5 is speaking of those who repeatedly broke the contracts, despite the Muslims keeping their engagements, attacked the Muslims first. These people, the Muslims should remain extremely cautious with. The Believers are required to put their trust in God and negotiate with them regardless of their treacherous history if they show an inclination towards peace 8:61-62, but at the same time should not hesitate to cancel the agreements in case they fear treachery on their part. Muslims must only do so openly and publicly so as to avoid any misunderstanding on the state of war between the parties 8:58 as was done with the very first verse of sura tawba and its unequivocal dissociation with the traitors. Then they should prepare themselves for every eventual threat from within and outside the community 8:60.
The Muslims should only stop fighting them under 2 conditions: - if they clearly become Muslims by praying regularly and pay the poor rate. This is the only guarantee Muslims have against being attacked by a people provably inclined to backstabbing and breaking of oaths
4:91"You will find others who desire that they should be safe from you and secure from their own people; as often as they are sent back to the mischief they get thrown into it headlong; therefore if they do not withdraw from you, and (do not) offer you peace and restrain their hands, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them; and against these We have given you a clear authority".
It is in such background that one should read the often misused report in which the prophet says
"I have been commanded to fight the idolators (Other versions "the people") until they bear witness to La ilaha illallah (there is none worthy of worship except Allah) and that Muhammad is His slave and Messenger. If they bear witness to La ilaha illallah and that Muhammad is His slave and Messenger, and they pray as we pray and face our Qiblah, and eat our slaughtered animals, then their blood and wealth becomes forbidden to us except for a right that is due, and they will have the same rights and obligations as the Muslims".
What is translated as to fight/uqaatil implies fighting opposite an initial attack, as is clear from the context of 9:5. Also, the more complete hadith further portrays the prophet quoting
88:22"Therefore do remind, for you are only a reminder. You are not a watcher over them".
This, in addition to the known proper context of the report, decisively shows there can be no compulsion in religion, as explicitly stated in the Quran in many places. As commented by ibn Taymiya
"what is meant here: Fighting the fighters of those that Allah made permissible to fight, and not those under the treaty and were loyal to Allah".
No forced conversions occured at the conquest of Mecca and sura 88, which is quoted by the prophet in relation to his statement in the hadith, is unanimously believed to have been revealed in Mecca. - And if they do not become Muslims but they stop their persecution then
2:193"there should be no hostility except against the oppressors"
and that is because
8:38"if they desist, that which is past shall be forgiven to them; and if they return, then what happened to the ancients has already passed"
These 2 important point show that 9:5 does not say to fight these hostile idolaters until they become Muslims since an idolater who stops fighting is left to go freely to his homeland 9:6, but until they refrain from their hostile attitude of which a conversion to Islam and the strict and public adherance to each of its ordinances would be a guarantee. One last time, not all idolaters were fought until they became Muslims, only those that were untrustworthy to be left based on a verbal agreement.
In answer to the video "The Most Violent Quran Verse (Sword Verse)"
Sura tawba was loudly announced by Ali on the day of sacrifice/idh al adha and for 3 consecutive days. It is to be kept in mind that even at this advanced stage of the prophetic mission, and when Mecca had become subdued to Muslim rule, the Muslims were still in inferiority compared to their opponents throughout the peninsula and beyond. The adjacent Roman and Persian empires were now well informed of the growing Muslim movement. The sura itself relates some Muslims' reluctancy to engage in confrontation due to this 9:38.
The first verse 9:1 announces a clearing of guilt or dissociation. That is from where the other name of sura tawba comes from "baraa’a". That baraa'a, or dissociation was between Allah and His messenger on one side and the idolators on the other. But not any idolaters, rather those who had previously made a treaty with the Muslims but violated it as seen just 3 verses later. The treacherous violation of mutual agreements is a serious and grave matter for all peoples and cultures.
In the times the Quran was revealed, the state of lawlesness was such that only tribal alliances could safeguard a people from attacks and if a group couldnt be reliable upon for their word then one shouldnt expect the Muslims to blindly accept putting their lives at risk. The Quran alludes to this perpetually violent environment of the peninsula during the rise of Islam
29:67"Do they not then see that We have made Makkah a sanctuary secure, while men are being snatched away and ravaged from all around them?"
It is thus impossible to read sura tawba without appreciating this historical background and the importance of consolidating the rule of law in war-torn Arabia. The Muslims had time and time again renewed their agreements after the opposing party had violated it 8:56,61. It was this frequent violation that ultimately led to this forceful and unambiguous declaration of immunity, against those who
9:10"do not pay regard to ties of relationship nor those of covenant in the case of a believer; and these are they who go beyond the limits".
Those further described as
9:12-13"break their oaths after their agreement and (openly) revile your religion"
those to whom "oaths are nothing" and
"broke their oaths and aimed at the expulsion of the Messenger, and they attacked you FIRST".
It was impossible that the Muslims should be bound forever by the terms of those agreements, while their enemies could repudiate them with impunity and aggressiveness
9:7"How can there be an agreement for the idolaters with Allah and with His Messenger; EXCEPT those with whom you made an agreement at the Sacred Mosque?".
Clearly we see, not all groups of idolaters are meant. We know from the earliest sources of Islam that the polytheists of Mecca which the verses point to, were fought against as a result of them breaking a treaty and murdering members of the tribe of Banu Khuza’a, who were allied with the Muslims at the time. The Banu Khuza'a werent even Muslims then. That is how truthful and indiscriminate the prophet and Islam are in applying justice. As a result of Banu Bakr and Quraysh blatant breach of the hudaybiya treaty, the conquest of Mecca took place. The declaration of immunity is therefore not directed at the idolators because of their religion, it does not cover those that honor their treaties
"So as long as they are true to you, be true to them; surely Allah loves those who are careful (of their duty)".
They are those idolaters who had honored their initial agreements with the Muslims and had not backed up anyone against them, the Muslims in turn are told to
9:4"fulfill their agreement to the end of their term; surely Allah loves those who are careful (of their duty)".
Even the elements within the treaty violators, once besieged, or during the course of warfare give up fighting, leaving their people to seek protection from the Muslims 9:6, they must then be protected and explained what is Islam in order to clear their preconceived notions
"this is because they are a people who do not know".
They are then, in full accordance with the divine principle of no coercion in religion 2:256, escorted to "attain his place of safety". This means any area they designate as their own place of shelter. That person is called musta'min in Islamic legal terminology. He would not be subjected to the jizyah and Islamic laws, being a temporary resident of the Islamic state.This is the justice, pragmatism, magnanimity of Islam, contrary to what the critics want to portray.
Further, even once that declaration of forceful dissociation was made, the Muslims didnt jump on the occasion and immidiately attacked Mecca, although it was completely within their right. Instead, the noble sura announces that those treaty violators are given respite during the 4 sacred months of pilgrimage.
That is how spiritually upright, in addition to magnanimous, the sura enjoyns Muslims to be, preserving first and foremost the religious sanctity of the Kaaba and the sacred months. During those 4 inviolable months, the opponents may walk freely in the land of Mecca now under Muslim authority, and reconsider their warmongering. They may also turn to God in repentence which would even be better for their own selves, although not a condition for not being fought. Their perseverence in their desire for war, towards an individual who by now has estabished without doubt his divine authority, will bring about the wrath of God. They were on the brink of suffering the same fate as the rejecters of old in the prophetic history, as the divine retribution manifested either through natural calamities, or the believers themselves as in Moses' and subsequent Israelite prophets' case 6:65. This is what active fighting of a messenger brings upon a people
9:2"you cannot weaken Allah and that Allah will bring disgrace to the unbelievers".
As just alluded to, in Muhammad's case, contrary to all cases of divine punishements, a 4 months ultimatum is given while clearly explaining what the outcome will be when it passes and they have not reformed themselves
9:5"So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate, leave their way free to them; surely Allah is Forgiving, Merciful".
This is the mercy of the sura, the fact that although all signs of the truth have been shown through a messenger, and the punishement is about to engulf the remaining disbelievers as it did in the previous battles up to that point, it is as if God, contrary to all previous cases in prophetic history when divine destruction was sent, hit the "pause button" and told the disbelievers to reevaluate their spiritual and antagonistic positions one last time. They have been given time to reflect, not for a day or 2 but 4 full months.
This verse was named by some scholars as the “verse of the sword”, not because it allows Muslims to kill indiscriminately, but because it commands them to defend the community against their enemies. This designation was not used by the Prophet, his companions, or the early Muslims.
