قَٰتِلُوا۟ ٱلَّذِينَ لَا يُؤْمِنُونَ بِٱللَّهِ وَلَا بِٱلْيَوْمِ ٱلْءَاخِرِ … حَتَّىٰ يُعْطُوا۟ ٱلْجِزْيَةَ عَن يَدٍ وَهُمْ صَٰغِرُونَ
Qātilu'lladhīna lā yuʾminūna bi'llāhi wa lā bi'l-yawmi'l-ākhiri wa lā yuḥarrimūna mā ḥarrama'llāhu wa rasūluhū wa lā yadīnūna dīna'l-ḥaqqi mina'lladhīna ūtu'l-kitāba ḥattā yuʿṭu'l-jizyata ʿan yadin wa hum ṣāghirūn
"Fight those, from among those who were given the Book, who do not believe in God nor in the last day, who do not hold forbidden what God and His Messenger have forbidden, and who do not take the religion of truth as their religion — until they give the jizya ʿan yad and are ṣāghirūn."
In respect of the method this is the most sensitive verse of the sūra. I apply here, to the letter, the five-point procedure I wrote out above.
مِنَ ٱلَّذِينَ أُوتُوا۟ ٱلْكِتَٰبَ — mina'lladhīna ūtu'l-kitāb: "from among those who were given the Book."
The function of this particle has been debated in the classical commentaries, and there are two readings. I convey the disagreement and impose no preference:
| Reading | What min states | Consequence |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Partitive | A part out of a whole | The ones addressed are the section from among the People of the Book who carry the three attributes |
| 2. Explicative | Explanation | The ones addressed are the whole of the People of the Book |
In al-Fatḥ at 48/29 the same grammatical question (whether the particle minhum is partitive or explicative) was given in a table and no preference was imposed. I keep the same posture here.
And I record this as an observation about the structure: in the sentence the one addressed is described by three negative relative clauses — not believing, not holding forbidden, not taking the religion of truth as one's religion. The description, that is, is built not by the name of a group but by a sequence of attributes. The name of the group (alladhīna ūtu'l-kitāb) comes at the end of the sentence, and with a min.
The sense of the root: to give the return for a thing, to pay its price, to suffice. From the same root:
| Derivative | Meaning |
|---|---|
| جَزَاء (jazāʾ) | A return — for good and for bad alike |
| جَزَىٰ (jazā) | He gave the return; it sufficed, it was enough |
| جِزْيَة (jizya) | The return paid, the price |
| تَجْزِى | "It suffices" — lā tajzī nafsun ʿan nafsin shayʾā |
I record this as an observation about the language: the word carries in its root an idea of return — not punishment but a price. The English word usually reached for here, "penalty", does not reflect the word's semantic field in Arabic.
The amount of the jizya, from whom it is to be taken, who is exempt, and what is provided in return are not stated in the Qurʾān. All of these have been debated in the legal literature, and there are divergences between the schools. This commentary does not enter that debate and issues no ruling.
This expression occurs in the Qurʾān only here, and its meaning has been debated in the classical commentaries. I convey the disagreement in a table:
| View | What ʿan yad means | Cited as ground |
|---|---|---|
| A | From hand to hand, in person — payment without an intermediary | The concrete sense of the word yad |
| B | In a state of power and superiority — the sense of yad as "power" | That yad states might in Arabic |
| C | In cash, down | Its use in the language of trade |
| D | In return for a benefit — in return for the safety granted them | The sense of yad as "benefit, favour" |
| E | In a state of obedience, without resistance | The context |
And one further note: that the word yad carries so many senses in Arabic is the reason the expression cannot be fixed in a single determinate meaning. I give this as an observation about the language.
The sense of the root: to be small. Ṣaghīr — small. The root was treated in al-Naml at 27/37, and it was recorded there: "Ṣāghir — one brought low not by his own will but of necessity." I rely on that treatment.
| Place | Expression | Context |
|---|---|---|
| al-Naml 27/37 | Wa la-nukhrijannahum minhā adhillatan wa hum ṣāghirūn | The reply sent by a ruler |
| al-Tawba 9/29 | Ḥattā yuʿṭu'l-jizyata ʿan yadin wa hum ṣāghirūn | The paying of an obligation |
The measure recorded in al-Naml should be mentioned here too: there the threat was not carried out, because the door left open had been used. This is recorded not in order to establish a link of ruling between the two verses but in order to show the word's use in the Qurʾān.
| View | What wa hum ṣāghirūn states |
|---|---|
| A | Legal subjection — having come under the rule of an order |
| B | The end of resistance — the ending of a state of war |
| C | The bearing at the moment of payment — a manner of transaction |
I adopt no preference. And I record this separately: the forms of practice drawn from view C have been debated in the legal literature, and some scholars have rejected them. That debate too is not entered into.
The third question: the frame of the verse — what is to be recorded per the method (Method)
The structure of the sentence is this: qātilū … ḥattā yuʿṭu'l-jizyata. Ḥattā is a particle of purpose, and it says where the verb ends.
I record this as my own reading, and its ground is the particle ḥattā: the verse writes into its own sentence that the fighting is not endless. The same structure occurred twice in Muḥammad at 47/4 (ḥattā idhā athkhantumūhum, ḥattā taḍaʿa'l-ḥarbu awzārahā), and it was recorded there: "the text says where what it permits ends, at the very place where it permits it." I rely on that treatment.
- The one addressed is described by three attributes, not by an identity.
- There is the particle مِنَ, and on at least one reading it states a partitive.
- The same Qurʾān separately praises a section from among the People of the Book (Āl ʿImrān 3/113-115) — I only refer to those verses; those sūras have not yet been treated in this series.
The relevant clause of Method is applied here directly: "No wholesale ruling is issued about an ethnic or religious group; what the verse describes are attributes, and whoever carries the attribute is included in it." In this commentary no ruling about any community is drawn from this verse.
The rulings drawn from this verse — from whom the jizya is to be taken, its amount, its exemptions, the security provided in return, and whether the regulation is bound to historical conditions — have been debated at length in the legal and political literature, and there are divergences between the schools. In this commentary the existence of the disagreement is recorded, no view is preferred, and no ruling is issued. None of what is conveyed is binding.
The ground for this is the sūra's own notes of time: the preceding verse says baʿda ʿāmihim hādhā (after this year of theirs); the following block is built around a particular expedition and a particular season. This does not mean that the meaning of the verse is imprisoned in history; but that the verse is a regulation of a situation can be read from the text's own notes.
Five. No link whatever is made to present-day politics, present-day conflicts or their parties. This verse is ascribed to no state, no community and no event of the present day.