Which Quranic verses address fighting non-Muslims and what do scholars say about their context?
Executive summary
Key Quranic passages commonly cited about fighting non‑Muslims include 2:191–193 and 9:5 and 9:29, which in translation tell believers to “fight” certain opponents and, in 9:29, to fight “until they pay the tax” (jizya) [1] [2] [3]. Modern official bodies and many scholars stress these verses are embedded in a broader Qur’anic discourse that permits fighting primarily in self‑defence or under specific historical circumstances and repeatedly commands restraint and peace when enemies desist [4] [5] [6].
1. What the verses say — the raw text most often quoted
Translations highlighted by multiple sources show verses such as “Kill them wherever you find them… and drive them out of the places from which they have driven you out” (Q 2:191) and the so‑called “sword verses” in Surah At‑Tawbah, including Q 9:5 and Q 9:29, the latter reading broadly as “Fight those who do not believe… until they pay the tax, willingly submitting” [1] [2] [3]. Those translations are the basis for claims that the Qur’an contains explicit commands to use force against non‑believers [7].
2. Classical juristic readings — context of conquest, treaties and jizya
Classical exegetes and jurists interpreted some of these verses as authorising military action in specific legal and political frameworks: for example, many jurists read Q 9:29 in light of treaty practices and the institution of jizya, treating the verse as governing relations with “People of the Book” and as a legitimation for war that could end with conversion or payment of tax (jizya) [8] [9]. Ibn Rushd and other medieval authorities are cited describing a consensus that fighting could aim at conversion or jizya payments; Ibn Kathir and others read some verses as directed at particular groups accused of treaty‑breaking or hostility [8] [5] [9].
3. Contextualist and modernist rebuttals — self‑defence and limits on force
Contemporary scholars and institutional fatwas emphasise that the Qur’an repeatedly frames fighting as defensive, conditional and bounded by prohibitions on transgression. Sources stress verses such as “fight in the way of Allah those who fight you, and do not transgress” and note injunctions to incline to peace if the other party inclines to it, which modernists use to reject claims that early “sword” verses abrogate peaceful commands [5] [6] [4]. Egyptian Dar al‑Ifta and popular apologetics argue the Qur’an urges kindness to non‑Muslims who show no enmity and that the corpus must be read as an integrated methodology distinguishing between peaceful dissidents and belligerent actors [10] [4].
4. Political and polemical uses — competing agendas in play
Reporting and commentary show these verses are frequently mobilised in opposing agendas. Secular critics and some commentators cite the literal translations to argue Islam preaches violence, sometimes without historical framing [7] [11]. Conversely, Muslim authorities and modernists emphasise mercy, defensive warfare, and legal limits, framing literalist readings as decontextualised or exploited by extremists or polemicists [4] [10]. Both uses reveal implicit agendas: one seeking to condemn the religion broadly, the other seeking to defend it from such charges.
5. Scholarly disagreements — abrogation, generality and historicity
Scholars disagree about whether later martial verses “abrogate” earlier peaceful ones (the doctrine of naskh), how general injunctions to “fight” should be applied, and whether specific verses refer to concrete historical episodes (e.g., treaty breaches, the Tabuk expedition) or to universal commandments [5] [9]. Wikipedia‑style surveys note that some exegetes read 9:5 and 9:29 as particular to historical groups, while others see broader religious‑based applicability; modernists typically reject abrogation of peace verses [5] [9].
6. What the reviewed sources do not settle
Available sources do not mention a definitive, single scholarly consensus that resolves all contested points: disputes remain about precise scope, whom the verses target today, and how classical rulings apply in modern international law contexts (not found in current reporting). The academic article excerpt notes the Qur’an imposes limits on force and frames reciprocity and restraint, but does not produce a unified contemporary jurisprudential ruling applicable across all contexts [6].
Conclusion — read verses in sequence and with history in view
The texts cited (Q 2:191–193, Q 9:5, Q 9:29 and related verses) include strong language about fighting that classical jurists embedded in doctrines of war, treaty law and jizya, while modern scholars and institutions emphasise defensive intent, strict limits, and peaceful options in the Qur’an’s broader message [1] [2] [3] [8] [4]. Any interpretation that treats those verses in isolation ignores centuries of exegetical debate and the explicit Qur’anic material that counsels restraint and peace [5] [6] [4].