وَقَٰتِلُوا۟ فِى سَبِيلِ ٱللَّهِ ٱلَّذِينَ يُقَٰتِلُونَكُمْ وَلَا تَعْتَدُوٓا۟ إِنَّ ٱللَّهَ لَا يُحِبُّ ٱلْمُعْتَدِينَ

“Fight in the way of Allah against those who fight against you, but begin not hostilities. Lo! Allah loveth not aggressors.” — M. M. Pickthall

Tafsirs

AI-generated
Taberî9-10. c.✓ Citation verified

Taberî reports the disagreements regarding who is intended in this verse and whether the ruling is abrogated. According to some commentators, this verse is the first one commanding fighting against polytheists and is abrogated by Surat Al-Bara'ah; it is ordered to fight those who fight and refrain from those who do not fight. However, Taberî prefers the view of Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz: the verse indicates that women, children, and clergy who do not fight should not be fought against, and he notes that the claim of abrogation is without proof.

وأولى هذين القولين بالصواب، القول الذي قاله عمر بن عبد العزيز؛ لأن دعوى المدعي نسخ آية يحتمل أن تكون غير منسوخة بغير دلالة على صحة دعواه تحكم، والتحكم لا يعجز عنه أحد
Fahreddin er-Râzî12-13. c.✓ Citation verified

According to al-Razi, this verse commands that fighting should only be against those who fight; attack against non-combatants is forbidden. He rejects the view that the verse has been abrogated and connects the verse with the preceding context (wisdom in invitation, three paths), noting that refraining from excess can have various meanings such as not initiating fighting in the sacred sanctuary, not fighting with those who have made pacts or with women, children, and the elderly. Thus, he argues that this verse is not abrogated and can be understood through different possibilities.

وأقول : إن حمل هذه الآية على قصة لا تعلق لها بما قبلها يوجب حصول سوء الترتيب في كلام الله تعالى وذلك يطرق الطعن إليه وهو في غاية البعد ، بل الأصوب عندي أن يقال : المراد أنه تعالى أمر محمدا صلى الله عليه وسلم أن يدعو الخلق إلى الدين الحق بأحد الطرق الثلاثة وهي الحكمة والموعظة الحسنة ، والجدال بالطريق الأحسن
Kurtubî13. c.✓ Citation verified

In this section, al-Qurtubi explains the expression 'la ta'tadu' (do not exceed limits) from several angles: According to some, this prevents fighting for reasons other than God's pleasure (such as for tribalism or fame); according to others, it means not fighting with non-combatants, in which case the verse is considered abrogated by the subsequent general command to fight. Furthermore, the view that the expression 'la ta'tadu' forbids both extremes (excessive strictness and excessive laxity) in a way that also includes considering what God has forbidden as permissible is transmitted. In this context, the ruling regarding a person making something lawful for themselves unlawful is also addressed (oaths, making a woman unlawful, the matter of divorce) and the views of Malik, Abu Hanifah, and al-Shafi'i are compared.

وقيل : لا تعتدوا أي لا تقاتلوا من لم يقاتل فعلى هذا تكون الآية منسوخة بالأمر بالقتال لجميع الكفار والله أعلم
İbn Kesîr14. c.✓ Citation verified

According to Ibn Kathir, this verse is the first one revealed in Medina regarding fighting; upon this verse being revealed, the Prophet fought with those who fought him and did not touch those who did not fight, until Surat Al-Bara'ah was revealed. The verse is in the nature of incitement and encouragement against polytheists; it is said that just as they fight you, so you fight, but this permission is not without limits; it is emphasized that one should not go to extremes such as killing, concealing spoils of war, killing women, children, the elderly, and monks, or burning trees.

قال هذه أول آية نزلت في القتال بالمدينة فلما نزلت كان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يقاتل من قاتله ويكف عمن كف عنه حتى نزلت سورة براءة
Beydâvî13. c.✓ Citation verified

According to al-Baydawi, there are two views regarding the expression 'those who fight with you': the first is that this precedes the general command to fight polytheists, the second is that the expression refers to those who actually fight or are expected to fight, excluding the elderly, children, monks, and women who do not fight. The expression 'do not exceed limits' refers to not exceeding the boundary in initiating fighting, fighting with those who have made pacts, making sudden raids without invitation, mutilating the dead, or killing those whose killing is forbidden. The incident of the year of al-Hudaybiyyah when the polytheists prevented the Prophet from entering Mecca and made a pact, and the Muslims' reluctance to fight in the sacred months or in the Sacred Sanctuary during the Lesser Pilgrimage is mentioned as the basis for the revelation of this verse.

ويؤيد الأول ما روى: أن المشركين صدوا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم عام الحديبية، وصالحوه على أن يرجع من قابل فيخلوا له مكة.

Comparison

Common ground

All commentators agree that the verse sets boundaries regarding fighting: aggression is forbidden, and the expression 'do not exceed limits' is related to not touching non-combatants including women, children, the elderly, and clergy. Furthermore, most commentators transmit that the verse is among the first verses revealed in Medina regarding fighting and has a historical context (such as al-Hudaybiyyah and the Lesser Pilgrimage).

Differences

The fundamental point of divergence is the validity of abrogation: according to one view transmitted by Taberî and one opinion conveyed by al-Qurtubi, the verse is considered abrogated by Surat Al-Bara'ah, while the view preferred by Taberî, an interpretation by al-Razi, and one possibility mentioned by al-Baydawi reject the claim of abrogation. While al-Razi emphasizes contextual polysemy through linguistic/rhetorical analysis, al-Qurtubi includes jurisprudential comparisons (Malik, Abu Hanifah, al-Shafi'i); Ibn Kathir draws attention to the aspect of incitement and encouragement of the verse through a narration-based reading. These differences partly stem from the methodological preferences of the commentators (narration-focused, linguistic/rhetorical focused, jurisprudential).

Historical context

While Taberî (early period, narration-based exegesis) transmits and makes a preference regarding the abrogation discussion, subsequent commentators (al-Razi, al-Qurtubi, Ibn Kathir, al-Baydawi) have made this discussion more systematic and deepened it with linguistic and jurisprudential arguments. The principle of not exceeding limits remains fixed throughout all periods, while over time more contextual and linguistic reasoning has come to the fore regarding the acceptance or rejection of abrogation.

Modern connection

This comparative reading shows that moderation and boundary consciousness in the use of force emerge as a timeless principle; the principle of not harming defenseless people has been preserved as a moral essence. In contemporary times, this can be related to general sensitivity regarding justice, moderation, and protection of the innocent even in situations of social conflict and tension. Moreover, the fact that different interpretations among commentators are transmitted with respect in a unified manner can be considered an example of tolerance and a culture of plurality in the scholarly tradition.

AI analysis — not a fatwa or ruling, not yet reviewed by a scholar