Qur’anic Root A L L
Kinship, covenants, and bonds that must be respected: from human relationships to faithfulness amid hostility
Qur’anic and lexical forms
إِلّ
(ill)
Lexical singular noun: kinship, covenant, or alliance
إِلًّا
(illan)
Indefinite accusative Qur’anic form; two occurrences, Al-Tawbah 9:8 and Al-Tawbah 9:10
إِلَال
(ilāl)
Reported lexical plural; absent from the Qur’an
إِلَّة
(illah)
Lexical kinship noun; absent from the Qur’an
أَلَّ يَؤُلُّ / يَئِلُّ
(alla yaʾullu / yaʾillu)
Lexical verb forms with branches of brilliance, movement, and sound; not Qur’anic
أَلِيل
(alīl)
Lexical noun or verbal noun for groaning and sound; not Qur’anic
أَلَّة
(ʾallah)
Lexical noun for a spear or pointed weapon; not Qur’anic
تَأْلِيل
(taʾlīl)
Lexical Form II verbal noun: sharpening and tapering an end
مُؤَلَّلَتَانِ
(muʾallalatāni)
Feminine dual passive participle, nominative; in Ṭarafah’s pre-Islamic witness, not the Qur’an
إِلّ / إِيل
(ill / īl)
Forms reported in discussion of a divine name; not the established meaning of the two verses
The Arabic root A L L has several semantic branches. In the usage directly relevant to the Qur’an, إِلّ, ill, denotes a bond between people that they are expected to respect: kinship, alliance, covenant, or a relationship creating obligations and claims to respect for the parties involved.
The Qur’an uses this root only twice, in Al-Tawbah 9:8 and Al-Tawbah 9:10. Both have إِلًّا وَلَا ذِمَّةً and describe a group who, if they gain the upper hand over the believers, respect neither existing bonds nor commitments and covenants.
This usage matters because the group’s hostility extends beyond a difference of belief into covenant-breaking and aggression. They disregard even bonds respected in Arab society, such as kinship and alliance.
Ill nevertheless does not mean blood kinship alone. Early Arabic also records it for a covenant, an oath of alliance, a protective relationship, and even as a name for The God. These meanings overlap, but cannot all be treated as equivalent without regard to context.
Other branches of the family concern sharpness and brilliance, loud sound, groaning, and rapid movement. They show the root’s breadth, but should not all be reduced to one historically unproven image to explain Qur’anic ill.
1. Qur’anic forms and semantic core
A L L occurs twice in the Qur’an, in two verses of Al-Tawbah:
Both forms have the same structure.
Ill is a singular noun from the doubled root A L L. Its last two root letters are identical, represented in writing by the shaddah on the lām.
Illan in both verses is indefinite and accusative, the object of يَرْقُبُوا or يَرْقُبُونَ. Alongside ذِمَّةً, it appears in a negative construction.
Arabic records ill for kinship, covenant, alliance, and a relationship creating obligations and claims to respect between people.
Lexical accounts record إِلَال, ilāl, as a plural of ill, but it does not occur in the Qur’an. The same form is also recorded as a plural of أَلَّة in the weapon branch. Identical plural forms do not by themselves establish identical meanings or a shared historical development for the branches.
Other forms recognized within this lexical family include أَلَّ, أَلِيل, أَلَّة, إِلَّة, and تَأْلِيل. They belong to different semantic domains and should not all be counted as Qur’anic derivatives.
An initial definition for Qur’anic ill is:
A human bond arising from kinship, covenant, alliance, or another recognized relationship, requiring respect for the other party’s standing and rights.
This does not mean that every bond is necessarily a formal written contract. Kinship can arise without a contract, whereas an alliance takes shape through commitment and the parties’ acceptance.
What they share is that the relationship gives the other party a right or claim to respect that should not readily be disregarded.
2. Ill in early Arabic: kinship, covenant, and human bonds
Ill as kinship
One clear early Arabic meaning of ill is kinship or relationship by descent.
Kinship in Arab society involved more than identifying ancestry. A family relationship could entail protection, assistance, respect, and avoiding violations of one another’s rights.
In this setting, ill is an existing bond expected to affect people’s conduct.
A line by Ḥassān ibn Thābit reads:
لَعَمْرُكَ إِنَّ إِلَّكَ مِنْ قُرَيْشٍ
كَإِلِّ السَّقْبِ مِنْ رَأْلِ النَّعَامِ
la-ʿamruka inna illaka min qurayshin / ka-illi al-saqbi min raʾli al-naʿāmi
“By your life, your kinship with Quraysh is like that of a young camel with an ostrich chick.”
The poet questions someone’s descent from Quraysh, comparing the relationship to that between two animals of different species.
Al-saqb denotes a male camel calf, while raʾl al-naʿām denotes an ostrich chick.
The comparison expresses remoteness or the invalidity of a claimed lineage.
Ill in both halves of the line denotes a bond of descent. The poet is not describing a written covenant with Quraysh; the issue is kinship and its validity.
The witness therefore clearly illustrates the kinship sense of ill.
The poet’s satirical judgment about ancestry is itself a literary claim. It should not be accepted as an established historical fact about the addressee’s lineage without investigation.
Ḥassān ibn Thābit lived across the pre-Islamic and Islamic periods. This particular poem cannot be dated to the pre-Islamic period without independent evidence.
Ill as covenant and alliance
Early Arabic also uses ill for a covenant, pact, or alliance.
In this usage, ill is a relationship established by people or groups accepting obligations toward each other.
It can connect people who are not relatives but have mutual responsibilities through a covenant.
A poetic witness transmitted in early sources reads:
وَجَدْنَاهُمْ كَاذِبًا إِلُّهُمْ
وَذُو الْإِلِّ وَالْعَهْدِ لَا يَكْذِبُ
wajadnāhum kādhiban illuhum / wa-dhū al-illi wa-l-ʿahdi lā yakdhibu
“We found them false to their covenant; one bound by a bond and covenant does not act falsely.”
Ill here concerns a covenant and an obligating relationship.
The juxtaposition of al-ill and al-ʿahd also shows their proximity within the field of faithfulness and responsibility.
Their juxtaposition does not establish that they mean exactly the same thing in every Arabic use.
ʿAhd can generally denote a covenant or commitment. Ill can refer to that same covenant, but elsewhere expresses kinship or a protective relationship.
The precise attribution of this line is not equally clear across the sources. It is best treated as evidence of recorded Arabic usage, rather than a securely dated pre-Islamic poem by a known speaker.
Ill as a bond between two people
A broader Arabic explanation describes ill as any connecting cause or relationship between two people.
This can encompass kinship, alliance, and certain protective relationships.
From this perspective, ill names more than a contract. It is a relationship that can create a right, a claim to respect, or an expectation of faithfulness for the other party.
Two people may be related by descent; two groups may assume responsibilities toward each other through a covenant; someone may also be under another person’s protection or shelter.
These relationships have different origins, but share the requirement to respect the other party’s standing.
“Any relationship between two people” should nevertheless not be extended so far that every passing acquaintance or social contact is necessarily called ill.
The Qur’anic use concerns a relationship whose observance carries value and responsibility, as the accompanying verb يَرْقُبُونَ concerns watching over and respecting.
Another witness: severing bonds and kinship
A line attributed to Ibn Muqbil reads:
أَفْسَدَ النَّاسَ خُلُوفٌ خَلَفُوا
قَطَعُوا الْإِلَّ وَأَعْرَاقَ الرَّحِمْ
afsada al-nāsa khulūfun khalafū / qaṭaʿū al-illa wa-aʿrāqa al-raḥim
“The people were corrupted by unworthy successors who came after their predecessors: they severed the bond and the roots of kinship.”
Ill here appears alongside أَعْرَاقَ الرَّحِمْ, “the roots of kinship.”
The juxtaposition can emphasize bonds that must be respected, especially kinship and interpersonal commitments.
Mentioning ill and raḥim separately may suggest that the poet also envisages a relationship beyond blood descent. Conjoining two expressions alone, however, does not prove that they never overlap: poetry can place related expressions together for emphasis.
Ibn Muqbil lived across the pre-Islamic and early Islamic periods, but this attribution also requires care. The critical apparatus of an edition of Al-Ṭabarī reports that the editor did not find the line elsewhere and that associated lines were transmitted separately. This does not make the attribution certain. Nor should the witness be dated before the Qur’an without evidence.
3. Other branches: sharpness, brilliance, and sound
The Arabic A L L family is not confined to human relationships.
Lexical sources record several other branches; recognizing them prevents an excessively narrow definition.
Alla: shining and rapid movement
Arabic uses أَلَّ الشَّيْءُ for something shining or flashing.
أَلَّ لَوْنُهُ concerns a color becoming clear and brilliant.
أَلَّ الْفَرَسُ is also recorded for a horse moving rapidly and vigorously.
Brilliance and rapid movement become associated in these uses.
Something moving rapidly may flash, or parts of its body may become visible and disappear as it moves.
This does not establish the historical origin of the entire family. Such uses do not show that covenant or kinship developed directly from a shining horse.
The spear term أَلَّة: a pointed weapon
أَلَّة, ʾallah, is used in Arabic for a spear or a weapon with a sharp, cutting head.
Some early explanations associate the weapon’s name with the sharpness of its head; another highlights the brilliance of its metal.
In one usage, تَأْلِيل, taʾlīl, likewise denotes making the end of something fine and sharp.
In the Muʿallaqah of the pre-Islamic poet Ṭarafah ibn Al-ʿAbd, a description of a she-camel’s ears reads:
مُؤَلَّلَتَانِ تَعْرِفُ الْعِتْقَ فِيهِمَا
كَسَامِعَتَيْ شَاةٍ بِحَوْمَلَ مُفْرَدِ
muʾallalatāni taʿrifu al-ʿitqa fīhimā / ka-sāmiʿatay shātin bi-ḥawmala mufradi
“She has two pointed, finely formed ears in which her noble breeding is recognized, like the ears of a lone wild bull at Ḥawmal.”
مُؤَلَّلَتَانِ is a feminine dual passive participle of Form II, describing two fine, elongated, pointed ears. Shāh in this image denotes a wild bull rather than a domestic sheep; mufrad is accordingly masculine in agreement with the intended male animal.
The witness establishes the branch concerning sharpness and physical form in pre-Islamic poetry.
Qur’anic ill nevertheless does not name a spear or a pointed ear. The witness does not show that pre-Islamic Arabs necessarily conceived of covenants or kinship as spearheads.
Alīl: groaning and loud sound
In another branch, أَلِيل, alīl, denotes groaning, crying out, or a sound arising from pain or sorrow.
Some uses also record it for the sound of water.
أَلَّ يَئِلُّ, alla yaʾillu, can in such settings concern groaning or raising the voice.
This branch differs from covenant and kinship.
Illan in Al-Tawbah should therefore not be translated as “a cry,” “pain,” or “a groan.”
Do all these branches have one origin?
Some lexical explanations try to derive ill in covenant and kinship from sharpness and defining boundaries.
On that explanation, a covenant establishes a relationship with defined limits, while kinship likewise creates a recognized bond and boundary between people.
Another explanation connects covenant with being clear and manifest, as brilliance makes something visible.
These explanations can make conceptual relationships between branches intelligible, but they are not historical proof.
Several meanings can be recorded under one root without their order of development being known.
For the Qur’anic use, direct witnesses for kinship, covenant, and alliance suffice. The verse’s meaning need not be constructed from a sharp spear, a moving horse, or a groan.
4. Ill and the question of a divine name
Some lexical sources and early explanations also report ill or īl as a name for The God.
This view relates to similar words in certain Semitic languages.
In ancient Hebrew, אֵל, pronounced ʾēl, is recognized for a deity and for referring to The God, and appears in personal names. Related forms are also recorded in other Semitic languages. This comparison does not by itself explain the doubled lām in Arabic ill.
This matters for comparative study, but does not establish that illan in Al-Tawbah 9:8 and Al-Tawbah 9:10 necessarily functions as a proper name for The God.
The Arabic lexical tradition itself disagrees about this reading.
Some explain ill in the verse as referring to The God: the group fails to respect The God in its treatment of believers.
Others prefer kinship, covenant, or alliance.
A similar Hebrew word alone cannot determine the verse’s meaning. One must consider the word’s Arabic uses and which meaning best fits the sentence and context.
In Al-Tawbah, ill appears beside dhimmah amid a discussion of covenants, faithfulness, aggression, and groups’ mutual rights. A bond that must be respected, kinship, and alliance therefore have more direct contextual support.
Nor does the Qur’an introduce ill as a divine name in these two verses.
These occurrences consequently do not conclusively justify adding ill to the divine names.
This caution does not deny related words in other Semitic languages. It distinguishes the history of languages from the specific meaning of a Qur’anic sentence.
5. لَا يَرْقُبُوا فِيكُمْ إِلًّا وَلَا ذِمَّةً: the first Qur’anic occurrence
Al-Tawbah 9:8 states:
كَيْفَ وَإِنْ يَظْهَرُوا عَلَيْكُمْ لَا يَرْقُبُوا فِيكُمْ إِلًّا وَلَا ذِمَّةً يُرْضُونَكُمْ بِأَفْوَاهِهِمْ وَتَأْبَىٰ قُلُوبُهُمْ وَأَكْثَرُهُمْ فَاسِقُونَ
kayfa wa-in yaẓharū ʿalaykum lā yarqubū fīkum illan wa-lā dhimmatan yurḍūnakum bi-afwāhihim wa-taʾbā qulūbuhum wa-aktharuhum fāsiqūn
“How could a covenant with them be regarded as valid, when, if they gain the upper hand over you, they respect neither any bond with you nor a covenant or assurance of protection? They please you with their mouths, but their hearts refuse; most of them are defiant.”
Al-Tawbah 9:8
Illan appears beside dhimmatan in this verse.
يَرْقُبُوا belongs to R Q B and here concerns observing, respecting, and guarding what must not be violated.
Illan is its object.
The expression therefore says more than that they have no kinship or covenant: it says that they do not respect an existing bond and its claims.
This distinction matters.
Two groups may share kinship or a covenant, yet one party may cease to recognize that relationship when it gains power.
The relationship may historically exist while being violated in someone’s conduct.
وَإِنْ يَظْهَرُوا عَلَيْكُمْ: testing faithfulness when power is gained
The verse connects this group’s conduct with a situation in which it gains the upper hand over believers.
يَظْهَرُوا عَلَيْكُمْ here denotes prevailing and obtaining superiority.
The issue is therefore more than disagreement between two equally powerful groups.
The Qur’an says that if this group gains power and dominance, it will not respect bonds or covenants.
The description establishes an important relationship between power and faithfulness.
Someone may outwardly observe a covenant while needing or fearing the other party. When they believe they can break it without immediate consequences, their actual conduct becomes apparent.
This is a contextual inference, however, rather than the lexical meaning of ill itself.
Ill denotes the bond that must be respected; dominance and prevailing are expressed by another verb.
يُرْضُونَكُمْ بِأَفْوَاهِهِمْ: conflicting speech and conduct
After describing their failure to respect bonds and covenants, the verse says:
يُرْضُونَكُمْ بِأَفْوَاهِهِمْ وَتَأْبَىٰ قُلُوبُهُمْ, “They please you with their mouths, but their hearts refuse.”
This describes a difference between outward speech and inward stance.
They try to please their addressees with words, but their hearts do not concur with what they say.
Verbal faithfulness and actual faithfulness are distinguished in this setting.
Someone may speak of peace, friendship, and respect for covenants, yet act contrary to those words when an opportunity to break a covenant arises.
Ill should nevertheless not be translated directly as “hypocrisy.” Hypocrisy and the conflict between speech and conduct emerge from the continuation of the verse.
Ill itself remains the bond and claim to respect that people are expected to observe.
وَأَكْثَرُهُمْ فَاسِقُونَ
The verse concludes by describing “most of them” as defiant.
This qualification matters: instead of describing everyone in this clause with an all-inclusive expression, the Qur’an uses أَكْثَرُهُمْ, “most of them.”
The referent of “them” must also be identified within this context. It concerns groups involved in the covenants and hostile conduct discussed in the surrounding verses.
The verse should therefore not be detached from its setting and applied to every person with a different religious identity.
Its subject is specific conduct involving bonds, covenants, and dominance, rather than simply the name of a belief or identity.
6. لَا يَرْقُبُونَ فِي مُؤْمِنٍ إِلًّا وَلَا ذِمَّةً: the repeated expression
Al-Tawbah 9:10 states:
لَا يَرْقُبُونَ فِي مُؤْمِنٍ إِلًّا وَلَا ذِمَّةً وَأُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الْمُعْتَدُونَ
lā yarqubūna fī muʾminin illan wa-lā dhimmatan wa-ulāʾika humu al-muʿtadūn
“With regard to any believer, they respect neither a bond nor a covenant or assurance of protection. Those are the aggressors.”
Al-Tawbah 9:10
إِلًّا وَلَا ذِمَّةً is repeated exactly.
The sentence’s structure nevertheless differs from Al-Tawbah 9:8.
The first verse describes a conditional situation: if they gain the upper hand over you, they do not respect bonds or covenants.
In the second, لَا يَرْقُبُونَ is an indicative statement describing their conduct.
It also replaces فِيكُمْ, “with regard to you,” with فِي مُؤْمِنٍ, “with regard to a believer.”
فِيكُمْ and فِي مُؤْمِنٍ
Fīkum in Al-Tawbah 9:8 refers to the plural addressees.
Fī muʾminin in Al-Tawbah 9:10 instead speaks of a believer with an indefinite noun.
An indefinite noun in such a negative construction can extend the negation to every individual in the group.
The expression thus emphasizes that they respect neither bond nor covenant in their treatment of any believer.
This construction does not show that all members of every nonbelieving group behave this way at all times.
The verse describes the conduct of the group under discussion toward believers.
Extending that description to other groups without independent evidence disregards contextual precision.
وَأُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الْمُعْتَدُونَ
The verse concludes by calling them al-muʿtadūn, “the aggressors.”
The word belongs to ʿ D W and here concerns overstepping limits and violating others’ rights.
The Qur’an therefore places failure to respect bonds and covenants within a setting of aggression and transgression.
Ill itself nevertheless does not mean aggression.
A bond and its claim to respect are one concept; violating them is another.
In this verse, failure to respect bonds and covenants accompanies an ethical judgment about the aggressors.
Translating ill as “injustice” or “aggression” is therefore inaccurate, since it conflates the object of aggression with the act itself.
Why repeat the expression?
Repeating إِلًّا وَلَا ذِمَّةً in two nearby verses highlights faithfulness.
The first concerns their possible conduct when dominant and the conflict between their words and hearts.
The second states that conduct explicitly as a description and concludes with “the aggressors.”
The repetition therefore does more than add words; it contributes to the sūrah’s argument.
The lexical meaning of ill nevertheless remains unchanged between the verses.
Both concern the same bond that must be respected; the sentence structure and contextual emphasis differ.
7. Do these verses concern all those who associate partners with The God?
Understanding the two occurrences of ill requires attention to the surrounding verses.
Al-Tawbah opens by discussing the status of covenants with groups among those who associate partners with The God.
From the outset, however, the Qur’an distinguishes covenant-breakers from those who remain faithful to their obligations.
Al-Tawbah 9:4 states:
إِلَّا الَّذِينَ عَاهَدْتُمْ مِنَ الْمُشْرِكِينَ ثُمَّ لَمْ يَنْقُصُوكُمْ شَيْئًا وَلَمْ يُظَاهِرُوا عَلَيْكُمْ أَحَدًا فَأَتِمُّوا إِلَيْهِمْ عَهْدَهُمْ إِلَىٰ مُدَّتِهِمْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ يُحِبُّ الْمُتَّقِينَ
illā alladhīna ʿāhadtum mina al-mushrikīna thumma lam yanquṣūkum shayʾan wa-lam yuẓāhirū ʿalaykum aḥadan fa-atimmū ilayhim ʿahdahum ilā muddatihim inna allāha yuḥibbu al-muttaqīn
“Except those among the associators with whom you made a covenant, who then diminished nothing of their obligations toward you and supported no one against you. Fulfil their covenant until its term. Indeed, The God loves the reverent.”
Al-Tawbah 9:4
The verse explicitly describes a group among the associators who remained faithful to their covenant.
The Qur’anic command is clear: their covenant must be respected until its term ends.
One cannot therefore say that these verses portray all associators as inherently faithless.
If they did, the explicit exception in Al-Tawbah 9:4 would have no meaning.
Al-Tawbah 9:7 also states:
كَيْفَ يَكُونُ لِلْمُشْرِكِينَ عَهْدٌ عِنْدَ اللَّهِ وَعِنْدَ رَسُولِهِ إِلَّا الَّذِينَ عَاهَدْتُمْ عِنْدَ الْمَسْجِدِ الْحَرَامِ فَمَا اسْتَقَامُوا لَكُمْ فَاسْتَقِيمُوا لَهُمْ إِنَّ اللَّهَ يُحِبُّ الْمُتَّقِينَ
kayfa yakūnu li-l-mushrikīna ʿahdun ʿinda allāhi wa-ʿinda rasūlihi illā alladhīna ʿāhadtum ʿinda al-masjidi al-ḥarāmi fa-mā istaqāmū lakum fa-istaqīmū lahum inna allāha yuḥibbu al-muttaqīn
“How can the associators have a covenant with The God and His Messenger, except those with whom you made a covenant at the Sacred Mosque? As long as they remain upright toward you, remain upright toward them. Indeed, The God loves the reverent.”
Al-Tawbah 9:7
This verse also highlights mutual faithfulness.
فَمَا اسْتَقَامُوا لَكُمْ فَاسْتَقِيمُوا لَهُمْ shows that as long as the other party remains faithful to its covenant, believers must likewise remain faithful toward it.
Within this context, Al-Tawbah 9:8 describes a group acting contrary to that principle.
لَا يَرْقُبُوا فِيكُمْ إِلًّا وَلَا ذِمَّةً must therefore be understood amid covenant-breaking and hostile conduct.
Granting protection even amid hostility
Al-Tawbah 9:6 states:
وَإِنْ أَحَدٌ مِنَ الْمُشْرِكِينَ اسْتَجَارَكَ فَأَجِرْهُ حَتَّىٰ يَسْمَعَ كَلَامَ اللَّهِ ثُمَّ أَبْلِغْهُ مَأْمَنَهُ ذَٰلِكَ بِأَنَّهُمْ قَوْمٌ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ
wa-in aḥadun mina al-mushrikīna istajāraka fa-ajirhu ḥattā yasmaʿa kalāma allāhi thumma ablighhu maʾmanahu dhālika bi-annahum qawmun lā yaʿlamūn
“If any one of the associators seeks your protection, grant him protection so that he may hear the speech of The God; then convey him to his place of safety. That is because they are people who do not know.”
Al-Tawbah 9:6
This verse appears within the same set of commands.
Even amid confrontation and hostility, therefore, an individual’s request for protection and safety receives attention.
This prevents the verses about covenant-breaking from becoming permission to violate the rights of anyone holding different beliefs.
The Qur’an itself distinguishes circumstances and individuals.
Ill here therefore concerns respecting bonds and commitments, rather than abolishing every claim to respect because of religious difference.
8. Ill and dhimmah
In both Qur’anic occurrences, ill appears alongside dhimmah.
This raises an important question: if both can concern a covenant, how do they differ?
Dhimmah: responsibility to uphold covenants and protection
Dhimmah belongs to DH M M.
Arabic dhimmah denotes a covenant, assurance of protection, commitment, or responsibility that someone must uphold.
In legal and social usage, someone may grant another person protection or commit to preserving their rights and safety.
Such a commitment establishes a relationship whose breach incurs blame and responsibility.
Explaining DH M M should not nevertheless reduce dhimmah to fear of public reproach. Commitment and protection have acquired independent lexical meanings.
Nor should the later technical and historical meaning of ahl al-dhimmah in legal systems replace the Qur’an’s general sense of dhimmah.
Al-Tawbah 9:8 and Al-Tawbah 9:10 concern covenants and rights expected to be respected, rather than setting out a complete legal classification of religious communities.
Does ill mean kinship and dhimmah mean covenant?
This is a strong and natural reading of the expression.
On this reading, ill denotes kinship or a recognized interpersonal bond, while dhimmah denotes the covenant and commitment that must be upheld.
This distinction fits the poetic witnesses and the verses’ context.
It should nevertheless not be treated as the only possible meaning in Arabic.
Early uses of ill also denote covenant and alliance.
The two words can consequently overlap in commitment and respect for obligations.
Their main distinction can be explained as follows:
Ill tends to emphasize the bond or relationship between people, such as descent, alliance, or protection.
Dhimmah tends to emphasize responsibility for preserving a covenant, protection, or claim to respect arising from the relationship.
This is a tendency rather than an absolute boundary applying without exception to every Arabic use.
Why does the Qur’an use both?
Mentioning ill and dhimmah in these verses can express the breadth of the group’s covenant-breaking.
They respect neither recognized bonds nor the obligations and assurances of protection that must be upheld.
The issue thus extends beyond breaking one particular contract to disregarding various bonds and obligations that can restrain aggression.
The combination nevertheless does not mean that someone must necessarily share both kinship and a formal contract with the other party for the verse to apply.
The negative construction describes the group’s failure to observe both kinds of obligation.
10. إِلًّا and إِلَّا: two different forms
Al-Tawbah places illan near another word with very similar spelling: إِلَّا, illā.
They nevertheless have different functions and meanings.
Illan in Al-Tawbah 9:8 and Al-Tawbah 9:10 is a noun denoting a bond, kinship, or covenant.
Illā in Al-Tawbah 9:4 and Al-Tawbah 9:7 is an exception particle meaning “except.”
إِلَّا الَّذِينَ عَاهَدْتُمْ excludes a group from the preceding ruling.
لَا يَرْقُبُونَ فِي مُؤْمِنٍ إِلًّا instead concerns failure to respect a bond or obligation.
Their similarity therefore does not make illan in these two verses an exception particle.
Nor should آل, āl, in expressions such as “the family of Abraham” or “the people of Pharaoh” automatically be assigned to A L L because of similar spelling, without investigating its derivation.
Morphological inquiry must consider the complete word form, its vowels, grammatical function, and actual root together.
11. Translation proposals for Forqan
Choosing one fixed English equivalent for ill is difficult because early Arabic uses it for both kinship and alliance or covenant.
“Kinship” is a direct, valid equivalent.
“Bond,” “alliance,” and “a relationship that must be respected” also fit parts of its semantic field.
Both Qur’anic verses nevertheless place ill beside dhimmah. A translation should preserve their distinction as far as possible.
For إِلًّا وَلَا ذِمَّةً, the proposed rendering is:
“Neither a bond nor a covenant or assurance of protection.”
“Bond” can encompass kinship and alliance, while “covenant or assurance of protection” clarifies the obligating aspect of dhimmah.
If a clearer rendering confined to the kinship reading is needed, one can say:
“Neither kinship nor a covenant.”
This is also lexically defensible, but conveys less of ill’s broader meanings in alliance and protective relationships.
Al-Tawbah 9:8
For لَا يَرْقُبُوا فِيكُمْ إِلًّا وَلَا ذِمَّةً, the proposed translation is:
“They respect neither a bond with you nor a covenant or assurance of protection.”
This preserves the contribution of yarqubū and avoids turning ill itself into the act of covenant-breaking.
Al-Tawbah 9:10
For لَا يَرْقُبُونَ فِي مُؤْمِنٍ إِلًّا وَلَا ذِمَّةً, the proposed translation is:
“With regard to any believer, they respect neither a bond nor a covenant or assurance of protection.”
“Any believer” conveys the negation combined with the indefinite muʾminin.
Retaining “neither … nor …” also helps keep both Arabic nouns visible in English.
Equivalents requiring care
Rendering ill as “The God” in these verses is a reading reported within lexical and interpretive tradition. It should not be presented as certain without explaining the disagreement and examining the context.
“Friendship” is also imprecise: kinship or a covenant can exist without personal affection.
“Formal contract” is too narrow, since ill also includes kinship.
“Law” or “legal system” is broader and later than the word’s direct usage.
“Tribal prejudice” is inappropriate, since kinship and respect for its obligations are not identical to prejudice or regarding one’s own group as superior.
For Forqan, ill is best understood through a bond that must be respected, explaining kinship, alliance, and covenant as its attested instances.
12. Conclusion
Arabic A L L has several semantic branches. Some concern brilliance and rapid movement, some sharpness and pointed implements, and some groaning and sound.
In the branch directly relevant to the Qur’an, ill instead denotes an interpersonal bond that people are expected to respect, such as kinship, covenant, alliance, or a protective relationship.
Early Arabic witnesses show that the word is not confined to kinship. Conversely, its meanings of covenant and alliance should not erase its genealogical usage.
Qur’anic ill occurs only twice, in Al-Tawbah 9:8 and Al-Tawbah 9:10.
Both occurrences accompany dhimmah and describe failure to respect these bonds and obligations as characteristic of a group portrayed amid covenant-breaking and hostility toward believers.
Yarqubūna shows that a bond’s existence is not the only issue: respecting its obligations matters as well.
The two verses also appear where the Qur’an explicitly distinguishes covenant-breakers from associators who have remained faithful to their covenant.
Al-Tawbah 9:4 commands fulfilling covenants with faithful associators. Al-Tawbah 9:7 emphasizes mutual steadfastness in covenant, while Al-Tawbah 9:6 provides safety even for an associator requesting protection.
The verses about failure to respect ill and dhimmah therefore cannot become a general ruling about everyone with different religious beliefs.
They concern a particular group’s conduct amid covenants, power, hostility, and aggression.
Semantically, ill and dhimmah are also close, but their distinction should preferably be preserved in translation. Ill can emphasize kinship or alliance, and dhimmah the commitment, protection, and responsibility that must be upheld.
The lexical tradition also reports ill as a divine name, but there is no conclusive reason to prefer that sense in these verses. Similarities with divine names in Semitic languages do not alone determine the Qur’anic expression’s meaning.
Forqan’s final definition of A L L:
“In the Qur’anic branch, an interpersonal bond or relationship that must be respected, such as kinship, alliance, covenant, or protection, requiring regard for the other party’s standing and rights. Qur’anic ill appears beside dhimmah, both times describing failure to respect these bonds and commitments. Ill itself does not name covenant-breaking, aggression, or hostility; it names a relationship that can be respected or violated. Other lexical branches concern brilliance, sharpness, movement, and sound, but a definite shared historical development should not be assumed without evidence.”