Tafsir of Al-Qasas 28:84

"Whoever comes with a good deed," then for him, in exchange for it, is "better than it" in essence, attribute, and quantity, according to what has been stated. It is possible that "better" (khayr) refers to one of the various forms of good and is not the superlative form, and that "min" (from) indicates causality; meaning: he has good because of performing it. However, this is contrary to the apparent meaning, and discussion regarding this has already passed.

"And whoever comes with an evil deed, then those who did the evil deeds shall not be requited" — the relative pronoun (alladhina) and the explicit noun (those who did) are placed in the position of the pronoun (those who did it) to condemn the condition of the evildoers by repeating the attribution of the evil deed to them. Mentioning the plural "evil deeds" while not doing so for "good deed" earlier is an indication of the scarcity of the righteous and the abundance of the evildoers. It is also said that it is an indication that adding one evil to another does not increase its requital; rather, its requital when it stands alone is the same as its requital when joined with others. It also implies that not adding a good deed to another good deed does not affect its being requited with something better than it. Perhaps the scarcity of the righteous is understood from the lack of consideration of the plural in "whoever" (man) in His saying, "Whoever comes with a good deed, for him is better than it," while the abundance of the evildoers is understood from the consideration of the plural in the verse, "those who did the evil deeds," as the relative pronoun stands in place of its pronoun.

"Except what they used to do" — meaning: except for the likes of what they used to do. The word "the like" (mithl) is omitted and replaced by "what they used to do" as an intensification of the equivalence. This is a kindness from Him, Exalted and Majestic is He, for He multiplied the good deed but did not consent to increase the requital of the evil deed by the weight of an atom. It is said that there is no need to consider the omitted word, as their own deeds will appear on the Day of Resurrection in the form of that with which they are punished, though the implications of this are not hidden.

The mention of "did" (amilu) a second time, rather than "comes" (ja'u), is an indication that what they are requited for is that which was done with intention, as "action" (al-amal) is specific to that, as Al-Raghib stated. In Al-Tafsir al-Kabir by Imam Al-Razi, during the discussion of the verse "Or have you thought that the Companions of the Cave and the Inscription...", it is noted that the use of "comes" (ja'a) rather than "did" (amila) — such as saying: "Whoever does a good deed..." — indicates that the entitlement to reward and punishment is derived from the final state (the end of life), not from the beginning of the deed. This is supported by the fact that if a person spent their life in disbelief and then accepted Islam at the very end, they would be among the people of reward, and vice versa. This is a sound perspective, and perhaps the nuance of using "did" (amilu) a second time also follows this logic.

In His saying, "then they shall not be requited" (rather than "then for those who did evil is the like of what they did" or "they have nothing but what they used to do"), there is an indication that pardon from punishment may occur. How vast are the secrets of the Revelation!

A difficulty is raised regarding what the verse indicates—that the requital of an evil deed is the like of it—given that one who disbelieves and dies in disbelief is punished with eternal punishment; how is this like an hour of disbelief? The answer given is that the matter of equivalence is unknown to us, especially according to the view that denies the rational goodness or ugliness of deeds. The extent of our knowledge is that Allah has set for every sin a requital, and He has informed us that it is equivalent to it. He, Glory be to Him, has informed us that the requital for disbelief is eternal torment, so we believe in it and that it is what Wisdom requires. It does not concern us if we do not know the nature of the equivalence or the aspect of wisdom in it. The same is said regarding sins for which Allah has legislated punishments in this world, such as adultery, drinking wine, or slandering the chaste—we do not know the reason for assigning each of these sins to a specific punishment among those different prescribed limits, but we are certain that it is not devoid of wisdom.

The Imam answered the issue of disbelief and eternal punishment by stating that this is because if the disbeliever had lived forever, they would have remained in that disbelief. It is also said regarding the reason for the eternal punishment of the disbeliever that the requital of a sin varies according to the greatness of the one who is disobeyed; the greater the one disobeyed, the greater the requital. Since disbelief is an act of disobedience against One whose greatness is infinite, its requital is infinite. By that measure, the requital of every sin should be likewise; however, it is not so in cases other than disbelief, out of His grace—Exalted is His Majesty—due to the presence of [the potential for] faith. It is also said that every act of disbelief, whether word or deed, amounts to attributing deficiency to Him—Glory be to Him—which contradicts His necessary existence (wujub al-wujud), which necessitates His existence eternally and everlastingly. If one imagines an extended time there, it would be infinite; thus, since disbelief necessitates the denial of His existence—Exalted is His Majesty—in what is infinite, its requital is infinite. This is not the case for other sins. So reflect upon this.