Al-Shura: (40–46) And the recompense for a bad deed is a bad deed like it...

After Allah Almighty said: {And those who, when oppression afflicts them, they defend themselves} (Al-Shura: 39), He followed it with what indicates that this defense must be restricted to the like measure. For deficiency is injustice, and excess is tyranny, while equality is justice, by which the heavens and the earth are sustained. For this reason, He said: {And the recompense for a bad deed is a bad deed like it}.

In this verse, there are several issues:

The author of Al-Kashshaf answered: Both the initial action and its recompense are called a "bad deed" because they cause distress to the one upon whom they fall. Allah says: {And if a misfortune befalls them because of what their hands have put forth, they say, "Our Lord, why have You not sent to us a messenger?} (An-Nisa: 78), meaning what distresses them of calamities and afflictions. Others answered that since one is made equivalent to the other metaphorically, the name of one is applied to the other. The truth is what the author of Al-Kashshaf mentioned.

Its implication is that every transgression must be met with its like, because ignoring it opens the door to evil and aggression, as injustice and aggression are inherent in human nature. If not deterred, one will proceed and not cease. Any excess beyond the measure of the sin is injustice, and the Law is free from it. Thus, nothing remains except meeting it with its like.

This text is further confirmed by other texts, such as: {And if you punish, punish with the like of that with which you were punished} (An-Nahl: 126), and {Whoever does a bad deed, he will not be recompensed except with the like of it} (Ghafir: 40), and {Prescribed for you is retaliation, [in cases] of murder} (Al-Baqarah: 178)—and Qisas (retaliation) is an expression of equality and likeness—and {And We ordained for them therein: a life for a life} (Al-Ma'idah: 45), and {And there is for you in retaliation [Qisas] preservation of life} (Al-Baqarah: 179). All these texts necessitate meeting a thing with its like.

Here lies a subtlety: If the right cannot be fully realized except by inflicting an excess, a conflict arises between inflicting additional harm on the perpetrator and preventing the victim from realizing their right. Which is prioritized? This is a matter of scholarly deliberation (Ijtihad) and varies according to the circumstances. Several issues branch off from this principle to indicate others:

Example 1: Al-Shafi'i (may Allah be pleased with him) argued that a Muslim is not killed for a Dhimmi (non-Muslim citizen), nor is a free person killed for a slave, by saying that likeness is a condition for Qisas to apply, and it is absent in these two cases. Therefore, Qisas should not apply between them.

The proof that likeness is a condition for Qisas lies in the aforementioned texts. The way to deduce this is to say: Either we interpret the likeness mentioned in these texts as likeness in all matters except what is specifically exempted by evidence, or we interpret it as likeness in a specific matter. The latter is weak because that specific matter is not mentioned in the verse. If we confined the verse to it, ambiguity would result. If we confined the text to the first interpretation, specialization (Takhsis) would be necessary. It is known that resolving ambiguity is preferable to resolving specialization. Thus, it is established that the verse requires observing likeness in all matters except what is exempted by rational evidence or explicit textual evidence. Given this, we say that observing likeness in killing a Muslim for a Dhimmi, or a free person for a slave, is impossible because Islam is a quality considered by the Law in imposing the death penalty—by preserving it when absent (as with the original disbeliever) and by maintaining it when present (as with the apostate). Furthermore, freedom is a quality considered by the Law regarding judgeship, imamate, and testimony. Thus, likeness is established as a condition for Qisas, and since it is absent here, preventing Qisas is necessary.

Example 2: Al-Shafi'i (may Allah be pleased with him) argued that if multiple people cut off one hand, the penalty applies to all of them. He said: If the cutting was done by all or some of those cutters, then the like must be legislated against those cutters. Everyone who mandates cutting, whether fully or partially, against all or some of them, mandates it against all. The remaining point is that this necessitates exacting an excess from the perpetrator, which is forbidden. However, we say: When a conflict arises between the perpetrator's side and the victim's side, the victim's side takes precedence.

Example 3: A partner in a father's estate is subject to Qisas for a wound inflicted by him. The proof is that a wound was inflicted by him, so it must be met with its like, according to {And We ordained for them therein: a life for a life} (Al-Ma'idah: 45). Once this is established, full Qisas is established, as no one differentiates here.

Example 4: Al-Shafi'i (may Allah be pleased with him) said: Whoever burns, we burn him; and whoever drowns, we drown him. The proof is these texts indicating that everything is met with its like.

Example 5: If the witnesses in a Qisas case retract and say they deliberately lied, Qisas is incumbent upon them because their testimony invalidated his life. Thus, their lives must be invalidated, according to {And the recompense for a bad deed is a bad deed like it}.

Example 6: Al-Shafi'i (may Allah be pleased with him) said: The coerced killer is subject to Qisas because he unjustly caused a killing. Thus, its like must be incumbent upon him. As for him causing a killing, sense indicates it, and as for it being an unjust killing, Muslims agree that he is religiously obligated by Allah not to kill, and they agree that doing so incurs great sin and severe punishment. Once this is established, it must be met with its like, according to {And the recompense for a bad deed is a bad deed like it}.

Example 7: Al-Shafi'i (may Allah be pleased with him) said: Killing with a blunt object necessitates Qisas. The proof is that the perpetrator nullified his life, so the heir of the murdered person must be enabled to nullify the life of the killer, according to {And the recompense for a bad deed is a bad deed like it}.

Example 8: A free person is not killed in retaliation for a slave. Although we mentioned this issue in Example 1, we mention another line of reasoning here: The killer destroyed something belonging to the slave's owner, worth, say, ten dinars. Thus, he must pay ten dinars, according to {And the recompense for a bad deed is a bad deed like it}. Once compensation is due, Qisas should not be due, as no one differentiates here.

Example 9: Al-Shafi'i (may Allah be pleased with him) holds that the usufruct of seized property is guaranteed. The proof is that the one seizing the property deprived the owner of benefits equivalent to one dinar in Arab custom. Thus, its like in wealth must be forfeited from the seizer, according to {And the recompense for a bad deed is a bad deed like it}. Everyone who mandates forfeiting this amount from the seizer says it must be paid to the one whose property was seized.

Example 10: A free person is not killed in retaliation for a slave because if he were killed for a slave, he would be equivalent to the slave in the meanings necessitating Qisas, according to {Whoever does a bad deed, he will not be recompensed except with the like of it} (Ghafir: 40) and the other texts we recited. Furthermore, his slave is killed in Qisas for his own slave. Thus, another's slave must be equivalent to his own slave in the meanings necessitating Qisas due to these same texts. Based on this, his own slave would be equivalent to another's slave in the meanings necessitating Qisas. Therefore, his own slave would be a like for his own self in the meanings necessitating Qisas. If a free person were killed for another's slave, he would be killed for his own slave based on the reasoning mentioned, yet he is not killed for his own slave. Thus, he should not be killed for another's slave.

We have mentioned these ten examples as derivations from this verse. For one who grasps shrewdness, deriving many issues of Sharia from this principle becomes easy. And Allah knows best.

Then there is a discussion: Abu Hanifa (may Allah be pleased with him) said regarding the cutting of hands: It is certain that the cutting was done by all or some of them, but this right cannot be fully realized except by inflicting an excess, because forfeiting ten hands is more than forfeiting one hand. Thus, the original prohibition must remain. Al-Shafi'i (may Allah be pleased with him) replied: If forfeiting ten hands for one hand were forbidden, then forfeiting ten lives for one life would also be forbidden, because forfeiting a life includes forfeiting a hand. Thus, forfeiting ten lives for one life would necessitate forfeiting ten hands for one hand. If forfeiting ten hands for one hand were forbidden, then forfeiting ten lives for one life would involve the forbidden, and everything that involves the forbidden is forbidden. Thus, killing ten lives for one life should be forbidden. Since we agree that it is not forbidden, we know that what you mentioned about exacting an excess is not forbidden by the Law. And Allah knows best.

We have explained that {And the recompense for a bad deed is a bad deed like it} necessitates observing likeness absolutely in all situations, except where evidence specifies an exception. The jurists have introduced exceptions in many cases, sometimes based on another, less explicit text, and sometimes based on analogy. Undoubtedly, whoever introduces an exception bears the burden of proof, while the obligated person suffices by adhering to this text in all demands. Mujahid and Al-Saddi said: If someone says to him, "May Allah disgrace you," he may reply, "May Allah disgrace you." But if he accuses him with an accusation that necessitates a prescribed punishment (Hadd), he is not allowed to do so; rather, the Hadd ordained by Allah must be applied.

Then Allah Almighty said: {But whoever pardons and makes reconciliation, his reward is due from Allah}. This means he reconciles with his adversary through pardon and overlooking, as Allah says: {And the recompense for an evil deed is an evil deed like it, but whoever pardons and makes reconciliation, his reward is due from Allah} (Fussilat: 34), {Then he, between whom and you was enmity, [will become] as though he was a devoted friend}. {His reward is due from Allah} is an open promise whose magnitude in glorification cannot be measured.

Then Allah Almighty said: {Indeed, He does not love the wrongdoers}. There are two opinions on this:

1. The intent is to alert the victim that it is not permissible for him to exact an excess from the wrongdoer, because the wrongdoer is protected beyond his transgression, and victory is rarely safe from exceeding equality and aggression, especially in times of war and inflamed passion. The wronged person might become a wrongdoer when moving to exact Qisas. It is narrated from the Prophet (peace be upon him): "When the Day of Resurrection comes, a caller will call out: 'Whoever has a reward due from Allah, let him stand up.' A group will stand up, and he will ask them, 'What is your reward from Allah?' They will say, 'We are those who pardoned those who wronged us.' He will say to them, 'Enter Paradise by the permission of Allah Almighty.'"
2. Since Allah encouraged pardoning the wrongdoer, He informed that despite this, He does not love him, to indicate that even though He does not love him, He encourages pardoning him. Therefore, the believer, who is beloved by Allah due to his faith, is more deserving of being pardoned.

Then Allah Almighty said: {And whoever defends himself after he has been wronged}. Meaning, the one who wronged the wrongdoer. This is an instance of attributing the verbal noun (Masdar) to the object. {Then for such—} meaning the defenders—{there is no cause for blame against them}, meaning no punishment or accountability, because they did what was permissible for them: self-defense. Al-Shafi'i (may Allah be pleased with him) used this verse to explain that the consequence of Qisas (e.g., if an amputation leads to death) is not guaranteed. He said: The Law either permitted the cutting absolutely or conditioned it on the absence of consequence. The second is false because the default ruling for cutting is prohibition. If its permissibility is contingent upon a condition that is unknown, then the cutting must remain under its original ruling of prohibition, because the default ruling is prohibition, and permissibility is only established contingent upon an unknown condition. Thus, the cutting must remain under its default ruling of prohibition. Since this is not the case, we know that the Law permitted the cutting regardless of whether it resulted in a consequence or not. If so, that consequence should not be guaranteed, because he defended himself after being wronged, so no cause for blame should exist against him.

Then He said: {The cause for blame is only against those who wrong people}—meaning, those who initiate injustice—{and transgress upon the earth without right. Those will have a painful punishment}.

Then He said: {But whoever is patient and forgives—indeed, that is from the matters of firm resolution}. Meaning, his resolve to refrain from retaliation is among the good matters of firm resolution. The pronoun referring back to the matter is omitted, as is understood from the saying, "Ghee is measured by a dirham." It is narrated that a man insulted Al-Hasan in a gathering. The insulted person suppressed his anger, wiped his sweat, then stood up and recited this verse. Al-Hasan said: "By Allah, he understood and grasped it, which the ignorant neglected."

Then Allah Almighty said: {And whoever Allah lets go astray, then for him there is no protector after Him}. Meaning, he has no helper to look after him after Allah's abandonment, i.e., after Allah has let him go astray. This is explicit regarding the permissibility of misguidance by Allah and that guidance is not within the power of anyone except Allah. The Judge said: What is meant is whoever Allah lets go astray from Paradise, then he has no protector after Him to help him. The response is that restricting misguidance to this specific situation contradicts the evidence. Moreover, Allah did not let him go astray from Paradise according to your claim; rather, he let himself go astray from Paradise.

Then Allah Almighty said: {And you will see the wrongdoers, when they see the punishment, say, "Is there any way back to the world?"} Meaning, they seek a return to the world due to the severity of the punishment they witness. Then He described their state when the Fire is presented to them: {And you will see them presented to it, humbled in abasement from [seeing] the punishment}. Meaning, in a state of being humbled, degraded, and humiliated due to the abasement they have suffered. Then He said: {looking with a furtive glance}. Meaning, their gaze begins with a slight, hidden movement of their eyelids, as if stealing a look, like when you see someone certain to be killed; he looks at the sword as if he cannot open his eyelids fully to take it all in, as he does when looking at pleasant things. If it is asked: Did Allah not say regarding the description of the disbelievers that they will be gathered blind? How can He say here that they look with a furtive glance? We answer: Perhaps they will be like that initially, and then they will be made blind, or perhaps this applies to one group, and that applies to another group.

When Allah described the state of the disbelievers, He recounted what the believers say about them: {And those who believed will say, "Indeed, the losers are those who lost themselves and their families on the Day of Resurrection."} The author of Al-Kashshaf said: {On the Day of Resurrection} can either be related to "lost" or the statement of the believers occurred in this world. Or it can be related to "say," meaning they will say it on the Day of Resurrection when they see them in that state.

Then He said: {Indeed, the wrongdoers are in an enduring punishment}. Meaning, permanent. The Judge said: This indicates that the punishment of the disbeliever and the sinner is perpetual. The response is that the absolute term "wrongdoer" in the Qur'an is specified for disbelief, as Allah says: {And the disbelievers—they are the wrongdoers} (Al-Baqarah: 254). What confirms this is that Allah followed this verse with: {And there will not be for them any protectors who will aid them other than Allah}. Meaning, the idols they used to worship for intercession with Allah did not provide that intercession, and it is known that this is only fitting for the disbelievers. Then He said: {And whoever Allah lets go astray, then for him there is no way}. This indicates that the one who misguides and the one who guides is Allah Almighty, according to our view and doctrine. And Allah knows best.

Translation and Commentary:

{Respond to your Lord} (i.e., accept His call and obey Him) {before there comes a Day from Allah of which there is no turning back.} {That Day you will have no refuge,} (no place to flee to) {nor will you have any means of denial} (no way to deny the truth or your deeds).

{But if they turn away—then We have not sent you, [O Muhammad], as a guardian over them.} (Your role is not to compel them or guard them against disbelief.) {Your duty is only to convey [the message].}

{And indeed, when We let man taste mercy from Us, he rejoices therein;} (he becomes arrogant and ungrateful) {but if a misfortune strikes him because of what his hands have put forth, then indeed, man is ungrateful.}

{To Allah belongs the sovereignty of the heavens and the earth. He creates what He wills. He grants to whom He wills female [children] and grants to whom He wills males,} {Or He makes them paired [both] males and females, and He makes whom He wills barren. Indeed, He is Knowing and All-Powerful.} (This demonstrates His absolute power over creation, including the most intimate aspects of human life, showing that He alone deserves obedience.)