Overview (Verses 178 - 179)
 
This passage covers a series of instructions relating to the social organization of the Muslim community during its formative period in Madinah. It also introduces certain aspects of Muslim religious worship. The two parts go hand in hand, and are linked with the notion of maintaining a sense of God-fearing, or taqwā, which is emphasized towards the end of each part. It is worth recalling that the same feature of taqwā was highlighted at the end of the previous verse (177), which outlined the fundamental elements of righteousness, incorporating aspects of faith and practical behaviour.
 
The passage discusses the legal aspects of just retribution (qişāş) in cases of killing. It outlines rulings on will and inheritance, and outlines provisions relating to fasting, prayer, retirement to a mosque for a certain period of time (i`tikāf), and rules governing financial claims.
 
The outline of each of these and other subjects in the passage is concluded with a direct or an indirect reference to taqwā.
 
This consistent and deliberate approach highlights the essential nature of the religion of Islam. It is an integral system, an indivisible whole. Its social systems, legislative codes, and religious rituals emanate from faith and the comprehensive world order it generates. These are all held together by a common goal of submission to, and veneration of God, the Creator and the Provider, who has instituted man as His vicegerent and custodian in this world. This trusteeship is conditional on man’s worship of God alone and on receiving all his concepts, systems and laws from Him only.
 
The passage is a notable example of the cohesion of the various aspects of Islam.
 
The Law of Just Retribution
 
Believers, just retribution is prescribed for you in cases of killing: a free man for a free man, a slave for a slave, and a female for a female. If something [of his guilt] is remitted to a person by his brother, this shall be pursued with fairness, and restitution to his fellow-man shall be made in a goodly manner. This is an alleviation from your Lord, and an act of His grace. He who transgresses thereafter shall face grievous suffering. There is life for you, men of understanding, in this law of just retribution, so that you may remain God-fearing. (Verses 178-179)
 
The passage begins with an address to the believers, highlighting their main quality of having accepted the faith, which means that they receive their laws from God. They are hereby informed that retribution in cases of killing is permitted to them, in accordance with the provisions laid down in these two verses. They are also called upon to reflect on the purpose and wisdom of this legislation, outlined in the second verse. They are reminded of the need to enhance their sense of God-fearing, which acts as a safety valve against any excess or injustice in punishing those accused of killing.
 
The statement clearly indicates how retribution ought to be exacted: a free man for a free man, a slave for a slave, a woman for a woman. But “If something [of his guilt] is remitted to a person by his brother, this shall be pursued with fairness, and restitution to his fellow-man shall be made in a goodly manner.” (Verse 178) This situation would arise when the victim’s relatives decide to accept financial compensation instead of insisting on the execution of the killer in retaliation. Once this is agreed, the victim’s relatives are also under an obligation to seek a fair and amicable settlement, while the killer’s guardian or representative must, on his part, settle readily and honourably. This serves to clear the air and to remove any ill-feelings or grudges that would have inevitably arisen between the two parties. It would also be conducive to a more friendly and pleasant relationship between the living members of both parties.
 
This provision has been laid down out of God’s grace, as a special favour and an act of mercy towards believers: “This is an alleviation from your Lord, and an act of His grace.” (Verse 178) The concession permitting the settlement of cases of killing by financial compensation paid to the victim’s family was not given to the Jews in the Torah. For Islam, it has been set up as an alternative aiming to spare lives when agreement and amicable settlement can be reached.
 
“He who transgresses thereafter shall face grievous suffering.” (Verse 178) It is not merely the punishment in the hereafter that is certain to come; such aggression means that capital punishment becomes due and financial compensation no longer accepted. Reneging on the agreement constitutes a violation of the agreed settlement and could only fuel hatred, animosity and a desire for vengeance from both sides. Therefore, when the victim’s closest relatives have accepted blood money, they can no longer seek retaliation by killing the killer.
 
We can appreciate the profound wisdom of the Islamic approach and its respect for, and understanding of, human nature and motivation. Islam recognizes anger as a very basic human reaction when one’s relative is killed, and Islam satisfies this desire by legislating for just retribution in this way. Rigorous justice cools tempers and helps to remove grudges and deter the killer from offending again.
 
At the same time, however, Islam holds out the prospect of pardon and opens the way for mutual agreement, defining precisely the principles and rules which govern it. Islam advocates that the alternative of pardon should, therefore, come as a voluntary option accepted by both sides out of a genuine desire for reconciliation, rather than having it forced upon them.
 
Some commentators consider that this ruling was cancelled and superseded by that given in Verse 45 of Sūrah 5, which provides for retribution on the basis of “a life for a life, an eye for an eye, a nose for a nose, an ear for an ear, a tooth for a tooth, and a similar retribution for wounds.” In his commentary on the Qur’ān, Ibn Kathīr quotes Sa`īd ibn Jubayr, an early scholar, explaining that the present verse was revealed with reference to fighting that broke out between two Arab clans, shortly before the advent of Islam, leading to widespread bloodshed on both sides. Among those killed were several slaves and women, but the dispute was not settled until much later, after both clans had embraced Islam. Excessive claims were made by both clans, demanding that a free man be killed for a slave and a man for a woman. They could not reach a settlement until this verse was revealed. But this verse has, in turn, been superseded by Verse 45 of Sūrah 5 revealed at a later date. The same version is supported in a report by Abū Mālik.
 
Nevertheless, it seems to me that the two verses are dealing with different aspects of the same issue, retribution for killing. Verse 5: 45, stating equal retribution is applicable in cases of premeditated murder of one specific person, or group of persons, by another, in which case conviction entails capital punishment. The verse we are discussing here, however, covers situations of assault by a group such as when a family, clan or community attacks another, as happened between those two Arab clans. As and when such conflicts come to be settled, just retribution would require that a free man be set against a free man, a slave against a slave, and a woman against a woman. How else in such cases, one may ask, can justice be seen to be done?
 
If this view is correct, then there is no conflict between the two verses, and the rulings of each remain valid without one superseding or replacing the other.
 
Revealing the profound wisdom underlying this ruling, and its objectives, the verse ends with the words: “There is life for you, men of understanding, in this law of just retribution, so that you may remain God fearing.” (Verse 179)
 
Vengeance, or the satisfaction of grudges, is not the prime goal of this legislation. Its objective is to promote and preserve human life. Furthermore, there is an invitation to reflect on the wisdom of this code and an endeavour to raise believers’ consciousness and fear of God.