A number of the early authorities also adopted this view, among them Saʿīd ibn al-Musayyib, Ibn Sīrīn, ʿAṭāʾ, Mujāhid, Isḥāq, Abū Thawr, and Ibn al-Mundhir.
-
The three Imams, however, hold that retaliation itself is obligatory and that the blood money is merely a substitute for it. Their proof is the Almighty’s words, “Retaliation has been prescribed for you” (Qur’an 2:178); what is prescribed admits of no choice. They also cite the Prophet’s ﷺ statement, “Whoever kills deliberately is subject to retaliation,” reported by al-Nasāʾī from Ibn ʿAbbās.
-
The evidence for the first opinion is the verse, “But if a remission is made for him by his brother, then a fair demand should be followed by good payment” (Qur’an 2:178), together with the hadith of this chapter, which explicitly supports that ruling.
-
The practical difference between the two positions is that, according to the first, the heir may opt for the blood money even if the killer objects, whereas under the second view he is entitled only to retaliation; the blood money becomes payable solely through a settlement with the offender. A further consequence is that, if retaliation becomes impossible—because the killer dies, or the limb that would be taken in kind is lost, and the like—those who obligate one of the two alternatives switch to the blood money, while those who insist on retaliation alone grant the victim nothing in such a case.
-
Al-Ḥajjāwī said in Sharḥ al-Iqnaʿ: “There is unanimous agreement that pardoning retaliation is permissible and that it is superior,” citing the divine words, “That is a concession and a mercy from your Lord” (Qur’an 2:178) and “To pardon is nearer to righteousness” (Qur’an 2:237). In Sunan Abī Dāwūd it is related from Anas: “I never saw the Messenger of Allah ﷺ presented with a matter involving retaliation without his commanding pardon.” Numerous texts affirm this.
-
Shaykh Taqī al-Dīn [Ibn Taymiyyah] said: “For a person to exact his right to blood is justice, and to forgo it is benevolence; and benevolence is better. Yet this benevolence is only truly benevolence after justice—that is, when pardoning causes no harm. Otherwise it becomes wrongdoing, either against oneself or against others.” Al-Mardāwī commented in al-Insāf: “This is precisely correct.”
-
The Vizier [Ibn Hubayrah] stated: “The jurists agree that if one of the male heirs pardons, retaliation is waived,”