take blood money from the killer, whether he agrees or not. They interpreted the one who pardons in the verse as the victim’s next of kin, who waives retaliation and then seeks blood money from the killer, who is consequently obliged to pay it graciously. This, however, is a far-fetched interpretation, because “something” is indefinite and cannot refer to retaliation, which is definite, having been expressly specified by Allah Most High in His words:
“And in retaliation there is life for you, O people of understanding.” [al-Baqarah: 179]
Rather, it refers to whatever amount of wealth the two parties agree upon, whether little or much, since no fixed amount is prescribed for blood money in cases of intentional killing.
Section
If they agree upon blood money without specifying an amount, the ruling, according to Mālik and his companions, is that it comprises four age categories of camels, contrary to al-Shāfiʿī’s position that it comprises three. Thus, Mālik understood the one described as pardoning in this verse to be the giver, not the one who relinquishes a right. In the verse concerning divorce, however, he understood the one who waives his right to be the husband. Allah says:
“If you divorce them before you have touched them, but after you have appointed a dowry for them, then half of what you appointed is due, unless they waive it or the one in whose hand is the marriage bond waives it.” [al-Baqarah: 237]
According to him, the verse therefore means: unless the wives waive their half, or the husband waives his right and pays the whole amount. Allah knows best what He intended by this; there is no deity but Him.
Section
The Grounds for Establishing Retaliation
Retaliation is established by one of three things:
Evidence establishing the killing;
The killer’s confession;
Or the qasāma oaths sworn by the victim’s next of kin, where the grounds validating such oaths exist, as we shall explain in the appropriate place, Allah willing.
If the killing is established by evidence, or the killer confesses to it, retaliation is exacted against him in the same manner as