Tafsir al-Baghawi - Al-Baghawi - (3/62)

Tafsir al-BaghawiAl-Baghawi

“And We decreed for them in it: 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 wounds are subject to retaliation. But whoever forgoes it charitably, it shall be an expiation for him. And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed—it is they who are the wrongdoers.” (45)

Allah the Exalted’s saying, “And We decreed for them in it”: that is, We made it obligatory for the Children of Israel in the Torah, “a life for a life”—meaning that the life of the killer is taken in requital for the life of the slain: he is killed for it. “An eye for an eye”: an eye is gouged out in return for it. “A nose for a nose”: a nose is cut off in return for it. “An ear for an ear”: an ear is cut off in return for it.

Ibn ‘Abbas said: Allah the Exalted informed them of His ruling in the Torah: “a life for a life,” and so on to the end of the verse. So why do they act contrary to it, killing two lives for one life and gouging out two eyes for one eye? Nafi‘ recited “ear” throughout the Quran with a light consonant, whereas the other reciters pronounced it with a doubled consonant.

“And a tooth for a tooth”: a tooth is extracted in return for it. All other limbs are likewise subject to analogy with these in the law of retaliation. “And wounds are subject to retaliation”: this is a general statement after specific examples, since He mentioned the eye, nose, ear, and tooth, then said, “And wounds are subject to retaliation”—that is, in cases where exact retaliation is possible, such as the hand, foot, tongue, and the like. As for injuries in which exact retaliation is not possible, such as a broken bone or a wound to the flesh that penetrates into the body cavity and the like, then there is no retaliation for them, since their precise extent cannot be determined.

Al-Kisa’i recited “the eye” and what follows it in the nominative case. Ibn Kathir, Ibn ‘Amir, Abu Ja‘far, and Abu ‘Amr recited only “wounds” in the nominative case, while the other reciters read all of them in the accusative case, like “a life.”

﴿وَكَتَبْنَا عَلَيْهِمْ فِيهَا أَنَّ النَّفْسَ بِالنَّفْسِ وَالْعَيْنَ بِالْعَيْنِ وَالْأَنْفَ بِالْأَنْفِ وَالْأُذُنَ بِالْأُذُنِ وَالسِّنَّ بِالسِّنِّ وَالْجُرُوحَ قِصَاصٌ فَمَنْ تَصَدَّقَ بِهِ فَهُوَ كَفَّارَةٌ لَهُ وَمَنْ لَمْ يَحْكُمْ بِمَا أَنْزَلَ اللَّهُ فَأُولَئِكَ هُمُ الظَّالِمُونَ (٤٥) ﴾ قَوْلُهُ تَعَالَى: ﴿وَكَتَبْنَا عَلَيْهِمْ فِيهَا﴾ أَيْ: أَوْجَبْنَا عَلَى بَنِي إِسْرَائِيلَ فِي التَّوْرَاةِ، ﴿أَنَّ النَّفْسَ بِالنَّفْسِ﴾ يَعْنِي: نَفْسَ الْقَاتِلِ بِنَفْسِ الْمَقْتُولِ وَفَاءً يُقْتَلُ بِهِ، ﴿وَالْعَيْنَ بِالْعَيْنِ﴾ تُفْقَأُ بِهَا، ﴿وَالْأَنْفَ بِالْأَنْفِ﴾ يُجْدَعُ بِهِ، ﴿وَالْأُذُنَ بِالْأُذُنِ﴾ تُقْطَعُ بِهَا، قَالَ ابْنُ عَبَّاسٍ: أَخْبَرَ اللَّهُ تَعَالَى بِحُكْمِهِ فِي التَّوْرَاةِ وَهُوَ: أَنَّ النَّفْسَ بِالنَّفْسِ إِلَى آخِرِهَا، فَمَا بَالُهُمْ يُخَالِفُونَ فَيَقْتُلُونَ بِالنَّفْسِ النَّفْسَيْنِ، وَيَفْقَأُونَ بِالْعَيْنِ الْعَيْنَيْنِ، وَخَفَّفَ نَافِعٌ الْأُذُنَ فِي جَمِيعِ الْقُرْآنِ وَثَقَّلَهَا الْآخَرُونَ، ﴿وَالسِّنَّ بِالسِّنِّ﴾ تُقْلَعُ بِهَا وَسَائِرُ الْجَوَارِحِ قِيَاسٌ عَلَيْهَا فِي الْقِصَاصِ، ﴿وَالْجُرُوحَ قِصَاصٌ﴾ فَهَذَا تَعْمِيمٌ بَعْدَ تَخْصِيصٍ، لِأَنَّهُ ذَكَرَ الْعَيْنَ وَالْأَنْفَ وَالْأُذُنَ وَالسِّنَّ، ثُمَّ قَالَ: ﴿وَالْجُرُوحَ قِصَاصٌ﴾ أَيْ فِيمَا يُمْكِنُ الِاقْتِصَاصُ مِنْهُ كَالْيَدِ وَالرِّجْلِ وَاللِّسَانِ وَنَحْوِهَا، وَأَمَّا مَا لَا يُمْكِنُ الِاقْتِصَاصُ مِنْهُ مِنْ كَسْرِ عَظْمٍ أَوْ جَرْحِ لَحْمٍ كَالْجَائِفَةِ وَنَحْوِهَا فَلَا قِصَاصَ فِيهِ، لِأَنَّهُ لَا يُمْكِنُ الْوُقُوفُ عَلَى نِهَايَتِهِ، وَقَرَأَ الْكِسَائِيُّ "وَالْعَيْنُ" وَمَا بَعْدَهَا بِالرَّفْعِ، وَقَرَأَ ابْنُ كَثِيرٍ وَابْنُ عَامِرٍ وَأَبُو جَعْفَرٍ وَأَبُو عَمْرٍو "وَالْجُرُوحُ" بِالرَّفْعِ فَقَطْ وَقَرَأَ الْآخَرُونَ كُلَّهَا بِالنَّصْبِ كَالنَّفْسِ.