Al-Nisa’ 92

5 min read

This page includes five instances of the use of Qur’an 4:92 in the books of Muhammad Shahrur, where it appears as a foundational text on accidental killing and its associated mitigation and penalty. Its centrality stems from linking unintentional error to lighter penal alternatives, while highlighting the meaning of freeing a slave within this context.

The Verse as Cited

Whoever kills a believer by mistake must free a believing slave …

Reader’s Answer

Question

How does Muhammad Shahrur employ Qur’an 4:92 in his discussion of accidental killing and its penalty?

Shahrur employs the verse to highlight the distinction between intentional killing and accidental killing, presenting it within a comparison between the Mosaic and Muhammadan messages. In his reading, the Muhammadan message tended toward mitigation in cases of accidental killing; he calls fasting for two consecutive months a “minimum limit” of the penalty. The available evidence does not independently establish a detailed account of “graduation in punishment” or the construction of a general theory of the minimum limit, but it does establish this description specifically in the context of accidental killing.

The clear answer: Shahrur reads the verse in the context of distinguishing intentional from accidental killing, and holds that the penalty for accidental killing in the Muhammadan message was lighter than what he reports from the Book of Moses; he describes fasting for two consecutive months as a “minimum limit.” How Shahrur employs the verse: after stating that the two messages distinguish between intent and error, he cites Qur’an 4:92 and makes it an example of what he calls mitigation in the Muhammadan message’s treatment of accidental killing. The evidence and its location: in Drying Up the Sources of Terrorism, p. 53, Shahrur states that the Muhammadan message distinguished between intent and error, then writes concerning error: “The Muhammadan message inclined toward mitigation, reducing the penalty to fasting for two consecutive months as a minimum limit,” followed by a quotation of Qur’an 4:92.

Evidence and Location

Drying Up the Sources of Terrorism — p. 53.

Limits of the Reading

  • The two pieces of evidence from the Book and the Qur’an cannot be used to interpret the verse, because they address the meaning of “the Book” and are unrelated to accidental killing.
  • The occurrence of the verse’s text in State and Society without interpretive commentary is insufficient to establish a claim about Shahrur’s reading of it.
  • The available evidence does not establish the attribution of the previously mentioned use to Islam and Humanity.
  • Shahrur’s description of fasting as a “minimum limit” should not be transformed into a juridical ruling attributed to the verse outside the context of his own presentation.

Continue from Here

Brief Reading

Shahrur reads the verse as an example of the gradation of penalty in cases of accidental killing, not intentional killing. He therefore connects it with freeing a slave and fasting for two consecutive months, deriving from it the meaning of a minimum limit in punishment, in keeping with his view of mitigation in this area.

Themes

  • Legislative
  • Human and ethical
  • Political and social
  • Accidental killing: 3
  • Killing by mistake: 2
  • Freeing a slave: 2
  • Minimum limit: 2

Its Place in the Network of Concepts

The verse enters a network bringing together accidental killing, emancipation, and the minimum limit of punishment. Here, it is among the verses invoked whenever legislative mitigation and the preservation of social life are discussed, because the text itself opens the way to distinguishing error from intent.

The Verse’s Role in the Argument

  • Example: 2
  • Support: 2
  • Foundation: 1

Summary of Its Presence in the Atlas

  • A principal theme in accidental killing
  • Connected to freeing a slave and mitigation
  • Used to affirm the minimum limit in punishment

Instances of Use

  • Islam and Humanity: Uses it as an example of an unintentional error that does not rise to the level of an intentional sin.
    • Concept: Killing by mistake
    • Function of the verse here: Example
    • Textual evidence: “{ It is not for a believer to kill a believer except by mistake… } (Al-Nisa’ 92)”
  • State and Society, p. 259: Mentions it among the texts on emancipation to show that the message encouraged the gradual freeing of slaves.
    • Concept: Freeing a slave
    • Function of the verse here: Support
    • Textual evidence: “- {It is not for a believer to kill a believer except by mistake …} (Al-Nisa’ 92).”
  • the Book and the Qur’an, p. 389: Cites it to argue that the Muhammadan message mitigated the penalty and distinguished between accidental and intentional killing, unlike earlier legislation.
    • Concept: Accidental killing
    • Function of the verse here: Support
    • Textual evidence: “– {It is not for a believer to kill a believer except by mistake …} (Al-Nisa’ 92 and 93)”
  • the Book and the Qur’an, p. 414: Makes the verse a model for the minimum limit of punishment in accidental killing, deriving from it a principle of graduated punishment according to capacity and circumstances.
    • Concept: Minimum limit
    • Function of the verse here: Foundation
    • Textual evidence: “As for accidental killing, its minimum penalty came in His, exalted be He, saying… {And whoever cannot find one, then fasting for two consecutive months}; and He set the minimum limit in the phrase”
  • Drying Up the Sources of Terrorism, p. 53: Uses it to show that the Muhammadan message mitigated the rulings on accidental killing in comparison with those in earlier religious laws.
    • Concept: Accidental killing
    • Function of the verse here: Example
    • Textual evidence: “Thus it reduced the penalty to fasting for two consecutive months … as stated in His, exalted be He, saying: {It is not for a believer to kill a believer except by mistake …}”

This page is presented within the general atlas-building methodology.

Graph View

Muhammad Shahrur Atlas