In this text, Taberî presents different interpretations of the verse on retribution together: According to some views, the term 'retribution' in the verse means not exceeding bounds in retribution (being satisfied with killing the murderer and not attacking others); according to others, it was revealed to correct unjust retribution practices during the era of ignorance (killing a free person instead of a slave, a man instead of a woman). Furthermore, according to one narration, the verse is based on an incident during the time of the Prophet when two tribes at war with each other had their blood-monies mutually reduced (mukassa). By listing these views, Taberî emphasizes that retribution is not 'an obligatory duty like prayer and fasting that cannot be abandoned,' but rather a permissible ruling where forgiveness is also possible.

والفرض الذي فرض الله علينا في القصاص هو ما وصفت من ترك المجاوزة بالقصاص قتل القاتل بقتيله إلى غيره لا أنه وجب علينا القصاص فرضا وجوب فرض الصلاة والصيام حتى لا يكون لنا تركه

According to Zemahşerî, this expression contains the linguistic analysis of the word 'tebi'' which means claiming vengeance or demanding a right in matters of retribution and blood-money; this word means one person demanding a right from another, pressing them for it. The meaning of the verse is that when retribution is applied or a right is fulfilled, no one can make any additional demand in exchange for it.

أي مطالبة . قال الشماخ : كما لاذ الغريم من التبيع يقال : فلان على فلان تبيع بحقه ، أي مصيطر عليه مطالب له بحقه

According to this exegete, the verse primarily expresses the obligatory nature of retribution; the phrase 'it has been prescribed upon you' indicates obligation according to legal convention, and the letter 'fi' is used for causation, meaning the verse's interpretation is 'retribution is prescribed upon you because of the killed being killed.' Furthermore, the verse's phrase 'the free for the free' conveys two views regarding whether retribution is conditional between the free and the slave, and between man and woman; one group says this phrase expresses restriction (retribution only between those of equal status), while another group says this restriction was made only to abolish the customs of the era of ignorance, and therefore does not express restriction. Finally, it is noted that the word 'ufiya' in the verse indicates that when the killer is forgiven, there exists a right in place of retribution, such as blood-money.

فدل ظاهر الآية على وجوب القصاص على جميع المؤمنين بسبب قتل جميع القتلى ، إلا أنهم جمعوا على أن غير القاتل خارج من هذا العموم وأما القاتل فقد دخله التخصيص أيضا في صور كثيرة

In his interpretation of this verse (the phrase 'whoever is forgiven' in the context of the retribution verse), Kurtubî transmits that scholars made five different interpretations. According to the most common view, 'whoever' refers to the killer, 'is forgiven' refers to the action of the guardian who pardons the blood, 'brother' refers to the killed person, and 'something' refers to blood-money; that is, if the guardian foregoes retribution and pardons, he returns to accepting blood-money and requests it from the killer in a kind manner. According to Malik's view, 'whoever' refers to the guardian, 'brother' refers to the killer, 'something' refers to blood-money; in this case, the guardian's transition from retribution to blood-money is an eased right, and the killer has the choice between paying blood-money or surrendering himself.

أحدها أن من يراد بها القاتل وعفى تتضمن عافيا هو ولي الدم والأخ هو المقتول وشيء هو الدم الذي يعفي عنه ويرجع إلى أخذ الدية هذا قول بن عباس وقتادة ومجاهد وجماعة من العلماء

According to Ibn Kesîr, this verse was revealed because of a conflict that occurred between two Arab tribes during the era of ignorance; the parties had stipulated that in response to the killing of their slaves and women, their own free men should be killed. The section of the verse concerning the ruling of retribution was later abrogated by the verse 'a soul for a soul.' Furthermore, the permission to take blood-money instead of retribution is explained as a lightening and mercy given to this community compared to previous communities (Jews and Christians).

وذلك أن حيين من العرب اقتتلوا في الجاهلية قبل الإسلام بقليل فكان بينهم قتل وجراحات حتى قتلوا العبيد والنساء فلم يأخذ بعضهم من بعض حتى أسلموا فكان أحد الحيين يتطاول على الآخر في العدة والأموال فحلفوا أن لا يرضوا حتى يقتل بالعبد منا الحر منهم والمرأة منا الرجل منهم فنزلت فيهم منها منسوخة نسختها النفس بالنفس

According to Beydâvî, the verse was revealed against the oath of one tribe showing superiority over another by killing a slave in exchange for a free person, or a woman in exchange for a man; the verse's expression does not indicate that a free person will not be killed in exchange for a slave or that a man will not be killed in exchange for a woman, nor does it indicate the opposite. He mentions that Malik and Shafi'i based their ruling that a free person is not killed in exchange for a slave on narrations and the practice of the companions, while the Hanafis considered the phrase 'a soul for a soul' in the verse as evidence for analogy but that this evidence is weak. Furthermore, he points out that the phrase 'whoever is forgiven by his brother something' indicates that partial forgiveness, like complete forgiveness, eliminates retribution, that blood-money should be demanded according to what is customary and paid with kindness, and that this is evidence that this is one of the rulings that intentional killing requires regarding blood-money.

ولا تدل على أن لا يقتل الحر بالعبد والذكر بالأنثى، كما لا تدل على عكسه، فإن المفهوم حيث لم يظهر للتخصيص غرض سوى اختصاص الحكم