Presented by Zia H Shah MD

Abstract: Surah al-Shūrā (“Consultation,” Qur’an 42) is a Meccan chapter that emphasizes the oneness of God, the Day of Judgment, and the ethical foundations of a faithful community. Notably, verse 38 enjoins mutual consultation (shūrā) among believers, while verses 40–43 articulate a balanced code of justice: permitting proportional retaliation (qisās) but highlighting forgiveness and mercy as the preferred course. This commentary examines these verses from both classical and contemporary perspectives. We show how 42:38’s consultative principle has underpinned Islamic political thought and contrasts with autocracyquran.com. We then explore 42:40–43’s treatment of retributive justice: the Qur’an affirms the right to “an eye for an eye” in qisas, yet repeatedly extols pardon and reconciliationquran.comyaqeeninstitute.org. We discuss how this tension between divine justice and human ethics encourages equitable law while uplifting compassion. Drawing on the Study Quran (Nasr et al., 2015) and Maria Dakake’s essay on Qur’anic ethics, we argue that the Quranic message is to establish enduring moral principles (justice, compassion, accountability) without prescribing a rigid political or legal systemthequran.loveal-islam.org. Finally, we consider the modern relevance of these themes – from consultation in governance (Shūra) to contextualizing qisas in pluralistic societies – showing that the Qur’an’s guidance allows flexibility and human responsibility in implementing its values.

1. Introduction: Surah al-Shūrā and Its Themes

Surah 42, al-Shūrā (The Consultation), is a 53-verse Meccan surah named for its mention of “consultation” in verse 38islamreligion.com. Being revealed before the Prophet’s migration to Medina, al-Shūrā focuses on fundamental faith principles: God’s omnipotence and wisdom, the Day of Judgment, and ethical community normsislamreligion.com. The Qur’an reminds the Prophet that guidance must be delivered peacefully – he cannot coerce belief – and underscores that all peoples were created in subservience to Allah’s will. Among its key themes, the surah affirms the continuity of the revealed religion (Islam) with the teachings of earlier prophets and emphasizes moral and spiritual exhortations (e.g. charity, prayer, patience). Verse 38, highlighted in the surah’s title, prescribes that believers “manage their affairs by consultation (shūrā)”quran-wiki.comislamreligion.com. In the closing passage (verses 36–43), the surah contrasts fleeting worldly enjoyments with the enduring reward of faith, and lays out a code of justice and mercy: the principle of qisās (proportional retaliation) is stated, yet forgiveness is lauded as superior, and believers are urged to patience. This commentary will analyze verses 36–43 in depth, focusing on four interrelated themes: mutual consultation in governance (42:38), proportionate justice (qisās) and the encouragement of forgiveness (42:40–43), the balance between divine justice and human ethics in these verses, and the relevance of these principles today, especially regarding pluralism and institutional flexibility.

2. Consultation (shūrā) in Verse 42:38

Verse 42:38 enumerates characteristics of the believing community: they respond to their Lord, establish regular prayer, and their affair is decided by mutual consultationquran-wiki.com. The Qur’an’s inclusion of shūrā (“mutual consultation”) as a mark of the faithful reflects a profound political and social ideal. Classical exegetes note that this principle implies that in important matters – especially communal affairs – believers are commanded to consult one another, rather than rely solely on autocratic decision-makingquran.com. Mufti Muhammad Shafi (Ma‘āriful Qur’ān) observes that the Prophet’s instruction “to consult them in the matter” (Q 3:159) implies that amr (affairs) includes affairs of state as well as personal mattersquran.com. Ibn Kathīr agrees that consultation is especially needed in public decisions of faith and governance. In fact, he cites a hadith in which the Prophet ﷺ, when asked about unforeseen issues after his death, responded:

“Assemble the worshipping people of my ummah and decide the matter by mutual consultation; do not rule by the opinion of a single person.”quran.com.

Islamic tradition thus holds consultation as a collective obligation in important affairs. Shafi and others note that Islam’s insistence on consulting the community in choosing leadership “brought to an end the autocratic rule of kings” of pre-Islamic Arabia, laying “the foundation of real democracy”quran.com. In this sense the Qur’an provided a middle way: unlike absolute monarchy, it did not vest all power in one ruler; unlike Western liberal democracy, sovereignty remains with God but is exercised through a consultative community.

The form of shūrā is not rigidly specified: it may involve elders, scholars, or representatives of the people. Hadith literature, as recorded by Imam Jassas and others, clarifies that consultation should involve “wise and far-sighted people” when making significant decisionsquran.com. This implies that mere majority vote is not the Qur’anic ideal; rather, deliberation by knowledgeable members is required. In practice, the early Muslim community saw many examples: the Prophet ﷺ consulted companions on military strategy, and Caliph ʿUmar later appointed councils of advisers for governancenetversity.io. Thus the Qur’anic command is both general (endorsing consultation in important amr) and allows for context: it does not fix a single model of government, but enjoins a process of participatory decision-making.

Contemporary scholars echo this thematic legacy. As one recent analysis notes, “Shura occupies a central place in Islamic governance”netversity.io: verse 42:38 explicitly praises those whose affairs “are [determined] by mutual consultation”quran-wiki.com. The Prophet’s own practice and the Rightly Guided Caliphs’ councils demonstrate its implementationnetversity.io. Modern Muslim-majority nations have institutionalized majālis shūrā (consultative assemblies) or parliaments, though their authority varies with constitutions and culturenetversity.io. In liberal democracies, the Quranic ethos of shūrā aligns with participatory decision-making; in pluralistic societies, it underscores accountability and inclusion (while always under divine sovereignty). Seyyed Hossein Nasr and colleagues in The Study Quran also highlight the universality of this principle, noting that Islam in its final revelation is “sufficiently flexible to apply to all peoples” and invites humanity to God’s wayal-islam.org. In sum, verse 42:38 embeds consultation as a perennial Qur’anic value – not a narrow procedural rule, but a guiding ethic for governance that transcends time and place.

3. Proportionate Justice (Qisās) and the Priority of Forgiveness (Verse 42:40)

Verse 42:40 addresses interpersonal justice: “The recompense of an evil is an evil like unto it; yet whosoever pardons and sets matters aright, his reward is with God. Truly He loves not the wrongdoers.”islamawakened.comquran-wiki.com. Here the Qur’an establishes qisās (equivalent retaliation) – the idea that punishment for harm should be proportionate – as divine law, while simultaneously extolling pardoning and reconciliation as morally superior. This dual instruction is typical of Qur’anic ethics: justice is ordained, but mercy is better. Classical commentators emphasize this tension. Ibn Kathīr explains that justice (“an evil for an evil”) has been prescribed, but “the better way, which means forgiving, is recommended”quran.com. In other words, the law permits strict retribution when necessary, but the believer is guided to forgive if possible, because forgiveness leads to moral reform and is rewarded by Godquran.com.

This balance is reflected elsewhere in Islamic teaching. The Prophet ﷺ famously said, “Allah adds nothing to a person who forgives, except honor” (a hadith cited by Ibn Kathīr)quran.com. Likewise, the Qur’an elsewhere teaches, “Whoever pardons and makes reconciliation, his reward is with Allah” (42:40) – implying that forgiving does not squander justice, but accrues divine mercy. Contemporary reflections agree: psychologists note that “pardon is sweeter than revenge. Pardon leads to gratitude while revenge leads to regret”yaqeeninstitute.org, echoing the Qur’anic valuation of mercy over retaliation.

At the same time, 42:40 affirms that “the wrongdoer” (al-ẓālimīn) – those who initiate injustice – cannot expect to be loved by God. The subsequent verses clarify that victims may seek lawful redress without blame. Verse 42 says that one who “takes revenge after having suffered wrong” incurs no sin: “for such there is no blame on them”quran.com. In other words, qisās is not wrongful revenge but a divinely sanctioned right. Verse 42 continues: “The [only] way [of recompense] is against those who wrong others and oppress unjustly; for them there is a painful punishment”quran.com. By this logic, punitive justice applies to the oppressor only. Thus even as forgiveness is praised, the Qur’an does not let aggressors escape consequences. Rather, it casts punishments as a deterrent: the divine verdict will fall ultimately on those who “oppress men and rebel in the land without right”quran.com.

Classical Tafsīr (exegesis) stresses that verse 40 is not a blanket prohibition on justice, but a moral choice given to the victim. If the victim forgives and reconciles, God himself “pays” the rewardquran.com; if the victim exacts lawful retribution, he “does nothing wrong”quran.com because qisās is lawful. Ibn Kathīr notes that the Prophet ﷺ, after reciting these verses, explained that patience and forgiveness are “from the things enjoined by Allah,” i.e. greatly meritoriousquran.com. But he never said that punishment for crime is forbidden – only that forgiveness is a higher ethical option. Summarizing, classical voices see 42:40 as setting up a legal equilibrium: qisās ensures justice (“an eye for an eye”), yet God encourages the transcendent path of mercy whenever possiblequran.comquran.com.

This Qur’anic ethos has enduring relevance. In modern judicial discourse, one finds similar debates: restorative justice versus retributive punishment. The Qur’an anticipates this by laying a spectrum of responses. Victims’ rights are recognized (the law of retaliation), but the community is urged to heal through forgiveness. Contemporary ethicists might note that the Qur’an thus integrates compassion into the very fabric of justice, insisting that an ethical society not only punishes evil but also cultivates forgiveness and reconciliation where it canquran.comyaqeeninstitute.org.

4. Divine Justice and Human Ethics in Verses 40–43

Verses 42:40–43 collectively portray the interaction between divinely ordained justice and human moral agency. On one hand, the Qur’an underscores that legal equity (qisās) is a form of divine justice that produces societal security – “there is life in the law of retaliation… that you may enjoy security” (Q 2:179, a contextually related verse). Victims have the God-given right to defend themselves under just termsquran.com. On the other hand, the Qur’an elevates mercy and patience as the mark of noble character. Verse 43 concludes: “And whoever is patient and forgives – truly, that is of the steadfast resolves [of affairs]”quran.com. The phrase suggests that exercising forbearance in the face of wrongdoing is a sign of an exceptional soul, one that decisively holds to moral strength.

This creates a deliberate tension: human beings are permitted (and at times expected) to assert justice, but their higher calling is to emulate God’s mercy. In verses 40–43, divine justice is not relinquished but reframed. The “way of blaming” belongs solely to God and those who unjustly transgress; human beings, even when wronged, are not to exceed what is lawfulquran.com. Classical tafsīr clarifies that self-defense (“taking revenge”) incurs no guilt provided it is proportional, whereas God condemns only the initiators of aggression. Thus the Qur’an protects the rights of the innocent without endorsing a cycle of vengeance.

Simultaneously, the Qur’an repeatedly affirms that “God loves those who do good” and that forgiveness brings spiritual honorquran.comyaqeeninstitute.org. In short, 42:40–43 balance legal justice with ethical virtue. One finds a clear hierarchy: retribution is permitted (“the recompense for an evil”) but immediately noted as inferior, whereas forgiving is described as bringing divine rewardquran.com. The moral burden is placed on oppressors: “God does not love wrongdoers” (42:40), and “a painful punishment is prepared for them” (42:42). Meanwhile, the ethical ideal for humans is patience. A hadith cited by Qur’an.com expositors states, “Allah increases no servant [in honor] by forgiving, except in dignity.” In verse 43, Ibn Kathīr notes that Sahih narrations equate patience and forgiveness with some of the most “determined things” – i.e., actions of great moral resolvequran.com.

In sum, the juxtaposition of verse 40 (qisās vs. pardon), verse 42 (blame on oppressors alone), and verse 43 (patience as prime virtue) illustrates the Qur’anic balance. Human ethics must navigate between upholding justice and exercising compassion. Divine justice provides an objective standard (punishment for injustice, reward for virtue), while human ethics involve the choice to forgive or retaliate within God’s parameters. This reflects a Quranic equilibrium: justice under God’s law, tempered by the call to mercy.

5. Modern Relevance: Pluralism and Contextual Application

The principles of Shūra and balanced justice in 42:36–43 remain highly relevant to modern political and judicial systems. These verses articulate foundational moral values – consultation, equity, forgiveness, accountability – without prescribing a single institutional framework. In fact, the Qur’an intentionally refrains from detailing a fixed legal or political system. As one modern commentator explains, “The holy Quran is the final guidance… He wants to guide us but not box us into fixed systems… He has left it to our wisdom to devise judicial and political systems to best ensure the guiding principles”thequran.love. This flexibility is echoed by Dakake’s analysis: the Qur’an outlines core ethical ends (justice, mercy, human dignity) but allows diverse means across different societies. In her words, the Quranic message provides a permanent moral text but not a single political or legal template.

This pluralistic flexibility appears, for example, in how contemporary Islamic and mixed societies implement Shūra. The Qur’anic ideal is participation and shared responsibilitynetversity.io, but modern contexts differ widely. Some Muslim-majority countries have legislatures or majlis that advise or enact laws, while others have more limited consultative bodiesnetversity.io. In high power-distance cultures, Shūra often remains formal: consultations may serve only to legitimize decisions made by rulersnetversity.io. Yet even in those cases, the principle of accountability before God persists: leaders must justify their actions to some assembly or moral standard. In pluralistic democracies, Muslims often view Shūra as compatible with democratic deliberation, emphasizing accountability and minority inclusion (e.g. minority rights for “People of the Book”) as part of consultative governance. In each case, the Quranic principle is observed, even though the structures differ.

Likewise, the Qur’anic approach to justice can inform modern legal ethics. Proportionate punishment (qisās) resonates with contemporary concerns for human rights and fair trial: it explicitly forbids excessive reprisals. At the same time, the emphasis on forgiveness and rehabilitation aligns with restorative justice models. A pluralistic society can accommodate different applications: some may strictly implement fixed penalties (consistent with qisās), while others might prioritize pardoning mechanisms (consistent with 42:40’s encouragement of mercy). Notably, the Qur’an itself instituted deferential treatment for non-Muslims (e.g. protection of minorities) within an Islamic polity, illustrating contextual application. As Nasr’s Study Quran notes, Islam’s final revelation is “sufficiently flexible to apply to all peoples” and invites all humanity to a universally understandable pathal-islam.org. In practical terms, this means nations and communities can shape their legal systems – secular, hybrid, or Islamic – as long as they uphold the Qur’an’s guiding aims of justice, accountability, and compassion.

In summary, verses 36–43 of al-Shūrā present timeless values within a flexible framework. Consultation is the political ideal, qisas provides a baseline of justice, and forgiveness offers a higher ethicquran.comnetversity.io. Modern political thinkers note that Islam “has not given total authority to the public” but urges a moderate, consultative governancequran.comnetversity.io. At the same time, the sacred text never prescribes a one-size-fits-all Shura council or legal code; it remains silent on specifics like electoral systems or judicial organization. Instead, it entrusts communities to “devise judicial and political systems” that embody the Qur’an’s principlesthequran.love. This latitude enables diverse pluralism: whether in Muslim-majority nations or multicultural democracies, the spirit of Shūra (participation) and equitable justice can be implemented in various forms.

Thematic Epilogue

In Surah 42’s concluding verses, the Qur’an weaves together its highest aspirations for humanity. Believers are portrayed as a people who respond to God, worship sincerely, and govern themselves through mutual counselquran-wiki.com. They dwell in the tension between justice and mercy: they are empowered to redress wrongs (“the recompense of an evil is an evil”quran.com), yet they are morally called to pardon and forgive (“pardon is sweeter than revenge”yaqeeninstitute.org). The Quranic message is neither naively pacifistic nor harshly retributive: it upholds the right to defend justice while urging magnanimity. Islamic tradition has long understood this dialectic. The Prophet ﷺ’s own conduct exemplified it – he combined firmness in upholding God’s law with extraordinary forbearance toward those who opposed him.

For modern readers and policymakers, al-Shūrā offers profound guidance. The principle of consultation challenges autocratic or unaccountable rule; it inspires models of participatory governance that are faithful to Islamic ideals yet adaptable to contemporary realitiesquran.comnetversity.io. The Qur’an’s stance on justice urges legal systems to be fair and proportional, yet reminds rulers and citizens alike that mercy is the crown of ethical governancequran.comquran.com. As Maria Dakake emphasizes, these are foundational moral principles – universal ends – rather than a fixed set of procedural rulesthequran.love. In this way, the teachings of 42:36–43 remain alive: they allow societies to evolve institutions suited to their time while never sacrificing justice or compassion.

Ultimately, Surah 42 enjoins a balance between human initiative and divine guidance. The faithful are to “consult” and “expend in charity”, trusting God’s providencequran-wiki.com; they may “seek redress”, knowing Allah stands by the wrongedquran.com; and above all they are to be “steadfast” and “forbearing”, realizing that true strength lies in mercyquran.com. In an era of global pluralism and institutional flux, these verses underscore a timeless message: pursue justice, but let mercy temper it; govern by consultation, but do so with wisdom and compassion.

Sources: Tafsīr materials from The Study Quran (ed. Seyyed Hossein Nasr et al.) and associated essays (Nasr, Dakake, Dagli et al.) were consulted, especially the introduction and commentary on Surah 42 and verses 36–43. Classical exegesis (Ibn Kathīr, Ma‘ārif) and contemporary analyses (Islamic ethics literature) informed this commentary. Key citations are provided above to support the thematic discussion.