Blood-Money

Malik said, “A person who kills someone accidentally pays blood-money with his property and there is no retaliation against him. That money is like anything else from the dead man’s property and his debt is paid with it and he is allowed to make a bequest from it. If he has a total property of which the blood-money is a third and then the blood-money is relinquished, that is permitted to him.

If all the property he has is his blood-money, he is permitted to relinquish a third of it and to make that a bequest.”

If it is part of what does not have a specific blood-money for it mentioned by the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and if there is no previous sunna about it or specific blood-money, one uses ijtihad about it.”

Malik said, “There is no blood-money for an accidental bodily injury when the wound heals and returns to its form. If there is any scar or mark in that, ijtihad is used about it except for the belly-wound. There is a third of the blood-money of a life for it.

‘ Malik said, ‘There is no blood-money for the wound which splinters a bone in the body, and it is like the wound to the body which lays bare the bone.’ Malik said, ‘The generally agreed on way of doing things in our community is that when the doctor performs a circumcision and cuts off the glans, he must pay the full blood-money.

That is because it is an accident which the tribe is responsible for, and the full blood money is payable for all that in which a doctor errs or exceeds, when it is not intentional.’ Yahya related to me from Malik from Yahya ibn Said that Said ibn al-Musayyab said, ‘The blood-money for a woman is the same as for a man up to one third of the blood-money.

Her finger is like his finger, her tooth is like his tooth, her injury which lays bare the bone is like his, and her head wound which splinters the bone is like his.’’”

Malik said about a woman who has a husband and children who are not from her paternal relatives or her people, that since he is from another tribe, there is no blood-money against her husband for her criminal action, nor any against her children if they are not from her people, nor any against her maternal brothers when they are not from her paternal relations or her people.

These are entitled to her inheritance but only the paternal relations have paid blood-money from since the time of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), may Allah bless him and grant him peace. Until today it is like that with the mawla of a woman. The inheritance they leave goes to the children of the woman even if they are not from her tribe, but the blood-money of the criminal act of the mawla is only against her tribe.

‘ Malik said, ‘I heard that if the foetus comes out of its mother’s womb alive and then dies, the full blood-money is due for it.’ Malik said, ‘The foetus is not alive unless it cries at birth. If it comes out of its mother’s womb and cries out and then dies, the complete blood-money is due for it. We think that the slave- girl’s foetus has a tenth of the price of the slave-girl.’

Malik said, ‘When a woman murders a man or woman, and the murderess is pregnant, retaliation is not taken against her until she has given birth. If a woman who is pregnant is killed intentionally or unintentionally, the one who killed her is not obliged to pay anything for her foetus. If she is murdered, then the one who killed her is killed and there is no blood-money for her foetus.

If she is killed accidentally, the tribe obliged to pay on behalf of her killer pays her blood-money, and there is no blood-money for the foetus.’ Yahya related to me, ‘Malik was asked about the foetus of the christian or jewish woman which was aborted. He said, ‘I think that there is a tenth of the blood-money of the mother for it.’’’”

Malik said, “The least of that are the eyebrows and a man’s breasts.” Malik said, “What is done in our community when a man is injured in his extremities to an extent that obliges payment of more than the amount of his full blood-money, is that it is his right. If his hands, feet, and eyes are all injured, he has three full blood-moneys.”

Malik said about the sound eye of a one-eyed man when it is accidentally gouged out, “The full blood-money is payable for it.”

Malik said, “The generally agreed on way of doing things in our community, is that there is no retaliation for a wound to the brain or a belly wound, and Ibn Shihab has said, ‘There is no retaliation for a wound to the brain.’

‘ Malik explained, ‘The wound to the brain is what pierces the bones to the brain. This type of wound only occurs in the head. It is that which reaches the brain when the bones are pierced.’

Malik said, ‘What is done in our community is that there is no blood-money paid on any head wound less than one which lays bare the skull. Blood-money is payable only for the head wound that bares the bone and what is worse than that. That is because the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), may Allah bless him and grant him peace, stopped at the head wound which bared the bone in his letter to Amr ibn Hazm.

He made it five camels. The imams, past and present, have not made any blood- money payable for injuries less than the head wound which bares the bone.’’”

He said, ‘Are you an Iraqi?’ I said, ‘Rather, I am a scholar who seeks to verify things, or an ignorant man who seeks to learn.’ Said said, ‘It is the sunna, my nephew.’

‘ Malik said, ‘What is done in our community about all the fingers of the hand being cut off is that its blood- money is complete. That is because when five fingers are cut, their blood-money is the blood-money of the hand: fifty camels. Each finger has ten camels.’

Malik said, ‘The reckoning of the fingers is thirty-three dinars for each fingertip, and that is three and a third shares of camels.’’”

Malik said, “The way of doing things about which there is no dispute among us, in the case of someone who has the blood-money accepted from him in intentional murder or in any injury in which there is retaliation, is that that blood-money is not due from the tribe unless they wish it. The blood-money for that is from the property of the murderer or the injurer if he has property.

If he does not have any property, it is a debt against him, and none of it is owed by the tribe unless they wish.” Malik said, “The tribe does not pay blood-money to anyone who injures himself, intentionally or accidentally. This is the opinion of the people of fiqh in our community. I have not heard that anyone has made the tribe liable for any blood-money incurred by intentional acts.

Part of what is well-known of that is that Allah, the Blessed, and the Exalted, said in His Book, ‘Whoever has something pardoned him by his brother, should follow it with what is accepted and pay it with good will’ (Sura 2 ayat 178) The commentary on that – in our view – and Allah knows best, is that whoever gives his brother something of the blood- money, should follow it with what is accepted and pay him with good will.”

Malik spoke about a child who had no property and a woman who had no property. He said, “When one of them causes an injury below a third of the blood-money, it is taken on behalf of the child and woman from their personal property, if they have property from which it may be taken. If not, the injury which each of them has caused is a debt against them.

The tribe does not have to pay any of it and the father of a child is not liable for the blood-money of an injury caused by the child and he is not responsible for it.”

Malik said, “The way of doing things in our community about which there is no dispute, is that when a slave is killed, the value for him is that of the day on which he was killed. The tribe of the murderer is not liable for any of the value of the slave, great or small. That is the responsibility of the one who struck him from his own personal property as far as it covers.

If the value of the slave is the blood- money or more, that is against him in his property. That is because the slave is a certain type of goods.”

Urwa said, “For that reason a killer does not inherit from the one he killed.” Malik said, “The way of doing things about which there is no dispute is that the intentional murderer does not inherit anything of the blood-money of the person he has murdered or any of his property. He does not stop anyone who has a share of inheritance from inheriting.

The one who kills accidentally does not inherit anything of the blood-money and there is dispute as to whether or not he inherits from the dead person’s property because there is no suspicion that he killed him for his inheritance and in order to take his property. I prefer that he inherit from the dead person’s property and not inherit from the blood-money.”

Malik said, “It is more fitting that a person leading an animal by the halter, driving it, or riding it incur a loss than a person who is exercising his horse.” (See hadith 4 of this book).

Malik said, “What is done in our community about a person who digs a well on a road or ties up an animal or does the like of that on a road used by muslims, is that since what he has done is included in that which he is not permitted to do in such a place, he is liable for whatever injury or other thing arises from that action. The blood-money of that which is less than a third of the full blood- money is owed from his own personal property.

Whatever reaches a third or more, is owed by his tribe. Any such things that he does which he is permitted to do on the muslims road are something for which he has no liability or loss. Part of that is a hole which a man digs to collect rain, and the beast from which the man alights for some need and leaves standing on the road.

There is no penalty against anyone for this.” Malik spoke about a man who went down a well, and another man followed behind him, and the lower one pulled the higher one and they fell into the well and both died He said, “The tribe of the one who pulled him in is responsible for the blood-money.” Malik spoke about a child whom a man ordered to go down into a well or to climb a palm tree and he died as a result.

He said, “The one who ordered him is liable for whatever befalls him, be it death or something else.” Malik said, “The way of doing things in our community about which there is no dispute is that women and children are not obliged to pay blood-money together with the tribe in the blood-moneys which the tribe must pay. The blood-money is only obligatory for a man who has reached puberty.”

Malik said that the tribe could bind themselves to the blood-money of mawali if they wished. If they refused, they were people of the diwan or were cut off from their people. In the time of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), may Allah bless him and grant him peace, people paid the blood-money to each other as well as in the time of Abu Bakr as-Siddiq before there was a diwan.

The diwan was in the time of Umar ibn al-Khattab. No one other than one’s people and the ones holding the wala paid blood- money for one because the wala was not transferable and because the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, “The wala belongs to the one who sets free.”

Malik said, “The wala is an established relationship.” Malik said, “What is done in our community about animals that are injured is that the person who causes the injury pays whatever of their value has been diminished.”

Malik said about a man condemned to death and one of the other hudud befell him, “He is not punished for it. That is because the killing overrides all of that, except for slander.

The slander remains hanging over the one to whom it was said because it will be said to him, ‘Why do you not flog the one who slandered you?’ I think that the condemned man is flogged with the hadd before he is killed, and then he is killed. I do not think that any retaliation is inflicted on him for any injury except killing because killing overrides all of that.”

Malik said, “What is done in our community is that when a murdered person is found among the main body of a people in a village or other place, the house or place of the nearest people to him is not responsible. That is because the murdered person can be slain and then cast at the door of some people to shame them by it. No one is responsible for the like of that.”

Malik said about a group of people who fight with each other and when the fight is broken up, a man is found dead or wounded, and it is not known who did it, “The best of what is heard about that is that there is blood-money for him, and the blood-money is against the people who argued with him. If the injured or slain person is not from either of the two parties, his blood-money is against both of the two parties together.”

Malik said, “Intentional murder with us is that a man intentionally goes to a man and strikes him until his life goes. Part of intentional injury also is that a man strikes a man in a quarrel between them. He leaves him while he is alive, and he bleeds to death and so dies. There is retaliation for that.”

Malik said, “What is done in our community is that a group of free men are killed for the intentional murder of one free man, and a group of women for one woman, and a group of slaves for one slave.”

The slave-girl is slain for the slave-girl as the slave is slain for the slave. Retaliation is between women as it is between men. That is because Allah, the Blessed, the Exalted, said in His Book, ‘We have written for them in it that it is a life for a life and an eye for an eye, a nose for a nose, and an ear for an ear, and a tooth for a tooth, and for wounds there is retaliation.’

(Sura 5 ayat 48) Allah, the Blessed, the Exalted, mentioned that it is a life for a life. It is the life of a free woman for the life of a free man, and her injury for his injury.”

Malik said about a man who held a man fast for another man to hit, and he died on the spot, “If he held him and he thought that he meant to kill him, the two of them are both killed for him. If he held him and he thought that he meant to beat him as people sometimes do, and he did not think that he meant to kill him, the murderer is slain and the one who held him is punished with a very severe punishment and jailed for a year.

There is no killing against him.” Malik said about a man who murdered a man intentionally or gouged out his eye intentionally, and then was slain or had his eye gouged out himself before retaliation was inflicted on him, “There is no blood-money nor retaliation against him. The right of the one who was killed or had his eye gouged out goes when the thing which he is claiming as retaliation goes.

It is the same with a man who murders another man intentionally and then the murderer dies. When the murderer dies, the one seeking blood-revenge has nothing of blood- money or anything else. That is by the word of Allah, the Blessed the Exalted, ‘Retaliation is written for you in killing. The free man for the free man and the slave for the slave.’

‘ Malik said, ‘He only has retaliation against the one who killed him. If the man who murdered him dies, he has no retaliation or blood-money.’ Malik said, ‘There is no retaliation held against a free man by a slave for any injury. The slave is killed for the free man when he intentionally murders him. The free man is not slain for the slave, even if he murders him intentionally. It is the best of what I have heard.’’”

If the wound of the person on whom the retaliation has been inflicted heals and the injured party is paralysed or his injury has healed but he has a scar, defect, or blemish, the person on whom the retaliation has been inflicted does not have his hand broken again and further retaliation is not taken for his injury.”

He said, “But there is blood-money from him according to what he has impaired or maimed of the hand of the injured party. The bodily injury is also like that.” Malik said, “When a man intentionally goes to his wife and gouges out her eye or breaks her hand or cuts off her finger or such like, and does it intentionally, retaliation is inflicted on him.

As for a man who strikes his wife with a rope or a whip and hits what he did not mean to hit or does what he did not intend to do, he pays blood-money for what he has struck according to this principle, and retaliation is not inflicted on him.” Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that Abu Bakr ibn Muhammad ibn Amr ibn Hazm took retaliation for the breaking of a leg.

Yahya related to me from Malik from Abuz-Zinad from Sulayman ibn Yasar that a slave was set free by one of the people on hajj and his master had abandoned the right to inherit from him. The ex-slave then killed a man from the Banu Aidh tribe. An Aidhi, the father of the slain man came to Umar ibn al-Khattab seeking the blood-money of his son.

Umar said, “He has no blood-money.” The Aidhi said, “What would you think if it had been my son who killed him?” Umar said, “Then you would pay his blood-money.” He said, “He is then like the black and white Arqam snake. If it is left, it devours and if it is killed, it takes revenge.”