one with whom we have a treaty, such as the Jews who occupied Palestine; there is no treaty between us and them.

If someone were to say, “There is a treaty between us and them—the general covenant represented by the United Nations,” we reply: They have violated the treaty, because they commit aggression against us.

His statement, “or an apostate,” means that if he kills an apostate, he incurs no liability for him and is not executed in retaliation for him, because the apostate’s blood is not inviolable. However, he is punished for killing him: the imam is to administer discretionary punishment to him, because no one has the right to take matters into his own hands without the authorization of the imam or his deputy.

Apostasy has many causes, including mocking Allah or His Messenger ﷺ, denying an obligation that is well known to be among the obligations of Islam, abandoning the prayer altogether, and the like. The apostate’s blood is not inviolable. Rather, it is obligatory upon the ruler of the Muslims to call him back to Islam. If he repents, then so be it; otherwise, he must be executed, because the presence of apostates among the Muslims constitutes great corruption in the land. It is more serious than many sins. Thus, if the rulers of the Muslims were to deal with apostates, whether through their repentance or through execution, apostasy would become less widespread.

If a person kills a married adulterer, he incurs no liability for him, because the married adulterer’s blood is not inviolable.

The second condition is legal accountability: there is no legal retaliation against a minor or an insane person, ............

His statement, “The second condition is legal accountability,” means the legal accountability of the killer.

His statement, “there is no legal retaliation against a minor or an insane person,” is because intentional killing cannot be conceived from either of them. We have previously stated that the intentional act of a child or an insane person is deemed accidental, so when