such as when he brings the child, lays him down, takes a knife, and slaughters him. This is a case in which no possibility of doubt arises. By contrast, if the matter admits of doubt, then retaliation is not carried out against him. He said: “For a parent’s killing of his child is something far removed; therefore, we cannot execute him in retaliation unless we know with absolute certainty that he intended to kill him.”

The stronger view in this issue is that a parent is executed in retaliation for killing his child. The proofs they cite are weak and cannot withstand the sound, explicit texts that indicate general applicability. Moreover, if people were lax in this matter, every person might turn upon his child—especially a more remote ascendant, such as the maternal grandfather or the like—and kill him, knowing that retaliation would not be carried out against him.

His statement, “The child is executed for killing either of them,” means that if a child kills either of his parents, he is executed, due to the generality of the evidences and because he has severed the ties of kinship through killing, so he is himself put to death. Is the daughter’s son executed for killing his maternal grandfather? Yes.

These, then, are four conditions. There is a fifth condition: that the offence be committed deliberately and wrongfully.

Some have stipulated another condition: that the killer not be the ruler. If the killer is the ruler, he is not executed, because executing the ruler entails a grave harm: disorder and the loss of the community. Rather, this ruler who killed deliberately and wrongfully is told: “Your recompense is Hell, abiding therein; Allah is angry with you, curses you, and has prepared Hell for you—what an evil destination!” As for our worldly affairs, however, we do not corrupt them for the sake of one individual.

This reasoning may contain some wisdom, because among the rulers