Al-Muqaddimāt al-Mumahhidāt - Ibn Rush al-Jadd - (3/290)

Al-Muqaddimāt al-MumahhidātIbn Rush al-Jadd

he killed his victim, except that there is disagreement if he killed him with fire or poison. Ibn Habīb stated in al-Wādiha that he is not to be killed with fire or poison, because that constitutes mutilation. The apparent meaning of the Mudawwana, however, is that retaliation is exacted against him in the same manner as he killed his victim, even if he killed him with fire, since it makes no distinction between fire and other means. This is also the apparent meaning of his statement concerning poison: that retaliation is exacted against him with it. Some scholars hold that retaliation may be carried out only with the sword. If, however, the killing is not established by evidence, and his liability to execution is established only through the qasāma oaths, he is to be killed only with the sword.

Section
Categories of Blood Money

According to Mālik—may Allah have mercy on him—and his companions, blood money falls into three categories:

Blood money for accidental killing; blood money for intentional killing, when accepted; and aggravated blood money in cases such as what al-Mudlijī did to his son. This last category is the blood money for quasi-intentional killing according to those who recognize and uphold that category. We have already mentioned that this is the position of most scholars and the view transmitted from Mālik by the Iraqi authorities. Abū Hanīfa holds that blood money in such cases comprises four age categories of camels, as we have previously related from him.

Section
Blood Money for Accidental Killing

For those whose wealth consists of camels, blood money for accidental killing is one hundred camels, payable by the killer’s ʿāqila—the group collectively liable for his blood money. This is established by the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, and no scholar disagrees on it. It is collected over three years, although some say four years. The first view is more widely held and is Mālik’s position.

Section

This was a practice in the pre-Islamic era which the Prophet ﷺ upheld in Islam. It cannot be justified by analogy, because the fundamental principle is that no one should bear responsibility for another’s offence, as Allah, Mighty and Majestic, says:

“Each soul is responsible only for its own deeds, and no bearer of burdens will bear the burden of another.” [al-Anʿām: 164]

القتلة التي قتله بها إلا أن يكون قتله بالنار أو بالسم فاختلف في ذلك. قال ابن حبيب في الواضحة: إنه لا يقتل بالنار ولا بالسم لأن ذلك من المثل. وظاهر ما في المدونة أنه يقتص منه بمثل القتلة التي قتله بها وإن كان قتله بالنار إذ لم يفرق فيها بين النار وغيره، وهو ظاهر قوله في السم أنه يقاد منه به. ومن أهل العلم من يرى أنه لا يكون القود إلا بالسيف. وأما إن لم يثبت القتل بالبينة وإنما استحق دمه بالقسامة فلا يقتل إلا بالسيف. فصل في تقاسيم الديات والديات على مذهب مالك ﵀ وأصحابه ثلاث: دية الخطأ، ودية العمد إذا قبلت، ودية التغليظ في مثل ما فعل المدلجي بابنه، وهي دية شبه العمد على مذهب من يراه ويقول به. وقد ذكرنا أنه قول أكثر أهل العلم ورواية العراقيين عن مالك. وأبو حنيفة يرى الدية في ذلك مربعة حسب ما ذكرناه عنه. فصل في دية الخطأ فأما دية الخطأ فإنها على أهل الإبل مائة من الإبل على عاقلة القاتل، سنة من رسول الله ﷺ لا اختلاف بين أحد من أهل العلم في ذلك. وتؤخذ في ثلاث سنين، وقيل في أربع سنين. والأول أكثر وهو مذهب مالك. فصل وهذا أمر كان في الجاهلية فأقره النبي ﷺ في الإسلام، ولا يحمله القياس، لأن الأصل كان ألا يحمل أحد جناية أحد لقول الله ﷿: ﴿وَلا تَكْسِبُ كُلُّ نَفْسٍ إِلا عَلَيْهَا وَلا تَزِرُ وَازِرَةٌ وِزْرَ أُخْرَى﴾ [الأنعام: ١٦٤]