lesser injuries, just as it does between free persons, since the parties are equal in status, whether they belong to one master or to different masters. However, the choice between pardon and retaliation belongs to the master of the wounded or slain slave, not to the slave himself. This is also the position of al-Shāfiʿī and his followers. The evidence for its correctness is the saying of Allah, Mighty and Majestic:

“O you who believe, retaliation is prescribed for you in cases of murder: the free person for the free person, and the slave for the slave.” [al-Baqarah: 178], to the end of the verse.

The second opinion is that retaliation does not apply between slaves, either for loss of life or for lesser injuries, just as it does not apply to minors and the insane. This opinion is reported from ʿAbd Allāh ibn Masʿūd and was adopted by a group of the Successors and some Iraqi jurists. It is very far-fetched, however, because minors and the insane are exempt from legal accountability, unlike slaves.

The third opinion is that retaliation applies between slaves for loss of life but not for wounds. This is the position of Abū Hanīfah and his followers. Al-Tahāwī argued in their support on the basis of the hadith narrated by Qatādah, from Abū Nadrah, from ʿImrān ibn Husayn: “A slave belonging to some poor people cut off the ear of a slave belonging to some wealthy people. They came to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, but he did not exact retaliation on their behalf.” He also cited the report narrated from him: “A slave belonging to some wealthy people cut off the ear of a slave belonging to some poor people, but the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, did not prescribe retaliation between them.”

He said: “Had it been obligatory, he would have exacted retaliation on their behalf, for Allah, Mighty and Majestic, says:

‘O you who believe, stand firmly for justice as witnesses for Allah, even against yourselves’ [al-Nisāʾ: 135], up to His words: ‘Whether one is rich or poor, Allah is more worthy of both.’ [al-Nisāʾ: 135]”

He further said: “Regarding a life for a life, we applied the saying of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace: ‘The lives of Muslims are equal in inviolability.’”

Section

As for the hadith, it provides them with no proof. It is possible that he did not exact retaliation on behalf of the poor people because, owing to their poverty, he instructed them to pardon in return for compensation, and they did so. Likewise, he may not have exacted retaliation on behalf of the wealthy people because he encouraged them to pardon, so that retaliation against the poor people’s slave would not diminish his value. That, and Allah knows best, is why their poverty was mentioned in the report. If retaliation is obligatory between slaves for loss of life, it is all the more obligatory for lesser injuries. And Allah knows best.