Chapter on Retaliation (qiṣāṣ) for Deliberate Wounds and on the Wounds for Which No Retaliation Is Allowed

1. Every wound for which exact retaliation is physically possible and whose infliction is not feared to bring about death is subject to retaliation, provided that the blood relationships of victim and offender are equivalent, as set out in the previous chapter.

2. According to Mālik, the life-threatening wounds for which no retaliation may be taken are the following:
   • the jāʾifa – a penetrating wound that reaches the body cavity;
   • the maʾmūma – a skull wound that pierces the membrane of the brain;
   • the munqilla – a fracture in which a piece of bone is displaced;
   • the muḍḥiḥa – a wound that exposes the bone; and
   • the hāshima – a blow that crushes the bone.

3. There is disagreement, in the reports from Mālik and his companions, about retaliation for a muḍḥiḥa and a munqilla. The more widely transmitted view is that retaliation is allowed for a muḍḥiḥa. A muḍḥiḥa occurs only in the head, specifically at the end of the upper jaw, not the lower. We shall, if God wills, explain the precise meanings of these categories in the chapter on their blood-monies.

4. A fracture of the thigh is considered dangerous because of its proximity to the abdomen. Mālik therefore treats it like a jāʾifa: no retaliation is taken and the penalty is one-half of a full diya (blood-money). The same ruling applies to a broken arm—no retaliation, with one-half diya—and likewise when the thigh or the arm is rendered useless even without a fracture.

   Muḥammad ibn ʿAmr ibn Ḥazm, however, held that retaliation is due for breaking the thigh. No retaliation is taken for a fracture of the collar-bone or of a rib.

5. There is also a divergence of opinion about severing the tongue, whether in whole or in part. Some report Mālik as holding that retaliation is due; others report him as denying it, on the ground that it is virtually impossible to gauge precisely how much may be cut without preventing speech.

6. In all other injuries, retaliation is postponed until the wounded person regains consciousness and his condition stabilises. Retaliation is not carried out before that. If the wound itself proves fatal, the assailant is executed. If the pain of the wound spreads to a part greater than the original injury but later heals, retaliation is carried out for the first wound only.

   If, after retaliation, the wound inflicted on the assailant spreads to the same extent as the victim’s wound had spread, the matter is settled; if it spreads farther, that excess is ignored; but if it spreads less, he must pay the indemnity for the additional harm that had affected the victim.

And if he splits his head with a muḍḥiḥa