If the animal belongs to the class that is ridden or used for carrying loads, the offender must pay whatever loss in price the injury has caused, no matter how great—unless the assault has eliminated most of the animal’s usefulness, in which case, as noted earlier, there are two opinions.

If a free person deliberately wounds a slave, he is liable for the reduction in the slave’s market value caused by any intentional act—be it the amputation of a hand or foot, the gouging of an eye, or any other injury—except in four specific wounds. For these four, fixed blood-money amounts are owed, taken as percentages of the slave’s value, just as they are taken from the full diya of a free man:
• A mudiḥa (a head wound that exposes the bone): one half of one tenth of the slave’s value.
• A munqilla (a displaced fracture): one tenth and a half of one tenth of his value.
• A maʾmūma (a head wound that reaches the membrane): one third of his value.
• A jāʾifah (a wound that penetrates a body cavity): one third of his value.
Thus, in these four cases, the proportion taken from a slave’s value matches the proportion taken from a free man’s diya. For all other injuries the offender pays only the amount by which the slave’s price has fallen—unless he cuts off the hand of a skilled craftsman, in which case he must pay the slave’s full value and, according to one report, the slave thereby becomes free. A second report from Mālik, however, states that the slave does not become free, for the mutilation did not occur while he was the property of the attacker.

If the slave is merely a domestic servant with no craft, the liability for his hand—or any other limb—is limited to the decrease in his value, except in the four wounds just mentioned. Mālik expressed two views concerning a jāʾifah that leaves a lasting blemish: on one occasion he held that something should be added to the standard one-third of the value because of the disfigurement, and on another he held that nothing should be added beyond the one-third.

Should a slave be wounded—whether intentionally or by mistake—and the wound heals leaving no blemish, nothing is payable. When a free person kills a slave, he must pay the slave’s full value, whatever that may be, even if it exceeds the diya of a free man; in the case of intentional homicide the payment comes out of the killer’s own wealth.