Malik said about an adult and a child when they murder a man together, The adult is killed and the child pays half the full blood-money.

Malik said, It is like that with a freeman and a slave when they murder a slave. The slave is killed and the freeman pays half of his value.

Malik said, One does not act on this.

Yahya related to me from Malik that Ibn Shihab, Sulayman ibn Yasar, and Rabia ibn Abi Abd ar-Rahman said, The blood-money of manslaughter is twenty yearlings, twenty two-year-olds, twenty male two-year-olds, twenty four-year-olds, and twenty five-year-olds.

Malik said, The generally agreed on way with us is that there is no retaliation against children. Their intention is accidental. The hudud are not obliged for them if they have not yet reached puberty. If a child kills someone it is only accidentally. Had a child and an adult killed a free man accidentally, each of them pays half the full blood-money.

Malik said, A person who kills someone accidentally pays blood-money with his property and there is no retaliation against him. That money is like anything else from the dead man's property and his debt is paid with it and he is allowed to make a bequest from it. If he has a total property of which the blood-money is a third and then the blood-money is relinquished, that is permitted to him. If all the property he has is his blood-money, he is permitted to relinquish a third of it and to make that a bequest.

Malik said, If that part of the body has a specific blood-money mentioned by the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, it is according to what the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, specified. If it is part of what does not have a specific blood-money for it mentioned by the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and if there is no previous sunna about it or specific blood-money, one uses ijtihad about it.

Malik said, There is no blood-money for an accidental bodily injury when the wound heals and returns to its form. If there is any scar or mark in that, ijtihad is used about it except for the belly-wound. There is a third of the blood-money of a life for it.

Malik said, There is no blood-money for the wound which splinters a bone in the body, and it is like the wound to the body which lays bare the bone.

Malik said, The generally agreed on way of doing things in our community is that when the doctor performs a circumcision and cuts off the glans, he must pay the full blood-money. That is because it is an accident which the tribe is responsible for, and the full blood money is payable for all that in which a doctor errs or exceeds, when it is not intentional.

Yahya related to me from Malik that Ibn Shihab and also Urwa ibn az-Zubayr said the same as Said ibn al-Musayyab said about a woman. Her blood-money from a man is the same up to a third of the blood-money of a man. If what she is owed exceeds a third of the blood-money of the man, she is given up to half of the blood-money of a man.

Malik said, The explanation of that is that she has blood-money for a head wound that lays bare the bone and one that splinters the bone and for what is less than the brain wound and the belly wound and the like of that of those which obliges a third of the blood-money or more. If the amount owed her exceeds that, her blood-money in that is half of the blood-money of a man.

Yahya related to me from Malik that he heard Ibn Shihab say, The precedent of the sunna when a man injures a woman is that he must pay the blood-money for that injury and there is no retaliation against him.

Malik said, That is an accidental injury, when a man strikes a woman and hits with a blow what he did not intend, for instance, if he struck her with a whip and cut her eye open and the like of that.

Malik said about a woman who has a husband and children who are not from her paternal relatives or her people, that since he is from another tribe, there is no blood-money against her husband for her criminal action, nor any against her children if they are not from her people, nor any against her maternal brothers when they are not from her paternal relations or her people. These are entitled to her inheritance but only the paternal relations have paid blood-money from since the time of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. Until today it is like that with the mawla of a woman. The inheritance they leave goes to the children of the woman even if they are not from her tribe, but the blood-money of the criminal act of the mawla is only against her tribe.

Yahya related to me from Malik that Rabia ibn Abi Abd ar-Rahman said, The slave of fair complexion and excellence is estimated at fifty dinars or six hundred dirhams. The blood-money of a free muslim woman is five hundred dinars or six thousand dirhams.

Malik said, The blood-money of the foetus of a free woman is a tenth of her blood-money. The tenth is fifty dinars or six hundred dirhams.

Malik said, I have not heard anyone dispute that there is no slave in compensation for the foetus until it leaves its mother's womb and falls still-born from her womb .

Malik said, I heard that if the foetus comes out of its mother's womb alive and then dies, the full blood-money is due for it.

Malik said, The foetus is not alive unless it cries at birth. If it comes out of its mother's womb and cries out and then dies, the complete blood-money is due for it. We think that the slave-girl's foetus has a tenth of the price of the slave-girl.

Malik said, When a woman murders a man or woman, and the murderess is pregnant, retaliation is not taken against her until she has given birth. If a woman who is pregnant is killed intentionally or unintentionally, the one who killed her is not obliged to pay anything for her foetus. If she is murdered, then the one who killed her is killed and there is no blood-money for her foetus. If she is killed accidentally, the tribe obliged to pay on behalf of her killer pays her blood-money, and there is no blood-money for the foetus.

Yahya related to me, Malik was asked about the foetus of the christian or jewish woman which was aborted. He said, 'I think that there is a tenth of the blood-money of the mother for it.'

Yahya related to me from Malik that he asked Ibn Shihab about the one-eyed man who gouged out the eye of a healthy person. Ibn Shihab said, If the healthy person wants to take retaliation from him, he can have his retaliation. If he prefers, he has blood-money of one thousand dinars, twelve thousand dirhams.

Yahya related to me from Malik that he heard that full blood-money was payable for both of a pair of anything in a man that occurred in pairs, and the tongue had full blood-money. The ears, when their hearing departed, had full blood-money, whether or not they were cut off, and a man's penis had full blood-money and the testicles had full blood-money.

Yahya related to me from Malik that he heard that the breasts of a woman had full blood-money.

Malik said, The least of that are the eyebrows and a man's breasts.

Malik said, What is done in our community when a man is injured in his extremities to an extent that obliges payment of more than the amount of his full blood-money, is that it is his right. If his hands, feet, and eyes are all injured, he has three full blood-moneys.

Malik said about the sound eye of a one-eyed man when it is accidentally gouged out, The full blood-money is payable for it.

Yahya said, Malik was asked about cutting off the lower lid of the eye and the bone around the eye. He said, 'There is only ijtihad in that unless the vision of the eye is impaired. He is entitled to an amount that is compatible to the extent the vision of the eye has been impaired.

Yahya said that Malik said, What is done in our community about removing the bad eye of a one-eyed man when it has already been blinded and still remains there in its place and the paralyzed hand when it is cut off, is that there is only ijtihad in that, and there is no prescribed blood-money.

Malik said, What is done in our community is that the head wound with splinters has fifteen camels. He explained, The head wound with splinters is that from which pieces of bone fly off and which does not reach the brain. It can be in the head or the face.

Malik said, The generally agreed on way of doing things in our community, is that there is no retaliation for a wound to the brain or a belly wound, and Ibn Shihab has said, 'There is no retaliation for a wound to the brain.'

Malik explained, The wound to the brain is what pierces the bones to the brain. This type of wound only occurs in the head. It is that which reaches the brain when the bones are pierced.

Malik said, What is done in our community is that there is no blood-money paid on any head wound less than one which lays bare the skull. Blood-money is payable only for the head wound that bares the bone and what is worse than that. That is because the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, stopped at the head wound which bared the bone in his letter to Amr ibn Hazm. He made it five camels. The imams, past and present, have not made any blood-money payable for injuries less than the head wound which bares the bone.

Yahya related to me from Malik from Yahya ibn Said, that Said ibn al-Musayyab said, For every piercing wound in any of the organs or limbs of the body, one third of the blood-money of that limb is payable.

Malik related to me, Ibn Shihab did not think and nor do I, that there is a generally agreed on way of doing things regarding a piercing wound in any of the organs or limbs of the body, but I think that there is ijtihad in the case. The imam uses ijtihad in it, and there is no generally agreed on way of doing things in our community about it.

Malik said, What is done in our community about the wound to the brain and the wound which splinters the bone, and the wound that bares the bone is that they apply only to the head and face. Whatever of that occurs in the body only has ijtihad in it.

Malik said, I do not think the lower jaw and the nose are part of the head in their injury because they are separate bones, and except for them the head is one bone.

Yahya related to me from Malik from Rabia ibn Abi Abd ar-Rahman that Abdullah ibn az-Zubayr allowed retaliation for a head wound which splintered the bone.

Malik said, What is done in our community about all the fingers of the hand being cut off is that its blood-money is complete. That is because when five fingers are cut, their blood-money is the blood-money of the hand: fifty camels. Each finger has ten camels.

Malik said, The reckoning of the fingers is thirty-three dinars for each fingertip, and that is three and a third shares of camels.

Yahya related to me from Malik that Yahya ibn Said heard Said ibn al-Musayyab say, ''Umar ibn al-Khattab decided on a camel for each molar, and Muawiya ibn Abi Sufyan decided on five camels for each molar.

Said ibn al-Musayyab said, The blood-money is less in the judgement of Umar ibn al-Khattab and more in the judgement of Muawiya. Had it been me, I would have made it two camels for each molar. That is the fair blood-money, and every one who strives with ijtihad is rewarded.

Yahya related to me from Malik from Yahya ibn Said that Said ibn al-Musayyab used to say,' 'When a tooth is struck and becomes black, there is complete blood-money for it. If it falls out after it becomes black, there is also the complete blood-money for it.