Hamba Allah

Hadith Imam Malik about Blood-Money

Book 43 : Hadith 43.16.8

Yahya related to me from Malik from Hisham ibn Urwa that his father said, "The tribe is not obliged to pay blood-money for intentional murder. They pay blood-money for accidental killing."

Yahya related to me from Malik that Ibn Shihab said, "The precedent of the sunna is that the tribe are not liable for any blood-money of an intentional killing unless they wish that."

Yahya related to me from Malik from Yahya ibn Said the same as that.

Malik said that Ibn Shihab said, "The precedent of the sunna in the intentional murder is that when the relatives of the murdered person relinquish retaliation, the blood-money is owed by the murderer from his own property unless the tribe helps him with it willingly."

Malik said, "What is done in our community is that the blood-money is not obliged against the tribe until it has reached a third of the full amount and upwards. Whatever reaches a third is against the tribe, and whatever is below a third, is against the property of the one who did the injury."

Malik said, "The way of doing things about which there is no dispute among us, in the case of someone who has the blood-money accepted from him in intentional murder or in any injury in which there is retaliation, is that that blood-money is not due from the tribe unless they wish it. The blood-money for that is from the property of the murderer or the injurer if he has property. If he does not have any property, it is a debt against him, and none of it is owed by the tribe unless they wish."

Malik said, "The tribe does not pay blood-money to anyone who injures himself, intentionally or accidentally. This is the opinion of the people of fiqh in our community. I have not heard that anyone has made the tribe liable for any blood-money incurred by intentional acts. Part of what is well-known of that is that Allah, the Blessed, and the Exalted, said in His Book, 'Whoever has something pardoned him by his brother, should follow it with what is accepted and pay it with good will' (Sura 2 ayat 178) The commentary on that - in our view - and Allah knows best, is that whoever gives his brother something of the blood-money, should follow it with what is accepted and pay him with good will."

Malik spoke about a child who had no property and a woman who had no property. He said, "When one of them causes an injury below a third of the blood-money, it is taken on behalf of the child and woman from their personal property, if they have property from which it may be taken. If not, the injury which each of them has caused is a debt against them. The tribe does not have to pay any of it and the father of a child is not liable for the blood-money of an injury caused by the child and he is not responsible for it."

Malik said, "The way of doing things in our community about which there is no dispute, is that when a slave is killed, the value for him is that of the day on which he was killed. The tribe of the murderer is not liable for any of the value of the slave, great or small. That is the responsibility of the one who struck him from his own personal property as far as it covers. If the value of the slave is the blood-money or more, that is against him in his property. That is because the slave is a certain type of goods."

Book 43 : Hadith 43.17.9

Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab that Umar ibn al-Khattab demanded of the people at Mina, "If anyone has knowledge of blood-money, let him inform me." Ad-Dahhak ibn Sufyan al-Kilabi stood up and said, "The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, wrote to me that the wife of Ashyam ad-Dibabi inherited from the blood-money of her husband." Umar ibn al-Khattab said to him, "Go into the tent until I come to you." When Umar ibn al-Khattab came in, ad-Dahhak told him about it and Umar ibn al-Khattab gave a decision based on that.

Ibn Shihab said, "The killing of Ashyam was accidental."

Book 43 : Hadith 43.17.10

Malik related to me from Yahya ibn Said from Amr ibn Shuayb that a man of the Banu Mudlij called Qatada threw a sword at his son and it struck his thigh. The wound bled profusely and he died. Suraqa ibn Jusham came to Umar ibn al-Khattab and mentioned that to him Umar said to him, "At the watering place of Qudayd count one hundred and twenty camels and wait until I come to you." When Umar ibn al-Khattab came to him, he took thirty four-year-old camels, thirty five-year-old camels, and forty pregnant camels from them. Then he said, "Where is the brother of the slain man?" He said, "Here." He said, "Take them. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, 'The killer gets nothing.' "

Malik said that he had heard that Said ibn al-Musayyab and Sulayman ibn Yasar were asked, "Does one deal more harshly in taking the blood-money in the sacred month?" They said, "No. But it is increased in it because of violating the month." It was said to Said, "Does one increase for the wound as one increases for the life?" He said, "Yes."

Malik added, "I think that they meant the same as what Umar ibn al-Khattab did with respect to the blood-money of the Mudliji when he struck his son." (i.e. giving 120 camels instead of 100).

Book 43 : Hadith 43.17.11

11 Malik related to me from Yahya ibn Said from Urwa ibn az-Zubayr that a man of the Ansar called Uhayha ibn al-Julah had a young paternal uncle who was younger than him and who was living with his maternal uncles. Uhayha took him and killed him. His maternal uncles said, "We brought him up from a baby to a youth till he stood firm on his feet, and we have had the right of a man taken from us by his paternal uncle." Urwa said, "For that reason a killer does not inherit from the one he killed."

Malik said, "The way of doing things about which there is no dispute is that the intentional murderer does not inherit anything of the blood-money of the person he has murdered or any of his property. He does not stop anyone who has a share of inheritance from inheriting. The one who kills accidentally does not inherit anything of the blood-money and there is dispute as to whether or not he inherits from the dead person's property because there is no suspicion that he killed him for his inheritance and in order to take his property. I prefer that he inherit from the dead person's property and not inherit from the blood-money."