thirty hiqqah, thirty jadha'ah, and forty khalifah. Reported by Malik in his "Muwatta" (9). The basis for the first [opinion] (10) is what al-Zuhri reported from al-Sa'ib ibn Yazid, who said: The blood money during the time of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) was [paid in] quarters: twenty-five jadha'ah, twenty-five hiqqah, twenty-five bint labun, and twenty-five bint makhad (11). Also, because it is the opinion of Ibn Mas'ud, and because it is a right pertaining to a category of livestock, therefore pregnancy is not considered in it, similar to Zakat and the sacrificial animal (udhiyah).

Section: The khalifah is the pregnant [camel]. The statement of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), "with their offspring in their wombs," is an emphasis. A camel rarely carries a pregnancy unless it is a thaniyyah, which is one that has reached five years of age and has entered the sixth. Any camel that is pregnant is a khalifah and is valid for blood money. It has been said: Only a thaniyyah is valid; because in some versions of the hadith it states: "Forty khalifah, between its thaniyyah age and a bazil." And because all other categories of camels are based on age, so too is the khalifah. The view mentioned by al-Qadi is more appropriate (12); because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) mentioned the term "khalifah" in general, and the khalifah is the pregnant one, which entails that every pregnant camel is valid. If he brought it as a khalifah, and it miscarried before he took possession of it, then he owes its replacement. But if it miscarried after he took possession, it is valid [as payment], because he was absolved of the obligation by handing it over.

Section: If they disagree regarding its pregnancy, the matter is referred to experts, just as it is referred to midwives regarding the pregnancy of a woman. If the guardian receives it, then says: "They were not pregnant, and their bellies were thin [indicating no pregnancy]," and the perpetrator says: "Rather, they gave birth while in your possession," you must look into it. If he took possession of them based on the testimony of the experts, then the statement of the perpetrator is accepted because it is apparent that the experts were correct. If he took possession without their testimony, then the statement of the guardian is accepted because the original state is the absence of pregnancy.

1462 - Issue; he said: (And if the killing is semi-intentional (1), then it is as I have described regarding its [camels'] ages, except that it is upon the 'aqila over three years, one-third each year.)

The total of this is that the discussion regarding the ages for the blood money of semi-intentional killing is the same as the discussion regarding the blood money for intentional killing, in both the disagreement of the two reports concerning it and the disagreement of the scholars regarding it. The discussion on that has already passed, except that it differs from intentional killing in two matters: One of them is that it is upon the 'aqila, according to the manifest view of the school (madhhab). This is also the opinion of al-Sha'bi, al-Nakha'i, al-Hakam, al-Shafi'i, al-Thawri, Ishaq, the People of Opinion (Ashab al-Ra'y), and Ibn al-Mundhir. Ibn Sirin, al-Zuhri, al-Harith al-'Ukli, Ibn Shubruma, Qatadah, and Abu Thawr said: It is upon the killer from his own wealth. Abu Bakr 'Abd al-'Aziz favored this because it is the requirement of an act he intended, so the 'aqila does not bear it, just like pure intentional killing; and because it is an intensified blood money, so it resembles the blood money of intentional killing. This is also how the school of Malik ought to be, because semi-intentional killing, according to him, is from the category of intentional killing. As for us, we rely on what Abu Hurayrah reported, saying: Two women from Hudhayl fought, and one of them threw a stone at the other, killing her and what was in her womb. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) decreed the blood money for the woman be upon her 'aqila. This is agreed upon (2). And because it is a type of killing that does not necessitate retaliation (qisas), its blood money must be upon the 'aqila, like [the case of] error. It differs from pure intentional killing because that is intensified in every respect due to his intending the action and his desiring the killing. An intentional error is intensified in one aspect—which is his intending the action—and mitigated (3) in another aspect—which is that he did not intend the killing (4). Thus, it necessitates its intensification in one aspect, which is the ages [of the camels], and its mitigation in another, which is the 'aqila bearing it and its being deferred. I know of no disagreement among the scholars that it is required to be deferred. This has been reported from 'Umar, 'Ali, and Ibn 'Abbas, may Allah be pleased with them. This is also the opinion of al-Sha'bi, al-Nakha'i, Qatadah, Abu Hashim (5), 'Ubayd Allah (6) ibn 'Umar, Malik, al-Shafi'i, Ishaq, Abu Thawr, and Ibn al-Mundhir. [It has been narrated] (7) from a group of the Khawarij that they said: The blood money is immediate because it is a substitute for destroyed property. However, this has not been transmitted to us from anyone whose disagreement is considered valid. And blood money differs from other...