Its form remains like the form of a healthy one. There is a difference in the narration from Ahmad concerning both of them, and concerning the blackened tooth; according to one narration, for each one of them is one-third of its blood money. This was narrated from ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab and Mujahid. Ishaq also held this view. From Zayd ibn Thabit, regarding the non-seeing eye, it is one hundred dinars. The third narration from Ahmad is that for each one of them there is a government-determined assessment (hukumah). This is the position of Masruq, al-Zuhri, Malik, al-Shafi‘i, Abu Thawr, al-Nu‘man, and Ibn al-Mundhir; because it is not possible to mandate a full blood money, given that its benefit has been lost, and it is not a determined amount, so a government-determined assessment (hukumah) is required, like in the case of an extra hand. As for us, we rely on what ‘Amr ibn Shu‘ayb narrated from his father, from his grandfather, who said: The Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) judged regarding the sightless eye that remains in its place to be one-third of the blood money, and in the case of the withered hand if it is cut off, one-third of its blood money, and in the case of the blackened tooth if it is pulled out, one-third of its blood money. Al-Nasa’i narrated it, and Abu Dawud extracted it, concerning the eye alone in a summarized form. The statement of ‘Umar, may Allah be pleased with him, was narrated by Qatadah from Khilas, from ‘Abd Allah ibn Buraydah, from Yahya ibn Ya‘mur, from Ibn ‘Abbas, that ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him, judged in the case of the sightless eye if it has collapsed, the withered hand if it is cut off, and the blackened tooth if it is broken, to be one-third of the blood money for each one of them. And also because it is complete in form, so there is a determined amount for it, like the healthy one. Their statement: "It is not possible to mandate a determined amount," is refuted; for we have already mentioned the assessment and explained it.