Section: Al-Qadi said: The statement of Ahmad, may Allah have mercy on him, regarding the blackened tooth as having one-third of its blood money is to be understood as applying to a tooth whose benefit has vanished such that the person cannot bite anything with it, or it has crumbled. As for a case where its benefit remains and only its color has changed, then its full blood money is due, regardless of whether its utility has diminished—such as being unable to bite hard objects—or has not, because its benefit remains, so its blood money is full, just like other limbs. The one who blackened it is only liable for a government-determined assessment (hukumah). This is the school of al-Shafi‘i. The correct view in the school of Ahmad is that which conforms to the apparent meaning of his words, due to the apparent nature of the reports, the judgment of ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab, may Allah be pleased with him, the opinion of most scholars, and because its beauty is lost by blackening it; therefore, its full blood money is due from the one who blackened it, just as if one had blackened his face. It is not obligatory upon the one who destroys it to pay more than one-third of its blood money, just as with the withered hand, or as with a tooth that was white but was pulled out and grew back black due to an ailment therein. The Qadi and the followers of al-Shafi‘i acknowledged that its full blood money is not due.

Section: If the teeth of a young child grow in black, then they fall out (thaghara), and then return black, then their blood money is full, because this is a category created in this form, so it is like someone created with a black body and face entirely. If they grew in white at first, then they fell out, and then returned black, the experts should be asked. If they say: The blackness is not due to an ailment or disease, then its full blood money is also due. If they say: It is due to an ailment therein, then the one who pulls it out is liable for one-third of its blood money or a government-determined assessment (hukumah). The Qadi and the followers of al-Shafi‘i have conceded this ruling in this instance, and it serves as a proof against them regarding what they differed upon. It is possible that the ruling is the same if it was black from the beginning of its creation, because an ailment may exist in his mouth from the beginning of his creation; thus, its ruling in reducing its blood money is established, just as if it were an incidental ailment.