Sa'id ibn al-Musayyib. Others said: Whatever injury is inflicted upon a slave, it is compensated by what it diminished from his value. The manifest view is that if this were truly the opinion of Ali, Ahmad would not have used any argument other than that alone. However, Abu Hanifa and al-Thawri stated: Regarding whatever obligates blood money in a free person, the owner of the slave has the choice between having him pay his value, in which case the slave becomes the property of the perpetrator, or not requiring him to pay anything, so as not to lead to the meeting of the compensation and the substituted object in one person. It is narrated from Iyas ibn Mu'awiya, regarding one who cuts off the hand of a slave intentionally or gouges out his eye, that he belongs to him, and he owes his price. The basis for this narration is the statement of Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, and we do not know of any opposing view from the Companions. Also, because he is a human being who is guaranteed by retaliation and expiation, his limbs are estimated as in the case of a free person. Furthermore, because his limbs have a fixed estimate derived from the free person, they have a fixed estimate in the slave, similar to the four types of head wounds according to Malik. Whatever is obligatory regarding his estimated wounds, an estimated amount is obligatory for his limbs, as in the case of a free person. According to Abu Hanifa, the statement of Ali applies, and these limbs have a fixed estimate; thus, it is obligatory for them while the master's ownership of the slave remains, just like a single hand and other body parts. Furthermore, because he whose hand is guaranteed by a fixed amount, his two hands are guaranteed by twice that amount without the perpetrator owning him, as with a free person. Their argument that the compensation and the substituted object are joined for one person is not correct, because the value here is the compensation for the limb alone. If it were compensation for the whole, then the compensation for one hand would be compensation for half of him, and the compensation for nine fingers would be compensation for nine-tenths of him, and the matter is to the contrary. The female slave is like the slave in this regard, except that she is compared to a free woman. When it reaches one-third of her value, it is possible that her injury is reduced to half, so for three fingers there would be three-tenths of her value, and for four fingers one-fifth, just as a woman is equal to a man in injuries up to one-third