Section: Expiation is mandatory for the killing of a protected (dhimmi) non-believer, whether he is a dhimmi or someone granted safe conduct (musta'man). This is the position of most scholars. Al-Hasan and Malik said: There is no expiation for it, due to His saying, the Almighty: "And whoever kills a believer by mistake - then the freeing of a believing slave," the implication of which is that there is no expiation for other than a believer. Our argument is His saying, the Almighty: "But if he was from a people between whom and you is a treaty, then a compensation payment delivered to his family and the freeing of a believing slave" [Qur'an 4:92]. The dhimmi has a treaty, and this is an explicit text (mantuq) that takes precedence over an implication derived from a context (dalil al-khitab). Furthermore, he is a human being killed unjustly, so expiation is mandatory for his killing, like the Muslim.

Section: If a boy or an insane person kills, expiation is mandatory from their assets, and likewise for a non-believer. This is the position of Al-Shafi'i. Abu Hanifa said: There is no expiation for any of them, because it is a pure act of worship, mandated by the Shari'a, thus it is not mandatory for the boy, the insane person, or the non-believer, like prayer and fasting. Our argument is that it is a financial right attached to killing, so it is attached to them, like blood money. It differs from fasting and prayer because those are two bodily acts of worship, while this is financial, resembling the maintenance of relatives. As for the expiation of an oath, it is not mandatory for a boy or an insane person because it relates to speech, and they have no speech, whereas this relates to action, and their action is established and has rendered them liable for damages. What does not relate to speech can relate to action; by evidence that manumission relates to their intercourse, not to their manumission through their speech. As for the non-believer, it is mandatory upon him, and it serves as a punishment for him, like the hadd punishments.

Section: Whoever kills a Muslim in the Abode of War (Dar al-Harb) believing him to be a non-believer, or shoots towards the ranks of the non-believers and hits a Muslim among them and kills him, he is subject to expiation, due to His saying, the Almighty: "But if he was from a people at war with you and he was a believer, then [only] the freeing of a believing slave" [Qur'an 4:92].

Section: The implication of Al-Khiraqi’s speech is that every permissible killing has no expiation, such as killing a combatant (harbi), a rebel (baghi), an adulterer who has been married (muhsan), and killing by way of retaliation (qisas) or as a hadd punishment; because it is a commanded killing, and expiation is not