not authentic. As for the hadith of Umar, it was at a time when the blood money was eight thousand, so he mandated four thousand for it, which is half. Evidence of this is what Amr ibn Shu'ayb narrated from his father, from his grandfather, who said: "The value of the blood money during the time of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) was eight hundred dinars or eight thousand dirhams, and the blood money of the People of the Book on that day was half." This is an explanation and clarification that removes ambiguity; it contains a synthesis of the hadiths, thus it serves as evidence for us. Even if it were not so, the statement of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) would take precedence over the statement of Umar and others without question. Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) used to abandon his own opinion and act upon a Sunnah of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) whenever it reached him, so how could it be permissible for anyone to argue using his opinion to abandon the statement of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)! As for what the others argued with, the authentic version of the hadith of Amr ibn Shu'ayb is what we have narrated, which the Imams recorded in their books, rather than what they narrated. As for the statements of the Companions they narrated, a contrary view has also been narrated from them, so we interpret their statements regarding mandating full blood money as being by way of discretionary punishment (ta'zir/taghliz). Ahmad said: Uthman only increased the blood money for him because it was intentional, so when he waived the retaliation (qisas), he increased the penalty for him. The same applies to the hadith of Mu'awiyah, and similar to this is what was narrated from Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) when a slave of Hatib slaughtered the camel of a man from the Muzaynah tribe. Umar said to Hatib: "I see that you are starving them; I will certainly impose a fine on you that will be burdensome for you." So he fined him double its value.

As for the blood money of their women, it is half of their [men's] blood money; we know of no disagreement regarding this. Ibn al-Mundhir said: The scholars have reached a consensus that the blood money of a woman is half the blood money of a man. Because when the blood money of Muslim women is half that of their men, likewise the women of the People of the Book have [blood money] half that of their men.

Section: Their injuries are treated like their blood money, just as the injuries of Muslims are treated like their blood money, and their blood money is increased due to the convergence of sanctity, for those who hold the view of increasing the blood money of Muslims [as the increase in the blood money of Muslims]. Harb said: I asked Abu Abd Allah: "If a Dhimmi is killed in the Sacred Precinct (Haram)?" He said: "It is also increased beyond its [original] amount, just as it is increased for a Muslim." al-Athram said: It was said to Abu Abd Allah: "If a crime was committed against a Magian regarding his eye or his hand?" He said: "It shall be calculated according to his blood money, just as the Muslim is treated by calculation, so too is this." It was said: "If he severed his hand?" He said: "[It is] half of his blood money."