The remainder of the blood money is due immediately from the wealth of his partners; because the deferment of blood money only occurs in cases where the 'aqila (tribal solidarity group) bears it. This, however, is not borne by the 'aqila, because they do not bear what is less than one-third, and the amount binding upon each one is less than one-third. Abu Bakr mentioned another report regarding this: that the 'aqila does bear it, because the crime is a single act that necessitates blood money exceeding one-third. The correct view is the first one, because each one of them is distinct with respect to the consequence of his own action, rather than the action of his partners. The bearing of the 'aqila was only legislated as a mitigation for the perpetrator in matters that are difficult and burdensome, and what is less than one-third is minor, as we previously explained, and the amount that is binding upon each one is less than one-third. As for his statement that it is a single act, we say: rather, they are multiple acts, for the act of each one is different from the act of the other, and only the consequence of all of them is one; thus it resembles the case where each of them inflicts a wound and the soul expires due to all of them together. Once this is established, liability relates to the one who pulled the ropes and threw the stone, rather than the one who placed it in the tray or held the wood, in consideration of the direct perpetrator (mubashir), just like one who placed an arrow in a man's bow and the owner of the bow shot it; the liability is upon the shooter, not the one who placed it.

Section: If a man falls into a well and another falls upon him and kills him, he is liable for his blood money, because he killed him and thus became liable for him, just as if he had thrown a stone upon him. Then, it is considered: if he intended to throw himself upon him, and it is something that usually kills, then retaliation (qisas) is due upon him. If it is something that does not usually kill, it is quasi-intentional (shibh 'amd). If it happened by mistake, then the blood money is upon his 'aqila in a mitigated form. If the second person dies by his fall upon the first, his blood is void (hadar), because he died due to his own action. Ali ibn Rabah al-Lakhmi narrated that a man was leading a blind man, and they both fell into a well; the sighted person fell, and the blind man fell on top of the sighted person and killed him, so Umar decreed the blood money of the sighted person upon the blind man.