dinar, or twelve thousand dirhams. This is the old view of al-Shafi'i. In his new view, he said: The value of the camels is mandatory, regardless of how much it reaches, due to the hadith of 'Amr ibn Shu'ayb from 'Umar regarding the valuation of camels. Also, because that which is guaranteed by a type of wealth, its value becomes mandatory, like items with equivalents (dhawat al-amthal). Moreover, if camels suffice when their value is low, they should also be mandatory when their value is high, just as dinars are when they become expensive or cheap. Thus, we should say the same when all camels become expensive. As for if the camels are available at their equivalent price, but this person could not find them because they are in a country other than his, or something similar, then 'Umar valued the blood money in dirhams at twelve thousand and one thousand dinars.
Section: The apparent meaning of al-Khiraqi's statement is that the value of the camels is not considered; rather, whenever they are found according to the stipulated condition, it is mandatory to take them, whether their value is low or high. This is the apparent school of al-Shafi'i. Our companions mentioned that the apparent view of Ahmad's school is that one hundred (camels) are to be taken, with the value of each camel being one hundred and twenty dirhams. If he is not able to do that, he pays twelve thousand dirhams or one thousand dinars; because 'Umar valued the camels for the people of gold at one thousand mithqals, and for the people of silver at twelve thousand, which indicates that this is their value. Also, because these are substitutes for one location, so they must be equal in value, like the equivalent (mithl) and the value (qimah) in the substitution of a loan (qard), and the destroyed items among fungibles (mithliyyat). Our argument is the statement of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him): "In the believing soul, there are one hundred camels." This is absolute (mutlaq), so restricting it contradicts its absoluteness, and thus it is not permissible except with evidence. Furthermore, they were taken during the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) while their value was eight thousand, and 'Umar's statement in his hadith—that camels had become expensive, so he valued them for the people of silver at twelve thousand—is evidence that in times of cheapness, they are of less value than that, and they were indeed taken in the era of
(19) In (B) and (M): "tujzi'" (they suffice). (20) Omitted from (M). (21) In (M): "ithnay" (two). (22) Omitted from the original (al-Asl). (23) In (M): "alfay" (two thousand). (24) Its documentation was mentioned previously on page 5.
