And others among our scholars said: There is Qasama (oath-taking procedure) in this, and this is the view of al-Shafi'i; because Lawth (the strong indication) is not limited to enmity according to them. Accordingly, it is permissible to file a claim against a group. Thus, if a claim is brought against a group, it is incumbent upon each of them to take fifty oaths. Some of our scholars said: The oaths are divided among them according to shares, like their division among the claimants, except that here they are divided equally, because the defendants are equal in it, so they are like the children of the deceased. Al-Shafi'i has two statements, similar to the two views. The evidence for this view is the statement of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him): "The Jews will exonerate you with fifty oaths." In one wording, he said: "They will swear fifty oaths for you and be absolved of his blood." And because they are one of the two disputing parties in the Qasama, the oaths fall upon them according to their number, just like the claimants. Malik said: Fifty men from among the defendants shall take fifty oaths. If they do not reach fifty men, it is turned back upon those who swore among them until they complete fifty oaths. If no one is found to swear except the one who was sued, he alone shall swear fifty oaths, due to the statement of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him): "The Jews will exonerate you with fifty oaths." As for us, these are oaths by which each person absolves himself of the killing, so fifty were incumbent upon each one, just as if a murder were alleged against each one individually; and because the defendant is not absolved in the case of participation except by what would absolve him in the case of being alone, and because each one of them swears to something other than what his companion swore to, unlike the claimants, for their oaths are concerning one thing, and therefore, combining them does not necessitate combining what differs in its meaning and objective.

1527 - Issue: He said: (And it is the same whether the victim is a Muslim or an infidel, free or a slave, if the victim is one for whom the defendant would be killed if the killing were proven against him; because the Qasama necessitates the Qisas [retaliation], unless the guardians wish to accept the Diya [blood money]).

As for when the victim is a free Muslim, there is no disagreement in this, regardless of whether the defendant is a Muslim or an infidel, for the basis of the Qasama is the story of Abdullah ibn Sahl when he was killed in Khaybar, and the Jews were accused.