Abu Hanifa, and Abu Thawr; based on the saying of Allah the Almighty: {And if you punish, punish with an equivalent of that with which you were punished} (5). And His saying, Glorified be He: {So whoever has assaulted you, then assault him in the same way that he has assaulted you} (6). And because the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, crushed (7) the head of a Jew for having crushed (8) the head of a girl from the Ansar between two stones (9). And because Allah the Almighty said: {And the eye for the eye} (10). And this [person] has plucked out his eye, so it is required that his eye be plucked out, due to the verse. It was also narrated from the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, that he said: "Whoever burns, we burn him; and whoever drowns, we drown him" (11). And because retaliation is founded upon equality, and its very term implies it, so it is necessary (12) that it be satisfied from him with the like of what he did, just as if someone other than him had struck the neck. As for the hadith: "There is no retaliation except with the sword," Ahmad said: Its chain of narration is not sound.

The second state is that the matter results in blood money, whether by the guardian's pardon (13), or the act being a mistake, or a quasi-intentional act, or otherwise. In that case, the requirement is one blood money payment. This is the apparent view of the school of al-Shafi'i. Some of them said: The blood money for the cut-off limbs and the blood money for the life are both due; because when the spread (14) of the wound was interrupted by killing him, it became like an established [injury], so it resembles the case where someone else killed him; and for this reason, retaliation for it does not lapse. Our argument is that he is a killer before the wound has become established, so the indemnity (arsh) for the wound is subsumed into the indemnity for the life, as if it had spread to his life. Furthermore, retaliation for limbs, according to one of the two narrations, is not required, and even if it were required, retaliation does not resemble blood money; because the spread of the wound does not cause retaliation for it to lapse, but it does cause its blood money to lapse.