among his own people, the prohibition of killing is not hidden from him, and he is not excused for his action. Whenever the slave knows the prohibition of killing, retaliation is upon him, and his master shall be disciplined for ordering that which led to the killing, with whatever the Imam deems appropriate in terms of imprisonment and discretionary punishment (ta'zir). If he was unaware of its gravity, then retaliation is upon his master, and the slave shall be disciplined. Ahmad said: He is whipped and disciplined. Abu Talib reported from him, saying: The master shall be killed, and the slave shall be imprisoned until he dies, because the slave is the master's whip and sword. This is what 'Ali and Abu Hurayra said. 'Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) said: He shall be consigned to prison. Among those who held this general view is Al-Shafi'i. Among those who said that the master shall be killed are 'Ali and Abu Hurayra. Qatada said: Both of them shall be killed. Sulayman ibn Musa said: The commander shall not be killed, but rather his hands [shall be restrained], and he shall be punished and imprisoned, because he did not personally commit the killing and did not force it, so retaliation is not incumbent upon him, just as if the slave knew the gravity of the killing. Our evidence is that if the slave is unaware of the gravity of the killing, he believes it is permissible, and that is a doubt (shubha) that prevents retaliation, just as if he believed it was game and shot at it, and it turned out to be a human. Furthermore, the wisdom of retaliation is deterrence and restraint, and this is not achieved in the case of one who believes in its permissibility. When it is not incumbent upon him, it becomes incumbent upon the master, because he is an instrument for him. It is not possible to impose retaliation upon the slave, so it becomes incumbent upon the one who caused it, just as if he had set a snake or a dog upon him, or threw him into a lion's pit and he ate him. This differs from the case where he knows the gravity of the killing, for then retaliation is upon the slave, because it is possible to impose it upon him, and he is the direct agent, so the rule of the commander is severed, like the pusher in relation to the digger [of a well]. The master shall receive discipline for his transgression in causing the killing.

Section: If he orders a child who does not possess discernment, a madman, or a foreigner who does not know the gravity of killing, and he kills, the ruling on it is [the same as the ruling on the slave]: the commander is killed, not the direct agent. If he orders him to commit adultery or theft, the legal penalty (hadd) is not incumbent upon the commander, because the legal penalty is not incumbent except upon the direct agent, while retaliation is incumbent through causation, which is why it is incumbent upon the coerced person and the witnesses in cases of retaliation.

Section: If the Sultan orders a man and he kills another, if the killer knows that he