and thus a full diya is mandatory, just like the ear of the deaf, the nose of the anosmic, and what they have cited is invalid; for the eyebrow repels sweat from the eye and disperses it, and the eyelash repels [harm] from it and protects it, so it functions in the manner of eyelids. What they have cited is invalidated by the principle upon which we made our analogy, and it differs from a paralyzed hand, for its beauty is not complete.

Section: For one of the eyebrows, there is half the diya, because for every pair of things there is a diya, so for one of them is half of it, just like the two hands. For some of it, or the loss of a portion of the mentioned hair, the diya is in proportion to its share, estimated by measurement, just like the two ears and the gristle of the nose. There is no difference regarding these hairs between whether they are thick or thin, beautiful or ugly, or whether they belong to a child or an adult; because for all other members for which a diya is mandatory, the situation does not differ based on that. If he leaves part of his beard that has no beauty, or [part of others] of the hairs, there are two opinions; one of them is that compensation is taken in proportion, because it is a location where a portion is mandatory according to its share, so it resembles the ear and the gristle of the nose. The second is that the full diya is mandatory, because he has removed the entire intended purpose, so it resembles the case where he removes the light of both eyes; and because his act of aggression might necessitate the removal of the remainder, due to it increasing the ugliness beyond the loss of the whole, thus his act of aggression becomes a cause for the loss of the whole, so it necessitates its diya, just as if he had destroyed it through the spreading of the act, or as if he needed, for the treatment of a head wound, something that resulted in the loss of the light of his eye.

Section: The diya is not mandatory for any of these hairs except upon their loss in a manner where there is no hope of their return, such as if he pours hot water on his head, causing the hair follicle to be destroyed so that it is completely uprooted in a way that it will not return. If there is hope for its return within a certain period, it is awaited. If the hair returns before the diya is taken, it is not mandatory; if it returns after it is taken, he returns it. The ruling regarding this is like the ruling regarding the loss of hearing and sight, in terms of what is expected to return and what is not.

Section: There is no retaliation (qisas) for any of these hairs, because destroying them only occurs through an act of aggression against