a time passes in which its like would return, but it does not return. If he extracts the tooth of one who has already reached the stage of 'thughr', its blood money is immediately due, because the apparent reality is that it will not return. If it does return, the blood money is not due, and if he has already taken it, he must return it. This is what the scholars of opinion (Ahl al-Ra'y) said. Malik said: He does not return anything, because the habit is that it does not return, so whenever it returns, it is a renewed gift from Allah the Exalted, so what became due to him by the extraction of his tooth is not dropped thereby. From al-Shafi'i, there are two views like the two schools. Our argument is that the likeness of what was extracted has returned in its place, so nothing was due to him, just like the one who has not reached the stage of 'thughr'. If it returns deficient or deformed, its ruling is the same as the tooth of a child when it returns, according to what we mentioned. If he extracted the tooth of one who had not reached the stage of 'thughr', and a period passes during which there is despair of its return, and it was judged that the blood money is due, then it returns after that, the blood money is dropped and must be returned if it was taken, just like the tooth of an adult when it returns.

Section: The blood money for a tooth is due for what appears of it from the gum, because that is what is called a 'tooth' (sinn), while that which is in the gum is called a 'root' (sinkh). Thus, if the tooth is broken, then another comes and extracts the root, there is blood money for the tooth, and a discretionary penalty for the root, just as if someone cut a man's fingers, then another cut his palm. If the first one extracted it with its root, nothing more than its blood money is due, just as if he cut the hand from its wrist. If he did that in two instances—breaking the tooth and then returning to extract the root—he owes its blood money and a discretionary penalty, because its blood money became due with the first, and then a discretionary penalty became due upon him with the second, just as if someone else did it. Likewise if he cut the fingers and then cut the palm. If he breaks some of the visible part, there is a portion of the tooth's blood money proportional to it. If half is gone, half the compensation (arsh) is due, and if one-third is gone, one-third is due. If another comes and breaks the remainder of it, he owes the remainder of the compensation. If the second extracts its remainder with its root, we look: if the first broke it horizontally, the second owes nothing for the root, because it is subordinate to what he extracted from the visible part of the tooth, so it becomes as if the first cut a phalanx from each of his fingers, then the second cut his hand from the wrist. If the first broke half the tooth longitudinally without its root, then the second came and extracted the remainder with the entire root, he owes the blood money for the remaining half, and a discretionary penalty for the half of the root that remained when the first broke it, just as if the first cut two fingers from a hand, then the second came and cut the entire palm. If the second and the victim differ regarding what the first extracted, the word of the victim is accepted, because the default is the integrity of the tooth. If the gum is exposed regarding a portion of the tooth, the blood money is for the amount that is typically visible, not what was exposed contrary to custom. If they differ in the amount of the visible part, it is assessed by its peers. If it has nothing to be assessed by, and it is not possible for experts to know it, the word of the perpetrator is accepted, because the default is the release of his liability.

Section: If he extracts a loose tooth due to old age or illness, and its benefits remain—from chewing and preserving food and saliva—its blood money is due. Likewise, if some of its benefits are gone and some remain, its blood money is complete because its beauty and some of its benefits remain, just like a diseased hand or the hand of an elderly person. If all its benefits are gone, it is like a paralyzed hand, according to what we will mention, if Allah the Exalted wills. If he extracts a tooth that has a disease or decay (akilah), if none of its parts are gone, the blood money for a healthy tooth is due, because it is like a diseased hand. If some of its parts have fallen, its blood money is reduced by the amount of what is gone from it, and the remainder is due. If one of his front teeth is short, its blood money is reduced by the amount of its deficiency, just as if it were reduced by breaking it.

Section: If a perpetrator commits an injury against his tooth, and it becomes loose and grows longer than the teeth, and it is said that it will return to what it was within a certain period, it is awaited. If it goes away and falls out, there is due...