1461- Issue: He said: "And if the killing is intentional, it is [incumbent] upon the property of the killer, payable immediately in quarters: twenty-five bint makhad, twenty-five bint labun, twenty-five hiqqah, and twenty-five jadha'ah."

Scholars have reached a consensus that the blood money for intentional killing is mandatory from the property of the killer; the 'aqila (paternal kin) does not bear it. This is the consequence of the fundamental principle that the substitute for destroyed property must be paid by the one who destroyed it, and the penalty for a crime by the perpetrator. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "No perpetrator commits a crime except against his own self." He also said to one of his companions, when he saw his son with him: "Is this your son?" He replied, "Yes." He said: "Indeed, he shall not commit a crime against you, nor shall you commit a crime against him." Furthermore, the cause of the crime is the act of the perpetrator, so it is necessary that he alone bears its burden, just as he alone enjoys its benefit; for if he were to earn something, his earnings would be for him alone, excluding anyone else. This rule has been established in all other crimes and earnings. This principle was only departed from in the case of killing a free person where there is an excuse [for the killer], due to the high amount of the obligation and the perpetrator's usual inability to bear it, alongside the obligation of expiation upon him and the existence of his valid excuse, as a means of mitigation and leniency towards him. As for the intentional killer, he has no excuse, so he does not deserve mitigation, and the meaning necessitating assistance, as found in cases of error, is not present in his case. Once this is established, it is due immediately. This is the view of Malik and al-Shafi'i. Abu Hanifah said: It is due over three years, because it is the blood money for a human, so it should be deferred, like the blood money for semi-intentional killing. Our argument is that what is mandatory for pure intentional killing is immediate, like retaliation (qisas) and the penalty for injuries to the limbs of a slave. It does not resemble semi-intentional killing; for the killer there is excused because he did not intend to kill, and it resulted [from his action] without his choice, so it resembles an error, and this is why the 'aqila bears it.