Mujahid. Some of the companions of al-Shafi‘i said: This is what the school of al-Shafi‘i necessitates; because he has taken away an intended benefit, so the blood money is due, just as if he had taken away his sexual intercourse, or as if he had severed his testicles or crushed them. It is possible that the full blood money is not due; because he has not taken away the entire benefit.
1495 - Issue: He said: (And for the penis is the blood money).
The scholars are in consensus that the blood money is due for the penis. In the letter of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) to ‘Amr ibn Hazm: "And for the penis is the blood money" (1). Also, it is a single organ that possesses beauty and benefit, so the blood money is completed in it, like the nose and the tongue. For its paralysis, its blood money is due; because he has taken away its benefit, similar to if he paralyzed his tongue. The blood money is due for the penis of a child and an adult, an old man and a young man, whether he is capable of sexual intercourse or not. As for the penis of the impotent man (‘innin), the majority of the scholars hold that the blood money is due for it (2); because of the generality of the hadith, and because he is not one from whom intercourse is despaired of, and it is a sound organ in itself, so its blood money is completed, like the penis of an old man. The Qadi mentioned two narrations from Ahmad regarding it; one of them is that the blood money is due for it; for that reason. The second is that its blood money is not completed. This is the school of Qatadah; because its benefit is ejaculation, impregnation, and sexual intercourse, and this has been absent from it during the state of completeness, so its blood money is not completed, like a paralyzed one, and by this it differs from the penis of the child and the old man. The narration differs regarding the penis of the castrated man (khasi), for there is a narration that it carries a full blood money. This is the view of Sa‘id ibn ‘Abd al-‘Aziz, al-Shafi‘i, and Ibn al-Mundhir; based on the report, and because the benefit of the penis is sexual intercourse, which remains in it. The second is that it is not due in it. This is the view of Malik, al-Thawri, the People of Opinion (Ashab al-Ra’y), Qatadah, and Ishaq; for what we have mentioned regarding the penis of the impotent man, and because its intended purpose is to obtain offspring, and that is not found from it, so its blood money is not completed, like a paralyzed one, and sexual intercourse is lost in most cases; evidenced by the fact that the sexual intercourse of beasts is lost by their castration. The difference between the penis of the impotent man and the penis of the castrated man is that sexual intercourse in the penis of the impotent man is more remote than in the penis of the
(1) Its source was previously cited on page 5. (2) Omitted from: M.
مُجاهِدٍ. قال بعضُ أصحابِ الشافعىِّ. هو الذي يقْتَضِيه مذهبُ الشافعىِّ؛ لأنَّه ذهَبَ بمَنْفَعةٍ مَقْصُودةٍ، فوجَبت الدِّيَةُ، كما لو ذهبَ بجِمَاعِه، أو كما لو قطَعَ أُنْثَيَيْهِ أو رَضَّهما. ويَحْتَمِلُ أن لا تجبَ الدِّيَةُ كاملةً؛ لأنَّه لم يَذهبْ بالمَنْفَعةِ كلِّها.
١٤٩٥ - مسألة؛ قال: (وَفِى الذَّكَرِ الدِّيَةُ)
أجْمعَ أهلُ العلمِ على أنَّ في الذَّكَرِ الدِّيَةَ. وفى كِتابِ النَّبِيِّ -صلى اللَّه عليه وسلم- لعَمْرو بن حَزْم: "وَفِى الذَّكَرِ الدِّيَةُ" (١). ولأنَّه عُضْوٌ واحدٌ فيه الجمالُ والمَنْفَعةُ، فكمَلَتْ فيه الدِّيَةُ، كالأنْفِ واللِّسانِ، وفى شَلَلِه دِيَتُه؛ لأنَّه ذهبَ بنَفْعِه، أشبَهَ ما لو أشلَّ لِسانَه. وتجبُ الدِّيَةُ في ذكرِ الصغيرِ والكبيرِ، والشَّيخِ والشَّابِّ، سواءٌ قَدَرَ على الجِماعِ أو لم يقْدِرْ. فأمَّا ذكرُ العِنِّين، فأكثرُ أهلِ العلمِ على وُجوبِ الدِّيَةِ فيه (٢)؛ لعُمومِ الحديثِ، ولأنَّه غيرُ مَأْيُوسٍ من جِماعِه، وهو عُضْوٌ سليمٌ في نَفْسِه، فكمَلَتْ دِيَتُه، كذكرِ الشَّيخِ. وذَكَرَ القاضي فيه عن أحمدَ رِوَايتَيْن؛ إحداهما، تجبُ فيه الدِّيَةُ؛ لذلك. والثانية؛ لا تَكْمُلُ دِيَتُه. وهو مذهبُ قَتادةَ؛ لأنَّ مَنْفعتَه الإِنْزالُ والإِحْبالُ والجِماعُ، وقد عُدِمَ ذلك منه في حالِ الكَمالِ، فلم تكْمُلْ دِيَتُه كالأَشلِّ، وبهذا فارقَ ذكرَ الصَّبىِّ والشَّيْخِ. واختلفَتِ الرِّوايةُ في ذَكَرِ الخَصِىِّ، فعنه فيه دِيَةٌ كاملةٌ. وهو قولُ سعيدِ بنِ عبدِ العزيزِ، والشافعىِّ, وابنِ المُنْذِرِ؛ للخبرِ، ولأنَّ مَنْفعةَ الذَّكرِ الجِماعُ، وهو باقٍ فيه. والثانية، لا تجبُ فيه. وهو قولُ مالكٍ، والثَّوْرِىِّ، وأصْحابِ الرَّأْىِ، وقَتادةَ، وإسْحاقَ؛ لما ذكرْنا في ذَكَرِ العِنِّين، ولأنَّ المقْصودَ منه تحْصِيلُ النَّسْلِ، ولا يُوجَدُ ذلك منه، فلم تَكْمُلْ دِيَتُه، كالأشلِّ، والجِماعُ يذْهَبُ في الغالبِ؛ بدليلِ أنَّ البهائمَ يذهبُ جِماعُها بخِصَائِها، والفرقُ بين ذَكَرِ العِنِّين، وذكَرِ الخَصِىِّ، أنَّ الجِماعَ في ذكَرِ العِنِّين أبْعَدُ منه في ذكَرِ
(١) تقدم تخريجه في صفحة ٥.(٢) سقط من: م.