is invalid; because if the compensation for the wounds (7) were subsumed into the blood money for the intellect, its compensation would not be required if it exceeded the blood money for the intellect, just as the blood money for all the limbs, when combined with killing, does not require more than the blood money for the soul. Their statement is also invalid: that the benefits of the limbs become void with the loss of the intellect, for the benefits and limbs of an insane person are guaranteed (indemnified) after the loss of his intellect in the same way the benefits and limbs of a healthy person are guaranteed. If his benefits and limbs were lost, they would not be guaranteed, just as the benefits and limbs of a dead person are not guaranteed. Since it is permissible for them to be guaranteed by being injured after the injury to the intellect occurred, it is permissible to guarantee them simultaneously with the injury to the intellect, just as if one injured him and destroyed his hearing and sight through a wound in a location other than their origin (8).
Section: If one injures him and destroys his intellect, hearing, sight, and speech, four blood monies are required, along with the compensation for the wound. Abu Qilabah said: A man (10) was struck (9) with a stone, and his intellect, sight (11), hearing, and tongue were lost, and ‘Umar ruled regarding him with four blood monies while he was still alive (12). This is because he destroyed benefits for each of which there is a blood money, so their blood monies became due (13) from him, just as if he had destroyed them in separate acts of injury. If he died from the injury, only one blood money is required, because the blood monies for all the benefits are subsumed into the blood money for the soul, just like the blood monies for the limbs.
1501 - Issue; he said: (And in the case of al-sa‘ar [wryneck], the blood money is due, and al-sa‘ar is for him to strike him so that his face turns to one side)
The origin of al-sa‘ar is a disease that affects a camel in its neck, causing its neck to twist (1). As for the words of Allah Almighty:
(7) In M: "the wound". (8) In B and M: "its location". (9) In the original: "struck". (10) In M: "a man". (11) In what preceded, the following appeared in its place: "and his marriage". (12) Its source was provided previously on page 116. (13) In B and M: "it became due". (1) Omitted from B and M.
يصحُّ؛ لأنَّه لو دخَلَ أرْشُ الجِراحِ (٧) في دِيَةِ العَقْلِ، لم يجبْ أرْشه إذا زاد على دِيَةِ العَقْلِ، كما أنَّ دِيَةَ الأعْضاءِ كلِّها مع القتلِ لا يجبُ بها أكثرُ من دِيَةِ النَّفسِ. ولا يصحُّ قولُهم: إنَّ مَنافعَ الأعْضاءِ تبْطُلُ بذَهابِ العقلِ، فإنَّ المَجنونَ تُضْمَنُ مَنافعُه وأعْضاؤُه بعدَ ذهَابِ عَقْلِه بما تُضْمَنُ به مَنافعُ الصَّحيحِ وأعضاؤُه، ولو ذهبتْ مَنافعُه وأعْضاؤُه، لم تُضْمَنْ، كما لا تُضْمَنُ مَنافعُ المَيِّتِ وأعْضاؤُه، وإذا جازَ أنْ تُضْمَنَ بالجنايةِ عليها بعدَ الجنايةِ عليه، جازَ ضَمانُها مع الجنايةِ عليه، كما لو جَنَى عليه فأذْهَبَ سمعَه وبصرَه بجِرَاحةٍ في غيرِ مَحَلِّهما (٨).
فصل: فإن جَنَى عليه، فأذْهَبَ عقْلَه وسمعَه وبصرَهُ وكلامَه، وجَب أرْبَعُ ديَاتٍ مع أرْشِ الجُرْحِ. قال أبو قِلَابةَ: رُمِيَ (٩) رجلٌ (١٠) بحجرٍ، فذهبَ عقلُه وبصرُه (١١) وسمعُه ولسانُه، فَقضى فيه عمر بأربعِ دِيَاتٍ وهو حَيٌّ (١٢). ولأنَّه أذْهبَ مَنافعَ في كلِّ واحدٍ منها دِيَةٌ، فوجبتْ (١٣) عليه دِيَاتُها، كما لو أذْهَبَها بجِناياتٍ. فإنْ مات من الجنايةِ، لم تَجِبْ إلَّا دِيَةٌ واحدةٌ؛ لأنَّ دِيَاتِ المَنْافعِ كلَّها تدْخُلُ في دِيَةِ النَّفْسِ، كدِيَاتِ الأعْضاءِ.
١٥٠١ - مسألة؛ قال: (وَفِي الصَّعَرِ الدِّيَةُ، وَالصَّعَرُ: أَنْ يَضْرِبَهُ، فَيَصِيرَ وَجْهُهُ فِي جَانبٍ)
أصلُ الصَّعَرِ، داءٌ يأخذُ البعيرَ في عُنُقِه، فيَلْتَوِي له (١) عنقُه، وقولُ اللهِ تَعالى:
(٧) في م: "الجرح".(٨) في ب، م: "محلها".(٩) في الأصل: "ضرب".(١٠) في م: "رجلا".(١١) جاء مكان هذا فيما تقدم: "ونكاحه".(١٢) تقدم تخريجه، في صفحة ١١٦.(١٣) في ب، م: "فوجب".(١) سقط من: ب، م.
