blood money differs from all other forms of destroyed property, for it becomes obligatory upon someone other than the perpetrator as a means of providing him with support, so wisdom dictated its mitigation for them. It has been reported from 'Umar and 'Ali, may Allah be pleased with them both, that they decreed the blood money be paid by the 'aqila over three years (8). There was no dissenter against them in their era, so it was considered a consensus.

Section: At the end of every year, one-third of it becomes obligatory, and the beginning of the year is considered from the time the blood money becomes binding. This is the opinion of al-Shafi'i. Abu Hanifah said: The beginning of it is from the time the judge renders his ruling, because it is a duration about which there is a difference (9), so its beginning is from the time the judge ruled, like the duration for impotence ('unna). As for us, it is a deferred monetary obligation, so the beginning of its term is from the time it becomes binding, like a deferred debt or a salam contract. We do not concede the disagreement regarding it, for the disagreement of the Khawarij is not taken into account. Once this is established, if what is obligatory is the blood money for a life (nafs), the beginning of its year is from the time of death, whether it was killing that requires [compensation] or due to the progression of a wound. If what is obligatory is the blood money for a wound, you must consider: if it was from a wound that healed without progression—such as if he cut off his hand and it healed after a period—then the beginning of the period is from the time of the cutting, because that is the state of the obligation. This is why if he cut off his hand while he was a dhimmi, then he accepted Islam, and then it healed, the half-blood money of a Jew becomes obligatory. However, if the wound was progressing (sari)—such as if he cut off his finger and it spread to his palm, then it healed—then the beginning of the period is from the time of healing, because once it spreads, the indemnity (arsh) does not settle until the healing. This is what al-Qadi and the companions of al-Shafi'i mentioned. Abu al-Khattab said: The period is considered from the time of healing in both cases, because the indemnity does not settle except upon healing in both.

Section: If what is obligatory is blood money, it is divided over three years, with one-third in each year, whether it is the blood money for a life or the blood money for a limb, such as the blood money for cutting off the nose, the two ears, the penis, or the two testicles (10). If it is less than the blood money, we consider: if it is one-third of the blood money, such as the blood money for the ma'muma or the ja'ifa, it becomes obligatory at the end of the first year, and nothing of it is required immediately [because the 'aqila [does not] bear immediate payment] (11). If it is half the blood money or one-third of it, such as the blood money for the hand or the blood money for the nostrils, one-third becomes obligatory at the end of the first year, and the remainder at the end of the second year (12). If it is more than two-thirds, such as the blood money for eight (13) fingers, two-thirds become obligatory in the two years, and the remainder at the end of the third year. If it is more than one blood money, such as [if the] hearing and sight of a person were lost (15), then in every year one-third [is paid]; because if the obligation were less than the blood money, it would not decrease in a year below one-third, and likewise it does not increase upon that if it exceeds one-third. If the obligation is due to a crime against two people, one-third becomes obligatory for each one in every year; because each one has blood money, so he is entitled to one-third of it, just as if his right were independent. If the obligation is less than one-third of the blood money, such as the blood money for a finger, the 'aqila does not bear it; because they do not bear what is less than one-third, and it becomes obligatory immediately; because it is a substitute for destroyed property that they do not bear, so it is immediate, like a crime against property.

Section: Concerning deficient blood money, such as the blood money for a woman or a Kitabi, there are two views. One is that it is divided over three years; because it is a substitute for a life, so it resembles full blood money. The second is that the amount of one-third of the full blood money becomes obligatory from it in the first year, and the remainder in the second year; because this is less than the [full] blood money, so it is not divided over three years, like the indemnity for a limb. This is the school of Abu Hanifah. Al-Shafi'i (16) has [a position like] the two views. If the blood money does not reach one-third of the full blood money, such as the blood money for a Magian, which is (17) eight hundred dirhams, and the blood money for a fetus, which is five camels, the 'aqila does not bear it; because they do not bear what is less than one-third, so it resembles the blood money for a tooth and the mu'diha (a wound that exposes the bone), unless the fetus is killed along with its mother.