Allah be pleased with both of them, decreed the blood money for error to be upon the 'aqila over three years (16). We do not know of any opposing view among the Companions regarding them, and the people of knowledge have followed them in this. This is because it is wealth that is obligated by way of consolation, so it is not obligated immediately, like zakah. Every blood money that the 'aqila bears is obligated as deferred, for the reason we have mentioned, while that which the 'aqila does not bear is obligated immediately; because it is a substitute for something destroyed, so it is incumbent upon the destroyer immediately, like the values of destroyed properties. It differs from that which the 'aqila bears; for that is obligated by way of consolation, so deferment was made mandatory as a mitigation for the one who bears it, and it was diverted from the original rule regarding deferment, just as it was diverted from the original rule regarding obligating it upon someone other than the perpetrator.

Section: Nothing of the blood money is incumbent upon the killer. Malik and al-Shafi'i stated this. Abu Hanifa said: He is like one of the 'aqila; because it was obligated upon them as assistance to him, so they should not exceed it regarding him. Our evidence is what Abu Hurayra narrated, that the Prophet - peace be upon him - decreed the blood money for a woman to be upon her 'aqila, which is agreed upon (17). This implies that he decreed all of it upon them. Furthermore, because he is a killer upon whom the blood money was not originally incumbent, so no part of it is incumbent upon him, just as if the Imam ordered him to kill a man, and he killed him believing he was doing so rightfully, then it became clear [the victim] was oppressed. Additionally, the kaffarah [expiation] is incumbent upon the killer from his own wealth, and that is equivalent to his share of the blood money or more, so there is no need to obligate any part of the blood money upon him.

Section: The kaffarah [expiation] is from the wealth of the killer, and it is not subject to being borne [by others]. The companions of al-Shafi'i said, in one of two opinions: It is to be paid from the Bayt al-Mal [Public Treasury]; because it is frequent, so obligating it upon his wealth causes him hardship. Our evidence is that it is a kaffarah, so it is not obligated upon anyone other than the one from whom its cause originated, like all other kaffarahs, and as if it were a fast. Also, because the kaffarah was legislated for expiating the sin of the perpetrator, and one cannot be expiated by the action of another. It differs from the blood money, for that was legislated to compensate the location [of the harm], and that is achieved by it regardless. Furthermore, when the Prophet - peace be upon him - decreed the blood money upon the 'aqila, he did not [let the 'aqila] perform the kaffarah for the female killer (18). What they mentioned has no basis, and his analogy to the blood money is not valid.