And because if hardship were legislated, the offender would be more entitled to it, as it is the requirement of his aggression and the penalty for his action. If it is not legislated for him, then it is more appropriate that it not be for others. The scholars disagreed on what each one of them should bear. Ahmad said: They shall bear according to their capacity. According to this, it is not legally quantified, but rather it is left to the discretion of the judge (ijtihad), who imposes on each person an amount that is easy and not harmful. This is the school of Malik, because quantification is not established except through a scriptural text (tawqif), and it cannot be established by mere opinion or arbitrary judgment, and there is no text in this issue, so it is necessary to refer it to the discretion of the judge, like the amounts of maintenance payments. There is another narration from Ahmad that he imposes half a mithqal on the wealthy person, because it is the smallest amount of wealth quantified in Zakat, so it is considered in relation to it. And the person of moderate means must pay a quarter of a mithqal, because anything less than that is trivial, since the hand is not cut off for it. Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) said: "The hand is not cut off for a trivial matter, and there is no amputation for anything less than a quarter of a dinar." This is the choice of Abu Bakr and the school of al-Shafi'i. Abu Hanifa said: The maximum imposed on an individual is four dirhams, and there is no limit for the minimum; because that is wealth which is required as a means of consolation for the kin, so its minimum is not quantified, like maintenance. He said: The wealthy and the one of moderate means are treated equally for that reason. The correct view is the first, because of what we mentioned that quantification is only turned to via scriptural text, and there is no such text here; and it varies with wealth and moderate means, like Zakat and maintenance, and it does not vary with closeness or distance of kinship for that reason. The proponents of quantification at half a dinar and a quarter thereof disagreed: some of them said it recurs over the three years, so the amount required from the wealthy person over those years is one and a half dinars, and from the one of moderate means, three-quarters of a dinar; because it is a right related to the year as a form of consolation, so it recurs with the recurrence of the year, like Zakat. Others said: It does not recur; because in making it mandatory...