1479 - Issue: He said: "And if a pregnant woman drinks medicine and consequently miscarries a fetus, she is liable for a ghurra, she does not inherit anything from it, and she must emancipate a slave."
There is no difference of opinion on this matter among the scholars that we are aware of, except for what was said by those who do not make the emancipation of a slave mandatory, as we have previously mentioned. This is because she caused the fetus to be miscarried through her own action and offense, so she is held liable for it with the ghurra, just as if someone other than her had committed the offense against it. She does not inherit anything from the ghurra, because the killer does not inherit from the one killed, and the ghurra belongs to the rest of the fetus's heirs. She is also required to emancipate a slave, for the reason we previously mentioned. If the offender who caused the miscarriage was the fetus's father, or another of its heirs, he is liable for a ghurra, from which he inherits nothing, and he must emancipate a slave. This is the position of al-Zuhri, al-Shafi'i, and others.
Section: If one commits an offense against an animal, causing it to miscarry its fetus, one is liable for the amount of its depreciation, according to the majority of scholars. It is narrated from Abu Bakr that there is one-tenth of the value of its mother due, because it is an offense against an animal whose sale one owns, and it caused the miscarriage of its fetus, resembling the fetus of a slave woman. This is not correct; because an offense against a slave woman is estimated based on her value; thus, for her hand, half her value is due, and for her mudiha wound, half a tenth of her value. Therefore, the fetus is estimated based on her value, like some of her limbs. In an offense against an animal, only the amount of its depreciation is mandatory, and likewise for its fetus. Furthermore, a slave woman is a human being and is equated to free persons in the estimation of her limbs based on her blood money, whereas an animal is the opposite.
1480 - Issue: He said: "And if three people throw with a catapult, and the stone returns and kills a man..."
(1) Omitted from: [B]. (2) In [B], [M]: "kama" (as). (3) In [B]: "li-annaha" (because it). (4) In [M]: "yamliku" (he owns). (5) In [M]: "bi-qadr" (by the amount of). A transcription error.
١٤٧٩ - مسألة؛ قال: (وَإذَا شَرِبَتِ الْحَامِلُ دَوَاءً، فَألْقَتْ بِهِ (١) جَنِينًا، فَعَلَيْهَا غُرَّةٌ، لَا تَرِثُ مِنْهَا شَيْئًا، وتَعْتِقُ رَقَبَةً)
ليس في هذه الجملة اختلافٌ بينَ أهلِ العلمِ نَعْلَمُه، إلَّا ما كان من قولِ مَنْ لم يُوجِبْ عِتْقَ الرَّقَبةِ، على ما قَدَّمْنا، وذلك لأنَّها أسْقَطَتِ الْجَنِينَ بفِعْلِها وجنايَتِها، فلَزِمَها ضَمانُه بالغُرَّةِ، كما لو جَنَى عليه غيرُها، ولا تَرِثُ من الغُرَّةِ شيئًا؛ لأَنَّ القاتلَ لا يَرِثُ المَقْتُولَ، وتكونُ الغُرَّةُ لسائرِ ورَثَتِه، وعليها عِتْقُ رَقَبةٍ؛ لما (٢) قَدَّمْنا. ولو كان الجانِى المُسْقِطُ للجَنينِ أبَاه، أو غيرَه من ورَثَتِه، فعليه غُرَّةٌ، لا يَرِثُ منها شيئًا، ويَعْتِقُ رقَبةً. وهذا قولُ الزُّهْرِىِّ، والشافعىِّ، وغيرِهِما.
فصل: وإن جَنَى على بَهِيمَةٍ، فألْقَتْ جَنِينَها، ففيه ما نَقَصَها، في قولِ عامَّةِ أهلِ العلمِ. وحُكِىَ عن أبي بكرٍ، أنَّ فيه عُشْرَ قِيمَةِ أُمِّه؛ لأنَّه (٣) جِنايةٌ على حَيَوانٍ ملكَ (٤) بَيْعَه أَسْقَطَتْ جَنِينَه، أشْبَهَ جَنِينَ الأمَةِ. وهذا لا يَصِحُّ؛ لأنَّ الجنايةَ على الأمَةِ تُقَدَّرُ من قِيمَتِها، ففى يَدِها نِصْفُ قِيمَتِها، وفي مُوضِحَتِها نِصْفُ عُشْرِ قِيمَتِها، فقُدِّرَ (٥) جَنِينُها من قِيمَتِها، كبعضِ أعْضائِها، والبَهِيمةُ إنَّما يَجِبُ في الجنايةِ عليها قَدْرُ نَقْصِها، فكذلك في جَنِينِها، ولأنَّ الأمَةَ آدَمِيَّةٌ، أُلْحِقَتْ بالأَحْرارِ في تَقْدِيرِ أعْضائِها من دِيَتِها، والبَهِيمةُ بخِلافِ ذلك.
١٤٨٠ - مسألة؛ قال: (وإذَا رَمَى ثَلَاثَةٌ بِالمَنْجَنِيقِ، فَرَجَعَ الْحَجَرُ، فقَتَلَ
(١) سقط من: ب.(٢) في ب، م: "كما".(٣) في ب: "لأنها".(٤) في م: "يملك".(٥) في م: "بقدر". تصحيف.