If the thief's hand is not cut off as required, does the victim have the right to demand reattachment?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : If the thief wants to reattach his hand, we prevent him from doing so. Now, in the case of qisas, did he stipulate...?
The Shaykh : The perpetrator or the victim?
The questioner : The victim.
The Shaykh : There is no harm, if it is possible, there is no harm. If it is possible, that is what is required, but it needs the person to directly handle the reattachment, meaning it must be done while it is still warm. Otherwise, the jurists (may Allah have mercy on them) differed on this. They said: If a person's ear is cut off and then reattached while it is still warm and it remains, then there is no qisas on him, because it is like hair that has grown back.
Meaning, if a person removes another person's beard, shaves it off, and the beard does not grow back, the one who removed the beard owes a full blood money according to the Hanbalis. Otherwise, the issue is subject to scholarly disagreement. They say this because the benefit of the beard exists in the body only once, and only once. Anything that exists in the body only once carries a full blood money. How many are in the head?
He dies. The nose is a full blood money, the tongue is a full blood money.
Now, if the tongue is cut off, speech is lost, taste is lost, and the size of the tongue is lost. Why do we not impose three blood moneys on him?
Because taste and speech are attributes of the tongue, and the attribute follows the thing it describes. If someone harms his tongue and the tongue remains but becomes paralyzed, so that it cannot taste or move, and naturally cannot speak, how much does he owe?
He owes two blood moneys, or three blood moneys. Just as a person—pay attention to this example—if someone harms a person, causing him to lose his sight, hearing, and sensation, and his fingers on his hands and feet are cut off, and he becomes unable to control his urine or feces, the perpetrator would owe seven blood moneys, even though the person is still alive. If he were killed once, it would be one blood money. Why?
Because these are attributes that follow the original body.
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : ...
The Shaykh : The perpetrator or the victim?
The questioner : The victim.
The Shaykh : There is no harm, if it is possible, there is no harm. If it is possible, that is what is required, but it needs the person to directly handle the reattachment, meaning it must be done while it is still warm. Otherwise, the jurists (may Allah have mercy on them) differed on this. They said: If a person's ear is cut off and then reattached while it is still warm and it remains, then there is no qisas on him, because it is like hair that has grown back.
Meaning, if a person removes another person's beard, shaves it off, and the beard does not grow back, the one who removed the beard owes a full blood money according to the Hanbalis. Otherwise, the issue is subject to scholarly disagreement. They say this because the benefit of the beard exists in the body only once, and only once. Anything that exists in the body only once carries a full blood money. How many are in the head?
He dies. The nose is a full blood money, the tongue is a full blood money.
Now, if the tongue is cut off, speech is lost, taste is lost, and the size of the tongue is lost. Why do we not impose three blood moneys on him?
Because taste and speech are attributes of the tongue, and the attribute follows the thing it describes. If someone harms his tongue and the tongue remains but becomes paralyzed, so that it cannot taste or move, and naturally cannot speak, how much does he owe?
He owes two blood moneys, or three blood moneys. Just as a person—pay attention to this example—if someone harms a person, causing him to lose his sight, hearing, and sensation, and his fingers on his hands and feet are cut off, and he becomes unable to control his urine or feces, the perpetrator would owe seven blood moneys, even though the person is still alive. If he were killed once, it would be one blood money. Why?
Because these are attributes that follow the original body.
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : ...