Yahya related to me from Malik that Ibn Shihab used to say, "When a man catches the Rak'ah he says, 'Allah is greater' once, and that takbir is enough for him." Malik added, "That is if he intended to begin the prayer by that takbir " Malik was asked about a man who began with the imam but forgot the opening takbir and the takbir of the ruku until he had done one raka. Then he remembered that he had not said the takbir at the opening nor in the ruku,so he said the takbir in the second raka. He said, "I prefer that he start his prayer again, but if he forgets the opening takbir with the imam and says the takbir in the first ruku, I consider that enough for him if he intends by it the opening takbir." Malik said, about someone who prayed by himself and forgot the opening takbir, "He begins his prayer afresh ." Malik said, about an imam who forgot the opening takbir until he had finished his prayer, "I think that he should do the prayer again, and those behind him, even if they have said the takbir."

Malik related to me from Yahya ibn Said from Urwa ibn az- Zubayr that a man of the Ansar called Uhayha ibn al-Julah had a young paternal uncle who was younger than him and who was living with his maternal uncles. Uhayha took him and killed him. His maternal uncles said, "We brought him up from a baby to a youth till he stood firm on his feet, and we have had the right of a man taken from us by his paternal uncle." Urwa said, "For that reason a killer does not inherit from the one he killed." Malik said, "The way of doing things about which there is no dispute is that the intentional murderer does not inherit anything of the blood-money of the person he has murdered or any of his property. He does not stop anyone who has a share of inheritance from inheriting. The one who kills accidentally does not inherit anything of the blood-money and there is dispute as to whether or not he inherits from the dead person's property because there is no suspicion that he killed him for his inheritance and in order to take his property. I prefer that he inherit from the dead person's property and not inherit from the blood-money."

Yahya related to me from Malik from Yahya ibn Said from Said ibn al-Musayyab that Umar ibn al-Khattab killed five or seven people for one man whom they had killed secretly by trickery. Umar said, "Had all the people of Sana joined forces against him, I would have killed them all."

Yahya related to me from Malik from Muhammad ibn Abd ar-Rahman ibn Sad ibn Zurara that he had heard that Hafsa, the wife of the Prophet ﷺ killed one of her slave-girls who had used sorcery against her. She was a mudabbara. Hafsa gave the order, and she was killed. Malik said, "The sorcerer is the one who uses sorcery for himself and no one else uses that for him. It is like the one about whom Allah, the Blessed, the Exalted, said in His Book, 'They know the one who devotes himself to it will have no share in the Next World.' (Sura 2 ayat 102) I think that that person is killed if he does that himself."

Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab from Said ibn al-Musayyab and Abu Salama ibn Abd ar-Rahman from Abu Hurayra that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said, "The wound of an animal is of no account and no compensation is due for it. The well is of no account and no compensation is due for it. The mine is of no account and no compensation is due for it and a fifth is due for buried treasures." (Al-kanz: see Book 17). Malik said, "Everyone leading an animal by the halter, driving it, and riding it is responsible for what the animal strikes unless the animal kicks out without anything being done to it to make it kick out. Umar ibn al-Khattab imposed the blood-money on a person who was exercising his horse." Malik said, "It is more fitting that a person leading an animal by the halter, driving it, or riding it incur a loss than a person who is exercising his horse." (See hadith 4 of this book). Malik said, "What is done in our community about a person who digs a well on a road or ties up an animal or does the like of that on a road used by muslims, is that since what he has done is included in that which he is not permitted to do in such a place, he is liable for whatever injury or other thing arises from that action. The blood-money of that which is less than a third of the full blood- money is owed from his own personal property. Whatever reaches a third or more, is owed by his tribe. Any such things that he does which he is permitted to do on the muslims' road are something for which he has no liability or loss. Part of that is a hole which a man digs to collect rain, and the beast from which the man alights for some need and leaves standing on the road. There is no penalty against anyone for this." Malik spoke about a man who went down a well, and another man followed behind him, and the lower one pulled the higher one and they fell into the well and both died He said, "The tribe of the one who pulled him in is responsible for the blood-money." Malik spoke about a child whom a man ordered to go down into a well or to climb a palm tree and he died as a result. He said, "The one who ordered him is liable for whatever befalls him, be it death or something else." Malik said, "The way of doing things in our community about which there is no dispute is that women and children are not obliged to pay blood-money together with the tribe in the blood-moneys which the tribe must pay. The blood-money is only obligatory for a man who has reached puberty." Malik said that the tribe could bind themselves to the blood-money of mawali if they wished. If they refused, they were people of the diwan or were cut off from their people. In the time of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ people paid the blood-money to each other as well as in the time of Abu Bakr as-Siddiq before there was a diwan. The diwan was in the time of Umar ibn al-Khattab. No one other than one's people and the ones holding the wala' paid blood- money for one because the wala' was not transferable and because the Prophet ﷺ said, "The wala' belongs to the one who sets free." Malik said, "The wala' is an established relationship." Malik said, "What is done in our community about animals that are injured is that the person who causes the injury pays whatever of their value has been diminished." Malik said about a man condemned to death and one of the other hudud befell him, "He is not punished for it. That is because the killing overrides all of that, except for slander. The slander remains hanging over the one to whom it was said because it will be said to him, 'Why do you not flog the one who slandered you?' I think that the condemned man is flogged with the hadd before he is killed, and then he is killed. I do not think that any retaliation is inflicted on him for any injury except killing because killing overrides all of that." Malik said, "What is done in our community is that when a murdered person is found among the main body of a people in a village or other place, the house or place of the nearest people to him is not responsible. That is because the murdered person can be slain and then cast at the door of some people to shame them by it. No one is responsible for the like of that." Malik said about a group of people who fight with each other and when the fight is broken up, a man is found dead or wounded, and it is not known who did it, "The best of what is heard about that is that there is blood-money for him, and the blood-money is against the people who argued with him. If the injured or slain person is not from either of the two parties, his blood-money is against both of the two parties together."

Yahya related to me from Malik from Umar ibn Husayn, the mawla of A'isha bint Qudama, that Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan imposed retaliation against a man who killed a mawla with a stick and so the mawla's patron killed the man with a stick. Malik said, "The generally agreed on way of doing things in our community about which there is no dispute is that when a man strikes another man with a stick or hits him with a rock or intentionally strikes him causing his death, that is an intentional injury and there is retaliation for it." Malik said, "Intentional murder with us is that a man intentionally goes to a man and strikes him until his life goes. Part of intentional injury also is that a man strikes a man in a quarrel between them. He leaves him while he is alive, and he bleeds to death and so dies. There is retaliation for that." Malik said, "What is done in our community is that a group of free men are killed for the intentional murder of one free man, and a group of women for one woman, and a group of slaves for one slave."

Yahya related to me from Malik that he saw whomever he was satisfied with among the people of knowledge say about a man who willed that his murderer be pardoned when he murdered him intentionally, "That is permitted for him. He is more entitled to the man's blood than any of his relatives after him." Malik said about a man who pardoned murder, after he had claimed his right and it was obliged for him, "There is no blood-money against the murderer unless the one who pardons him stipulates that when he pardons him." Malik said about the murderer when he was pardoned, "He is flogged one hundred lashes and jailed for a year." Malik said, "When a man murders intentionally and there is a clear proof of that, and the murdered man has sons and daughters and the sons pardon and the daughters refuse to pardon, the pardon of the sons is permitted in opposition to the daughters and there is no authority for the daughters with the sons in demanding blood and pardoning."

Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that Marwan ibn al-Hakam wrote to Muawiya ibn Abi Sufyan to mention to him that a drunkard was brought to him who had killed a man. Muawiya wrote to him to kill him in retaliation for the dead man. Yahya said that Malik said, "The best of what I have heard on the interpretation of this ayat, the word of Allah, the Blessed, the Exalted, 'The free man for the free man and the slave for the slave - these are men and the woman for the woman,' (Sura 2 ayat 178) is that retaliation is between women as it is between men. The free woman is killed for the free woman as the free man is killed for the free man. The slave-girl is slain for the slave-girl as the slave is slain for the slave. Retaliation is between women as it is between men. That is because Allah, the Blessed, the Exalted, said in His Book, 'We have written for them in it that it is a life for a life and an eye for an eye, a nose for a nose, and an ear for an ear, and a tooth for a tooth, and for wounds there is retaliation.' (Sura 5 ayat 48) Allah, the Blessed, the Exalted, mentioned that it is a life for a life. It is the life of a free woman for the life of a free man, and her injury for his injury." Malik said about a man who held a man fast for another man to hit, and he died on the spot, "If he held him and he thought that he meant to kill him, the two of them are both killed for him. If he held him and he thought that he meant to beat him as people sometimes do, and he did not think that he meant to kill him, the murderer is slain and the one who held him is punished with a very severe punishment and jailed for a year. There is no killing against him." Malik said about a man who murdered a man intentionally or gouged out his eye intentionally, and then was slain or had his eye gouged out himself before retaliation was inflicted on him, "There is no blood-money nor retaliation against him. The right of the one who was killed or had his eye gouged out goes when the thing which he is claiming as retaliation goes. It is the same with a man who murders another man intentionally and then the murderer dies. When the murderer dies, the one seeking blood-revenge has nothing of blood- money or anything else. That is by the word of Allah, the Blessed the Exalted, 'Retaliation is written for you in killing. The free man for the free man and the slave for the slave.' " Malik said, "He only has retaliation against the one who killed him. If the man who murdered him dies, he has no retaliation or blood-money." Malik said, "There is no retaliation held against a free man by a slave for any injury. The slave is killed for the free man when he intentionally murders him. The free man is not slain for the slave, even if he murders him intentionally. It is the best of what I have heard."

Yahya said that Malik said, "The generally agreed on way of doing things in our community is that retaliation is taken from someone who breaks someone's hand or foot intentionally and not blood-money." Malik said, "Retaliation is not inflicted on anyone until the wound of the injured party has healed. Then retaliation is inflicted on him. If the wound of the person on whom the retaliation has been inflicted is like the first person's wound when it heals, it is retaliation. If the wound of the one on whom the retaliation has been inflicted becomes worse or he dies, there is nothing held against the one who has taken retaliation. If the wound of the person on whom the retaliation has been inflicted heals and the injured party is paralysed or his injury has healed but he has a scar, defect, or blemish, the person on whom the retaliation has been inflicted does not have his hand broken again and further retaliation is not taken for his injury." He said, "But there is blood-money from him according to what he has impaired or maimed of the hand of the injured party. The bodily injury is also like that." Malik said, "When a man intentionally goes to his wife and gouges out her eye or breaks her hand or cuts off her finger or such like, and does it intentionally, retaliation is inflicted on him. As for a man who strikes his wife with a rope or a whip and hits what he did not mean to hit or does what he did not intend to do, he pays blood-money for what he has struck according to this principle, and retaliation is not inflicted on him." Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that Abu Bakr ibn Muhammd ibn Amr ibn Hazm took retaliation for the breaking of a leg.

Yahya related to me from Malik from Abu'z-Zinad from Sulayman ibn Yasar that a slave was set free by one of the people on hajj and his master had abandoned the right to inherit from him. The ex-slave then killed a man from the Banu A'idh tribe. An A'idhi, the father of the slain man came to Umar ibn al-Khattab seeking the blood-money of his son. Umar said, "He has no blood-money." The A'idhi said, "What would you think if it had been my son who killed him?" Umar said, "Then you would pay his blood-money." He said, "He is then like the black and white Arqam snake. If it is left, it devours and if it is killed, it takes revenge."

Yahya related to me from Malik from Abu Layla ibn Abdullah ibn Abd ar-Rahman ibn Sahl from Sahl ibn Abi Hathma that some of the great men of his people informed him that Abdullah ibn Sahl and Muhayyisa went out to Khaybar because extreme poverty had overtaken them. Muhayyisa returned and said that Abdullah ibn Sahl had been killed and thrown in a shallow well or spring. The jews came and he said, "By Allah! You have killed him." They said, "By Allah! We have not killed him!" Then he made for his people and mentioned that to them. Then he, his brother Huwayyisa, who was older than him, and Abd ar-Rahman, set out. Muhayyisa began to speak, as he had been at Khaybar. The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said to him, "The greater first, the greater first," meaning in age. So Huwayyisa spoke and then Muhayyisa spoke. The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said, "Either they pay your companion's blood-money or we will declare war against them." The Messenger of Allah ﷺ wrote that to them and they wrote, "By Allah, we did not kill him!" The Messenger of Allah ﷺ said to Huwayyisa, Muhayyisa, and Abd ar-Rahman, "Do you swear and claim the blood of your companion?" They said, "No." He said, "Shall the jews swear to you?" They said, "But they are not muslims." The Messenger of Allah ﷺ gave blood-money from his own property, and sent them one hundred camels to their house. Sahl added, "A red camel among them kicked me."