Hadith 30594

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