@Ray sir I read somewhere that there is an issue with the "bloody money" ritual, as Davis is not a muslim.
Diyya (plural: Diyyat; Arabic: دية"Ž) is compensation paid to the heirs of a victim. In Arabic, the word means both blood money and ransom.
There is no specific amount for Diyat and the fine does not differ based on the gender, victim, or state of freedom of the victim. However, the Qur'an leaves open its quantity, nature and other related affairs to the customs and traditions of a society. The Qur'an directs to pay Diyat according to this law both in case of intentional as well as unintentional murder.[2]
The four Sunni legal schools of thought debated what should be the Diyya for a Jew or Christian, who were considered Dhimmi. According to the Shafi school, the Diyya in such a case was a third paid for a Muslim. The Maliki prescribed half. The Hanafi school, on the other hand, does not differentiate between a Muslim and non-Muslim. In Yemen, the Diyya for a Jew was sometimes much higher than for a Muslim, since he was considered a protege of the tribe, and any injury to him was considered injury to the whole tribe.[3]
Firstly, Qisas11 is an obligation imposed by the Almighty on an Islamic State. It guarantees survival to a society and is, in fact, a Divine Law which can only be breached by those who wrong their souls. Consequently, it is the responsibility of the government to search for the murderer, arrest him and implement the will of the heirs of the murdered person.
Secondly, complete equality should be observed in taking Qisas. Hence, if the murderer is a slave, only that particular slave should be executed and if the murderer is a free man, only that particular free man should be executed. A person's social status should never create an exception to this rule of equality nor should it be given any emphasis in this regard.
Thirdly, the heirs of the slain or wounded person have only two options: they can either demand life for life, limb for limb wound for wound or they can forgive the criminal and accept Diyat from him. The latter case, according to the Qur'an is a favour and rebate by the Almighty to the criminal. Consequently, their forgiveness shall become an atonement (kaffarah) for the criminal and as a result the government shall not lay hands on him at all.
Fourthly, if the heirs of the slain or wounded person agree to accept Diyat, then this should be given to them with goodness and goodwill. In the words of Imam Amin Ahsan Islahi:
The directive of paying Diyat with goodness has been given because in that period in Arabia Diyat was generally not given in the form of cash; it was paid in kind or in the form of animals. Therefore, if the payers of Diyat had any ill-intention in their hearts, they could defraud the receiving party. It is easily possible in case of camels and goats or dates and other grains to pay Diyat as far as the agreed quantity and weight is concerned, disregarding their quality and nature. This would amount to ignoring the favour done by the aggrieved party by forgiving the murderer. Someone whose life had been left at the mercy of a person by the Shari'ah had been forgiven by him and had agreed to accept some wealth instead. This favour should be answered by a favour only, ie, the payment of Diyat should be done with such magnanimity and munificence that the heirs of the slain person should not feel that by accepting camels and goats in place of the life of a beloved they had committed a mistake or done something dishonourable.12
The basic objective of this law, as is mentioned by the Qur'an, is to protect life. Imam Amin Ahsan Islahi explains this in the following way:
If a murderer is executed because of his crime, it apparently seems as if a second life has been taken, but a little deliberation shows that this punishment is actually a guarantee of the life of the whole society. If this punishment is not carried out, the mental disorder in which a person commits this crime is actually transmitted to the society. The extent of various diseases differ: diseases which result in such heinous crimes as murder, robbery, theft or fornication are like those diseases in which it is necessary to amputate some limb of the body to save the whole body. Amputating a limb may seem a callous act, yet a doctor has to be callous. If by showing sympathy to this limb he does not force himself to this cruelty, he shall have to bear with the patients death.
A society in its collective capacity is like a body. At times, its limbs get infected to the extent that the only option is to cut them off from the body through an operation. If sympathy is shown by considering it to be the limb of a patient, there is all the chance that this would fatally affect the whole body.13
b. Unintentional
وَمَا كَانَ Ù„ÙÙ…ÙؤْمÙن٠أَنْ يَقْتÙÙ„ÙŽ Ù…ÙؤْمÙنًا Ø¥Ùلَّا خَطَأً وَمَنْ قَتَلَ Ù…ÙؤْمÙنًا خَطَأً ÙَتَØْرÙير٠رَقَبَة٠مÙؤْمÙنَة٠وَدÙÙŠÙŽØ©ÙŒ Ù…Ùسَلَّمَةٌ Ø¥ÙÙ„ÙŽÙ‰ أَهْلÙه٠إÙلَّا أَنْ يَصَّدَّقÙوا ÙÙŽØ¥Ùنْ كَانَ Ù…Ùنْ قَوْم٠عَدÙوّ٠لَكÙمْ ÙˆÙŽÙ‡ÙÙˆÙŽ Ù…ÙؤْمÙÙ†ÙŒ ÙَتَØْرÙير٠رَقَبَة٠مÙؤْمÙÙ†ÙŽØ©Ù ÙˆÙŽØ¥Ùنْ كَانَ Ù…Ùنْ قَوْم٠بَيْنَكÙمْ وَبَيْنَهÙمْ Ù…Ùيثَاقٌ ÙَدÙÙŠÙŽØ©ÙŒ Ù…Ùسَلَّمَةٌ Ø¥ÙÙ„ÙŽÙ‰ أَهْلÙه٠وَتَØْرÙير٠رَقَبَة٠مÙؤْمÙÙ†ÙŽØ©Ù Ùَمَنْ لَمْ يَجÙدْ ÙَصÙيَام٠شَهْرَيْن٠مÙتَتَابÙعَيْن٠تَوْبَةً Ù…Ùنْ اللَّه٠وَكَانَ اللَّه٠عَلÙيمًا ØÙŽÙƒÙيمًا (4 :92-3)Ù‡
It is unlawful for a believer to kill a believer except if it happens by accident. And he who kills a believer accidentally must free one Muslim slave and pay Diyat to the heirs of the victim except if they forgive him. If the victim is a Muslim belonging to a people at enmity with you, the freeing of a Muslim slave is enough. But if the victim belongs to an ally, Diyat shall also be given to his heirs and a Muslim slave shall also have to be set free. He who does not have a slave, must fast two consecutive months. This is from Allah a way to repent from this sin: He is Wise, All-Knowing. (4:92-3)
In Islamic law, according to the Qur'an, the punishment of unintentionally murdering or wounding in some cases is Diyat and Atonement (Kaffarah), and in some cases only Atonement (Kaffarah) except if the wounded person or the heirs of the slain person forgive the criminal. In this case, life for life, wound for wound and limb for limb cannot be demanded from a person.
This law is based on three clauses:
Firstly, if the murdered person is a Muslim citizen of an Islamic State or if he is not a Muslim but belongs to a nation with which a treaty has been concluded, it is necessary for the murderer who has not been forgiven to pay Diyat to atone for his sin and repent before the Almighty and free a Muslim slave as well.
Secondly, if the murdered person is a Muslim and belongs to an enemy country, the murderer is not required to pay Diyat; in this case, it is enough that he only free a Muslim slave.
Thirdly, in both these cases, if the criminal does not have a slave, he should consecutively fast for two months.
These are the directives as far as unintentional murder14 is concerned. But it is obvious that the directive of unintentionally injuring someone should also be no different. Hence, in this case also Diyat shall have to be paid and fasts shall have to be kept considering the amount of Diyat paid. For example, if the Diyat of a certain type of wound is fixed at one-third of the Diyat of murder, twenty fasts as atonement shall also have to be kept.
An important issue in these directives of intentional and unintentional murder is the amount of Diyat to be given and its methodology. In verse 92 of Surah Nisa quoted above, the words 'دية مسلمة الى اهله' (diyatun mussalamatun ila ahlihi) are used. The word Diyat in these verses occurs as a common noun, about which we all know that its meaning is determined by its linguistic and customary usage, and by the context in which it is used. Nothing other than these are required. Therefore, in this verse Diyat means something which in the general custom and usage is called 'Diyat'. And the words 'دية مسلمة الى اهله' (diyatun mussalamatun ila ahlihi) simply mean that the family of the murdered person should be given what the general custom and linguistic usage term as 'Diyat'.
In verse 178 of Surah Baqarah, where the directive of Diyat in case of intentional murder has been given, the word 'معروÙ' (ma'ruf: custom) is used to qualify it:
Ùَمَنْ عÙÙÙÙŠÙŽ Ù„ÙŽÙ‡Ù Ù…Ùنْ Ø£ÙŽØ®Ùيه٠شَيْءٌ ÙَاتّÙبَاعٌ بÙالْمَعْرÙÙˆÙ٠وَأَدَاءٌ Ø¥Ùلَيْه٠بÙØ¥ÙØْسَان٠(178:2)Ù‡
Then for whom there has been some remission from his brother, [the remission] should be followed according to the Ma'ruf and Diyat should be paid with goodness. (2:178)
It is evident from the above mentioned verses of Surah Nisa and Surah Baqarah that in case of intentional as well as un-intentional murder, the Qur'an wants Diyat to be paid according to the custom and tradition of the society. It has not prescribed any specific amount for Diyat nor has it directed the Muslims to discriminate in this matter between a man or a woman, a slave or a free man and a Muslim or a non-Muslim15. The Prophet (sws) and his Rightly Guided Caliphs decided all the cases of Diyat according to the customs and traditions of the Arabian society during their own times. The quantities of Diyat which have been mentioned in our books of Hadith and Fiqh are in accordance with this custom and tradition, which itself has its roots in the social conditions and cultural traditions of the Arabs. However, since then, the wheel of fortune has revolved through fourteen more centuries and the tide of time has sped past innumerable crests and falls. Social conditions and cultural traditions have undergone a drastic change. In present times, it is not possible to pay Diyat in the form of camels nor is it a very wise step to fix the amount of Diyat on this basis. The nature of 'عاقلة' (aqilah: community/tribe) has completely changed and various forms of unintentional murder have come into existence which could never have been imagined before. We know that the guidance provided by the Qur'an is for all times and for every society. Hence, in this regard it has directed us to follow the 'معروÙ' (ma'ruf: custom) which may change with time. By this Qur'anic directive, every society is to obey its customs, and since in our own society no law about Diyat exists previously, those at the helm of our state can either continue with the above mentioned Arab custom or re-legislate in this regard; whatever they do, if the society accepts the legislation, it will assume the status of our ma'ruf. Also, it is obvious that those in authority in any society can revise and re-structure the laws which are based on the ma'ruf, keeping in view the collective good of the masses.
http://www.renaissance.com.pk/septfeart2y2.html