There is not a single well-authenticated statement by the Prophet (blessings
and peace be upon him), nor any consensus of religious authorities (Ijm,')
to establish that the blood money paid for the killing of a woman is half
the sum paid for the killing of a man. There are two Hadiths (prophetic
traditions), neither perfectly authenticated, that address the question.
The best one on terms of authentication is that narrated Al-Nisa"i and
Al-Daraqatny, which still suffers a time gap in the chain of transmitters
up to the Prophet (blessings and peace be upon him). Statements related
to the Companions suffer in the same manner. What remains then is the only
well-authenticated tradition on the subject "for a soul, a hundred camels."
The general agreement of authorities that make the value of the blood money
paid for the killing of a woman half that for the killing of a man falls
short of a consensus. Ibn `UIayya and Al-Asam, two scholars from the high
order of jurisprudents (fuquh," as-salaf) make the value of the blood money
the same for both men and women. This opinion is in agreement with the
generality of reference to "believer" and `soul" in the Qur'an and the
Hadith. If we opt for this opinion today, we are not to blame since, in
addition to the previous reason, the legal opinion (fatwa) could change
with the age and environment but the new legal opinion is not in conflict
with the relevant textual statements nor with the general objectives of
Islamic Teachings. Under the subtitle of "Blood Money, the Same for Men
and Women," Sheikh Shaltut writes:
Woman's humanity stemming from the same origin as that of the man, her
blood is the same as his, he being from her and she from him and equal
retaliation in kind being the rule common to both cases of homicide and
hell and damnation being the other wordly punishment for the killing of
either man or woman, so the rule of the verse applies to the accidental
homicide of either a man or a woman.
Given that our primary frame of reference is the Qur'an, we find that its
statement is general and does not privilege the man with any special status:
"and whosoever kills a believer by mistake (it
is ordained that) he must set free a believing
slave and a compensation (blood-money i.e.
Diya) be given to the deceased's family".31
It is true that the scholars have differed over the amount of blood money,
whether it is the same or double in the man's case. Al-Razi tells us in
his At-Tafsr Al-Kabr that the majority of jurisprudents double the sum
in cases of male homicide. He adds that Al-Asam and Ibn `Ulayya make the
sum paid the same. The majority cite the ruling of the Companions `Ali,
`Umar and Ibn Mas'ud ruling on this matter, as well as the rules of inheritance
and legal testimony in which the woman's inheritance and testimony equals
only half those of the man. Al-Asam, however, cites the verse: and whosoever
kills a believer by mistake32
All agree this verse addresses both men and women, therefore the ruling
on the sum paid is the same.