How should a claim specifying intentional homicide be treated if the claimant subsequently defines 'intentional' as 'quasi-intentional killing' (*amd al-khata*)?
Chapter on Qasamah (Oaths regarding murder)
Al-Mughni
Book of Blood-Money (Diyyāt)
Primary text
If a claimant asserts intentional homicide but explains their definition of intent as quasi-intentional killing, their explanation must be accepted, and they shall swear upon what they have explained. This acceptance is based on the understanding that the claimant erred in classifying quasi-intentional killing as intentional, which is an understandable confusion. The basis for this ruling is that the claim has been clarified, and the error was merely in terminology regarding an ambiguous matter, for which the claimant should not be penalized.
Supporting text
Al-Muzani narrated from Al-Shafi'i that the oath should not be administered because by initially claiming intent, the liability of the *aqilah* was waived; therefore, a subsequent claim shifting liability back to them should not be accepted. Furthermore, if the judge had administered the oath before the claim was formalized and the type of killing determined, the oath would be invalid because the claim was inadmissible in its initial form.