Is expiation due for accidental killing regardless of the victim's characteristics or the method of causation?
Chapter on Qasamah (Oaths regarding murder)
Al-Mughni
Book of Blood-Money (Diyyāt)
Primary text
Scholarly consensus holds that expiation is due upon the accidental killer whether the deceased was male or female, young or old. Expiation is obligatory whether the killer directly performed the act or caused the death through means that incur liability for life, such as digging a well, setting a trap (like a knife), or giving false testimony. This view is held by Malik and Al-Shafi'i.
Supporting text
Abu Hanifa holds that expiation is not obligatory for causing death indirectly (by means) because he considers it not to be actual killing, and because the liability for blood money is assumed by the 'Aqilah (blood relatives) without direct participation in the killing. The rejoinder is that causation is analogous to direct action in incurring liability for blood money, thus it should be analogous in requiring expiation. Furthermore, causation that necessitates liability for life necessitates expiation, similar to a rider whose animal tramples a person. Their analogy breaks down when considering a father forcing someone to kill his son; expiation is due from the father without direct action, differentiating it from the 'Aqilah who pay on behalf of another without committing the act themselves.