What is the ruling on extracting a tooth from an adult whose permanent teeth have already fully erupted (Qad Thaghara)?
Chapter on Diyat (Blood Money) for Wounds
Al-Mughni
Book of Blood-Money (Diyyāt)
Primary text
If a tooth is extracted from a person who has fully erupted teeth, the diya is due immediately because the expectation is that it will not regrow. If it does regrow, the diya is not due, and the recipient must return it. This is the position of the Companions of Opinion. However, Malik stated that nothing is returned, as regrowth is not customary, and any return is considered a renewed gift from God, so what was due upon extraction remains obligatory. A narration from Al-Shafi'i aligns with both views.
Supporting text
The preferred opinion is that since a replacement like the original tooth has returned in its place, nothing is due, similar to the child whose tooth regrows. If the returned tooth is deficient or deformed, the ruling follows the established ruling for the child's returning tooth. If a tooth is extracted from a non-erupted child, the diya is ruled obligatory after a period of despairing regrowth, but if the tooth subsequently returns, the diya is waived, and any compensation taken must be returned, similar to the adult's tooth that returns.