Is there a difference between intentional and accidental killing of game by a person in the state of Ihram regarding the requirement of compensation (Jaza')?
Chapter on Ransom (Fidyah) and Penalty for Hunting
Al-Mughni
Book of Hajj
Primary text
There is no distinction between accidental and intentional killing of game for the obligation of compensation, according to one narration. This view is held by Al-Hasan, 'Ata', Al-Nakha'i, Malik, Al-Thawri, Al-Shafi'i, and the People of Opinion (Ashab Al-Ra'y). The evidence supporting this is the statement of Jabir, where the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) decreed a ram as compensation for a hyena killed by a Muhrim (one in Ihram), and similarly, the equivalent value for ostrich eggs harmed by a Muhrim. Neither instance involved a distinction between intention or error. This ruling is based on the principle that compensation for destruction is established regardless of intent, analogous to the liability for the loss of a human life.
Supporting text
The second narration dictates that there is no expiation (Kaffarah) for accidental killing. This position is taken by Ibn 'Abbas, Sa'id ibn Jubayr, Tawus, Ibn Al-Mundhir, and Dawud. Their proof is the verse stating, "And whoever kills it intentionally among you..." (Quran 5:95). By inference from the explicit mention of intentional killing, they deduce that there is no compensation for the accidental killer, as the default state is exoneration of liability, which requires specific proof to override. Furthermore, since accidental killing is a prohibition related to Ihram that does not invalidate the Ihram itself, they argue there must be a distinction between the intentional and accidental act, similar to the rulings on wearing sewn garments or using perfume.