How is compensation liability apportioned among two hunters whose non-fatal wounds combine to cause death, where the first hunter could have slaughtered but did not?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Hunting and Slaughter
Primary text
Under the proportionality method, if the first hunter's shot diminished the value by one unit and the second by one unit (out of a total value of ten), the second hunter is liable for the direct diminution (one unit) plus half of the remaining value after that diminution (half of eight, which is four), totaling five units. If the second hunter's diminution was two units, they are liable for that (two) plus half of the remaining value (half of seven, which is three and a half), totaling five and a half units. This division applies similarly if the game belonged to someone else. This method justifies the equal liability for the resulting death (saraayah) because both equally contributed to the remaining loss beyond their direct damage, and it accounts for the difference in how assessed value (arsh) applies to animals versus humans.
Supporting text
The Shafi'i scholars propose six methods for dividing compensation. The soundest among them suggests that the first hunter caused the loss of half a life valued at ten (liability of five), and the second caused the loss of half a life valued at nine (liability of four and a half), totaling nine and a half. This total loss (nine and a half) is then prorated against the original value (ten), reducing the first hunter's initial liability of five by the amount corresponding to the reduction in the total loss (four and a half). A challenge to this method is that it holds each hunter liable for more than half the value of the animal at the time they inflicted their wound.