What is the ruling when a slave inflicts an injury upon his master that mandates retaliation (qawad) but the injury is less than loss of life?

Primary text

If the injury mandates retaliation but is less than the loss of life, the right belongs to the master. If the master pardons the injury in exchange for financial compensation (mal), the right to retaliation (qisas) is forfeited, and the compensation is not obligatory, based on the principle that the slave is the master's property. Similarly, if the master pardons without compensation, the right is waived. However, if the master chooses to exact retaliation, he is permitted to do so because the master does not possess the right to injure his own slave, and thus this right is established for him through the slave's injurious act against him. Retaliation is established for deterrence, and there is a need to deter the slave from harming his master. If retaliation is exacted, the master must pay the slave's value, which is held as a pledge in place of the slave, serving to settle any debt, because the master voluntarily removes the slave from being collateral (by execution), thus requiring compensation, similar to the case of manumission.