If an assailant severs a man's hands and feet, then strikes his neck before the wounds heal, what is the prescribed retribution?
Chapter on Retaliation (Qawad)
Al-Mughni
Book of Wounds
Primary text
In one narration from Imam Ahmad, the ruling is that the assailant must be killed by the sword to the neck, and the prior mutilations of the hands and feet are not reciprocated. This position is supported by 'Ata, Al-Thawri, Abu Yusuf, and Muhammad, based on the Hadith stating, 'There is no Qisas except by the sword' (reported by Ibn Majah). Furthermore, since retribution for life is the primary form, the limb mutilations fall under the ruling of the whole, as in Diyah, where only the Diyah for life would be due. The intent of Qisas for life is the total incapacitation and destruction of the whole, which is achieved by severing the neck; therefore, torture through mutilation is not permissible.
Supporting text
The second narration from Imam Ahmad holds that the victim's guardian is entitled to inflict upon the assailant the same actions performed upon the victim (mutilation followed by execution). This is the position of 'Umar ibn 'Abd al-'Aziz, Malik, Al-Shafi'i, Abu Hanifa, and Abu Thawr, based on the Quranic verses commanding retribution proportional to the offense (Quran 16:126 and Quran 2:194), and the Hadith regarding the reciprocal treatment of the Jew who crushed a slave girl's head. Additionally, the verse 'And the eye for an eye' (Quran 5:45) supports specific retaliation for specific injuries, and the Hadith stating, 'Whoever burns, we burn him, and whoever drowns, we drown him,' confirms retribution by matching the method of harm.