What is the legal ruling regarding a master ordering a non-cognizant slave to kill, even if the master knows the act carries the risk of fatal consequences?
Chapter on Retaliation (Qawad)
Al-Mughni
Book of Wounds
Primary text
The killing committed by a slave who is unaware of the prohibition of killing is a prohibited act. If the master was aware of the risk of death, the master is subject to penal discipline (Ta'dib), while the slave incurs no Qisas. The initial mention of the slave being non-Arabian (A'jami) served to confirm genuine ignorance. Ignorance of the prohibition of killing is only excused for one raised outside the lands of Islam; one residing in Islamic lands among its people is presumed to know the prohibition and is not excused.
Supporting text
If the slave was aware of the prohibition of killing, Qisas is applied against the slave, and the master is disciplined (Ta'dib) for commanding an act leading to killing, through measures such as detention (Habs) and corporal punishment (Ta'zir) as deemed appropriate by the Imam. Ahmad narrated a view suggesting the slave should be beaten and disciplined. Abu Talib narrated from Ahmad that the heirs may execute the slave, and the slave should be imprisoned until death, based on the principle that the slave is the master's lash and sword. Sayyiduna Ali and Abu Hurayrah held similar views regarding severe punishment, and Al-Shafi'i also upheld this general position. Qatadah stated both parties (master and slave) are killed. Sulayman ibn Musa suggested that the one who commanded the killing should suffer the penalty for the limb injury and be punished and imprisoned, but not Qisas for life, as he did not directly perpetrate the killing nor force it, similar to the case where the slave knew the prohibition.