What is the liability for subsequent harm (*sirayah*) if a wound from an assault heals, retaliation (*qisas*) is performed, and then the retaliation wound breaks open and festers?

Primary text

The subsequent harm (*sirayah*) resulting from the execution of retaliation is not guaranteed (not liable for). This is because the retaliation was carried out after its permissibility was established. If a hand was cut as retaliation for an assault, and the victim healed, but then the retaliation wound festered and the victim died from it, the heirs of the victim have the right to demand the life of the perpetrator. This is because the death resulted from the initial assault. If the heirs opt for blood money (*diyah*) instead, they receive nothing, as the cutting already compensated for what its value equals, which is the hand, and subsequent harm arising from the execution of the *qisas* (retaliation) also does not mandate payment because the right to *qisas* itself lapsed upon the victim's death, and *diyah* cannot be imposed for the reasons stated.