Three Is Greater Than Four: A Mathematical Paradox

In the discussion on restitution for mayhem (willful bodily injury) in his Mughni, Ibn Qudama says:

شاوي جراح المرأة جراح الرجل إلى ثلث الدية، فان جاوزالثلث فعلى النصف.

روي هذا عن عمروابن عمروزيد ين ثابرا. وبه قال سعيد بن المسيب وعمرين عبدالعزيز وعروة بن الزبيروالزهري وقتادة والأعرج ورييعة وماكل. قال اين عبد البر؛ وهوقول فقهاء المدينة السبعة وجمهورأهل المدينة. وحي عن الشافي في القديم. وروي عن على — رقى هللا عنه — أنها على النصف في ما قل أوكار.

وروي ذكل عن ابن سيرن. وبه قال الثوري واليث وابن أبي ليلى واين شرمة وأو حنيفة وأصحابه وأو ثور والبشافي في ظاهرمذهبه، واختاره ان المنذر قال ريعة؛ قنت لسعيد ن المسيب؛ كم في إصبع المرأة؟ قال؛ عشر. قلت؛ في إصبعين؟ قال؛ عشرون. قت؛ في ثلاث أصاع؟ قال؛ ثلاثون. قلت؛ في أرع؟ قال؛ عشرون. قلت؛ لمنا عظمت مصيبتها قل عقلها؟! قال؛ هكذا اسلئة يا اين أح!^{^[1220]}

The [restitution for] injury to a woman is equivalent to [the amount payable for] injury to a man, up to one-third of the blood-money [for a homicide].

If the [injury calculation] exceeds one-third, it will be half [of the blood-money]. This was reported from 'Umar, Ibn 'Umar, and Zayd b. Thabit, as well as Sa'id b. al-Musayyib, 'Umar b. 'Abd al-Aziz, 'Urwa b. al-Zubayr, Zuhri, Qatada, ['Abd al-Rahman] al-A'raj, Rabi'a, and Malik. Ibn 'Abd al-Barr said that this was the opinion of the Seven Jurists of Medina as well as other jurists of the town. It was also reportedly Shafis old opinion. 'All [on the other hand] is reported to have held that the [restitution for the injury of a woman] is half [of that of a man for every injury], whether small or large [and many other jurists agreed with this opinion]. Rabi'a said, “I said to Sa'id b. al-Musayyib, ‘What is the restitution for a woman's finger?' He said, ‘Ten [camels].' I said, ‘What about two fingers?' He said, ‘Twenty.' I said, ‘What about three fingers?' He said, ‘Thirty.' I said, ‘What about four fingers?' He said, ‘Twenty.' I said, ‘When her injury worsens, her restitution decreases?' He said, ‘That is the Sunna, O son of my brother!'"

The opinion attributed to 'All in Ibn Qudama's text, specifying a uniform standard of restitution for women's injuries, is recorded in both Sunni^[1221] and Shi^[1222] hadith collections.^[1223] It clearly applies to cases of mayhem that lead to the loss of fingers, as in the scenario raised by Rabi'a. The opposite opinion risks the paradox that Sa'id b. al-Musayyib, the well-known late first-century jurist of Medina (d. 94), faced—namely, that the restitution for the loss of four fingers ended up being less than that for the loss of three.^[1224] Sa'id b. al-Musayyib's answer is both mathematically paradoxical and legally incomprehensible.

A redaction of Sa'id b. al-Musayyib's conversation with his student is attributed to an alleged conversation between Ja'far alSdiq and a learned disciple of his, Aban b. Taghlib.^[1225] Ja'far al-Sadiq advised his followers that when facing a case such as this one, in which a position that the common sense^[1226] could not understand was ascribed to the Imams, they should suspend judgment and refer the case to the Imams.^[1227] The standards of 'ilm rijal al-hadith concerning the reliability or lack thereof of transmitters were not applicable in such situations.

The point made in the statements quoted from 'Ah, Ibn 'Abbas, and Muhammad al-Baqir about potentially conflicting inheritance shares—that there are no mathematical paradoxes in the religion of God^[1228]—also applies here:

إنن الذي أحص رمل عالج ليعلم أتن الفرائض لانعول على أكش من ستة.

He who counted the sand grains of the desert surely knows that the number of shares does not exceed six.

<< | >>

↑

Source: Modarressi Hossein. Text and Interpretation: Imam Jaʿfar Al-Ṣādiq and His Legacy in Islamic Law. Harvard University Press,2022. — 375 p.. 2022

More legal literature on Laws.Studio

Three Is Greater Than Four: A Mathematical Paradox

More on the topic Three Is Greater Than Four: A Mathematical Paradox: