He said that ar-Rubaiyi‘, paternal aunt of Anas b. Malik, broke the front tooth of a girl of the Ansar, and when they went to the Prophet he ordered retaliation to be taken. Then Anas b. an-Nadr, paternal uncle of Anas b. Malik, said, “No, by God, her front tooth will not be broken, Messenger of God." He replied, “Anas, God’s decree is retaliation." But the people were agreeable to accepting a fine, so God’s Messenger said, “Among God’s servants there are those who, if one adjured God, would consent to it."
Anas said that a Jew crushed a girl’s head between two stones and she was asked who had done this to her, whether it was so and so, or so and so, until the Jew was named, whereupon she gave a sign with her head. The Jew was fetched, and when he admitted it God’s Messenger gave command that his head should be crushed with stones.
Abu Juhaifa said he asked ‘Ali whether he had any instruction not contained in the Qur’an and he replied, “By Him who split the seed and created the soul, I have nothing but what is in the Qur’an, except understanding which a man is given regarding His Book and what is in the document.” He asked him what the document contained, and he replied, “Blood wit, the setting free of a prisoner, and that a Muslim should not be killed for an infidel.”
Abu Shuraih al-Ka'bi reported God’s Messenger as saying, “Then you, Khuza’a, have killed this man of Hudhail, but I swear by God that I will pay his blood wit. If anyone kills a man hereafter his people will have a choice, to kill him if they wish, or to accept blood wit if they wish."
Tirmidhi and Shafi‘i transmitted it. It occurs in Sharh as-sunna with his isnad, but it states clearly that it does not occur in the two Sahihs on the authority of Abu Shuraih, saying that they rendered it from Abu Huraira’s version, meaning something similar.*
*In Masabih as-sunna the tradition is given among the sound ones without any reference to its source. Here Sharh as-sunna is quoted to the effect that the above tradition is not given by Bukhari or Muslim, but that they give something similar on Abu Huraira’s authority. Section 1 is normally confined to traditions from Bukhari or Muslim, or from both, so it is strange to find that a tradition from another source is here preferred to theirs.
