What is the ruling on retributive torture in two cases: First, if a Muslim is tortured to death and his family demands retributive torture, should the perpetrator be tortured to death, and should he be killed with a sword stroke despite the different methods of killing he employed? And if the victim's family insists on torture, should the perpetrator be tortured and then left, or should he be killed without being tortured? Second, if a Muslim is tortured but does not die, what is the fundamental ruling on retributive torture, and should the perpetrator be tortured literally in the same manner as the victim, no matter how horrific it was? If the answer is no, should the torture inflicted on the perpetrator be alleviated, and does the ruling differ if the torture caused a permanent condition?

The ruling on torture and retribution (qisas) can be summarized as follows:

- Retribution is legislated if it can be exacted without injustice; otherwise, the alternative is disciplinary punishment (ta'zir) and blood money (diyah).

- The majority of jurists do not consider retribution to be legislated for a slap or a whip strike, or similar actions, if no injury results, due to the lack of precision.

- Scholars differed on the method of retribution for taking a life: - The Hanafis and the Hanbalis (the soundest opinion among them) hold that retribution is only exacted with a sword, based on the saying of the Prophet, peace be upon him: "There is no retribution except with the sword." - The Malikis, the Shafi'is, and one narration among the Hanbalis hold that the victim's family may do to the perpetrator what he did, killing him with the same method he used, based on the Almighty's saying: "{And if you punish, then punish with the like of that with which you were punished}." Killing by magic, sodomy, alcohol, or similar methods where retribution cannot be exacted in kind, are exceptions.

- Scholars differed on retribution for the loss of a limb's function while its form remains: - The Malikis, the Hanbalis, and the Shafi'is hold that retribution applies to the loss of sight, hearing, smell, and similar functions that have precise locations. - The Hanafis hold that retribution is permissible only for the loss of sight, and there is no retribution for the loss of intellect, hearing, speech, smell, or other functions.