What is the ruling on qisas in the following cases: If a man cuts off another man's right hand, which is paralyzed, and the assailant's right hand is sound? And if the owner of the paralyzed right hand cuts off another man's sound right hand, should the paralyzed hand be amputated in retribution for the sound one?

The jurists differ on the issue of qisas (retaliation) for a paralyzed hand.

The Maliki school holds that there is no qisas for a paralyzed hand whatsoever, whether it is the aggressor's hand or the victim's hand. Instead, there is 'aql (blood money or government compensation) for it.

As for the Shafi'i and Hanbali schools, a healthy hand is not taken in qisas for a paralyzed one; rather, there is government compensation for it.

If a paralyzed hand severs a healthy hand, there is also 'aql for it, unless the victim agrees to qisas and its amputation would not harm the aggressor, in which case qisas is permissible.

It is a condition for the permissibility of qisas for a paralyzed hand against a healthy one that experts affirm that the amputation would not harm the aggressor.