عنوان مقاله [English]
roof of retaliation (qi.sas) in premeditated murder requires conditions, one of which is the equivalence of the perpetrator and the victim in “religion”. This condition is due to the controversy of Islamic jurists that there are three sects of narrations in relation to it. Thus, the Shiite jurists, by rejecting the narrations based on the retaliation of the Muslim killer against the Dhimmi infidel (first category), have been believed in the non-retaliation of the Muslim killer
murder of a muslim murderer against the tributary (dhimmi) infidel (third category). These narrations by attributing narrations tending to corroborate retaliation in the case of habitual murder, they refer to the absoluteness of some verses of the Holy Quran, such as the verse of denying (no) domination (Allah will by no means give the unbelievers a way against the believers), as well as the consensus of the jurists. However, it seems that their reasons for not proving (ascertaining) the retaliation of a Muslim murderer, absolutely or non- habitually, face serious problems. So that by renouncing the mentioned narrations to the infidel deserving to be fought with, finally in the face of the intentional killing (deliberate killing) of a Muslim against a dhimmi infidel (Tributary infidel), there will be no choice but to prove (ascertain) retribution.