Islam prices people like livestock

October 14, 2011

What’s the life of a human being worth under Islam?  A hundred camels if you’re a male.  If you’re a woman, fifty.  If you’re a non-Muslim, twenty-five.  From Crossroads Arabia last month:

The Price of Camels and a Life

Blood Money or diyya is an Shariah principle that arose to avoid feuds and independent application of lex talionis or retribution. In the case of accidental death, it may be covered by insurance, but for intentional killings, it falls upon the miscreant and his family. The value of blood money has remained static in Saudi Arabia for the past 29 years. It is now being raised to three or four times the old value to keep in line with the changes in its baseline figure: the price of a camel.

The Saudi system still values women’s lives at half that of men and of non-Muslims at only a quarter.

Proposal to raise blood money limit gets royal consent
ARAB NEWS RIYADH: Royal consent has been given to raise the diyyah (blood money) limit for murder to SR400,000 and accidental killings to SR300,000, Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper reported on Tuesday.

The newspaper said the adjustments were requested by the Supreme Court in light of the hikes in the price of camels. According to Shariah rules, the heirs of a murdered person should be compensated with 100 camels.

The new blood money values are expected to be circulated soon.

Blood money values, currently set at SR110,000 for murder and SR100,000 for accidental killings, have been static for the last 29 years. Murdered women are paid half of the amount…

Selling daughters for some sheep

Meanwhile, men across Afghanistan have a tradition of (and are continuing to) sell their daughters for “some sheep”…  Hat tip to Act for America and forrestlynx:

This is the same Islam that prohibits assigning a monetary value in terms of an interest rate (riba) to loans.  But the religion has no qualms about assigning a monetary value to people’s lives.  Nevertheless, we’re told that Islamic finance is more “ethical” than Western finance.


  1. To be specific the blood money is not applicable as 25% on all Non-Muslims, if you are a christian or Jew [People of books, as how they call them] then its 25%, 12.5 if you are a Hindu [only accepted in Hanafi schools, ah so nice of them that after committing genocide in millions, and pushing other millions in slavery, they found a rate ] … but if one is a Zoroastrian, Pagan, Atheist, Agnostic etc.. no chance, no blood money is applicable, as Islam dictate death sentence on them, and slavery to their kids and women …. Interesting is to find that the the marriage of a Muslim men to a Zoroastrian women is specifically mentioned to be void in Islamic jurisprudence [m6.7 , The Classic Manual of Islamic Sacred Law Umdat Al-Salik ISBN: 0915957728 ]… If considered in clear light, then ISlamic jurisprudence is sort of earliest Version of Racist Nürnberg law passed by Nazis…

    Never the less, yep we have to repeat that Islamic banking is more “ethical” than Western finance for sake of ‘Political correctness’…

  2. What a hate-filled world you’re working towards. You don’t attach people’s religions to their names when they commit crimes (I hope you’re not deluded enough to think non-Muslims simply don’t commit crimes), but the moment a Muslim does something wrong or unjustified you paint the picture as if it has something to do with Islam. Congratulations on your work towards world peace. Islam is the fastest growing religion in the world, despite there being no rabid army running around with swords, but it’s still the people’s popular choice, the moment they stop being biased and stop listening to your cruel terror-mongering. So go ahead, continue in the dark with your hate propaganda, while the rest of the world educates itself on Islam with an open mind and reaps its benefits.

    • In this case, the religion is central to the monetization/commoditization of human life. The Koran (5:45) and Book 83 of the Sahih Bukhari in particular lay out guidelines for blood tax compensation.

      • You once again libel a commentor by posting a summary with gross inaccuracy. “Anony” did not suggest Islam has nothing to do with diyya.

    • not sure if the Islamic command of not seeing evil committed by fellow ummah members, that had driven you to write that, or was it really your innocence …

      anyways its not the non-muslims attaching religion to the crime, its the work done by your own fellow ummah members … check any beheading video.. you will find koranic satanic verses read in starting …. there is nothing hidden, all what is restricting peoples are cries like yours….

      Hopefully my comment underline who really attach religion to crime, before you next time claim such rubbishness…

      now not documenting that visible fact, or trying to hide the fact is equivalent to speaking a lie … but then what one should say, Muslims are trying to hide the Mohammeded dirty deeds since centuries… wanna speak about 60 years old Mohammeed practicing pedophilia on a 6 yrs old Aisha ? thats also living islam.. isn’t it ? i mean look how many kids are denied their childhood due to islam….. so much about living islam…

  3. Although it is true that the religion is defined by its followers how can one justify the actions of the followers when they don’t even know what the orders are? The readers above are happy to refer 5:45 as their main source but I very much doubt that they have actually read it in full. No where does in Quran there exists a numbering system as is mentioned by the learned scholar above. Yes it is indeed defined by some school of thoughts in Islam, but if you cannot find the evidence in support from Quran, the teachings should not be taken seriously. Yes there are people to whom the teachings of the founders of these schools is sacred but based on how someone interprets a symbolic description should not be proof enough to label the symbols as satanic?

    • dear zargham, your words make sense if Islam allows interpretation, but it does not !! and koran does not come in a single package, it comes along with sīra and Hadith …. something which you failed to mention…

      anyways back to topic… the people, who consider the teachings of founder of schools are not considered Muslims! Two best visible example are Ahmadi’s and Bahai’s , both are prosecuted ..

      oh one more thing, the problem with Islam is not linked with teachings of founder of Islamic school of thoughts, its linked with teachings of founder of Islam.. namely Mohammed himself !!! tell me one horrible crime that he hadn’t committed ? Pedophilia, looting, Raping, Murders, genocides, FGM, slave trading … all comes in package with Mohammed biography !!

      • The response has been vague as expected. The debate was about the origins of blood money and the alleged numbering system and yet the response was all over the place.
        You should also have mentioned that sira and hadith are not a part of the quran, but are human narratives about the life and the saying of the prophet: a fact I am sure you are very well aware of, but thought not to mention it for the sake of the argument.
        The core of Islam, as you definitely know, encompasses Muhammad as the last prophet, the two examples you quoted: Bahai and Ahmadi have varying beliefs in this regard. The treatment by muslims, is indeed despicable but are prosecuted for reasons mentioned above.
        Reading your comments about Muhammad makes one wonder whether you are anti-religion or you are anti-Islam. The “ills” you associated with Muhammad can easily be associated with any religious figure, given one is willing to dive into history, and yet your obvious choice is Muhammad. It may either be because of your prejudice against Islam or may be a result of not having access to enough resources to form an informed opinion.

      • #zargham

        >>Reading your comments about Muhammad makes one wonder whether you are anti-religion or you are anti-Islam.

        If saying Truth is regarding as anti-crap .. then yes i am anti-crap… are you in denial about any of what i said? of course not.. rather you agreed that what i said was true…. though like any other person compromised moral (considering that you are not a dedicated Jihadi, because that would means you have no morals….), you are simply seeking a excuse to overlook your bigotry… and I am not willing to compromise my morals… any ways back to your query!

        >>The “ills” you associated with Muhammad can easily be associated with any religious figure,

        nice try dear… Lets Start with slavery ! I am not aware that Jesus, Moses, Krishna, Buddha, Mahavira were slave traders… can you enlighten me ? because i was always told that all of them condemned slavery (except Mohammed, the pedo abuser of ayisha).

        P.S. regarding blood money … its in Hadith, something without which koran is senseless because of self contradicting passage…

      • If Islam does not allow interpretation then why are there different rulings on the same issue?

      • #Jafar

        LOL, oh ye !! so why different sects of Islam does features different koran’s based on their interpretation ? why not Islamic judiciary [rulings] use brain and logics instead of Mohammed’s life as reference ? thousand why’s !!!!

        yes you are right, that different issues can have different rulings, but not based on interpretation .. rather based on embarrassment Islam brings to them, and to save their noses next to non-muslim world.. Infact as above pointed, sects in islam are based on how much Mohammed they adopt in their life, rather then based on interpretation of koran !…. best example of our time is fatwa regarding Radāʿ(adult suckling in office)…fatwa is not valid any more, but the controversy is worth revisiting … the excuse was that its bizarre to implement, as majority sects outcried….., though minority that proposed that proposed it because its not part of Mohammed sayings and deeds (the force that drive Islamic judiciary…)

        reference : Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3425: (http://www.cmje.org/religious-texts/hadith/muslim/008-smt.php)

        ‘A’isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Salim, the freed slave of Abu Hadhaifa, lived with him and his family in their house. She (i. e. the daughter of Suhail came to Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) and said: Salim has attained (purbety) [sic] as men attain, and he understands what they understand, and he enters our house freely, I, however, perceive that something (rankles) in the heart of Abu Hudhaifa, whereupon Allah’s Apostle (may peace be upon him) said to her: Suckle him and you would become unlawful for him, and (the rankling) which Abu Hudhaifa feels in his heart will disappear. She returned and said: So I suckled him, and what (was there) in the heart of Abu Hudhaifa disappeared.

      • Puneet, you obviously have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to islamic jurisprudence. There are five existent schools of Islamic jurisprudence each of which has several interpretations. None of these interpretations was developed as a reaction to the negative opinions of non-Muslims. I do not suggest that these interpretations are error free or not deserving of reform or our right repudiation. I am categorially stating that your position that Islam is frozen in time with absolutely no capacity to adapt to novel circumstances is incorrect.

  4. Okay, zargham. Take a look at this post which explains the Koranic basis in 2:178.

    Do we really have to cite chapter & verse every single time we refer to diyya?

    Apparently so..

  5. The commentary on the side stating that zargham said diyya does not exist in Islam is completely false. He wrote that it is not necessarily pegged to a particular ammount, (a camal in the case of Saudi Arabia). Why do you feel the need to provide commentary which is at best misleading? Are your positions that weak?

    Your article seems to indicate that you do not support compensating the relatives of a murder vicitm, or other intentional tort. Does this mean you do not support the compensation of the family of Nicole Brown Simpson for her murder?

    • Civil lawsuits in the U.S. are not based on mathematical equations attributed to Jesus.

      The calculation for a man’s life to the number of camels is provided in the Hadith.

      • Why are you dodging the issue that you misrepresented zargham’s statement regarding diyya? zargham pointed out that camels do not serve as the exclusive basis for calculating damages in a diyya (wrongful death suit), yet you falsely summarize his post as denying that diyya exists in Islam

        Your article ridicules diyya, yet when confronted with the realty that we have wrongful death suits in the United States to compensate the families of victims of violent crimes, all you can do is attack the basis of calculation used. Even this is a weak dodge as there is nothing mandating that camels are the only basis of calculation.

        I appreciate that you have an antipathy towards Islam, and Islamic law specifically, but whatever legitimate points you may have are obscured by your distortions of what poster write and your failure to even concede the obvious similarities between diyya and wrongful death suits (as well as other torts).

  6. Jafar:

    “Zargham” wrote “if you cannot find the evidence [for diyya] in support from Quran the teachings should not be taken seriously.”

    The basis for diyya, as we have spelled out several times now, comes from the Koran in 2:178 and 5:45.

    To your other point, if somebody commits murder in America, they are put on trial in criminal court. Civil proceedings our separate. The U.S. does not “excuse” or “release” murderers who agree to pay diyya, so your comparison is off-base.

    Anyway, thanks for your comments.

    • The sentence preceeding the one you cite reads, “[n]o where does in Quran there exists a numbering system as is mentioned by the learned scholar above.” It is therefore evident that your parathentical is wildly inaccurate as zargham was writing about, “the numbering system” (e.g. the basis of calculating damages) and did not state diyya does not exist.

      Your article insinuates that Islam denegrates human life because Saudi law uses camels as its basis for calculating damages [diyya] in personal injury [qisas] cases. When confronted with the twin facts that 1) the basis of calculation is not immutable, and 2) America law also places a calculation on human life you attempt to once again dodge by stating the Islamic and American legal systems are not the identical.

      Unfortunately your critic confuses the Islamic system of diyya and qisas with the right of the state to impose criminal penalties. The following is taken from Wikipedia, your preferred source on Islam.

      “[T]he state itself may prosecute for crimes committed alongside the qisas offense. If the victim’s family pardons the criminal, in addition to the sharia punishment he would normally receive a tazir prison sentence (such as ten to twenty years in prison) for crimes such as “intentional loss of life”, “tazir assault and battery” “disturbance of the peace”, and so forth.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia#Justice

      Tazir penalties are discretionary. While the article mentions ten to twenty years in prison, that is only an example. The state has the right to impose the death penalty on a murderer even if the family of the victim pardons the offender.

      I am not condemning you for your articles or your stance against Islam or Islamic law. I only hope that in the future you will conduct more exhaustive research.


      • Our source is the Koran and Hadith. Yours is Wikipedia. And you say our research is not “exhaustive” enough for you.


      • First, you again appear to be evading the central issues I raised regarding: 1) you mischaracertization of zargham’s post; and 2) the similarity between damage awards in tort suits in American and diyya payments [damage awards] in qisas [personal injury] cases. I do not see the need for such an evasion. Your critic would be merely limited to Saudi practice as opposed to diyya generally. Why not refine your position?

        Second, the Qur’an and hadith are sources of Islamic law and are not the entire corpus of the law. You appear to be attempting to demonstrate that your position is somehow more authentically Islamic or authoritative because of your reference to Qur’an and hadith. Neither the Qur’an or hadith require calculation of diyya based on the price of camels. Your reference to them is therefore misplaced. It would be like referring to the Declaration of Independence or Constitution to prove a point of regulatory law on which they are silent. In this context, your reference is irrelevant.

        Third, you have repeatedly cited Wikipedia as a source when it comes to the details of Islamic law. Wikipedia appears to be a principal source for you, which is why I referred to it. I apologize for my early snarky remark, and assumption that all you do is wiki everything and throw in an news article or two.

        Finally, you stated that “if somebody commits murder in America, they are put on trial in criminal court. Civil proceedings our separate. The U.S. does not “excuse” or “release” murderers who agree to pay diyya, so your comparison is off-base.” Your statement appears be an effort to dodge evidence that Islam does not have an immutable methodology for calcuating damages in a qisas [personal injury] case and the separation criminal and civil proceedings exists in Islamic law. In light of this additional information, perhaps you could refine your critic to Saudi Arabia instead of imputting Saudi practices to all of Islamic law.

        I wholeheartedly support your right to find faults with Islamic law. Your freedom to do so is one of the things which makes our country great. The freedoms we enjoy here are unparalleled anywhere else in world, and I would not trade them for life in a so-called “Islamic” country. I just hope that you will refer to the Arabic sources on Islamic law. If you do not read Arabic, I am sure you could find someone willing to assist you who does. Doing so would expontentionally improve the quality of your critic of Islamic law. If you have already done so, then it would be nice to see those efforts reflected in your articles.


  7. […] Islam prices people like livestock « Money Jihad […]

  8. Common elements of Islam with fascism

    Islam is a religion with a very political agenda. The ultimate goal of Islam is to rule the world. But what kind of government an Islamic state would have?
    It certainly won’t be democratic. Islam is not compatible with democracy. Amir Taheri, an Iranian born author/journalist in a debate on Islam and democracy argued that in fact the word democracy does not exist in any of the languages spoken by Muslims. “To understand a civilization,” Taheri said, “it is important to understand its vocabulary. If it was not on their tongues it is likely that it was not on their minds either.”
    Democracy implies equality. But equality is unacceptable in Islam. Un-believers cannot be equal to believers and women are not equal to men. Even the non-Muslims are not deemed to be equal. The People of the Book (Jews and Christians) are accepted as second class citizens and allowed to live in an Islamic state provided they pay the protection tax; Jizyah. But the pagans, atheists and idolaters are not regarded as fully humans. According to the Quran, the idolaters are to be killed wherever they are found. (9:5)
    In the April 9, 2002 issue, The Wall Street Journal published the concept of blood money in Saudi Arabia. If a person has been killed or caused to die by another, the latter has to pay blood money or compensation, as follow.
    100,000 riyals if the victim is a Muslim man
    50,000 riyals if a Muslim woman
    50,000 riyals if a Christian man
    25,000 riyals if a Christian woman
    6,666 riyals if a Hindu man
    3,333 riyals if a Hindu woman
    According to this hierarchy, a Muslim man’s life is worth 33 times that of a Hindu woman. This hierarchy is based on the Islamic definition of human rights and is rooted in the Quran and Sharia (Islamic law). How can we talk of democracy when the concept of equality in Islam is inexistent?
    Of course killing the idolaters “where ye find them” was not always expedient. What would the Muslim rulers in India gain if they killed all the Hindus? Over whom would they rule? So pragmatism often prevailed and Muslim rulers would exert some degree of tolerance towards their pagan subjects. It is hard to find a Muslim ruler as ruthless as Muhammad himself. Muslim rulers killed whenever profit dictated and since live subjects were more profitable than dead ones, exterminations were not total as was intended by Muhammad. Nonetheless, their tolerance was out of political expediency. Muhammad’s butchery of his victims on the other hand, was psychopathological. He would massacre entire populations simply because they rejected him or hurt his narcissistic ego.
    The Christians and the Jews, the so called People of the Book, had some conditional rights. They had to pay Jizyah and buy their protection. Nonetheless they lived in a state of religious apartheid and were subject to humiliating treatments. For example, they were considered najis (impure) and were not allowed to go out in rainy days, lest their impurity rub on a passing Muslim, make him “impure” and annul his prayer.
    Jews and Christians were required to dismount from their riding animals if they met a Muslim on their way and they were supposed to greet him humbly and show submissiveness towards him. The Dhimmis were not allowed to build their houses taller than those of their Muslim neighbors and in some cases they were not allowed to build new churches and synagogues and needed permission to repair the existing ones. This law is practiced to this day in virtually all Muslim countries.
    Taheri says: “To say that Islam is incompatible with democracy should not be seen as a disparagement of Islam. On the contrary, many Muslims would see it as a compliment because they sincerely believe that their idea of rule by God is superior to that of rule by men which is democracy.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: