Malik related to me that he had heard that Abdullah ibn Umar was asked whether a slave could be bought on the specific condition that it was to be used to fulfil the obligation of freeing a slave, and he said, "No."

Malik said, "That is the best of what I have heard on the obligation of freeing slaves. Someone who has to set a slave free because of an obligation on him, may not buy one on the condition that he sets it free because if he does that, whatever he buys is not completely a slave because he has reduced its price by the condition he has made of setting it free."

Malik added, "There is no harm, however, in someone buying a person expressly to set him free."

Malik said, "The best of what I have heard on the obligation of freeing slaves is that it is not permitted to free a christian or a jew to fulfil it, and one does not free a mukatab or a mudabbar or an umm walad or a slave to be freed after a certain number of years, or a blind person. There is no harm in freeing a christian, jew, or magian voluntarily, because Allah, the Blessed, the Exalted, said in His Book, 'either as a favour then or by ransom,' (Sura 47 ayat 4) The favour is setting free."

Malik said, "As for obligations of freeing slaves which Allah has mentioned in the Book, one only frees a mumin slave for them."

Malik said, "It is like that in feeding poor people for kaffara. One must only feed muslims and one does not feed anyone outside of the deen of Islam."

Malik related to me that he had heard that Said ibn al-Musayyab was asked who had the wala' of the children whom a slave had by a free woman. Said said, "If their father dies and he is a slave who was not set free, their wala' belongs to the mawali of their mother."

Malik said, "That is like the child of a woman who is a mawla who has been divorced by lian; the child is attached to the mawali of his mother and they are his mawali. If he dies, they inherit from him. If he commits a crime, they pay the blood-money for him. If his father acknowledges him, he is given a kinship to him and his wala' goes to the mawali of his father. They are his heirs, they pay his blood-money and his father is punished with the hadd-punishment."

Malik said, "It is like that with a free-born woman divorced by lian. If her husband who curses her by lian does not acknowledge her child, the child is dealt with in the same way except that the rest of his inheritance after the inheritance of his mother and his brothers from his mother goes to all the muslims as long as he was not given kinship to his father. The child of the lian is attached to the patronage of the mawali of his mother until his father acknowledges him because he does not have a lineage or paternal relations. If his lineage is confirmed, it goes to his paternal relations."

Malik said, "The generally agreed-on way of doing things among us about a child of a slave by a free woman, while the father of the slave is free, is that the grandfather (the father of the slave), attracts the wala' of his son's free children by a free woman. They leave their inheritance to him as long as their father is a slave. If the father becomes free, the wala' returns to his mawali. If he dies and he is still a slave, the inheritance and the wala' go to the grandfather. If the slave has two free sons, and one of them dies while the father is still a slave, the grandfather, the father of the father, attracts the wala' and the inheritance."

Malik spoke about a slave-girl who was set free while she was pregnant and her husband was a slave and then her husband became free before she gave birth, or after she gave birth. He said, "The wala' of what is in her womb goes to the person who set the mother free because slavery touched the child before the mother was set free. It is not treated in the same way as a child conceived by its mother after she has been set free because the wala' of such a child, is attracted by the father when he is set free."

Malik said that if a slave asked his master's permission to free a slave of his and his master gave permission, the wala' of the freed slave went to the master of his master, and his wala' did not return to the master who had set him free, even if he were to become free himself."

Malik said, "What is done among us when a slave divorces a slave- girl when she is a slave and then she is set free, is that her idda is the idda of a slave-girl, and her being set free does not change her idda whether or not he can still return to her. Her idda is not altered."

Malik added, "The hadd-punishment which a slave incurs is the same as this. When he is freed after he has incurred but before the punishment has been executed, his hadd is the hadd of the slave."

Malik said, "When a free man divorces a slave-girl three times, her idda is two periods. When a slave divorces a free woman twice, her idda is three periods."

Malik said about a man who had a slave-girl as a wife, and he bought her and set her free, ''Her idda is the idda of a slave-girl, i.e. two periods, as long as he has not had intercourse with her. If he has had intercourse with her after buying her and before he set her free, she only has to wait until one period has passed . "

Malik said, "Neither a free man nor a slave who divorces a slave- girl nor a slave who divorces a free woman, in an irrevocable divorce, is obliged to pay maintenance even if she is pregnant, and he cannot return to her."

Malik said, "A free man is not obliged to pay for the suckling of his son when he is a slave of other people, nor is a slave obliged to spend his money for what his master owns except with the permission of his master."

Yahya related to me that Malik said, "What is done in our community in the case of a man who makes his slave-girl a mudabbara and she gives birth to children after that, and then the slave-girl dies before the one who gave her a tadbir is that her children are in her position. The conditions which were confirmed for her are confirmed for them. The death of their mother does not harm them. If the one who made her mudabbara dies, they are free if their value is less than one third of his total property."

Malik said, "For every mother by birth as opposed to mother by suckling, her children are in her position. If she is free and she gives birth after she is free, her children are free. If she is a mudabbara or mukataba, or freed after a number of years in service, or part of her is free or pledged or she is an umm walad, each of her children are in the same position as their mother. They are set free when she is set free and they are slaves when she is a slave."

Malik said about the mudabbara given a tadbir while she was pregnant, "Her children are in her position. That is also the position of a man who frees his slave- girl while she is pregnant and does not know that she is pregnant."

Malik said, "The sunna about such women is that their children follow them and are set free by their being set free."

Malik said, "It is the same as if a man had bought a slave-girl while she was pregnant. The slave-girl and what is in her womb belong to the one who bought her whether or not the buyer stipulates that."

Malik continued, "It is not halal for the seller to make an exception about what is in her womb because that is an uncertain transaction. It reduces her price and he does not know if that will reach him or not. That is as if one sold the foetus in the womb of the mother. That is not halal because it is an uncertain transaction ."

Malik said about the mukatab or mudabbar who bought a slave- girl and had intercourse with her and she became pregnant by him and gives birth, "The children of both of them by a slave-girl are in his position. They are set free when he is set free and they are slaves when he is a slave."

Malik said, "When he is set free, the umm walad is part of his property which is surrendered to him when he is set free."

The Prophet said, "If one manumits his share of a common slave (Abd), and he has money sufficient to free the remaining portion of the price of the slave (justly estimated), then he should free the slave completely by paying the rest of his price; otherwise the slave is freed partly. "

Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab, and he had heard from al-Qasim ibn Muhammad that they said, "When a free man marries a slave-girl and consummates the marriage, she makes him muhsan."

Malik said, "All (of the people of knowledge) I have seen said that a slave-girl makes a free man muhsan when he marries her and consummates the marriage."

Malik said, "A slave makes a free woman muhsana when he consummates a marriage with her and a free woman only makes a slave muhsan when he is freed and he is her husband and has had sexual relations with her after he has been set free. If he parts from her before he is free, he is not a muhsan unless he marries her after having been set free and he consummates the marriage."

Malik said, "When a slave-girl is married to a free man and then he separates from her before she is set free, his marriage to her does not make her muhsana. She is not muhsana until she has married after she has been set free and she has had intercourse with her husband. That gives her ihsan. If she is the wife of a freeman and then she is set free while she is his wife before he separates from her, the man makes her muhsana if he has intercourse with her after she has been set free."

Malik said, "The christian and jewish free women and the muslim slave-girl all make a muslim free man muhsan when he marries one of them and has intercourse with her."

Malik said, "The generally agreed-on way of doing things among us in the case of slave whose master makes a bequest to free part of him - a third, a fourth, a half, or any share after his death, is that only the portion of him is freed that his master has named. This is because the freeing of that portion is only obliged to take place after the death of the master because the master has the option to withdraw the bequest as long as he lives. When the slave is freed from his master, the master is a testator and the testator only has access to free what he can take from his property, being the third of the property he is allowed to bequeath, and the rest of the slave is not free because the man's property has gone out of his hands. How can the rest of the slave which belongs to other people be free when they did not initiate the setting free and did not confirm it and they do not have the wala' established for them? Only the deceased could do that. He was the one who freed him and the one for whom the wala' was confirmed. That is not to be borne by another's property unless he bequeaths within the third of his property what remains of a lave to be freed. That is a request against his partners and inheritors and the partners must not refuse the slave that when it is within the third of the dead man's property because there is no harm in that to the inheritors."

Malik said, "If a man frees a third of his slave while he is critically ill, he must complete the emancipation so all of him is free from him, if it is within the third of his property that he has access to, because he is not treated in the same way as a man who frees a third of a slave after his death, because had the one who freed a third of his slave after his death lived, he could have cancelled it and the slave's being set free would be of no effect. The master who made the freeing of the third of the slave irrevocable in his illness, would still have to free all of him if he lived. If he died, the slave would be set free within the third of the bequest. That is because the command of the deceased is permissible in his third as the command of the healthy is permissible in all his property."

Malik said, "A master who frees a slave of his and settles his emancipation so that his testimony is permitted, his inviolability complete, and his right to inherit confirmed, cannot impose stipulations on him like what he imposes on a slave about property or service, nor get him to do anything of slavery, because the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "If a man frees his share of a slave and has enough money to cover the full price of the slave justly evaluated for him, he must give his partners their shares so the slave is completely free."

Malik commented, "If he owns the slave completely, it is more proper to free him completely and not mingle any slavery with it."

Yahya related to me from Malik from Yahya ibn Said that Said ibn al-Musayyab said, "The slave girl is not married when there is a free woman who is a wife unless the free woman wishes it. If the free woman complies, she has two-thirds of the division of time."

Malik said, "A free man must not marry a slave-girl when he can afford to marry a free-woman, and he should not marry a slave-girl when he cannot afford a free woman unless he fears fornication. That is because Allah, may he be Blessed and Exalted, says in His Book, 'If you are not affluent enough to marry believing women, who are muhsanat, take slave-girls who are believing women that your right hands own.' (Sura 4 ayat 24) He says, 'That is for those of you who fear al-anat.' "

Malik said, "Al-anat is fornication."

The Prophet said, "Whoever frees his portion of a common slave should free the slave completely by paying the rest of his price from his money if he has enough money; otherwise the price of the slave is to be estimated and the slave is to be helped to work without hardship till he pays the rest of his price."

The Prophet (saws) was brought a pouch containing bead and divided it among free women and slave women. Aisha said: My father used to divide things between free men and slave.

Malik said about a man who had his slave in a kitaba and then the mukatab died and left his umm walad, and there remained for him some of his kitaba to pay and he left what would pay it, "The umm walad is a slave since the mukatab was not freed until he died and he did not leave children that were set free by his paying what remained, so that the umm walad of their father was freed by their being set free."

Malik said about a mukatab who set free a slave of his or gave sadaqa with some of his property and his master did not know that until he had set the mukatab free, "That has been performed by him and the master does not rescind it. If the master of the mukatab knows before he sets the mukatab free, he can reject that and not permit it. If the mukatab is then freed and it becomes in his power to do so, he does not have to free the slave, nor give the sadaqa unless he does it voluntarily from himself."

Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that Marwan ibn al-Hakam wrote to Muawiya ibn Abi Sufyan to mention to him that a drunkard was brought to him who had killed a man. Muawiya wrote to him to kill him in retaliation for the dead man.

Yahya said that Malik said, "The best of what I have heard on the interpretation of this ayat, the word of Allah, the Blessed, the Exalted, 'The free man for the free man and the slave for the slave - these are men and the woman for the woman,' (Sura 2 ayat 178) is that retaliation is between women as it is between men. The free woman is killed for the free woman as the free man is killed for the free man. The slave-girl is slain for the slave-girl as the slave is slain for the slave. Retaliation is between women as it is between men. That is because Allah, the Blessed, the Exalted, said in His Book, 'We have written for them in it that it is a life for a life and an eye for an eye, a nose for a nose, and an ear for an ear, and a tooth for a tooth, and for wounds there is retaliation.' (Sura 5 ayat 48) Allah, the Blessed, the Exalted, mentioned that it is a life for a life. It is the life of a free woman for the life of a free man, and her injury for his injury."

Malik said about a man who held a man fast for another man to hit, and he died on the spot, "If he held him and he thought that he meant to kill him, the two of them are both killed for him. If he held him and he thought that he meant to beat him as people sometimes do, and he did not think that he meant to kill him, the murderer is slain and the one who held him is punished with a very severe punishment and jailed for a year. There is no killing against him."

Malik said about a man who murdered a man intentionally or gouged out his eye intentionally, and then was slain or had his eye gouged out himself before retaliation was inflicted on him, "There is no blood-money nor retaliation against him. The right of the one who was killed or had his eye gouged out goes when the thing which he is claiming as retaliation goes. It is the same with a man who murders another man intentionally and then the murderer dies. When the murderer dies, the one seeking blood-revenge has nothing of blood- money or anything else. That is by the word of Allah, the Blessed the Exalted, 'Retaliation is written for you in killing. The free man for the free man and the slave for the slave.' "

Malik said, "He only has retaliation against the one who killed him. If the man who murdered him dies, he has no retaliation or blood-money."

Malik said, "There is no retaliation held against a free man by a slave for any injury. The slave is killed for the free man when he intentionally murders him. The free man is not slain for the slave, even if he murders him intentionally. It is the best of what I have heard."

Malik said, "When a mukatab sets his own slaves free, it is only permitted for a mukatab to set his own slaves free with the consent of his master. If his master gives his consent and the mukatab sets his slave free, his wala' goes to the mukatab . If the mukatab then dies before he has been set free himself, the wala' of the freed slave goes to the master of the mukatab. If the freed one dies before the mukatab has been set free, the master of the mukatab inherits from him."

Malik said, "It is like that also when a mukatab gives his slave a kitaba and his mukatab is set free before he is himself. The wala' goes to the master of the mukatab as long as he is not free. If this one who wrote the kitaba is set free, then the wala' of his mukatab who was freed before him reverts to him. If the first mukatab dies before he pays, or he cannot pay his kitaba and he has free children, they do not inherit the wala' of their father's mukatab because the wala' has not been established for their father and he does not have the wala' until he is free."

Malik spoke about a mukatab who was shared between two men and one of them forewent what the mukatab owed him and the other insisted on his due. Then the mukatab died and left property.

Malik said, "The one who did not abandon any of what he was owed, is paid in full. Then the property is divided between them both just as if a slave had died because what the first one did was not setting him free. He only abandoned a debt that was owed to him ."

Malik said, "One clarification of that is that when a man dies and leaves a mukatab and he also leaves male and female children and one of the children frees his portion of the mukatab, that does not establish any of the wala' for him. Had it been a true setting free, the wala' would have been established for whichever men and women freed him."

Malik said, "Another clarification of that is that if one of them freed his portion and then the mukatab could not pay, the value of what was left of the mukatab would be altered because of the one who freed his portion. Had it been a true setting-free, his estimated value would have been taken from the property of the one who set free until he had been set completely free as the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, 'Whoever frees his share in a slave and has money to cover the full price of the slave, justly evaluated for him, gives his partners their shares. If not, he frees of him what he frees.' " (See Book 37 hadith 1).

He said, "Another clarification of that is that part of the sunna of the muslims in which there is no dispute, is that whoever frees his share of a mukatab, the mukatab is not set fully free using his property. Had he been truly set free, the wala' would have been his alone rather than his partners. Part of what will clarify that also is that part of the sunna of the muslims is that the wala' belongs to whoever writes the contract of kitaba. The women who inherit from the master of the mukatab do not have any of the wala' of the mukatab. If they free any of their share, the wala' belongs to the male children of the master of the mukatab or his male paternal relations."

Yahya related to me from Malik from Nafi that Abdullah ibn Umar said, "When the slave divorces his wife twice, she is haram for him until she has married another husband, whether she is free or a slave. The idda of a free woman is three menstrual periods, and the idda of a slave-girl is two periods.

Allah's Apostle said, "Whoever frees his share of a common slave and he has sufficient money to free him completely, should let its price be estimated by a just man and give his partners the price of their shares and manumit the slave; otherwise (i.e. if he has not sufficient money) he manumits the slave partially."

Malik related to me that he heard that Umar ibn al-Khattab saw a female slave belonging to Abdullah ibn Umar ibn al-Khattab. She was dressed like free (non-slave) women. He went to his daughter Hafsa and said, "Didn't I see your brother's slave-girl dressed like a free (non-slave) woman walking among the people and causing trouble?" Umar disapproved of that.

Malik related to me from Abd ar-Rahman ibn Abi Amra al-Ansari that his mother had wanted to make a bequest, but she delayed until morning and died. She had intended to set someone free, so Abd ar- Rahman said, 'I said to al-Qasim ibn Muhammad, 'Will it help her if I free a slave for her?' Al-Qasim replied, 'Sad ibn Ubada said to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, 'My mother died, will it help her if I set a slave free for her?' The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said "Yes." "'

Yahya related to me the like of that from Malik from Ibn Shihab.

Malik said, about a slave who divorced a slave-girl but did not make it absolute, "He can return to her. If he then dies while she is still in the idda from her divorce, she does the idda of a slave- girl whose husband dies, and it is two months and five days. If she has been set free and he can return to her, and she does not choose to separate after she has been set free, and he dies while she is in the idda from the divorce, she does the idda of a free woman whose husband has died, four months and ten days. That is because the idda of widowhood befell her while she was free, so her idda is the idda of a free woman."

Malik said, "That is what is done among us."

Malik related to me from Nafi from Abdullah ibn Umar that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace,said, "If a man frees his share of a slave and has enough money to cover the full price of the slave justly evaluated for him, he must buy out his partners so that the slave is completely freed. If he doesn't have the money, he partially frees him.

Malik related to me from Rabia ibn Abd ar-Rahman that az-Zubayr ibn al-Awwam bought a slave and set him free. The slave had children by a free woman. When az-Zubayr freed him, he said, "They are my mawali." The man argued, "They are the mawali of their mother. Rather, they are our mawali." They took the dispute to Uthman ibn Affan, and Uthman gave a judgement that az-Zubayr had their wala'.

The Prophet said, "He who manumits his share of a slave and has money sufficient to free the remaining portion of that slave's price (justly estimated) then he should manumit him (by giving the rest of his price to the other co-owners)." Nafi` added, "Otherwise the slave is partially free." Aiyub is not sure whether the last statement was said by Nafi` or it was a part of the Hadith.

That the Prophet said, "Whoever frees his portion of a (common) slave."

Another chain reports a similar hadith.

Malik related to me that he had heard that al-Maqburi said that Abu Hurayra was asked whether a man who had to free a slave, could free an illegitimate child to fulfil that obligation. Abu Hurayra said, "Yes. That will give satisfaction for him."

I intended to buy Barirah but her masters stipulated that her Wala should be for them. When the Prophet was told about it, he said to me, "Buy and manumit her, as the Wala' is for the liberator." Once Barirah was given some meat, and the Prophet asked, "What is this?" I said, "It has been given to Barirah in charity." He said, "It is sadaqa for her but a gift for us." Barirah was given the option (to stay with her husband or to part with him). `Abdur-Rahman (a sub-narrator) wondered, "Was her husband a slave or a free man?" Shu`ba (another sub-narrator) said, "I asked `Abdur-Rahman whether her husband was a slave or a free man. He replied that he did not know whether he was a slave or a free man."

The Prophet ordered us to free slaves at the time of solar eclipses.

We were ordered to free slaves at the time of lunar eclipses.

Malik said, "The generally agreed-on way of doing things in our community is that any setting-free which a man makes in a bequest that he wills in health or illness can be rescinded by him when he likes and changed when he likes as long as it is not a tadbir. There is no way to rescind a tadbir once he has made it.

"As for every child born to him by a slave-girl who he wills to be set free but he does not make mudabbara, her children are not freed with her when she is freed. That is because her master can change his will when he likes and rescind it when he likes, and being set free is not confirmed for her. She is in the position of a slave-girl whose master says, 'If so- and-so remains with me until I die, she is free.' " (i.e. he does not make a definite contract.)

Malik said, "If she fulfils that, that is hers. If he wishes, before that, he can sell her and her child because he has not entered her child into any condition he has made for her.

"The bequest in setting free is different from the tadbir. The precedent of the sunna makes a distinction between them. Had a bequest been in the position of a tadbir, no testator would be able to change his will and what he mentioned in it of setting free. His property would be tied up and he would not be able to use it."

Malik said about a man who made all his slaves mudabbar while he was well and they were his only property, "If he made some of them mudabbar before the others, one begins with the first until the third of his property is reached. (i.e. their value is matched against the third, and those whose value is covered are free.) If he makes the mall mudabbar in his illness, and says in one statement, 'So-and-so is free. So-and-so is free. So-and-so is free if my death occurs in this illness,' or he makes them all mudabbar in one statement, they are matched against the third and one does not begin with any of them before the others. It is a bequest and they have a third of his property divided between them in shares. Then the third of his property frees each of them according to the extent of his share.

"No single one of them is given preference when that all occurs in his illness."

Malik spoke about a master who made his slave a mudabbar and then he died and the only property he had was the mudabbar slave and the slave had property. He said, "A third of the mudabbar is freed and his property remains in his possession."

Malik said about a mudabbar whose master gave him a kitaba and then the master died and did not leave any property other than him, "A third of him is freed and a third of his kitaba is reduced, and he owes two-thirds."

Malik spoke about a man who freed half of his slave while he was ill and made irrevocable his freeing half of him or all of him, and he had made another slave of his mudabbar before that. He said, "One begins with the slave he made mudabbar before the one he freed while he was ill. That is because the man cannot revoke what he has made mudabbar and cannot follow it with a matter which will rescind it. When this mudabbar is freed, then what remains of the third goes to the one who had half of him freed so as to complete his setting-free entirely in the third of the property of the deceased. If what is left of the third does not cover that, whatever is covered by what is left of the third is freed after the first mudabbar is freed . "

I heard Abu-l-Qasim (the Prophet) saying, "If somebody slanders his slave and the slave is free from what he says, he will be flogged on the Day of Resurrection unless the slave is really as he has described him."

The Prophet came to know that one of his companions had given the promise of freeing his slave after his death, but as he had no other property than that slave, the Prophet sold that slave for 800 dirhams and sent the price to him.

The Prophet said, "If somebody manumits a Muslim slave, Allah will save from the Fire every part of his body for freeing the corresponding parts of the slave's body, even his private parts will be saved from the Fire) because of freeing the slave's private parts."

When Abu Huraira accompanied by his slave came intending to embrace Islam, they lost each other on the way. (When the slave showed up) Abu Huraira said (to the Prophet), "I make you witness that the slave is free for Allah's Cause."

The Muslims did not free slaves as Sa'iba, but the People of the Pre-lslamic Period of Ignorance used to do so.

Yahya related to me from Malik that he had asked Ibn Shihab about the ila of the slave. He said that it was like the ila of the free man, and it put an obligation on him. The ila of the slave was two months.

Malik said that if a slave-girl, who was the wife of a slave, was set free before he had consummated the marriage, and she chose herself, then she had no bride-price and it was a pronouncement of divorce. That was what was done among them.

Malik related to me that he had heard that Fadala ibn Ubayd al- Ansari who was one of the companions of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, was asked whether it was permissible for a man who had to free a slave to free an illegitimate child. He said, "Yes, That will give satisfaction for him."

Malik related to me that he heard that Abu Salama ibn Abd ar- Rahman and Sulayman ibn Yasar were both asked, "Does one pronounce judgement on the basis of an oath with one witness?" They both said, "Yes."

Malik said, "The precedent of the sunna in judging by an oath with one witness is that if the plaintiff takes an oath with his witness, he is confirmed in his right. If he draws back and refuses to take an oath, the defendant is made to take an oath. If he takes an oath, the claim against him is dropped. If he refuses to take an oath, the claim is confirmed against him."

Malik said, "This procedure pertains to property cases in particular. It does not occur in any of the hadd-punishments, nor in marriage, divorce, freeing slaves, theft or slander. If some one says, 'Freeing slaves comes under property,' he has erred. It is not as he said. Had it been as he said, a slave could take an oath with one witness, if he could find one, that his master had freed him.

"However, when a slave lays claim to a piece of property, he can take an oath with one witness and demand his right as the freeman demands his right."

Malik said, "The sunna with us is that when a slave brings somebody who witnesses that he has been set free, his master is made to take an oath that he has not freed him, and the slave's claim is dropped."

Malik said, "The sunna about divorce is also like that with us. When a woman brings somebody who witnesses that her husband has divorced her, the husband is made to take an oath that he has not divorced her. If he takes the oath, the divorce does not proceed . "

Malik said, "There is only one sunna of bringing a witness in cases of divorce and freeing a slave. The right to make an oath only belongs to the husband of the woman, and the master of the slave. Freeing is a hadd matter, and the testimony of women is not permitted in it because when a slave is freed, his inviolability is affirmed and the hadd punishments are applied for and against him. If he commits fornication and he is a muhsan, he is stoned. If he kills a slave, he is killed for it. Inheritance is established for him, between him and whoever inherits from him. If somebody disputes this, arguing that if a man frees his slave and then a man comes to demand from the master of the slave payment of a debt, and a man and two women testify to his right, that establishes the right against the master of the slave so that his freeing him is cancelled if he only has the slave as property, inferring by this case that the testimony of women is permitted in cases of setting free. The case is not as he suggests (i.e. it is a case of property not freeing). It is like a man who frees his slave, and then the claimant of a debt comes to the master and takes an oath with one witness, demanding his right. By that, the freeing of the slave would be cancelled. Or else a man comes who has frequent dealings and transactions with the master of the slave. He claims that he is owed money by the master of the slave. Someone says to the master of the slave, 'Take an oath that you don't owe what he claims'. If he draws back and refuses to take an oath, the one making the claim takes an oath and his right against the master of the slave is confirmed. That would cancel the freeing of the slave if it is confirmed that property is owed by the master."

Malik said, "It is the same case with a man who marries a slave-girl and then the master of the slave-girl comes to the man who has married her and claims, 'You and so-and-so have bought my slave-girl from me for such an amount of dinars. The husband of the slave-girl denies that. The master of the slave-girl brings a man and two women and they testify to what he has said. The sale is confirmed and his claim is considered true. So the slave-girl is haram for her husband and they have to separate, even though the testimony of women is not accepted in divorce."

Malik said, "It is also the same case with a man who accuses a free man, so the hadd falls on him. A man and two women come and testify that the one accused is a slave. That would remove the hadd from the accused after it had befallen him, even though the testimony of women is not accepted in accusations involving hadd punishments."

Malik said, "Another similar case in which judgement appears to go against the precedent of the sunna is that two women testify that a child is born alive and so it is necessary for him to inherit if a situation arises where he is entitled to inherit, and the child's property goes to those who inherit from him, if he dies, and it is not necessary that the two women witnesses should be accompanied by a man or an oath even though it may involve vast properties of gold, silver, live-stock, gardens and slaves and other properties. However, had two women testified to one dirham or more or less than that in a property case, their testimony would not affect anything and would not be permitted unless there was a witness or an oath with them."

Malik said, "There are people who say that an oath is not acceptable with only one witness and they argue by the word of Allah the Blessed, the Exalted, and His word is the Truth, 'And call in to witness two witnesses, men; or if the two be not men, then one man and two women, such witnesses as you approve of.' (Sura 2 ayat 282). Such people argue that if he does not bring one man and two women, he has no claim and he is not allowed to take an oath with one witness."

Malik said, "Part of the proof against those who argue this, is to reply to them, 'Do you think that if a man claimed property from a man, the one claimed from would not swear that the claim was false?' If he swears, the claim against him is dropped. If he refuses to take an oath, the claimant is made to take an oath that his claim is true, and his right against his companion is established. There is no dispute about this with any of the people nor in any country. By what does he take this? In what place in the Book of Allah does he find it? So if he confirms this, let him confirm the oath with one witness, even if it is not in the Book of Allah, the Mighty, the Majestic! It is enough that this is the precedent of the sunna. However, man wants to recognise the proper course of action and the location of the proof. In this there is a clarification for what is obscure about that, if Allah ta'ala wills."

Malik related to me from Yahya ibn Said from Amra bint Abd ar- Rahman that Barira came asking the help of A'isha, umm al-muminin. A'isha said, "If your masters agree that I pay them your price in one lump sum and set you free I will do it." Barira mentioned that to her masters and they said, "No, not unless your wala' is ours." Yahya ibn Said added that Amra bint Abd ar-Rahman claimed that A'isha mentioned that to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace said, "Buy her and set her free. The wala' only belongs to the one who sets free."

Allah's Apostle made it incumbent on all the slave or free Muslims, male or female, to pay one Sa' of dates or barley as Zakat-ul-Fitr.

Humaid b. 'Abd al-Rahman reported that Abu Huraira had narrated to him that the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) commanded the person (who) broke the fast in Ramadan to free a slave or observe fasts for two (consecutive) months or feed sixty poor persons.

Malik related to me from Ibn Shihab from Ubaydullah ibn Abdullah ibn Utba ibn Masud that one of the Ansar came to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, with a black slave- girl of his. He said, "Messenger of Allah, I must set a slave free who is a mumina. If you think that she is mumina, I will free her." The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, questioned her, "Do you testify that there is no god but Allah?" She said, "Yes." "Do you testify that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah?" She said, "Yes." "Are you certain about the rising after death?" She said, "Yes." The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "Free her."