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."

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 . "

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."

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.

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.

Yahya related to me from Malik from Nafi that Abdullah ibn Umar said, "If a man gives his slave permission to marry, the divorce is in the hand of the slave, and nobody else has any power over his divorce. Nothing is held against a man who takes the slave-girl of his male slave or the slave-girl of his female-slave."

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 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."

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."

Yahya related to me from Malik that he heard Rabia ibn Abd ar- Rahman say that a slave could marry four women.

Malik said, "This is the best of what I have heard about the matter."

Malik said, "The slave differs with the muhallil if the slave is given permission by his master for his ex-wife. If his master does not give him permission, he separates them. The muhallil is separated in any case if he intends to make the woman halal by marriage."

Malik said, "When a slave is owned by his wife or a husband owns his wife, the possession of each of them is rendered void without divorce. If a man, for instance, is married to a slave-girl, and then he buys her, he must divorce her as a matter of course. They can then re- marry. If they re-marry afterwards, that separation was not divorce."

Malik said, "When a slave is freed by his wife who owns him and she is in the idda-period from him, they can only return to each other after she has made another marriage."

Abu Hasan, a client of Banu Nawfal asked Ibn Abbas: A slave had a wife who was a slave-girl. He divorced her by two pronouncements. Afterwards both of them were freed. Is it permissible for him to ask her in marriage again? He said: Yes. This is a decision given by the Messenger of Allah (saws).

Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that Abd ar- Rahman ibn Awf divorced his wife, and gave her compensation in the form of a slave-girl.

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."

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."

ahya related to me from Malik that he asked Ibn Shihab about the dhihar of a slave. He said, "It is like the dhihar of a free man."

Malik said, "He meant that the same conditions were applied in both cases."

Malik said, "The dhihar of the slave is incumbent on him, and the fasting of the slave in the dhihar is two months. "

Malik said that there was no ila for a slave who pronounced a dhihar from his wife. That was because if he were to fast the kaffara for pronouncing a dhihar, the divorce of the ila would come to him before he had finished the fast.

Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that Said ibn al-Musayyab and Sulayman ibn Yasar were asked whether, when a man married a slave of his to a slave-girl and the slave divorced her irrevocably, and then her master gave her to the slave, she was then halal for the slave by the possession of the right hand. They said, "No. She is not halal until she has married another husband."

Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab from Abu Abd ar- Rahman that Zayd ibn Thabit said that if a man divorced his slave-girl three times and then bought her, she was not halal for him until she had married another husband.

Allah's Apostle forbade the selling of things by a town dweller on behalf of a desert dweller; and similarly Najsh was forbidden. And one should not urge somebody to return the goods to the seller so as to sell him his own goods; nor should one demand the hand of a girl who has already been engaged to someone else; and a woman should not try to cause some other woman to be divorced in order to take her place.

Malik said, "It is not halal to marry a christian or jewish slave-girl because Allah the Blessed, the Exalted, said in His Book, 'Believing women who are muhsanat and women of those who were given the Book before you who are muhsanat', (sura 5 ayat 6) and they are free women from the Christians and Jews. Allah, the Blessed, the Exalted, said in His Book, 'If you are not affluent enough to marry believing women who are muhsanat, take believing slave-girls whom your right hands own.' " (Sura 4 ayat 24)

Malik said, "In our opinion, Allah made marriage to believing slave-girls halal, and He did not make halal marriage to christian and jewish slave-girls from the People of the Book."

Malik said, "The christian and jewish slave-girl are halal for their master by right of possession, but intercourse with a magian slave-girl is not halal by the right of possession."

Abd Yazid, the father of Rukanah and his brothers, divorced Umm Rukanah and married a woman of the tribe of Muzaynah. She went to the Prophet (saws) and said: He is of no use to me except that he is as useful to me as a hair; and she took a hair from her head. So separate me from him. The Prophet (saws) became furious. He called on Rukanah and his brothers. He then said to those who were sitting beside him. Do you see so-and-so who resembles Abdu Yazid in respect of so-and-so; and so-and-so who resembles him in respect of so-and-so? They replied: Yes. The Prophet (saws) said to Abdu Yazid: Divorce her. Then he did so. He said: Take your wife, the mother of Rukanah and his brothers, back in marriage. He said: I have divorced her by three pronouncements, Messenger of Allah. He said: I know: take her back. He then recited the verse: "O Prophet, when you divorce women, divorce them at their appointed periods."

Abu Dawud said: The tradition narrated by Nafi' b. 'Ujair and 'Abd Allah b. Yazid b. Rukanah from his father on the authority of his grandfather reads: Rukanah divorced his wife absolutely (i.e. irrevocable divorce). The Prophet (saws) restored her to him. This version is sounder (than other versions), for they (i.e. these narrators) are the children of his man, and the members of the family are more aware of his case. Rukanah divorced his wife absolutely (i.e. three divorces in one pronouncement) and the Prophet (saws) made it a single divorce.

Yahya related to me from Malik from Humayd ibn Qays al-Makki that a man called Dhafif said that Ibn Abbas was asked about coitus interruptus. He called a slave-girl of his and said, "Tell them." She was embarrassed. He said, "It is alright, and I do it myself."

Malik said, "A man does not practise coitus interruptus with a free woman unless she gives her permission. There is no harm in practising coitus interruptus with a slave-girl without her permission. Someone who has someone else's slave-girl as a wife, does not practise coitus interruptus with her unless her people give him permission."

Yahya related to me from Malik that he had heard that Abdullah ibn Abbas and Abdullah ibn Umar were asked about a man who had a free woman as a wife and then wanted to marry a slave-girl. They disapproved that he should combine the two of them.

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.

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."

Yahya related to me from Malik that Ibn Shihab said that he had heard Said ibn al-Musayyab, Humayd ibn Abd ar-Rahman ibn Awf, Ubaydullah ibn Abdullah ibn Utba ibn Masud, and Sulayman ibn Yasarall say, that they had heard Abu Hurayra say that he had heard Umar ibn al-Khattab say, "If a woman is divorced by her husband once or twice, and he leaves her until she is free to marry and she marries another husband and he dies or divorces her, and then she marries her first husband, she is with him according to what remains of her divorce."

Malik said, "That is what is done among us and there is no dispute about it."

Yahya related to me from Malik from Nafic from Abdullah ibn Umar that a man cursed his wife in the time of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and disowned her child. The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, separated them and gave the child to the woman.

Malik said, "Allah the Blessed, the Exalted, said, 'The testimony of men who accuse their wives but do not have any witnesses except themselves is to testify by Allah four times that he is being truthful, and a fifth time, that the curse of Allah will be upon him, if he should be a liar. She will avoid punishment if she testifies by Allah four times that he is a liar, and a fifth time, that the wrath of Allah shall be upon her, if he should be telling the truth. ' "(Sura 24 ayat 6).

Malik said, "The sunna with us is that those who curse each other are never to be remarried. If the man calls himself a liar, (i.e. takes back his accusation), he is flogged with the hadd-punishment, and the child is given to him, and his wife can never return to him. There is no doubt or dispute about this sunna among us. "

Malik said, "If a man separates from his wife by an irrevocable divorce by which he cannot return to her, and then he denies the paternity of the child she is carrying, whilst she claims that he is the father, and it is possible by the timing, that he be so, he must curse her, and the child is not recognised as his."

Malik said, "That is what is done among us, and it is what I have heard from the people of knowledge."

Malik said that a man who accused his wife after he had divorced her trebly while she was pregnant, and he had at first accepted being the father but then claimed that he had seen her committing adultery before he separated from her, was flogged with the hadd-punishment, and did not curse her.

If he denied the paternity of her child after he had divorced her trebly, and he had not previously accepted it, then he cursed her.

Malik said, "This is what I have heard."

Malik said, "The slave is in the same position as the free man as regards making accusations and invoking mutual curses (lian). He acts in the lian as the free man acts although there is no hadd applied for slandering a female-slave."

Malik said, "The muslim slave-girl and the christian and jewish free woman also do lian when a free muslim marries one of them and has intercourse with her. That is because Allah - may He be blessed and Exalted, said in His Book, 'As for those who accuse their wives,' and they are their wives. This is what is done among us.

Malik said that a man who did the lian with his wife, and then stopped and called himself a liar after one or two oaths and he had not cursed himself in the fifth one, had to be flogged with the hadd-punishment, but they did not have to be separated.

Malik said that if a man divorced his wife and then after three months the woman said, "I am pregnant," and he denied paternity, then he had to do lian.

Malik said that the husband of a female slave who pronounced the lian on her and then bought her, was not to have intercourse with her, even if he owned her. The sunna which had been handed down about a couple who mutually cursed each other in the lian was that they were never to return to each other.

Malik said that when a man pronounced the lian against his wife before he had consummated the marriage, she only had half of the bride price.

Regarding the Verse:--"If a woman fears cruelty or desertion on her husband's part." (4.128) It is about a man who has a woman (wife) and he does not like her and wants to divorce her but she says to him, "I make you free as regards myself." So this Verse was revealed in this connection.

Yahya related to me from Malik that he had asked Ibn Shihab about a man who had a slave-girl as a wife, and then he bought her, and divorced her once. He said, "She is halal for him by the possession of the right hand as long as he does not make his divorce irrevocable. If he irrevocably divorces her, she is not halal for him by the possession of the right hand until she has married another husband."

Malik said that if a man rnarried a female slave and then she had a child by him, and then he bought her, she was not an umm walad for him because of the child born to him while she belonged to another, until she had had a child by him while she was in his possession after he had purchased her.

Malik said, "If he buys her and she is pregnant by him and she then gives birth while she belongs to him, she is his umm walad by that pregnancy, according to what we think, and Allah knows best."

Yahya related to me from Malik from Yahya ibn Said from al-Qasim ibn Muhammad that a certain man had taken a slave-girl belonging to somebody else as a wife. He said to her people, "She is your concern," and people considered that to be one pronouncement of divorce.

Yahya related to me from Malik from Yahya ibn Said from Abu Bakr ibn Hazm thatUmar ibn Abd al-Aziz had asked him what people said about the 'irrevocable' divorce, and Abu Bakr had replied that Aban ibn Uthman had clarified that it was declared only once. Umar ibn Abd al- Aziz said, "Even if divorce had to be declared a thousand times, the'irrevocable' would use them all up. A person who says, 'irrevocably' has cast the furthest limit."

Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab from Urwa ibn az- Zubayr that a mawla of the tribe of Banu Adi called Zabra told him that she had been the wife of a slave when she was a slave-girl. Then she was set free and she sent a message to Hafsa, the wife of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace. Hafsa called her and said, "I will tell you something., but I would prefer that you did not act upon it. You have authority over yourself as long as your husband does not have intercourse with you. If he has intercourse with you, you have no authority at all." Therefore she pronounced her divorce from him three times.

Yahya related to me from Malik that he heard Rabia ibn Abi Abd ar-Rahman say, ''I heard that the wife of Abd ar-Rahman ibn Awf asked him to divorce her. He said, 'When you have menstruated and are pure, then come to me.' She did not menstruate until Abd ar-Rahman ibn Awf was ill. When she was purified, she told him and he divorced her irrevocably or made a pronouncement of divorce which was all that he had left over her Abd arRahman ibn Awf was terminally ill at the time, so Uthman ibn Affan made her one of the heirs after the end of her idda."

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."