كِتَابُ الْعِتْقِEmancipation

² The statement: “Whoever frees a Muslim slave, etc.”: This indicates that freeing a Muslim is superior to freeing a non-Muslim, which is the opinion of all scholars. This means there is no disagreement that one who frees a non-Muslim slave is rewarded for the emancipation, but it is not equivalent to the reward for freeing a believing slave. The specification of Islam is to increase the reward. This is the essence of what is stated in Umdat Al-Qari, Nayl Al-Awtar, and Al-Mirqat. It is said to him: Any Muslim who frees a believer, Allah will free for every limb of his a limb from the Fire. For this reason, they recommended that a man free a male slave and a woman free a female slave to ensure the correspondence of limbs to limbs.

¹ The statement: “Who had incurred, etc.”: This means he committed a sin that necessitated entering the Fire, meaning intentional killing, due to the words of Allah, the Exalted: And whoever kills a believer intentionally, his recompense is Hell [An-Nisa: 93]. It must be specified that this was after fulfilling the penalty for killing; otherwise, how could freeing a slave suffice for the right of the victim’s guardian, or it is understood that he killed himself. This indicates that, according to us, punishments do not suffice to expiate the crime, for if they did, there would be no need to free a slave afterward. Thus, it is stated in Badhl Al-Majhud. The essence is what is stated in Ad-Durr Al-Mukhtar and Radd Al-Muhtar: The punishment is not purifying according to us; rather, purification is through repentance. If one is punished but does not repent, the sin of the disobedience remains. Many scholars hold that it is purifying, and our clearest evidence is in An-Nahr.

³ The statement: “Allah will free for every limb of his a limb from him from the Fire, even his private parts for his private parts”: It is stated in Al-Hidayah: Emancipation is a recommended act.

¹ The statement: “Which slaves are best?” He said: “The most valuable in price and the most precious to their owners”: It is stated in Al-Mabsut: These narrations clarify that emancipation is an act of righteousness and kindness, and the best slaves are those most valued by their owners. As for what is narrated from Malik, that if a non-Muslim slave is more valuable than a Muslim slave, his emancipation is better than that of a Muslim due to the saying, “The best are the most valuable,” this is far from correct and must be restricted to the most valuable among Muslims. This is because it enables the Muslim to achieve his objectives and frees him. The apparent reason for preferring the emancipation of a non-Muslim is to collect jizyah from him for the Muslims, and as for freeing him for contemplation, it is conceded as a possibility. Thus, it is stated in Al-Mirqat.

¹ The statement: Uproot his palm trees, he ordered the Ansari to uproot the palm trees because it was clear that Samurah was harming him, as it was known that they were planted on borrowed land. As stated in Al-Marqah. In Al-Hidayah: If someone borrows land to build or plant, it is permissible, and the lender can retract and require the removal of the building or plants.

¹ The statement: “And give them a contract, etc.”: It is stated in Al-Hidayah: This command is not obligatory by consensus among jurists; rather, it is a recommendation, which is the correct view. Interpreting it as permission nullifies the condition, i.e., His saying: if you know there is good in them [An-Nur: 33], because the contract of emancipation is permissible without it. However, the recommendation is tied to it. The meaning of “good” mentioned in His saying: if you know there is good in them [An-Nur: 33], as has been said, is that they will not harm Muslims after emancipation. If they would harm them, it is better not to grant the contract, though it would be valid if the master did so.