Explanation of the author's statement: "And if he embraces Islam while in his possession, he is compelled to relinquish his ownership, and manumission by contract is not sufficient"
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Then he said "And if he embraces Islam while in his possession, he is compelled to relinquish his ownership". If a slave embraces Islam while in the possession of a disbeliever, the disbeliever is compelled to relinquish his ownership of him, because it is not possible for a disbeliever to have authority or dominion over a Muslim. For example, a disbeliever man has a disbeliever slave, and then the disbeliever slave embraces Islam, so he is granted the favor of Islam and embraces it. We tell the disbeliever: it is not possible for you to remain in ownership of him; you must remove him from your ownership. But by what means does he remove him from his ownership? By manumission, that is one way, or by sale, but on the condition that he does not sell him to a disbeliever. If he sells him to a disbeliever, the sale is forbidden and invalid. So the author's statement "he is compelled to relinquish his ownership" is general; relinquishing his ownership is by sale, gift, manumission, or otherwise. However, if it is by sale or gift, he must not sell or gift him to a disbeliever.
Then he said "and manumission by contract is not sufficient". This means if the disbeliever man whose slave embraced Islam says, "I will enter into a manumission contract with him." Manumission by contract is when the master sells his slave to himself. Allah referred to this manumission by contract in His saying:[An-Nur 24:33]. So this disbeliever man says, "I have no objection; I have no objection to removing my ownership of my slave, but I want to remove it by manumission by contract; I will sell him to himself." We say this is not sufficient, because manumission by contract does not remove the master's ownership of the slave until he pays the full amount. Before the payment is completed, he is in the state of slavery of the master. Therefore, manumission by contract is not sufficient. Now, if he says, "I will sell him, but I want to stipulate an option for myself for one month," is this sufficient or not?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : No, because the ties of ownership have not been severed from him. Perhaps he will say, "I have annulled the sale." So if he enters into a manumission contract with him, it is not valid, and if he sells him with an option, it is also not valid. Yes, it is not valid; it is not sufficient.
Then he said "and manumission by contract is not sufficient". This means if the disbeliever man whose slave embraced Islam says, "I will enter into a manumission contract with him." Manumission by contract is when the master sells his slave to himself. Allah referred to this manumission by contract in His saying:
And those who seek a contract [for eventual emancipation] from among whom your right hands possess - then make a contract with them if you know there is within them goodness
والذين يبتغون الكتاب مما ملكت أيمانك فكاتبوهم إن علمتم فيهم خيراThe questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : No, because the ties of ownership have not been severed from him. Perhaps he will say, "I have annulled the sale." So if he enters into a manumission contract with him, it is not valid, and if he sells him with an option, it is also not valid. Yes, it is not valid; it is not sufficient.