Continuation of the explanation of the author's statement: "And a Muslim slave is not to be sold to a disbeliever if he does not become free upon him."
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : If you sell a Muslim to a disbeliever, you have empowered the disbeliever over the Muslim, for it is known that the master has authority and command over his slave. So if you sell a Muslim slave to a disbeliever, you have empowered the disbeliever over him and humiliated the Muslim before the disbeliever. Humiliating a Muslim is forbidden and not lawful. Therefore, it is not lawful for a person to sell his Muslim slave to a disbeliever. Do you understand? Good. And selling a disbelieving slave to a disbeliever: if a person has a disbelieving slave and sells him to a disbeliever.
The questioner : It is valid.
The Shaykh : Is it valid? Good. If it is not valid to sell him to a disbeliever, he stated as a condition: "if he does not become free upon him". If the slave does not become free upon the disbeliever, but if he becomes free upon the disbeliever through the purchase, then selling him to him is valid. And who becomes free upon his buyer? It is the one with a prohibited kinship tie, meaning his brother, his paternal uncle, his maternal uncle, his nephew, and the like. Anyone between whom there is a prohibited kinship tie: if one of them owns the other, he becomes free upon him. His son becomes free, his daughter's son becomes free. Good. So if this slave is the nephew of the disbeliever and you sell him to the disbeliever, it is valid. Why? Because as soon as he says "I accept," the slave becomes free and goes away free. And this is actually in the interest of the slave, as it hastens what? His freedom. It is not possible for him to remain in the ownership of the disbeliever for even a moment, because as soon as he says "I accept," he becomes free. So if he becomes free upon him, then selling him to him is valid. Likewise, if he becomes free upon him through a conditional statement. How through a conditional statement? Meaning, if this disbeliever says, "If I own this slave, he is free," then as soon as he owns him, he becomes free. The author generalized and said: "if he does not become free upon him". So if he becomes free upon him, either due to a prohibited kinship tie or due to a conditional statement, then selling him to him is valid, because that hastens his freedom. Good. Is it valid to sell a disbelieving slave to a Muslim?
The questioner : Yes, it is valid.
The Shaykh : It is valid. Good. So selling a Muslim slave to a Muslim is valid, a disbeliever to a disbeliever is valid, a Muslim to a disbeliever?
The questioner : It is not valid.
The Shaykh : A disbeliever to a Muslim?
The questioner : Correct.
The Shaykh : It is valid. Good.
The questioner : It is valid.
The Shaykh : Is it valid? Good. If it is not valid to sell him to a disbeliever, he stated as a condition: "if he does not become free upon him". If the slave does not become free upon the disbeliever, but if he becomes free upon the disbeliever through the purchase, then selling him to him is valid. And who becomes free upon his buyer? It is the one with a prohibited kinship tie, meaning his brother, his paternal uncle, his maternal uncle, his nephew, and the like. Anyone between whom there is a prohibited kinship tie: if one of them owns the other, he becomes free upon him. His son becomes free, his daughter's son becomes free. Good. So if this slave is the nephew of the disbeliever and you sell him to the disbeliever, it is valid. Why? Because as soon as he says "I accept," the slave becomes free and goes away free. And this is actually in the interest of the slave, as it hastens what? His freedom. It is not possible for him to remain in the ownership of the disbeliever for even a moment, because as soon as he says "I accept," he becomes free. So if he becomes free upon him, then selling him to him is valid. Likewise, if he becomes free upon him through a conditional statement. How through a conditional statement? Meaning, if this disbeliever says, "If I own this slave, he is free," then as soon as he owns him, he becomes free. The author generalized and said: "if he does not become free upon him". So if he becomes free upon him, either due to a prohibited kinship tie or due to a conditional statement, then selling him to him is valid, because that hastens his freedom. Good. Is it valid to sell a disbelieving slave to a Muslim?
The questioner : Yes, it is valid.
The Shaykh : It is valid. Good. So selling a Muslim slave to a Muslim is valid, a disbeliever to a disbeliever is valid, a Muslim to a disbeliever?
The questioner : It is not valid.
The Shaykh : A disbeliever to a Muslim?
The questioner : Correct.
The Shaykh : It is valid. Good.