موطا امام مالك رواية يحييٰ
Muwatta Imam Malik (Riwayat Yahya)
كتاب العتق والولاءBook: On the Explanation of Emancipation and Allegiance
بَابُ مَا جَاءَ فِيمَنْ أَعْتَقَ شِرْكًا لَهُ فِي عَبْدٍChapter on what is reported regarding one who frees his share in a slave
Hadith 1268B1
قَالَ مَالِك : وَالْأَمْرُ الْمُجْتَمَعُ عَلَيْهِ عِنْدَنَا فِي الْعَبْدِ يُعْتِقُ سَيِّدُهُ مِنْهُ شِقْصًا ثُلُثَهُ أَوْ رُبُعَهُ أَوْ نِصْفَهُ أَوْ سَهْمًا مِنَ الْأَسْهُمِ بَعْدَ مَوْتِهِ، أَنَّهُ لَا يَعْتِقُ مِنْهُ إِلَّا مَا أَعْتَقَ سَيِّدُهُ، وَسَمَّى مِنْ ذَلِكَ الشِّقْصِ، وَذَلِكَ أَنَّ عَتَاقَةَ ذَلِكَ الشِّقْصِ إِنَّمَا وَجَبَتْ وَكَانَتْ بَعْدَ وَفَاةِ الْمَيِّتِ، وَأَنَّ سَيِّدَهُ كَانَ مُخَيَّرًا فِي ذَلِكَ مَا عَاشَ، فَلَمَّا وَقَعَ الْعِتْقُ لِلْعَبْدِ عَلَى سَيِّدِهِ الْمُوصِي، لَمْ يَكُنْ لِلْمُوصِي إِلَّا مَا أَخَذَ مِنْ مَالِهِ، وَلَمْ يَعْتِقْ مَا بَقِيَ مِنَ الْعَبْدِ، لِأَنَّ مَالَهُ قَدْ صَارَ لِغَيْرِهِ، فَكَيْفَ يَعْتِقُ مَا بَقِيَ مِنَ الْعَبْدِ عَلَى قَوْمٍ آخَرِينَ لَيْسُوا هُمُ ابْتَدَءُوا الْعَتَاقَةَ وَلَا أَثْبَتُوهَا وَلَا لَهُمُ الْوَلَاءُ وَلَا يَثْبُتُ لَهُمْ، وَإِنَّمَا صَنَعَ ذَلِكَ الْمَيِّتُ هُوَ الَّذِي أَعْتَقَ وَأُثْبِتَ لَهُ الْوَلَاءُ، فَلَا يُحْمَلُ ذَلِكَ فِي مَالِ غَيْرِهِ إِلَّا أَنْ يُوصِيَ بِأَنْ يَعْتِقَ مَا بَقِيَ مِنْهُ فِي مَالِهِ، فَإِنَّ ذَلِكَ لَازِمٌ لِشُرَكَائِهِ وَوَرَثَتِهِ، وَلَيْسَ لِشُرَكَائِهِ أَنْ يَأْبَوْا ذَلِكَ عَلَيْهِ وَهُوَ فِي ثُلُثِ مَالِ الْمَيِّتِ، لِأَنَّهُ لَيْسَ عَلَى وَرَثَتِهِ فِي ذَلِكَ ضَرَرٌ .
Imam Malik, may Allah have mercy on him, said: In our view, this ruling is agreed upon that if a master, after his death, frees a portion of his slave, such as a third, a quarter, or a half, then after the master's death, only that portion which the master had freed will become free, because the freedom of that portion becomes obligatory after the master's death. And as long as the master was alive, he had the choice; when he died, then according to his will, only that portion will be freed, and the rest of the slave will not be freed, because it has become the property of someone else. So how can the rest of the slave be freed by someone else, when neither did he initiate the freedom nor establish it, nor does he have the right of wala (allegiance); rather, this is the act of the deceased, he is the one who freed, and he is the one who established wala for himself. So how can it be valid in the property of someone else? However, if he makes a will that the rest of the slave should also be freed from his wealth, and if the slave can be freed from one third of the wealth, then he will be freed, and then the partners or heirs will not be affected, because they suffer no harm.
