the unbeliever, as the act of expiation through fasting is not valid for him because it is an act of worship and he is not among its people. Nor is [expiation valid] through manumission, because one of its conditions is faith in the slave, and it is not permissible for an unbeliever to purchase a Muslim, unless it happens that [the slave] becomes Muslim while in his possession, or he inherits a Muslim and emancipates him, in which case his emancipation is valid. If that does not happen, his expiation is through feeding or clothing. So if he performs the expiation, then becomes a Muslim, he is not required to repeat the expiation. If he becomes a Muslim before performing the expiation, he performs the expiation with what is obligatory upon him in that state, whether it be emancipation, feeding, clothing, or fasting. It is possible, according to the statement of al-Khiraqi, that fasting would not suffice him, because he only performs the expiation with what was obligatory upon him at the time of the violation, and fasting was not among what was obligatory upon him.
(9) In M, there is an addition: "bihi" (with it). (10) In A: "annahu la" (that he does not).
أَنَّ الكافِرَ لا يَصِحُّ منه التَّكْفيرُ بالصِّيامِ؛ لأنَّه عبادَةٌ، وليس هو من أهْلِها، ولا بالإعْتاقِ؛ لأنَّ مِن شَرْطِه الإِيمانُ فى الرَّقَبةِ، ولا يجوزُ لكافِرٍ شراءُ مُسْلِمٍ، إِلَّا أَنْ يَتَّفِقَ إسْلامُه فى يَدَيْه، أو يَرِثَ مُسْلِمًا فيَعْتِقَه، فيَصِحُّ إعْتاقُه، وإِنْ لم يتَّفِقْ ذلك، فتَكْفِيرُه بالإطعامِ أو الكِسْوَةِ، فإذا كفَّرَ (٩) ثم أسْلَمَ، لم يَلْزَمْه إعادَةُ التَّكْفِيرِ. وإن أَسْلَمَ قبلَ التَّكْفِيرِ، كَفَّرَ بما يَجِبُ عليه فى تِلكَ الحالِ؛ من إعْتاقٍ، أو إطْعام، أو كِسْوَةٍ، أو صيامٍ. ويَحْتَمِلُ، على قولِ الخِرَقِىِّ، ألَّا (١٠) يُجْزِئَه الصِّيامُ؛ لأنَّه إنَّما يُكَفِّرُ بما وَجَبَ عليه حينَ الحِنْثِ، ولم يكُنِ الصِّيامُ ممَّا وجَبَ عليه.
(٩) فى م زيادة: "به".(١٠) فى أ: "أنه لا".
