And there is nothing found herein that necessitates the invalidation of the safe conduct for it, so it remains as it was. If he takes it with him to the Abode of War, the safe conduct for it is invalidated, just as it is invalidated regarding his person, due to the presence of the invalidating factor in both of them. Once this is established, if its owner demands it, it is sent to him. If he disposes of it through sale, gift, or otherwise, his disposition is valid. If he dies in the Abode of War, it is transferred to his heir, and the safe conduct for it is not voided. Abu Hanifa said: It is voided for it. This is also one opinion of al-Shafi'i, because it has become the property of his heir, and he did not contract a safe conduct for it, so it must necessarily be voided regarding it, like the rest of his wealth. Our argument is that the safe conduct is a right of his that is binding and attached to the property, so if it is transferred to the heir, it is transferred with its right, like other rights such as mortgage, collateral, and pre-emption. This is the choice of al-Muzani. Also, it is wealth for which there is safe conduct, so it is transferred to his heir while the safe conduct for it remains, like the wealth that is with his mudarib. If he has no heir, it becomes fay' (spoils) for the Bayt al-Mal (Public Treasury). If he has an heir in the Abode of Islam, the Qadi said: He does not inherit from him due to the difference between the two abodes. The preferred view is that he does inherit from him, because their religion is one, so he inherits from him like Muslims. If the person granted safe conduct dies in the Abode of Islam, it is the same as if he died in the Abode of War, because the person granted safe conduct is a Harbi (belligerent) to whom their rulings apply. If he returns to the Abode of War and is taken captive and enslaved, the Qadi said: His wealth is held in suspense until his final state is known, whether by death or otherwise. If he dies, it becomes fay', because a slave does not inherit, and if he is freed, it belongs to him. If he is not enslaved, but the Imam shows him favor or ransoms him, his wealth belongs to him. If he kills him, his wealth belongs to his heirs. If he is not captured, but enters the Abode of Islam without safe conduct to take his wealth, it is permissible to kill him and enslave him, because the establishment of safe conduct for his wealth does not establish safe conduct for him, just as if his wealth were a deposit in the Abode of Islam while he resides in the Abode of War.

Section: If a person granted safe conduct steals, kills, or usurps in the Abode of Islam, then returns to his homeland [in the Abode of War], and then exits under safe conduct a second time, he is held accountable for what was binding upon him during his [first] safe conduct.