She is emancipated. And if the mukatab has left behind enough to fulfill the contract, and we say: "The kitaba is annulled by his death," the ruling is the same. And if we say: "It is not annulled by his death" (21), then he is entitled to the value (qimah) from his master, which is distributed to his heirs, just as if the injury had occurred to some of his limbs during his lifetime. If the fulfillment is achieved by requiring the value and is not achieved without it, it becomes obligatory, just as if he had left behind enough to fulfill the contract; because the blood money (diyah) of the killed person is like his estate, in the settlement of his debts from it, and its distribution to his heirs (22) among them according to the divine inheritance shares of Allah the Almighty. There is no difference, in what we have mentioned, between his leaving an heir (23) or not leaving an heir. The Qadi mentioned that if he leaves no heir other than his master, the value is not obligatory upon him at all. We argue: He who has no heir, his wealth is distributed to the Muslims, and his master has no right to it; because its distribution to his master would be by way of inheritance, and the killer has no inheritance. And if the killer is a stranger, the value is obligatory for his master, except in the situation where the kitaba is not annulled, for it is then obligatory for his heirs. And Allah knows best.

1983 - Issue: He said: (And when the master dies, the slave remains under his kitaba, and whatever he pays is [distributed] among the heirs of his master, divided like inheritance.)

The sum of this is that the kitaba is not annulled by the death of the master; we know of no disagreement among the people of knowledge regarding this. This is because it is a binding contract on his part, and there is no way to annul it, so it is not annulled by his death, like a sale or a lease. When this is established, the mukatab pays his installments, and whatever remains of them, to his heirs; because it is a debt owed to their testator, and it is divided among them according to the extent of their inheritance, like all his other debts. If he has male and female children, the male receives the share of two females. He is not emancipated until he pays every person of right their right. If he pays some of them and not others, he is not emancipated, just as if he were between partners and he paid only some of them. If some of them are absent and have an agent, he pays their share to his agent, and if he has no agent, he pays their share to the judge, and he is emancipated. If he is under guardianship, he pays his share to his guardian, whether it is his son, his executor (wasi), the judge, or his trustee. If he has two executors, he is not discharged except by paying them both together. And if...