as a benefit, so he owns it, like leasing. [This is what Abu al-Khattab stated in "Ru'us al-Masa'il"]. It was narrated from the Qadi that he said in "al-Khisal": He has the right to marry off the slave-girl, but not the male slave. This is the opinion of Abu Hanifa, because he takes compensation for her marriage, unlike the male slave, and because it is a contract regarding her benefits, thus resembling leasing her out. Our evidence is that the master incurs harm in this; for if he marries [the male slave, the slave becomes obligated to provide for his wife and pay her dower, he is occupied with the rights of marriage, and his value decreases. And if he marries off] the slave-girl, the husband owns her intimate relations, her value decreases, the desire for her diminishes, and perhaps her sale becomes entirely impossible. This is not among the means of earning, so it might render him unable to pay his installments. If he becomes incapacitated, he returns to being a slave to the master, along with the rights attached to them and the decrease they suffered. Therefore, it is not permissible for him, just like emancipating them. It differs from leasing a house, as that is customarily among the means of earning. Based on this, if marriage becomes necessary for them, due to their request and need for it, he sells them; for whenever a slave requests marriage, his master is given the choice between selling him or marrying him off. And if the master permits him to do that, it is permissible, because the right belongs to him and the prohibition was for his sake, so it is permitted with his permission.

Section: He does not have the right to emancipate his slaves except with the permission of his master. This is the opinion of al-Hasan, al-Awza'i, Malik, al-Shafi'i, and Abu Hanifa; because it involves harm to his master by squandering his property in a way that does not result in obtaining property for him, so it resembles a gift. If he emancipates, his emancipation is not valid. It is suggested that it might be valid and suspended upon the permission of his master. Abu Bakr said: It is suspended upon the final outcome of the mukatab; if he fulfills his contract, the one he emancipated is free, and if he does not fulfill it, he remains a slave. The Qadi said: This is the analogy of the school, like our statement regarding blood relatives (dhu al-arham) that they are suspended. Our evidence is that it is a gratuitous donation of his property without the permission of his master, so it is invalid, like a gift. And because he performed an action he was prohibited from for the sake of his master's right, so it was invalid, like everything else he was prohibited from. It is not valid to use as an analogy his