al-Hasan, Malik, al-Thawri, al-Shafi'i, and the People of Opinion (Ashab al-Ra'y), and I know of no dissenter regarding this. This is because the right of his master has not been severed from him, for he may become incapacitated, in which case it (the wealth) returns to him. Also, because the objective of the kitabah is to attain emancipation through performance, and the gifting of his wealth would cause the loss of that. If his master grants permission for it, it is permissible. Abu Hanifah said: It is not permissible, because it causes the loss of the objective of the kitabah. From al-Shafi'i, there are two opinions regarding this [similar to the two views mentioned]. Our evidence is that the right does not exit from the two of them, so it is permissible upon their agreement, like the pledger and the pledgee. As for a gift in exchange for a reward, it is not valid. Al-Shafi'i said, in one of his two opinions: It is valid, because it contains a compensatory element. Our evidence is that the discrepancy in determining the reward entails uncertainty (gharar) in it, and because its compensation is delayed, it is like a sale on credit (nasi'ah). If the master grants permission for it, it is permissible. If he gifts it to his master, it is permissible, because his acceptance of the gift constitutes permission for it. Likewise, if he gifts it to the master’s young son.

Section: He may not practice favoritism (muhabah) in a sale, nor may he increase the price at which he purchased, nor lend an animal, nor give a gift. The People of Opinion permitted that. It is possible that the lending of his animal and the gifting of food, or inviting someone to it, is permissible, because that is permissible for one who is granted permission to trade, and the mukatab does not fall below his status. The view of the first (opinion) is that it is a gratuitous donation of his wealth, so it is not permissible, like a gift. He may not bequeath his wealth, nor reduce anything for a buyer, nor lend money, nor provide a guarantee, nor act as a surety for anyone. This is the opinion of al-Shafi'i and the People of Opinion, because that is a gratuitous donation of his wealth, so he is prohibited from it, like a gift.

Section: He has no right to perform Hajj if he needs to spend his wealth on it. Al-Maymuni narrated from Ahmad that the mukatab may perform Hajj from the wealth he has collected if his deadline (najm) has not yet arrived. This is interpreted as performing it with his master's permission. As for without his permission, it is not permissible, because it is a gratuitous donation of what he spends his wealth on, so it is not permissible, like emancipation. However, if it is possible for him to perform Hajj without spending his wealth—such as when a person volunteers to facilitate his Hajj, or he serves someone who covers his expenses—then it is permissible if his deadline has not yet arrived.