his partner, then it is not appraised, because he acknowledges that he is free and that this partner has wronged him by enslaving his free half. If it is possible to seek recourse against the receiver for the fifty and pay it to the denier, but he refuses to do so, does the denier have the power to declare him unable and enslave his half? There are two views based on the opinion regarding the slave declaring himself unable while being capable of performance; if we say he may do so, then the denier may enslave him. If we say he may not, then the denier may not enslave him, because he is capable of performance. If it is said: Why does the denier not seek recourse against the receiver for half of what he received when he enslaved half of the slave? We say: Because if he sought recourse against him for it, he would be collecting his full due from the kitabah property, and the mukatab would become free thereby, unless receiving it in its installments is impossible, so the kitabah is annulled, and he is then demanded for it after that, in which case he may seek recourse for half of it, just as if it were absent in another land and delivery of it was impossible until the kitabah was annulled. And Allah knows best.

2004 - Issue: He said: (And if the master says: "I have contracted a kitabah with you for two thousand." And the slave says: "For one thousand." The word is the word of the master with his oath.)

The Qadi said: This is the school of thought. Ahmad, may Allah be pleased with him, stated it explicitly in the report of al-Kawthaj. It is also the opinion of al-Thawri, al-Awza'i, and Ishaq. Abu Bakr said: Ahmad and al-Shafi'i agreed that they take an oath against each other and reject [each other's claims]. This is the opinion of Abu Yusuf and Muhammad, because they differ on the consideration of the contract existing between them, so they take an oath against each other when there is no evidence, like the two parties in a sale. A third report is narrated from Ahmad, may Allah be pleased with him, that the word is the word of the mukatab. This is the opinion of Abu Hanifah, because he is a denier of the additional thousand, and the word is the word of the denier, and because he is a person against whom a claim is made, so he enters into the generality of his saying, peace be upon him: "But the oath is upon the one against whom the claim is made." Our argument is that it is a disagreement regarding the kitabah, so the word is the word of the master regarding it, just as if they differed regarding its very existence. It differs from a sale in two respects: First,