then the statement is that of the patron of their mother, because the original state is servitude, and the persistence of their walā' (patronage rights) belongs to him; therefore, he takes an oath, and their walā' remains with him.

2005 - Issue: He said: "And if he emancipates a slave woman, or his mukātib (contractual slave), and stipulates what is in her womb, or emancipates what is in her womb to the exclusion of her, then his stipulation is valid for him."

Similar to this opinion has been narrated from Ibn Umar, Abu Hurayrah, al-Nakha'i, Ishaq, and Ibn al-Mundhir. Ibn Sirin said: He is entitled to what he excepted. 'Ata' and al-Sha'bi said: If he excepts what is in her womb, he is entitled to his exception (thunyāhu). Malik and al-Shafi'i said: Excepting the fetus is not valid, because the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) forbade thunyā (exception) unless it is known. Also, because it is not valid to except it in a sale, so it is not valid in emancipation, just like some of her limbs. Our evidence is the statement of Ibn Umar and Abu Hurayrah, and we do not know of any opponent to them among the Companions. Ahmad said: I follow the hadith of Ibn Umar regarding emancipation, but I do not follow it regarding sale. Al-Athram has narrated with his chain of authority from Ibn Umar that he emancipated a slave woman and excepted what was in her womb. Furthermore, the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) said: "Muslims are bound by their conditions." This person has stipulated what is in the womb of the one he is emancipating, so it belongs to him according to the requirement of the report. It is also because it is valid to emancipate it specifically, thus its exception is valid, like that which is separate. As for their report, we subscribe to it, and the pregnancy is known, so its exception is valid according to the requirement of the hadith, and it differs from...