Based on the evidence that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) forbade the sale and gifting of wala' (patronage rights), and said: "Wala' belongs only to the one who frees." It is also because it is a bond similar to the bond of lineage; therefore, it is not valid to stipulate it for anyone other than its rightful owner, like kinship. Furthermore, it is a legal effect of emancipation, so it is not valid to stipulate it for anyone other than the emancipator, just as it is not valid to stipulate the legal effect of marriage for someone other than the husband, nor the legal effect of a sale for someone other than the contracting party. It makes no difference whether he stipulates that the wala' belongs to whomsoever he wishes, or stipulates it for his seller, or for another specific man. The kitaba (contract of manumission) does not become void due to this condition. Ahmad, may Allah be pleased with him, explicitly stated this. Al-Shafi'i, may Allah be pleased with him, said: It becomes void, just as if one were to stipulate an unknown compensation. An equivalent position could be derived for us, based on [the rulings on] corrupt conditions in a sale. Our position is supported by the hadith of Barira; her owners stipulated the wala' for themselves, yet the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) commanded her to buy her [freedom] with this condition, and he said: "Wala' belongs only to the one who frees." It differs from unknown compensation, as compensation is a pillar of the contract; it is impossible to validate the contract without it, and its ignorance may lead to conflict and disagreement. This, however, is an extraneous condition; if we remove it, the contract remains valid as it is. If it is said: "The meaning of the Prophet's statement (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), 'Stipulate the wala' for them' (ishtarti lahum al-wala'), means 'against them' (alayhim), because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) would not command a corrupt condition, and the particle 'lam' is used with the meaning of 'ala' (against), as in the saying of Allah the Exalted: 'And if you do evil, it is for it' (Quran 17:7)—meaning 'against it'." We respond: This is not valid for three reasons: First, it contradicts the usage and established meaning of the wording. Second, the owners of Barira rejected this condition, so how would the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) order her to make a condition they would not accept! Third, the establishment of wala' for her does not require a condition, because it is the requirement and legal effect of emancipation. Fourth, in some versions it states: "This condition shall not prevent you from it; buy and free." The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) only commanded her to include the condition to make clear to us that the presence of such a condition is as if it were non-existent, and that it does not transfer the wala' away from the emancipator.