become an umm al-walad until she produces a pregnancy while in his possession. His son Salih narrated from him, saying: I asked my father about a man who marries a slave girl, she gives birth by him, then he purchases her. He said: 'She does not become an umm al-walad for him.' I asked: 'What if he clears her of pregnancy (istabra'aha) while she is pregnant by him?' He said: 'If the intercourse increases the child (in development), and he has intercourse with her after he purchased her while she is pregnant by him, she becomes an umm al-walad for him.' Ibn Hamid said: 'If he has intercourse with her at the beginning or middle of her pregnancy, she [becomes] thereby an umm al-walad for him; because the fluid increases the child in hearing and sight.' The Qadi said: 'If he owns her while she is pregnant and does not have intercourse with her until she gives birth, she does not become an umm al-walad. If he has intercourse with her during her pregnancy, we examine the case; if it was after the child was fully formed and had reached five months, she does not become an umm al-walad by that. But if he has intercourse with her before that, she becomes an umm al-walad for him by that; because Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) said: "After your blood and theirs, and your flesh and theirs have intermingled, you sold them!" He attributed the cause to the intermingling (mukhalata), and the intermingling here is achieved because the fluid increases the child, and because the freedom of a part has an effect in liberating the whole, as evidenced by when one of two partners emancipates his share of a slave.' Abu al-Khattab said: 'If he has intercourse with her after the purchase, she is an umm al-walad.' The words of al-Khiraqi imply that she does not become an umm al-walad unless she becomes pregnant by him while in his possession. This is what Ahmad (may Allah be pleased with him) explicitly stated in the narration of Ishaq ibn Mansur, saying: 'She does not become an umm al-walad until she produces a pregnancy while in his possession,' because she did not conceive a free child from him, so the ruling of istilad (motherhood status) is not established for her, just as if he committed adultery with her and then purchased her. This is verified by the fact that her pregnancy by him was something that provided freedom for his child, so that it should not provide her with freedom is more appropriate. This differs from the case where she becomes pregnant by him while in his possession; for the child is free, so it is liberated through his liberation. What they mentioned regarding the increase of the child by intercourse is not certain; for this child might have increased, and it might not have increased, so the ruling is not established upon doubt. Even if it were established that it increased, the ruling would not be established by this increase, as evidenced by the case where he owns her while she is pregnant from an act of adultery by him, or from someone else, and he has intercourse with her; she does not become an umm al-walad, even if the child increases by it. And because the ruling of istilad is only established by consensus for the one whom he made pregnant while in his possession, and whatever is other than that is not in its meaning, nor is there any text or consensus regarding it, so it is necessary that this ruling not be established. And because the base principle is slavery, it remains upon what it was.