is an annulment by which he is entitled to reclaim the substance. He is therefore not entitled to take the disconnected increase, similar to the annulment of a sale due to a defect, an option (khiyar), or mutual rescission (iqala), and the annulment of a marriage for any reason necessitating it. The saying of the Prophet (may God bless him and grant him peace), "The gain is for the one who bears the liability," indicates that the growth and profit belong to the purchaser because the liability is upon him. As for the connected increase, we have already demonstrated that it also belongs to the insolvent person, and that serves as a reminder that the disconnected increase likewise belongs to him. Furthermore, even if we were to concede that point, the distinction is manifest; for the connected increase follows the substance in cases of annulments and returns due to defects, unlike the disconnected increase. It is not appropriate for there to be any disagreement regarding this due to its clarity, and the words of Ahmad, in the narration of Hanbal, are interpreted as meaning that he sold them while they were pregnant, thus they are considered sold items; this is why he singled these two out for mention rather than the rest of the growth.

Section: If one purchases a pregnant slave girl and then becomes insolvent while she is still pregnant, he [the seller] has the right to reclaim her, unless the pregnancy has increased [her] with its growth, and her value has increased because of it, in which case it falls under the category of that which has increased with a connected increase, according to what has preceded. If he becomes insolvent after she gives birth, the Qadi said: He has the right to reclaim both in all cases, without distinction. The correct view is that if we say: the pregnancy has no legal ruling, then the child is a disconnected increase; thus, according to the opinion of Abu Bakr, it does not prevent reclamation of both, and according to the opinion of others, the child belongs to the insolvent person, so it is possible that it would prevent the reclamation of the mother so as not to lead to separating the mother from her child, and it is also possible that he may reclaim the mother and pay the value of the child so that he may have both.