The child of the woman who performed li'an joins the man who performed li'an if he claims his paternity, whereas the child of zina does not join the adulterer according to the majority opinion. Al-Hasan and Ibn Sirin said: He joins the person who had intercourse with her if the prescribed punishment (hadd) is carried out against him, and he inherits from him. Ibrahim said: He joins him if he is flogged with the hadd, or if he owns the woman who was had intercourse with. Ishaq said: He joins him. It is reported from 'Urwa and Sulayman ibn Yasar similar to this. 'Ali ibn 'Asim reported from Abu Hanifa that he said: I do not see any harm if a man commits zina with a woman and she becomes pregnant by him, that he marries her while she is pregnant and conceals her situation, and the child is a child of his. They reached consensus that if a child is born on a man's bed (firash), and another claims him, he does not join him; the disagreement is only in cases where the child is born outside of a bed. Our evidence is the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him): "The child is for the bed, and for the adulterer is the stone (i.e., nothing)." Also, because he does not join him if he does not claim his paternity, he does not join him under any circumstances, just as if his mother were a bed, or as if he had not been flogged with the hadd according to those who stipulate that condition.

1040 - Issue: He said: (And the slave does not inherit, nor does he possess wealth, so that it might be inherited from him.)

I do not know of any disagreement that the slave does not inherit, except for what is narrated from Ibn Mas'ud regarding a man who died and left behind an enslaved father, that he is to be purchased from his wealth, then emancipated, [then he inherits]. Al-Hasan said this, and it was narrated from Tawus that the slave inherits, and what he inherits belongs to his master, like his earnings, and as if he had bequeathed something to him; and because a bequest to him is valid, so he inherits like a fetus. Our evidence is that there is a deficiency in him that prevents him from being inherited from, so it prevents him from being an heir, like the apostate. He differs from a bequest, for a bequest is valid for his master even though he has no right of inheritance, and their analogy is invalidated by cases of those of different religions. The opinion of Ibn Mas'ud is not correct, because the father was a slave at the time of his son's death, so he did not inherit from him, like other relatives; this is because the inheritance belonged to his rightful heirs at the moment of death, so it did not transfer from them to anyone else. They reached consensus...