Section: If one emancipates a slave as part of his expiation (kaffarah), his vow (nadhr), or from his zakat, Ahmad said regarding the one who emancipates from his zakat: If he inherits anything from him, he should place it in the like of it (i.e., another charitable cause). He said: This is the opinion of al-Hasan, and Ishaq held the same view. By analogy, this applies to emancipation for expiation and vows, because it is an obligation upon him. It has been narrated from Ahmad that he said regarding the one who emancipates as part of zakat: The wala' (right of patronage) belongs to the one at whose hands his emancipation occurred. Malik and al-'Anbari said: The wala' belongs to all Muslims, and it is placed in the public treasury (bayt al-mal). Abu 'Ubayd said: The wala' belongs to the owner of the charity. This is the opinion of the majority regarding emancipation for a vow or expiation, due to the saying of the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him: "The wala' belongs to the one who emancipates." Furthermore, 'Aishah, may Allah be pleased with her, purchased Barirah on the condition of emancipation, so she emancipated her, and the wala' was hers. The condition of emancipation necessitates this (13), and because he is an emancipator on his own behalf, the wala' is his, just as if he had stipulated emancipation upon him and he then emancipated him. Our argument is that the one who emancipates from zakat is an emancipator using wealth other than his own, so he does not possess the wala', just as if he had paid it to the collector (sa'i) who then purchased [a slave] with it and emancipated him, or as if he had paid a mukatab (contracted slave) wealth, which the slave then paid toward his manumission contract. This differs from the case where one is stipulated to emancipate, for he is effectively emancipating his own wealth, whereas emancipation for expiation and vows is an obligation upon him, so it resembles emancipation from zakat. Many scholars held the view that one may not emancipate from zakat. Some of them argued against this on the basis that it draws the wala' to himself, thereby benefiting from his own zakat. This is one of the opinions of Ahmad, narrated by a group of his followers, and it is the opinion of al-Nakha'i and al-Shafi'i.

1052 - Issue: He said: (And whoever takes possession of a close relative by blood (dhu rahim mahram), he becomes free upon him, and he holds his wala').

A close relative by blood (dhu rahim mahram) is the relative with whom marriage is forbidden (haram) if one of them were a man and the other a woman. They are the parents, however high they ascend, from both the paternal and maternal sides; the children, however low they descend, from sons and daughters; the brothers and sisters; their children, however low they descend; and the paternal uncles/aunts and maternal uncles/aunts,