on me, and yet his inheritance is for this one?" He said: "Yes." We have interpreted al-Khiraqi’s issue based on the case where the emancipator is a woman, because the reports we cited only concern that case, and because a woman does not pay blood money (ta'qil), and her son is not from her clan ('ashirah), so he does not pay blood money for her emancipated slave; rather, her agnates from her clan pay it for her. As for a male emancipator, he pays blood money for his emancipated slave because he is an agnate who is among those responsible for blood money, and his son and father pay it as well because they are among his agnates and clan, so his son is not to be equated with the son of a woman regarding the negation of blood money liability. And Allah knows best.

Section: If the master is alive, and he is a sane, wealthy man, then the liability for blood money lies with him, and the inheritance is his, because he is the agnate of his emancipated slave. If he is a minor, a woman, or a mentally challenged person (ma'tuh), then the blood money liability lies with his agnates, and the inheritance is his, because he is not among those responsible for paying blood money. He is similar to those who commit an unintentional crime; the liability lies with their agnates, and if a crime is committed against them, the compensation (arsh) is theirs.

Section: The "lower master" (mawla al-asfal)—the one emancipated by the master—does not inherit from him, according to the opinion of the general body of scholars. It was narrated from Shurayh and Tawus that they did not grant him inheritance, based on what Sa'id narrated from Sufyan, from 'Amr ibn Dinar, from 'Awsajah, from Ibn 'Abbas, that a man died during the time of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) having no heir except a slave boy whom he had emancipated, so the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) gave him his inheritance. Al-Tirmidhi said: This is a hasan (good) hadith. Something similar was narrated from 'Umar. Our evidence is the saying of the Prophet (peace be upon him): "Wala' belongs only to the one who emancipated." Also, because he did not bestow a favor upon him, he does not inherit from him, like a stranger. The fact that the Prophet (peace be upon him) gave it to him is a specific case, which could mean he was an heir through a means other than emancipation, and the benefit of the hadith is that his emancipating him did not prevent him from inheriting. It is also possible that he gave it to him as a gift (silah) and an act of grace. Once it is established that he does not inherit from him, he does not pay blood money for him. Al-Shafi'i said in his earlier (qadim) opinion: He pays blood money for him because he is his master who bestowed a favor upon him, so it is permissible for him to incur debts on his behalf. Our evidence is that the blood money lies with the agnates, and he is not one of them. What he mentioned has no basis, and it is invalidated