is a contract concerning the benefits of his body, and he [the master] possesses the right to exact them.

The second section: Regarding the young slave who has not reached puberty, the master has the right to marry him off, according to the opinion of the majority of scholars, although some Shafi'is said: There are two opinions regarding it. Abu al-Khattab said: It is possible that he does not possess the right to marry him off. Our position is that if he possesses the right to marry off his young son, then his slave—with his ownership of him and the completeness of his guardianship over him—is more deserving [of that right]. The same rule applies to his insane slave.

Section: The dowry (mahr) and maintenance (nafaqah) are the responsibility of the master, whether he guaranteed them or did not guarantee them, and whether he initiated the contract himself or gave permission to his slave to contract it, and whether the slave was authorized for trade or was under an interdiction (mahjur 'alayh). Ahmad explicitly stated this. There is another report from him that indicates that these [responsibilities] relate to the slave's earnings, for he said: His maintenance is from his tribute (daribah). He also said: If he has enough to cover the value of his tribute, he shall spend on her, and he does not give [the excess] to the master. If he does not have enough to cover her maintenance, a separation is made between them. This is one opinion held by al-Shafi'i. The benefit of this disagreement is that whoever obligates the master to pay the dowry and maintenance, makes them incumbent upon him even if the slave has no earnings, and the wife does not have the right of annulment due to the slave's lack of earnings, and the master has the right to utilize his labor and prevent him from earning. Whoever links it to his earnings, if he has no earnings, the wife has the right of annulment, and the master does not have the right to prevent him from earning. Our position is that it is a right that attached to the slave with his master's consent, so it attached to his master, and it is permissible to sell him [the slave] on account of it, just as if he had pledged him as collateral for a debt. Based on this, if his master sells him or emancipates him, the dowry does not lapse from the master. He [Ahmad] stated this explicitly; because it is a right that attached to his personal liability (dhimmah), so it does not lapse by his sale or emancipation, like the indemnity (arsh) for his crime. As for maintenance, it is recurrent, so in the future, it is on the buyer, or on the slave if he is emancipated.