Section: A master may not marry his own slave girl, because ownership of the person grants ownership of the usufruct and the permissibility of sexual relations, and a weaker contract cannot be joined with it. If a man owns his wife and she is a slave girl, her marriage is dissolved. Likewise, if a woman owns her husband, her marriage is dissolved. We know of no disagreement regarding this. It is not permissible to marry a slave girl in whom he has a share of ownership. Nor may he marry his mukataba (slave girl under a contract of manumission), because she is his property.

Section: It is not permissible for a free man to marry his son’s slave girl because he has a semblance of ownership in her. This is the view of the people of the Hijaz. The people of Iraq said: He may do so because she is not owned by him, nor is she emancipated by his act of emancipating her. Our evidence is the statement of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him): "You and your wealth belong to your father." Also, if he owned a part of a slave girl, his marriage to her would not be valid; therefore, one who is entirely attributed to him legally is more entitled to being forbidden. Likewise, a slave may not marry the mother of his master or mistress, along with the disagreement we have previously mentioned. It is permissible for a slave to marry his son's slave girl because slavery has severed his guardianship over his father and his father's wealth; for this reason, he has no guardianship over his wealth or his marriage, and neither of them inherits from the other, so he is like a stranger to him.

Section: A son may marry his father’s slave girl because he has no ownership of her, nor any semblance of ownership, so he is like a stranger; the same applies to other relatives. It is permissible for a man to marry his daughter to his slave if we say that freedom is not a condition for the validity of the marriage. Whenever the father dies and one of the two spouses inherits the other, or a part of them, the marriage is dissolved. The same applies if one acquires the other, or a part of them, through means other than inheritance. We know of no disagreement regarding this, except that al-Hasan said: If he buys his wife for the sake of emancipation and emancipates her as soon as he takes possession of her, they remain in their marriage. This is not valid, because they are mutually exclusive and cannot be joined in any capacity, whether small or large, so by the mere...