herself from the one who had been her marital partner, so that sufficed, just as if she had performed istibra' on herself from her master if she had been free of a husband. If he purchases her while she is still observing the 'idda from her husband, it is not required for her to perform istibra', because she was not a marital partner to her master, and the istibra' from the husband has already been achieved through the 'idda. For this reason, if she were to be emancipated in this state, istibra' would not be required of her. Abu al-Khattab said regarding a married slave girl: Does the istibra' enter into the 'idda? There are two views. The Qadi said regarding a woman observing the 'idda: The master is required to perform her istibra' after the completion of the 'idda, and they do not overlap, because they are from two different men. The understanding of Ahmad's words is what we mentioned first, because he provided the reason regarding [the case] before consummation that it is a stratagem devised by the proponents of ra'y (personal opinion), and that is not found here. Their claim that the istibra' is from two men is not correct, for the master here has no istibra'.

Section: If a slave girl belongs to two men and they both have intercourse with her, then they sell her to a man, a single istibra' suffices for him, because the knowledge of [the absence of] pregnancy is achieved by it. If it is said: Then if he were to emancipate her, you would have made two istibra's obligatory upon her. We reply: The obligation of istibra' in the case of an emancipated woman is justified by intercourse. For this reason, if he emancipates her while she is among those whom he does not have intercourse with, istibra' is not required of her. Intercourse has indeed occurred from two, so the ruling of their intercourse became binding upon her. In our current issue, it [the obligation] is justified by the renewal of ownership and nothing else. This is why the purchaser is required to perform istibra' regardless of whether her master had intercourse with her or not, and the ownership is singular, so it is necessary that the istibra' be renewed.

Section: If a man purchases his own wife who is a slave girl, he is not required to perform her istibra', because she is already his marital partner, so he is not required to perform her istibra' from his own seed. However, it is recommended to do so in order to know whether the child is from the marriage, in which case the child's wala' (patronage) belongs to him—because the child was emancipated by his [the master's] ownership of him, and the slave girl does not become an umm al-walad (mother of a child) through that—or if the pregnancy occurred while she was his possession by right (milk al-yamin), in which case the child's wala' does not belong to him and the slave girl becomes an umm al-walad. Whenever her pregnancy becomes evident, he is permitted to have intercourse with her, because the pregnancy has become known and the uncertainty is removed.