slave girl with whom he has intercourse, without distinction between one in menopause and others. The most appropriate view is that this is not mandatory for one in menopause, because the rationale for the obligation is the possibility of pregnancy, which is a far-fetched conjecture; the fundamental principle is its absence, so we do not establish a legal ruling based solely upon it.

Section: If one buys a slave girl and she appears to be pregnant, there are five possible states. The first is that the seller admitted to having intercourse with her at the time of the sale or prior to it, and she gives birth [to a child in less than] six months, or the seller claimed the child and the purchaser confirmed it; in this case, the child belongs to the seller, the slave girl is an umm walad (mother of a child) to him, and the sale is void. The second state is that one of them performed her istibra', then she gave birth to a child more than six months after the time the purchaser had intercourse with her; in this case, the child belongs to the purchaser, and the slave girl is his umm walad. The third state is that she gives birth to the child more than six months after one of them performed her istibra', but less than six months since the purchaser had intercourse with her. In this case, the child's lineage is not attributed to either of them, and it is the property of the purchaser; he does not have the right to annul the sale because the pregnancy appeared to have been renewed while in his possession. If each of them claims the child, it belongs to the purchaser because it was born while in his possession, with the possibility that it is his. If the seller alone claims it and the purchaser confirms it, the lineage is established, and the sale is void. If he denies it, the word of the purchaser is accepted regarding the ownership of the child, because ownership was transferred to him in outward appearance, so the seller's claim regarding what nullifies the purchaser's right is not accepted, just as if he had admitted after the sale that the slave girl was usurped or emancipated. Does the child's lineage from the seller become established? There are two views: one is that it is established, because it is a benefit to the child without harm to the purchaser, so his statement regarding it is accepted, as in the case where he admits to a financial debt for his child. The second is that it is not accepted, because it entails harm to the purchaser; for if he emancipated him, his father would have a greater right to his inheritance than the purchaser. Therefore, if two slaves each claimed that the other was his brother, it would not be accepted except with evidence. The fourth state is that she gives birth to the child more than six months since the purchaser had intercourse with her before performing her istibra'; in this case, his lineage is attributed to the purchaser. If the seller claims it and the purchaser confirms it for him, it is attributed to him, and the sale is void.