And his wealth is established only through his Islam, so the removal of his Islam removes the inviolability of both [his person and his wealth], just as if he were to flee to the territory of war (dar al-harb). And because the Muslims acquired the right to shed his blood through his apostasy, it is necessary that they should also acquire his wealth through it. The companions of Abu Hanifa said: His wealth is suspended (mawquf); if he embraces Islam, we determine that his ownership remained intact, and if he dies or is killed in his state of apostasy, we determine that it ceased from the time of his apostasy. Al-Sharif Abu Ja'far said: This is the apparent view of Ahmad. Regarding al-Shafi'i, there are three opinions, similar to these three. Our stance is that it is a cause that makes his blood permissible, but his ownership does not cease because of it, similar to the case of the married adulterer, or one who intentionally kills an equal, for the removal of inviolability does not necessarily imply the removal of ownership, as evidenced by the married adulterer, the murderer in banditry (muharabah), and the people of the territory of war (ahl al-harb); for their ownership remains established despite the lack of their inviolability. If an apostate flees to the territory of war, his ownership does not cease, but it becomes permissible for anyone to kill him without a request for repentance, and for anyone who is able to take his wealth to do so, because he has become an enemy (harbi), and his status is that of the people of war. Likewise, if a group apostatizes and refuses in their territory to obey the Imam of the Muslims, their inviolability in their persons and their wealth ceases; because original disbelievers have no inviolability in their territory, and apostates are even more so.

Section: The wealth of the apostate shall be taken and placed with a trustworthy person from the Muslims, and if he has slave women, they shall be placed with a trustworthy woman, for they are forbidden to him, so he shall not be given access to them. The Qadi mentioned that his real estate, slaves, and slave women shall be leased out. The preferable view is that this should not be done, for the duration of waiting for him is short, and there is no harm in waiting for him, so the benefits of his property should not be forfeited by him in a manner he would not be pleased with for their sake; for he might return to Islam, and then the disposal of his wealth through the ruler's leasing of it would be restricted for him. If he flees to the territory of war, or his killing is delayed for a long time, the ruler shall do what he sees as beneficial, such as selling the livestock that requires maintenance and other things, and leasing what he deems appropriate to preserve. The mukatab (slave under a contract of emancipation) pays to the ruler, and when he pays, he is emancipated, for the ruler is a representative on his behalf.