had bewitched her (41). And because she is a fully competent owner who is among those capable of exercising discretion, she resembles the man. There is a third opinion that the punishment is delegated to her guardian, because he marries off her slave girl and her female client, so he possesses the right to carry out the punishment on her owned property.

Section: If one commits immorality with a slave girl, then kills her, the punishment and her value are incumbent upon him. This is the opinion of Abu Hanifa, al-Shafi'i, and Abu Thawr. Abu Yusuf said: If I impose her value upon him, I waive the punishment for him; because he becomes her owner by paying her compensation, so this constitutes a ambiguity (shubha) for the dropping of the punishment. Our position is that the punishment became due upon him, so it does not drop [by killing the one with whom the immorality was committed], just as if she were a free woman and he paid her blood money. Their argument that he becomes her owner is incorrect; because he only paid her value after killing her, and she no longer remains a subject of ownership. Furthermore, even if it were established that he became her owner, he would only have become her owner after the punishment had already become due, so the punishment would not be dropped from him, just as if he had bought her. If he committed adultery with a slave girl and then bought her, the punishment would not be dropped from him, despite the establishment of the reality of ownership for him, so here it is even more appropriate. If he committed adultery with a slave girl, then usurped her, and she fled from his possession, then he paid her value, the punishment does not drop from him; because if it does not drop by undisputed ownership, it is even more so regarding that which is differed upon.

Section: If a person who is half-free and half-slave commits adultery, there is no stoning for him; because freedom is not complete in him. There is incumbent upon him half the punishment of the free person, which is fifty lashes, and half the punishment of the slave, which is twenty-five (44), so there are seventy-five lashes incumbent upon him, and he is to be exiled for half a year. Ahmad stated this explicitly. It is possible that he is not exiled; because the right of the master is over his entire self at all times, and his portion of the slave [status] does not entail exile, so he is not required to abandon his right in some of the time by what is not required of him, nor to delay his right by alternation without his consent. If we say that his exile is mandatory, then the period of exile should be calculated against the slave from his free portion, and the master receives half a year in exchange for it. As for what exceeds [this] of freedom or