al-Hasan ibn Harun regarding manumission, that it does not take effect, and I do not consider it but a mistake; thus I heard al-Khallal say. If he did indeed memorize it, then it is another opinion. The difference between them is that the one who vows manumission is bound to fulfill it, while the one who vows divorce is not bound to fulfill it. Just as they differ in the vow, it is permissible that they differ in the oath. Also, if he said to his slave-woman: "The first child you bear is free," this is valid, and it is a suspension of freedom upon ownership. From Ahmad, may Allah have mercy on him, there is that which indicates the occurrence of divorce and manumission. This is the opinion of al-Thawri and the People of Opinion (Ashab al-Ra'y), because it is valid to suspend it upon future contingencies, so it is valid to suspend it upon the occurrence of ownership, like a bequest, a vow, and an oath. Malik said: If he specifies a gender among the types, or a specific slave, he is freed when he owns him. But if he says: "Every slave I own is free," it is not valid. The first is more correct, if Allah the Almighty wills, because it is a suspension of divorce and manumission before ownership, so it resembles what if he said to a non-spouse: "If you enter the house, you are divorced," or to someone else's slave-woman: "If you enter the house, you are free." Then he marries the non-spouse and comes to own the slave-woman, and they both enter the house; then the divorce does not take effect, and the slave-woman is not freed, without any disagreement that we know of.

1800- Issue: He said: (If he swears not to marry so-and-so, or: "I will not buy so-and-so," and he marries her in an invalid marriage, or buys her in an invalid purchase, he does not break his oath.)

This is also the view of al-Shafi'i. Abu Hanifah said: If he says to his slave: "If I marry you off, or sell you, you are free," and he marries him off in an invalid marriage, he is not freed. But if he sells him in an invalid sale through which ownership is acquired, he breaks his oath, because an invalid sale, according to him, establishes ownership if possession is connected to it. We argue that the word "sale" refers to the valid sale, by the evidence of the statement of Allah the Almighty: "And Allah has permitted trade" [Al-Baqarah 275]. Most of its usages regarding sale refer only to the valid one, so he does not break his oath by what is less than that, just as in marriage, prayer, and other things. As for what they mentioned about the establishment of ownership by it, we do not concede it. Ibn Abi Musa said: He does not break his oath by an invalid marriage. As for whether he breaks his oath by an invalid sale? There are two narrations. Abu al-Khattab said: If he marries her in a marriage that is disagreed upon, such as if he marries her without a guardian or witnesses, or sells at the time of the call to prayer, there are two views. Ibn Abi Musa said: If he marries her in a marriage that is disagreed upon, or acquires ownership in a way that is disagreed upon,