nothing against the emancipator; due to what Ibn al-Tilibb reported from his father, that a man emancipated a share he had in a slave, and the Prophet (peace be upon him) did not make him liable for it. Ahmad mentioned it, and he narrated it. Also, because if he were to sell his share, the sale would be limited to it, and likewise is emancipation, unless it is a precious slave girl in whom one is overcharged, in which case it is tantamount to an offense by the emancipator, due to the harm he has inflicted upon his partner. Abu Hanifa said: Only the share of the emancipator is emancipated, and his partner has the choice of three things: if he wishes, he emancipates; if he wishes, he seeks the slave's work to earn his freedom (istis'a); and if he wishes, he makes his partner liable, and then [the remainder] is emancipated. For us, the evidence is the hadith we narrated, which is a sound (sahih) hadith that is agreed upon, and Malik narrated it in his "Muwatta" from Nafi' from Ibn Umar, wherein the Prophet (peace be upon him) established the emancipation of the entirety of the slave and obligated the emancipator who is wealthy to pay the value of his partner's share, and did not grant him, or anyone else, a choice. Qatada reported from Abu al-Malih from his father that a man from his people emancipated a share he had of a slave, and this was brought to the Prophet (peace be upon him), who made the completion of his freedom [a liability] upon his wealth and said: "There is no partner to Allah." Abu Abd Allah [Ibn Qudama] said: The correct view is that it is from Abu al-Malih from the Prophet (peace be upon him) as a mursal report, and there is no mention of his father in it. This is the meaning of his statement. The opinion of al-Batti is anomalous, contradicts all the reports, and is not to be relied upon. The hadith of al-Tilibb must be interpreted as applying to the insolvent person, as a way of reconciling the hadiths. The analogy of emancipation to sale is invalid, for sale does not extend [to the whole] when the slave is entirely his [own property]—except in a specific case—whereas emancipation does extend; for if he sold half his slave, it would not extend, but if he emancipated half of him, the whole of him becomes free. Once this is established, his wala' belongs to him, because he became free through his emancipation [from his wealth], and the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: "Wala' belongs only to the one who emancipates." There is no disagreement regarding this among those who hold the view that his emancipation is binding upon him.