and if we say: he has no right to accept it, but he accepts it nonetheless, it is possible that the acceptance is not valid, because he has performed an act that the Sharia did not authorize for him, so it resembles the case where he sells his property at a loss. It is also possible that it is valid, and the liability rests upon him, because he imposed this liability upon him, so it is his responsibility, like the expenses of Hajj if he causes him to perform it.

Section: If he sells a slave who is his blood relative and a third party in a single transaction, the entire slave becomes free if the blood relative is wealthy, and he must guarantee the value of the share [of the slave] to his partner. Abu Hanifa said: He does not guarantee anything to his partner, because his ownership is not complete except with the acceptance of his partner, so it is as if he had permitted him to emancipate his share. Our argument is that his share became free upon his ownership through his own choice, so it is mandatory that the remainder be valued against him along with his wealth, just as if he had purchased him individually. We do not concede that his acceptance is not valid without the acceptance of his partner.

Section: If there is a married bondswoman who has a wealthy son, and he and her husband purchase her while she is pregnant by him in a single transaction, the son's share of his mother becomes free, and it spreads to the husband's share, and it is valued against him. The fetus becomes free upon them both together, because it is the son of the husband and the brother of the son, and neither of them owes the other anything for it, because it became free upon both of them at the same moment. If the situation were the same and she was gifted to them, or bequeathed to them, and they both accepted her at the same moment, then the same rule applies. If one of them accepted her before the other, we must look: if the son accepted first, the mother and her fetus become free upon him; [his share of the mother by ownership, followed by his share of the fetus, and the emancipation spreads to the remainder] [of the mother and the child], and he is liable for the value of their remainder to the husband. If the husband accepted first, the entire fetus becomes free upon him; [his share by ownership, and the remainder by spread, and it was valued against him]. Then, if the son accepts, the entire mother becomes free upon him,