and being intimate with her, and he shall be compelled to provide for her. If she becomes Muslim, she becomes lawful for him, and when he dies, she becomes free.

This issue, its explanation is deferred to the chapter on the emancipation of Ummahat al-Awlad (mothers of children), for it is more appropriate there.

1964. Issue: He said: "If you say to your slave woman: 'The first child you give birth to is free.' Then she gives birth to two children, lots shall be cast between them; whichever the lot falls upon is free, if it is ambiguous which of them was born first."

This is only so because one of them deserves freedom, but it is not known which one specifically, so it was necessary to determine it by lot, just as if he had said to his slaves: "One of you is free." The discussion on this issue has already passed. However, if it is known which of them was born first, then he alone is the free one. This is the view of Malik, al-Thawri, Abu Hashim, al-Shafi'i, and Ibn al-Mundhir. Al-Hasan, al-Sha'bi, and Qatadah said: If she gives birth to two children in one pregnancy, both are free. Our view is that he only emancipated the first, and the one who came out first is the first of the two children, so the emancipation is restricted to him, just as if she had given birth to them in two separate pregnancies.

Section: If she gives birth to the first one dead and the second one alive, al-Sharif mentioned that the living one among them becomes free. Abu Hanifa held this view as well. Abu Yusuf, Muhammad, and al-Shafi'i said: Neither of them becomes free. This is the correct view, if Allah the Almighty wills, because the condition for emancipation was found in the dead one, and he is not a valid subject for emancipation, so the oath was voided by him. We said: "the condition of emancipation was found in him," because he is the firstborn, evidenced by the fact that if he said to his slave woman: "If you give birth to a child, you are free," and she gives birth to a stillborn child, she becomes free. The argument for the first view is that emancipation is impossible for the dead one, so the oath became attached to the living one, just as if he had said: "If you hit so-and-so, my slave is free." If he hits him while alive, he is freed; if he hits him while dead, he is not freed. Furthermore, it is known through custom that he intended his oath to apply to a child for whom emancipation is valid, which requires the child to be alive; thus, life becomes a condition for it, as if he had said: "The first child you give birth to alive is free."

Section: If he says to his slave woman: "Every child you give birth to is free," then every child she gives birth to is free, according to the opinion of the majority of scholars, among them: Malik, al-Shafi'i, al-Awza'i, al-Layth, and al-Thawri. Ibn al-Mundhir said: "I do not know of any disagreement among them other than them." If he sells the slave woman, and she subsequently gives birth, her child does not become free, because she gave birth to them after his ownership ceased.