upon himself, and he cannot find anyone to provide for his sustenance, then his kitaba is disliked. If, however, he finds someone to cover his expenses, his kitaba is not disliked, because the benefit of freedom is achieved without harm. As for Juwayriya, she had a family, and she was the daughter of the leader of her people; thus, when she was emancipated, she returned to her family, and Allah replaced her family for her with what was better, as the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) married her, and she became one of the Mothers of the Believers. The people then emancipated those whom they possessed from her people when they heard that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) had married her, saying: "They are the in-laws of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)." No woman was ever seen to be of greater blessing to her people than her. As for Barira, her kitaba indicates the permissibility of that, and that it is not something blameworthy; the disagreement only concerns its dislike. Masruq said: "If the slave asks his master for a kitaba, then if he has the ability to earn or has wealth, he should enter into a kitaba with him; but if he has no wealth or earning ability, he should treat his ownership of him well and not burden him beyond his capacity."
Section: A kitaba is not valid except from one whose disposition is valid. As for the insane person and the child, their entering into a kitaba with their slaves is not valid, nor is the kitaba of their master with them. As for the discerning child, if he enters into a kitaba with his slave with the permission of his guardian, it is valid. It is also possible that it is not valid, based on our position that his sale is not valid even with the permission of his guardian, and because this is a contract of emancipation, so it is not valid from him, like emancipation without payment. As for if his guardian does not permit it, it is not valid under any circumstances. If the discerning child enters into a kitaba with his master, it is valid; this is the opinion of Abu Hanifa. Al-Shafi'i said: It is not valid in either case at all, because he is not legally responsible (mukallaf), so he resembles the insane person. Our argument is that his disposition and his sale are valid with the permission of his guardian, so the kitaba is valid from him by that, like the legally responsible person. The proof for the validity of his disposition is the word of Allah
(23) In B and M, there is an addition: "and wealth." (24) In the original: "sahara" (in-law). (25) In the original: "makruh" (disliked). (26) In the original: "karahatihi" (its dislike). (27) In A and M: "al-mukataaba" (the contracting). (28) In the original: "wasiyyihi" (his executor). (29) In B: "kal-mu'taq" (like the emancipated one). (30) In M: "kana" (was). (31) In B, there is an addition: "fihi" (in it).
