two views; one of them is that it is not permissible. The other is that it is permissible, which is the opinion of Abu Hanifa and Malik; because manumission is a concept that is not susceptible to rescission, so it is permissible for an unspecified animal to be a compensation for it, like the blood money (‘aql). Our position is that what is not permissible as compensation in sales and leasing is not permissible as compensation in a kitaba contract, such as an unspecified garment, and it differs from blood money; because that is a substitute (40) for damaged property estimated by the Sharia, whereas here it is a compensation in a contract, so it resembles a sale. Furthermore, the animal obligated in blood money is not an unspecified animal; rather, it is specified by its genus and age, so it is not valid to draw an analogy to it. Additionally, there is no disagreement among the people, as far as we know, that a kitaba contract is not valid over an unspecified animal; the disagreement only concerns an unspecified slave, and we know of no place where the Sharia has designated that as a substitute. Once this is established, whoever validates the kitaba contract with it, obligates him to provide a medium-grade slave, namely a Sindhi slave, and it must be a medium-grade among Sindhis in terms of value, as we said regarding the mahr (dower). Kitaba is not valid over an unspecified animal other than a slave, as far as we know, nor over a garment, nor a house. Likewise (41), it is not permissible over a garment from his garments, nor a turban from his turbans, nor any other unknowns. If he describes that [with its descriptions in a salam contract] (42), it is valid. Among those who permitted kitaba over slaves are al-Hasan, Sa'id ibn Jubayr, al-Nakha'i, al-Zuhri, Ibn Sirin, Malik, and the People of Reason (Ahl al-Ra'y). This was also narrated from Abu Barza and Hafsa, may Allah be pleased with them both.

Section: Kitaba is valid over service and permissible benefit; because it is one of the two compensations in a leasing contract, so it is permissible for it to be a compensation in kitaba, like currencies. It is a condition that it be known, just as it is conditioned in leasing. If he enters into a kitaba contract for one month's service and a dinar, it is valid, and there is no need to mention the month and that it is immediately following the contract; because its absolute mention implies that. If he specifies the month for a time that is not connected to the contract, such as if he enters into a kitaba contract in Muharram for his service in Rajab and a dinar, it is also valid, just as it is permissible for him to lease his house for the month of Rajab in Muharram. The companions of al-Shafi'i said: It is not permissible for a month that is not connected to the contract. They stipulate