He has the wala' for what he emancipated, based on the report and because he is the one who bestowed the favor of emancipation upon him, so the wala' belongs to him, unlike other mukatabs. The Qadi said: If they all emancipate him before he becomes incapable, the wala' belongs to the master. If some of them emancipate him, his emancipation does not extend; then it is examined: if he pays the rest, his entire person is emancipated, and the wala' belongs to the master. If he becomes incapable and they return him to slavery, the wala' for the share of the one who emancipated him belongs to him, because were it not for his emancipation, his share would have returned to slavery like the shares of the other heirs. So when he emancipated him, he was the one who bestowed the favor upon him, so the wala' belongs to him to the exclusion of the others. As for if all the heirs release him from his debt (7), he is emancipated, and his wala' follows the two narrations we mentioned regarding when he pays to them, because release serves the same purpose as satisfying what is upon him. It is possible that the wala' belongs to them, because they bestowed upon him the favor by which he was emancipated, so it resembles the case where they emancipated him. If some of them release him from his share, his wala' is subject to the disagreement we have mentioned. And Allah knows best.

Section: If the heirs sell the mukatab or give him as a gift, their sale and gift are valid, because they stand in the place of the mukatab, and the mukatab has the right to sell and gift himself, so his heirs do as well. He remains with the purchaser or the recipient under his kitaba contract; if he becomes incapable and they declare his incapacity, he returns to being their slave. If he pays and is emancipated, his wala' belongs to whomever he pays, according to the narration which states that his wala' is for the heirs if he pays to them. As for the other narration, it is possible that his sale and gift are not valid, because that would entail nullifying the cause for the establishment of wala' for the master who contracted the kitaba with him, and the heirs do not have that right. It is also possible that it is valid, and the wala' belongs to the master if he is emancipated through the kitaba, because the master established it, so he is emancipated by it, and the wala' belongs to him. This differs from what the master sells, because the master, by his sale, nullified his own right, and he has the authority to do so, unlike the heirs, for they do not have the right to nullify the right of their predecessor.

Section: If the master bequeaths (8) the kitaba wealth to a man, it is valid. If he delivers the kitaba wealth to the legatee, or his agent, or his guardian if he is under interdiction, he is absolved of it, and he is emancipated, and his wala' belongs to the master who contracted the kitaba with him, for he is the one who bestowed the favor upon him. If he releases him from the wealth, he is also emancipated, because he is cleared of the kitaba wealth, which resembles the case of his having paid it. If he emancipates him, he is not emancipated, because he does not own his person, nor did he bequeath it to him.