like a full slave. Once this is established, he begins by paying the offense before the kitaba (contractual manumission), regardless of whether an installment has fallen due or not. This is the text narrated from Ahmad and is what is practiced in the school. Abu Bakr mentioned another position: that the master shares with the victim’s guardian, so he may lay claim to the amount of the kitaba installments that have become due; because they are both debts, so they share proportionally, like other debts. We argue that the indemnity for an offense committed by a slave takes precedence over all other rights attached to him; for this reason, it is given precedence over the right of the owner, the right of the mortgagee, and others, so it must be given precedence here. This is further confirmed by the fact that the indemnity for his offense takes precedence over the master's ownership of his slave; therefore, it is more appropriate that it be given precedence over his compensation, which is the wealth of the kitaba. This is because ownership of him before the kitaba was fixed, whereas the debt of the kitaba is not fixed. Since it is given precedence over what is fixed, it is more appropriate that it be given precedence over what is not. Furthermore, the indemnity for the offense is fixed, so it must be given precedence over the kitaba, which is not fixed. Once this is established, he ransoms himself for the lesser of two things: his value or the indemnity for his offense. If the indemnity for the offense is less, he is not obligated to pay more than what his offense requires, which is its indemnity. If it is more, he is not obligated to pay more than his value, because he is not obligated to pay more than the substitute for the object to which the indemnity attached. If he begins by paying the wealth to the victim's guardian, he fulfills what is required of him regarding the offense's indemnity; otherwise, the judge shall sell him for the remainder of the offense's indemnity, and the rest remains on his kitaba. If he chooses to annul the contract, he may do so, and he returns to being a slave who is not a mukatab, held in common between the master and the buyer. If he keeps him on the kitaba and he pays, he becomes free through the kitaba, and the freedom extends to his remaining part. If the mukatab is wealthy, he is appraised and must pay, and if he is insolvent, the portion that is freed becomes free, and the rest remains a slave. If he has no wealth in his hand and cannot cover the offense except with his entire value, he is sold in his entirety for the offense, and his kitaba becomes void. If he begins by paying the wealth to his master, we consider: if the victim's guardian has asked the judge and he has [placed the mukatab under legal restraint, the restraint is established] upon him, and the consideration thereof lies with the judge, then his payment to his master is not valid. The judge shall reclaim it and pay it to the victim's guardian, and if