then he should not be prohibited from what contains a necessary benefit for one of the two parties, for that is more appropriate. The child of a mukataba (a female slave under a contract of manumission) enters into her kitaba, and the ruling regarding his offense is the same as the ruling regarding the child of a mukatab, exactly.

Section: If one of the mukatab's slaves commits an offense against another, and the legal consequence of the offense is a financial liability, no ruling is established for it, because a master is not entitled to a financial liability from his own slave. If the consequence is retaliation (qisas), Abu Bakr said: He does not have the right of retaliation, because it is a squandering of his property by his own volition. This is what Abu al-Khattab mentioned in "Ru'us al-Masa'il". The Qadi said: He has the right of retaliation, because it is in the interest of his ownership. If he does not exact it, it will lead to them committing offenses against one another. He does not have the right to pardon it for a financial consideration, for the reason we mentioned. It is not permissible to sell him for the indemnity of the offense, because the indemnity is not established for him in the person of his slave. If the offender is the slave who is his son, it is not permissible to sell him, for that reason. The companions of al-Shafi'i said: It is permissible to sell him, according to one of the two views, because he did not possess the right to sell him before his offense, so he benefits from the offense by gaining the right to sell him. Our position is that he is his slave, therefore no indemnity is owed to him from him, just like an outsider. What they mentioned is invalidated by the case of a pawn, if it commits an offense against its pawner.

Section: If a mukatab's slave commits an offense against him, and the consequence is financial liability, it is considered void (hadran), for the reason we mentioned. If the consequence is retaliation, he has the right to exact retaliation if it is in something other than life (nafs), because the slave is subject to retaliation for his master. If he pardons it for a financial consideration, the retaliation is dropped, and the financial liability is not established. If the offender is his father, retaliation cannot be exacted from him, because a parent is not killed for his child. If the mukatab commits an offense against him, retaliation cannot be exacted from him, because a master is not subject to retaliation for his slave. The Qadi said: There is another view, that retaliation can be exacted from him, because the ruling of the father with him is the ruling of free individuals, as evidenced by the fact that he does not possess the right to sell him or exercise control over him, and his freedom is made contingent upon his [the mukatab's] freedom. He said: We know of no other case where a slave exacts retaliation from his owner except in this instance.

Section: If an offense is committed against a mukatab in something other than life, the indemnity for the offense belongs to him, and not to