does not make him perished, based on the evidence that the rulings of life, such as legal obligation (taklif) and others, do not lapse for him, nor do the rulings of the dead apply to him, such as inheriting his wealth, the execution of his will, and others. Furthermore, his departure from the ruling of the original state cannot be established except by evidence, and there is no text regarding this, nor is there consensus. It is also not valid to draw an analogy to vermin and carcasses, because those did not possess any utility in the past, nor in the present. Moreover, this absoluteness can possibly be removed, due to the disappearance of the grounds upon which it was established, such as retraction from a confession—if it was established thereby—or the retraction of evidence. Even if its removal were impossible, the most it entails is the certainty of his destruction, which makes him akin to a sick person from whose recovery one has despaired, and his sale is permissible.

748 - Issue: He said: "Whoever sells a slave who has wealth, his wealth belongs to the seller unless the purchaser stipulates it, provided his intention is for the slave and not for the wealth."

In summary, when a master sells his slave, whether male or female, and he has wealth that his master has granted him ownership of or has designated for him, it belongs to the seller. This is based on what Ibn Umar reported, that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: "Whoever sells a slave who has wealth, his wealth belongs to the seller unless the purchaser stipulates it." This was narrated by Muslim, Abu Dawud, and Ibn Majah. Also, the slave and his wealth belong to the seller, so when he sells the slave, the sale is restricted to him exclusively and not to anyone else, just as if he had two slaves and sold one of them. If the purchaser stipulates it, it becomes his due to the report. This was also narrated by Nafi' from Ibn Umar from Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him), and Shurayh ruled accordingly, and it is the view of 'Ata', Tawus, Malik, al-Shafi'i, and Ishaq. Al-Khiraqi said: "Provided his intention is for the slave and not for the wealth." This is what has been textually stated by Ahmad, and it is the opinion of al-Shafi'i, Abu Thawr, and 'Uthman al-Batti. Its meaning is that he does not intend by the sale to purchase the wealth of the slave, but rather he intends for the wealth to remain with his slave and for it to be confirmed in his possession. Whenever this is the case, the stipulation is valid, and it enters into the sale, whether the wealth is known or unknown, whether it is of the same genus as the price or otherwise, whether it is an asset