to his master, like his beast. As for if his master grants him ownership of something, there are two narrations [in our school]. One of them is that he does not own it. This is the apparent view of al-Khiraqi, for he said: The master pays Zakat for what is in the possession of his slave, because he is its owner. He also said: The slave does not inherit, nor does he have wealth that can be inherited from him. This is the choice of Abu Bakr, and the view of Abu Hanifah, al-Thawri, Ishaq, and al-Shafi'i in his later (jadid) school; because he is owned, he therefore does not own, like a beast. The second [narration] is that he does own. This is the more correct view in my estimation, and it is the view of Malik and al-Shafi'i in his earlier (qadim) school, based on the verse and the report, and because he is a living human being, so he may own like a free person. Also, he may own in [the context of] marriage, so he may own in wealth, like a free person. Furthermore, it is valid to make an admission (iqrar) in his favor, so he resembles a free person. The reasoning they provided is based on a preventative factor, but its consideration is not established unless the requiring cause (muqtadi) exists in the original, and there is no cause in a beast that necessitates the establishment of ownership for it. Rather, its ownership is negated due to the lack of a requiring cause, not due to it being owned; the state of it being owned has no effect, for other beasts that are not owned, such as wild game and predatory animals, are not capable of ownership, and likewise inanimate objects. When the status of what they mentioned as a preventive factor is invalidated, and the requiring cause is established, the establishment of its ruling becomes necessary. And Allah knows best.

749 - Issue: He said: "And whoever sells a commodity on credit, it is not permissible for him to buy it back for less than what he sold it for."

The sum of this is that whoever sells a commodity for a deferred price, then buys it back for less than that in cash, it is not permissible according to the view of the majority of scholars. This has been narrated from Ibn Abbas, Aishah, al-Hasan, Ibn Sirin, al-Sha'bi, and al-Nakha'i. Abu al-Zinad, Rabi'ah, Abd al-Aziz ibn Abi Salamah, al-Thawri, al-Awza'i, Malik, Ishaq, and the People of Reason (Ahl al-Ra'y) also held this view. Al-Shafi'i permitted it, because it is a price for which it is permissible [to sell it] to someone other than its seller, so it is permissible