tained by means of manumiffion; and, II. Inheritance,— becaufe the
emancipator has given life to the emancipated by means of removing
his bondage, and confequently inherits of him. T h e relationfhip of
JVtlla, moreover, refembles relationffiip o f blood, with refpedt to inheritance,
and the obligation of atonement by fine, the prophet
having faid, “ The relationjhip o f W il l a is like the relationjhip o f con-
“ fanguinity."
O b j e c t i o n .— From this it would follow that the emancipated
alfo inherits o f his emancipator, where he is deflitute of kindred;
(and fuch is the opinion of Hdjan Bin Zeeyad;) whereas it is other-
wife.
R e p l y .— An emancipated {lave is a ftranger with regard to his
emancipator, and confequently does not inherit of him. The emancipator’
s right, moreover, to inherit of the emancipated, is founded
; on a particular text of the K oran, in oppofition to analogy, which,
therefore, muft not be abandoned or departed from with refpeft to any
other inftance o f inheritance.
— Another reafon, alfo, why the Willa o f an emancipated flave appertains
to his emancipator is, that there muft be an acquifition for a fur-
render,— or, in other words, an advantage-in lieu of a lofs; and as, in
confequence of emancipation, the property involved in the {lave is de-
ftroyed, the Willa thereof confequently belongs to his emancipator.]
It is to be obferved that a woman is entitled to the Willa of her emancipated
flave in the lame manner as a man;— becaufe of the tradition
before quoted;— and alfo becaufe it is recorded that upon a freedman of
Hamaza dying, and leaving a daughter, (Hamaza alfo being dead and
having left a daughter,) the prophet divided his effefts equally between
this daughter and the daughter of Hctmaza.— It is alfo proper to
obferve that manumiffion fo r a compenfation, and manumiffion without
a compenfation, are alike Vvith relpedl to this rule, as the tradition
abovementioned is abfoiute.
If a perfon emancipate his {lave, engaging, at the fame time, that
he will not claim the right from him,” fuch engagement is null,
and the IVilla appertains to the emancipator notwithftanding; becaufe
the condition here mentioned is contrary to the text [of the Koran,]
and is confequently invalid.
Upon a Mokâtib paying his ranfom he is free, and the Willa belongs
to his mafter, although he become free after his [the mafter’s]
deceafe*; beçaufe he becomes free in confequence of a contrat of
Kitabat to which his mafter was a party; and as a Mokâtib, like a
Modabbir, is not a fubjeft of inheritance, he is confequently emancipated
while the mafter’s right of property continues.—The fame rule
alio holds with refpedt to a Have whofe mafter has bequeathed him
manumiffion,—or a flave whom a perfon diredls, in his will, to be
purchafed and let free upon his deceafe,—for the aft of the executor,
after the teftator’s death, is equivalent to the adl of the
teftator.
Objection.—T he flave in queftion cannot be confidered as
emancipated from the teftator, except where he is his actual property
; and he difcontinues from being his property becaufe of his
death.
Reply— T he whole eftate of the teftator is regarded as his property
as long as there is occafion,—that is, until his will be executed.
If a mafter of flaves die, his Modabbirs and Am-Walids are free,
(as has been explained in treating of manumifion,) and the Willa o f
them belong® t° h im+, as he emancipated them by making them
Modabbirs and Am-Walids.
to his hdrl'liCh Cafe thS mUa appemins t0 his heirs- t Defcending, 8S a heritage,
If
A Aipalation
o f waving the
claim to inheritance
is
invalid.
The W illa o f
a flave emancipated
by
Kitabat appertains
tohis
mailer;
and the ian>e
o f the W illa
o f Modaèbirt
Am-W.alidi,