អ៊ុមដាតុល រីអាយ៉ះ (ការពន្យល់ក្បួនច្បាប់វីកាយ៉ះ ហាណាហ្វី)

I say [(2)]: The first evidence is problematic; Because what is disputed is if the master denies the management of one of his servants, or the heir denies that after the death of the decedent, and the two servants want to prove it, so how can it be said: The plaintiff is the testator, or his representative (1). The second evidence [also problematic] (2); Because it requires that the testimony for the emancipation of one of his slaves without a will, if it is established after death, is accepted due to the prevalence of emancipation by death (3).

(It was accepted[(1)] in the divorce of one of his wives due to the condition of the case[(2)] in the emancipation of a slave according to Abu Hanifa - may God be pleased with him - not divorce[(3)], and the emancipation(4) of the female slave[(5)] if he deprived[(6)] of relief(7), so she declared[(1)] in the emancipation of one of his female slaves, due to the lack of prohibition[(2)]): That is, she accepted the testimony in the divorce of one of his wives[(3)]. This difference, which is the non-acceptance of testimony in the emancipation of one of the two slaves, and the acceptance in the divorce of one of the women, is (4) according to Abu Hanifa - may God be pleased with him - in contrast to them, as the testimony is acceptable to them in both cases [(5)], but the difference [(6)] Abu Hanifa - may God be pleased with him - is because [(7)] the lawsuit is a condition for the emancipation of a slave according to Abu Hanifa - may God be pleased with him - without divorce; Because in divorce, the prohibition of private parts is the right of God Almighty, so a lawsuit is not required, and in a slave, a lawsuit is required, so if the plaintiff, who is one of the two slaves [(1)] is not obligated, the lawsuit is not valid. As for the emancipation of a female slave, the lawsuit is not required according to Abu Hanifa - may God be pleased with him - if it contains a prohibition on the private parts[(2)], but if it is not a condition, then in the emancipation[(3)] of one of the two female slaves, the testimony is invalidated, as it does not contain a prohibition on the private parts according to Abu Hanifa - may God be pleased with him -, so a lawsuit is necessary, and if the plaintiff is not present, the lawsuit is not valid, so the testimony is invalid...(4). [And God knows best] (5).

Chapter (1) Swearing to emancipate [(2)]

(And he will be freed if I enter [the house][(3)](4) Every slave of mine on that day is free, from[(5)] his when he enters[(6)] his possession[(7)] after or before his oath, and on that day[(8)] who has only the time of his oath, such as: Every slave[(1)] of mine or that I own[(2)](3) is free the day after tomorrow with him), so his saying is like[(4)]: Every slave is mine; That is, just as someone who has the right to swear an oath is freed only in his saying: Every slave of mine or whom I own is free from him the day after tomorrow: that is, he is freed at (5) the day after tomorrow, (not the pregnancy(6)[(7)] of every free male slave of mine, even if she gave birth to him for less than half a year)(1), but rather restricted[(2)] to the male; Because if he had not been restricted, the pregnancy would be freed by the mother’s dependency (3)[(4)].

(And manage[(1)] with every slave of mine or whom I own, free after my death, whoever has a day, he said, not of his ownership after him), so his saying: who has a day, he said, is the effect of his saying: and manage(2)[(3)]. (And if he dies[(4)] emancipating(5) from a third)(6), know[(7)] that when he added emancipation to death, then since it is the obligation of emancipation, he takes possession of the slave immediately, so he becomes abandoned; Because it is conditional upon death, it is not permissible to sell it, and since it is an obligation after death, it becomes a will, so it deals [(1)] with what he owns after this statement; Because what is considered in the commandments is kingship in the event of death, so he is not a manager; Because there is no time for the offer until emancipation is due, it is permissible to sell it.

[Chapter on emancipation upon making] And whoever (1) is emancipated for money or with it[(2)] and accepts emancipation[(3) and the money is a debt on him[(4)], he is guaranteed for it other than the writing allowance. Its form is that he says: You are free for a thousand, or for a thousand and he accepts emancipation, and the money is a debt against him[(5)], so the guarantee is valid with it; Because it is a true religion; Because it is a debt owed by a free person, unlike the writing allowance, it is a debt owed to his slave.

(And the commentator [(1)] is freed by performing it, he is authorized [(2)] if he performs emancipation, not offices (3): His form is that he says: If you give to (1) such and such (2), then you are free, for he becomes authorized to trade; So that he can pay the money, (and his payment [(3)] is restricted in the council if it is suspended if and if not)(4): That is, he is not restricted in the council, (and [(5)] the master returns to him if he pays from what he earned before the suspension(6) and not from what comes after it, and he is freed in his two cases[(7)]): that is, in the case of paying what he earned before the suspension, and in the case of paying what he earned after it, (even if it is empty[(8)] between him and him): that is, between the master and the money, by He placed[(9)] the money in a place where the master could take it, and his saying: even if he leaves it, is connected to his saying: and emancipates, that is, he is freed, even if the payment is by way of releasing it[(1)]: that is, the payment occurs by releasing it[(2)].

(Not if he pays some of it[(1)]): That is, he is not emancipated if he pays part of it, (even if he descends [(2)] holding it in both chapters). This is related to what was mentioned about emancipation by performing the whole and not being emancipated by paying some of it, for he is emancipated in the first chapter, and he is not emancipated in the second (3) chapter even though he descends[(4)] holding it in both chapters, but he only said this[(1)]; Because according to some sheikhs - may God be pleased with them - if some give, he is not forced [(2)] to accept, so according to this narration, if (3) some gives by way of abandonment (4) the master is not given the status of the one who holds it, but what is chosen is that he is one who holds it, but he is not freed; Because the condition of emancipation is performance of all; He is not freed in this sense, not because he did not become a possessor, but rather he became a possessor of some.

(And you are free after my death for a thousand, if he accepts[(1)] after his death and the heir[(2)] emancipates him, emancipating him(3). Otherwise, he will not be emancipated. That is, he will not be emancipated with the aforementioned money(4), but rather [(5)] was restricted by this restriction; Because he said [(6)]: Otherwise, no; That is, if (1) the total is not found, which is acceptance after death, and the emancipation of the heir is not emancipation, then it includes what if he accepts after death, but the heir does not emancipate him, then he is not emancipated[(2)], so it is true[(3)] to say: He is not emancipated with the aforementioned money, and it includes what if he is not accepted after death[(4)], but the heir emancipates him, then it is also true: He is not emancipated with the aforementioned money, and it is not true to say: He is not He is emancipated by necessity, he is emancipated for free[(5)].

(And if [(1)] freed him for his service for a year, then he accepted his emancipation[(2)], and his service for his period (3)): That is, he was obligated to serve him for the period mentioned, and the pronoun (4)[(5)] in his period refers to the slave, adding the period to it with the slightest ambiguity: i.e. a period that was struck for him, and its period [in](1) in a copy in the handwriting of the author - may God be pleased with him - means the period of service[(2)], i.e. a period that was struck for service.

(If his master dies before that period[(3)]): that is, before the period, (its value[(4)] is obligatory): that is, the value of the slave, (and according to Muhammad(5) - may God be pleased with him - the value of his service is like selling[(6)] a slave of his own for an eye[(1)] and it perished, its value becomes obligatory, [and according to Muhammad](2) - may God be pleased with him - its value): that is, the difference in the issue of the duration of service based[(3)] on the difference in this issue(4), which is if he said to his slave: I sold Your soul is from you [(5)] with this eye, like a certain garment, and the eye is destroyed[(6)], the value of the slave is due[(1)]. According to Muhammad - may God be pleased with him - the value of the eye; Because it is not possible [(2)] to arrive at the replacement here, as in that picture, but the value of the item is obligatory according to him; Because the property is in exchange for something that is not money, which is emancipation, and emancipation has no value, so the value of the property must be paid. And for them: The property is in exchange for the slave’s soul, so it becomes like if he sold a slave for a slave girl[(3)], then the slave died, and then they annul the contract with the slave girl, the slave’s value is obligatory.

(And in: I free her for a thousand[(1)] on the condition that you marry her. If he does so and she refuses[(2)] then I shall be freed and nothing is upon his command[(3)]): That is, one man said to another[(4)]: I free your female slave for a thousand upon me on the condition[(5)] that you marry her to me. So the master freed her, and the slave girl refused to marry, so there is nothing[(6)] upon the commander; Because requiring compensation from others is not permissible in emancipation.

(And if he joins: on my behalf;[(1)] divide [the thousand](2) by its value and its dowry, and the share of the value is obligatory): That is, if (3) said: Free your female slave on my behalf for a thousand, and the rest of the issue is as it is[(4)], then emancipation on behalf of (5) the commander[(6)] occurs by way of necessity, as you know(7) [(8)] so he divides (9) the thousand by its value and a dowry like it, so we assumed that its value is a thousand and a dowry like it. Five hundred, then the thousand is divided by one thousand and five hundred, so two-thirds of the thousand is the share of the value [(10)], and one-third is the share of the equivalent dowry, so he must pay two-thirds of the thousand to the master, and a third of the thousand is waived from him; Because he exchanged a thousand for a slave to buy, and for a few to marry, so he handed him the neck but not the few, so he was obligated to share what was handed to him, and he was not obligated to share what was not handed to him. (If she gets married[(1)] then her dowry share is her dowry on his two sides. This is what we mentioned[(2)] but it is based on the father’s estimation. But if she does not refuse and gets married, then her dowry is a share of the equivalent dowry of a thousand, which is a third of a thousand as we have imposed, and his saying: on his two faces: that is, in what he did not say: on my behalf, and in what he said: on my behalf.

Chapter on management and generation (1) [(2)] (Whoever is freed from (1) back [(2)] absolutely, if you die [(3)] then you are free, or you are free for back from me, or you are freed from my back, or you are backed by me, or (4) if you die to a hundred years and his death predominates [(5)] before that, then he backs away), so his saying: who is freed: subject, and its predicate: back.

And know that he said in ((Al-Hidaya)) [(1)]: The measure is proof of emancipation from a plan (2). Rather, he interpreted it in this way out of concern for the derivation of the measure. That's why he said ((Al-Matn)): Whoever is freed from the past. But he said: absolutely; As a precaution against the restriction [(3)].

Absolute: That emancipation is conditional upon absolute death, or restricted by a restriction that is most likely to occur. What is restricted is that it attaches him to a restricted death with a restriction that is not normally the case, such as: If I die during this illness of mine, then he is free.

So his saying: If I die for a hundred years; He is [(1)] eighty years old, for example, and if he is restricted in form, then in meaning he is absolute[(2)]; Because most likely he dies before this period. So his saying: If I die for a hundred years; It would be like saying: If you die, then it would be absolute. And his saying: If I die within a hundred years, his estimate [(3)] is: If I die at this time, up to a hundred years.

Then he [(1)] proceeded with the rule of the manager, and said: (He is not sold or given away[(2)], used[(3)], and rented, and the female slave has intercourse and is married): This is according to us(4), but according to al-Shafi’i(5) - may God be pleased with him - it is permissible to transfer him[(6)] from one king to another.

(If his master dies, he shall be freed from a third of his wealth[(1)], and he shall work with two-thirds of it if he does not leave [(2)] anyone else, and with all of it[(3)] if his debt has taken over.) Because since it was an offer after death[(4)] it had the same ruling as a will[(5)]. (And a sale [(1)] if he said to him: If I die while traveling, or I am sick, or for a year, or something similar, which is often possible[(2)] and emancipation[(3)] if he fulfills his condition, such as emancipating a manager): So his saying: and a sale: meaning his sale is valid, and likewise [(4)] all that necessitates a transfer from one king to another, and his saying: of what is often possible: that is, of what is not obligatory in most cases. He mentioned the possibility and wanted to hesitate[(5)].

...(1)(And a female slave who was born[(2)] from her master, or from a husband[(3)](4) and her possessions [became](5) the mother of a child, and her rule is like a ruler[(6)] except that she[(7)] is freed upon his death from all his wealth, and she does not seek his religion, nor (1) does the lineage of her child prove unless he acknowledges it. If he acknowledges it and she gives birth to another, his lineage is proven without invitation, and he denies it[(2)] by denying it. Know that the mattress is either weak, (3) medium, or strong.