by way of revoking a gift; and the slave may dispose of it as he wishes without his master’s permission, because it is his property.

The apparent meaning of the hadith is general: “His property belongs to the one who sold him.” Even if we hold that a slave acquires ownership when ownership is conferred upon him, whatever his master has conferred upon him becomes his property. Since it is his property, it falls within the generality of the Prophet’s words, peace and blessings be upon him: “His property belongs to the one who sold him.”

Question: If the slave dies while possessing property that his master gave him to trade with, and the slave has a free son, who inherits this property? If we hold that he acquires ownership through such a grant, then his property belongs to his son. If we hold that he does not, then his property belongs to the master. Ibn Rajab mentioned this issue in al-Qawāʿid and derived many subsidiary issues from it. It is a matter of scholarly disagreement: does a slave acquire ownership when ownership is conferred upon him, or does he not?

“Unless the buyer stipulates it. If his purpose is the property, knowledge of it and all the other conditions of sale are required; otherwise, they are not. Garments of finery belong to the seller, while customary clothing belongs to the buyer.”

His statement, “Unless the buyer stipulates it”: the pronoun in “stipulates it” refers to the property. Thus, if the buyer stipulates the property, it belongs to him, according to the hadith: “Unless the purchaser stipulates it.” This explicitly establishes the matter. Even if there were no specific text concerning this, it would still be included in the generality of Allah’s words, exalted is He:

“O you who believe, fulfil all contracts.” [al-Māʾidah 5:1]

For fulfilling contracts includes fulfilling both the basis of the contract and its stipulated descriptions, and the conditions stipulated in a contract are among its descriptions. It is also supported by the hadith: “Muslims are bound by their conditions, except a condition that permits what is unlawful or forbids what is lawful.” (1)

However, a difficulty arises here. Suppose this slave has ten thousand riyals in cash, and the buyer purchases him for one hundred thousand, stipulating that the money in the slave’s possession is included with him. This would make the matter analogous to the legal case of “a mudd of ʿajwah dates and a dirham”;