He—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—said:

“Any slave who contracts a mukātaba for one hundred uqiyyahs and pays everything except ten uqiyyahs is still a slave; and any slave who contracts for one hundred dinars and pays everything except ten dinars is still a slave.”

Those who hold that the very act of contracting the mukātaba sets the slave free base their view on an analogy with sale: it is as though the mukātab has purchased himself from his master. If, afterwards, he becomes unable to pay, the master has no right over his person—he may only pursue the debt, just as a seller would pursue payment from a buyer who purchased on credit, fell insolvent, and then died.

The chief proof for those who say that he is emancipated in proportion to what he has already paid is the report transmitted by Yaḥyā ibn Kathīr, from ʽIkrimah, from Ibn ʽAbbās, that the Prophet—peace and blessings be upon him—said:

“The mukātab is liable, in proportion to what he has paid, for the blood money of a free man, and, in proportion to what remains enslaved of him, for the blood money of a slave.”

Al-Nasaʾī recorded this ḥadīth. The point of contention lies in the reliability of ʽIkrimah, just as the dispute over the ḥadīths of ʽAmr ibn Shuʽayb turns on the fact that they were taken from a written document. This was also the opinion adopted by ʽAlī—that is, on the basis of the report of Ibn ʽAbbās.

It is narrated from ʽUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb that once half the price has been paid the slave is free, while Ibn Masʽūd held that he is freed upon paying one-third. Although the statements of the Companions are not, in themselves, definitive proof, the likelihood is that any specific proportion they mention rests on a Sunnah that had reached them.

A fifth opinion states that if he pays three-quarters he becomes free, remaining simply without assets as to the outstanding balance. It has likewise been said that if he pays the slave’s current market value he is thereafter treated merely as a debtor; this is the view of ʽĀʾishah, Ibn ʽUmar, and Zayd ibn Thābit.

The position most widely reported from ʽUmar and from Umm Salamah coincides with that of the majority. This is the opinion relied upon by the jurists of the great regional centres, for the transmission from those two Companions is sound beyond dispute; Mālik relates it in his Muwaṭṭaʾ. Moreover, it better safeguards the masters’ property, for in sales the seller may reclaim the very item sold if the buyer becomes insolvent.

Second Category: When does the mukātab revert to slavery?

The jurists agree that he reverts only upon incapacity—whether total or partial—according to the differing thresholds set out above.

They disagreed, however, over whether the slave may of his own accord declare himself incapable without any external cause.

• Al-Shāfiʽī said: the mukātaba is binding on the slave but not on the master.
• Mālik and Abū Ḥanīfah said: the mukātaba is binding on both parties, that is, on master and slave alike.

In Mālik’s school the matter is summed up as follows: the slave and the master may either concur in declaring incapacity or differ about it. If they differ, then either the master wishes