Is a bequest validly entrusted to a slave (Abd)?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Bequests
Primary text
According to Abu 'Abdillah ibn Hamid and Malik, the bequest is validly entrusted to a slave, whether he is the testator's own slave or someone else's. The evidence is that a slave can be delegated authority during the owner's life, therefore he can be named as an executor, similar to a free person. This also invalidates the analogy used against women.
Supporting text
Al-Nakh'i, Al-Awza'i, and Ibn Shubrumah held that it is valid only if he is the testator's own slave, not another's. Abu Hanifa permits it for his own slave only if there is no mature heir. Abu Yusuf, Muhammad, and Al-Shafi'i hold that it is never valid because a slave cannot have paternal guardianship over his son, rendering him unfit for executorship, similar to an insane person. The rulings concerning a slave under a contract of manumission (Mukatab), a pledged slave (Mudabbar), or one partially freed follow the ruling concerning the chattel slave (Qinn). A bequest to a slave mother ('Umm Walad) is valid because she becomes free when the bequest takes effect from the original estate.