Is a legally emancipated slave (*mu'taq*) liable for *diya* (blood money) on behalf of his former master, or does the master's estate cover it?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Deposits
Primary text
The established view, chosen by Al-Khallal, is that the emancipated slave is not liable for the *diya* on behalf of his former master. A dissenting view, chosen by Abu Bakr, states that he is liable because he is a freed slave, similar to one he freed from his own wealth. The rationale against liability is that the freed slave accrues no *wala'* (allegiance/inheritance right by emancipation), and thus cannot be liable for *diya*, just as if he were an agent in the act of manumission. Furthermore, since the freed slave does not inherit from the master, he is not liable for *diya*, mirroring cases where religious differences prevent inheritance.
Supporting text
There is an opposing view, favored by Abu Bakr, that the freed slave is liable for the *diya* because he is a freed slave. This view distinguishes this situation from the non-inheritance rule by stating that paying *diya* is not considered benefitting from *zakat* (unlike receiving inheritance through *wala'*), thus preserving the general principle of liability.