If a female slave contracts Khul' without her master's permission for a debt owed by her, what happens upon her manumission (liberation)?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Khul' (Redemption Divorce)
Primary text
If the Khul' was for something owed on her debt (in her capacity as a slave), the obligation follows her upon manumission. This is because the husband consented to her liability. If the Khul' was for a specific object (Ayn) that she did not own, the established view is that an equivalent object or its value, if it is not fungible, becomes incumbent upon her upon manumission. This is because she does not own the object, and anything in her possession belongs to her master, thus she must fulfill the obligation through payment, similar to when one contracts Khul' for a slave who turns out to be free.
Supporting text
A dissenting view, conforming to the dominant school opinion, holds that the husband receives nothing because when he contracted Khul' for a specific object knowing she was a slave and unable to own it, he consented to a situation without actual compensation, similar to contracting Khul' for a usurped item or a free person. This view is also attributed to Malik. Al-Shafi'i is reported to hold that he is entitled to the dowry of the equivalent (mahr al-mithl), similar to his ruling regarding Khul' for a usurped item.