What is the ruling on manumission if a master says to his slave, 'If you enter the dwelling, you are free,' then sells the slave, and the slave later enters the dwelling after the master repurchases him?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Manumission
Primary text
Manumission occurs in this scenario. This is the opinion of Abu Hanifa. The juristic reasoning is that the condition was suspended upon the slave while he was in the master's ownership, and the condition was fulfilled while the slave was in the master's ownership (after repurchase), thus necessitating manumission, similar to the case where ownership was never alienated. The potential objection that the condition does not imply repetition is dismissed because the initial entry occurred while the slave was in another's possession, dissolving the oath (or condition), but the subsequent fulfillment in the master's ownership mandates the outcome.
Supporting text
Al-Shafi'i holds two opinions on this matter. One view is that manumission does not occur because the acquisition of ownership was subsequent to the conditional decree, thus preventing the manumission from taking effect, similar to when the condition is set during the removal of ownership. This contrasts with the case where the condition was suspended during the removal of ownership and then fulfilled while the slave was in the master's possession, as in that case, an immediate manumission would not have taken effect, making subsequent fulfillment also ineffective.