What is the ruling when a master frees his female slave on the condition that she marries him, and her freedom serves as her dower (mahr)?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Marriage
Primary text
If a master states to his female slave, 'I emancipate you on the condition that you marry yourself to me, and your emancipation is your dower,' and she accepts, she is emancipated, but she is not obligated to marry him. This condition is invalid because it constitutes a loan (*salaf*) preceding a marriage contract, rendering it void, similar to if he had loaned a free woman a thousand in exchange for marrying her. Furthermore, she invalidated her right of choice before its cause arose, meaning the condition does not stand, akin to a preemptive waiving of preemption rights before a sale. She is obligated to pay the value of her person (as compensation for the invalid condition). This view is indicated by Ahmad in the narration of Abdullah and is the position of Al-Shafi'i. The justification is that he removed his ownership from her based on a condition for an exchange that was not fulfilled for him; thus, he is entitled to reclaim the value, similar to a void sale where the item perishes in the buyer's possession, or a void marriage where consummation occurs.
Supporting text
It is plausible that she owes nothing in compensation, following the ruling in the case where a master says to his male slave, 'I emancipate you on the condition that you give me a thousand.' This is the position of Malik and Zufar because the statement does not constitute an explicit term or condition, making it resemble a simple emancipation followed by a request for marriage ('I emancipate you, and marry yourself to me').