Does insanity nullify a deed of manumission upon installment (Kitabah)?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Mukātaba (Contractual Manumission)
Primary text
The deed of manumission upon installment (Kitabah) is not dissolved by the onset of insanity because it is a binding contract, similar to a pledge (rahn). Insanity differs from death because death destroys the subject matter (the slave), whereas insanity does not. Furthermore, the intent of Kitabah is emancipation, which death negates, demonstrated by the invalidity of emancipating a deceased person. Insanity does not negate this intent, evidenced by the validity of emancipating an insane person. Therefore, if the slave pays the agreed-upon amount while insane, he is freed because the master has received his due right, which implies the slave's exoneration from the debt. If the slave does not pay, the master may bring him before the judge. If the payment is proven by evidence, the judge investigates the slave's wealth. If wealth is found, it is delivered for the Kitabah, and the slave is freed. If no wealth is found, the judge declares the slave incapable (of fulfilling the contract), and the master is obligated to provide maintenance because the slave has reverted to being a full slave (qan). If wealth sufficient for the Kitabah payment is found later, the master's subsequent declaration of nullification is invalidated because the underlying reality (the payment) became evident. This is analogous to a judge making an error in legal reasoning despite the clear textual ruling. However, the master is reimbursed for expenses incurred from the time of the attempted nullification because those expenses were not fundamentally due from the slave's estate in reality.
Supporting text
If the formerly insane slave recovers and provides evidence that he had already paid the Kitabah amount before his insanity, the master's declaration of nullification is also voided. In this case, the master is not reimbursed for maintenance expenses because he provided support while knowingly aware of the slave's freedom, thus acting as a volunteer. The judge should require the master to swear an oath that he did not actually receive the Kitabah payment. This latter ruling is attributed to the companions of Imam Shafi'i and is deemed sound, as the judge stands in the place of the insane person, who cannot assert his claim, to administer the oath regarding the receipt of payment.