Does a slave's absconding (*ibaq*) invalidate prior permission granted for trade?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Partnership
Primary text
The permission granted to a slave for trade is not nullified by the slave's absconding. This aligns with the opinion of Al-Shafi'i. The rationale is that if absconding does not prevent the initial granting of permission for trade, it does not prevent its continuation, similar to a case where an usurper seizes the slave or the slave is detained due to a debt owed by him or another party. The underlying cause for the master's authority, which is the state of slavery (*riqq*), remains intact.
Supporting text
Abu Hanifa argues that absconding nullifies the permission because it removes the master's authority over the slave's trading capacity. He supports this by noting that the slave cannot be sold, gifted, or mortgaged while absconding, thus resembling a case where the slave has been sold. This reasoning is invalid because the basis of authority (slavery) persists, and the slave can still be sold or leased to one who can secure him, although sale is voided if the slave is unlawfully seized (*maghsūb*).