Is the slave financially responsible for the compensation (arsh) for the injuries or the value of damaged property they cause?
Chapter on Selling the Musarrah (Animal with milk retained in udder)
Al-Mughni
Book of Sales
Primary text
The slave is always responsible for the compensation (*arsh*) resulting from their physical harm (*janayah*) or the value of their destruction, regardless of whether the master authorized their actions or not. This view is held by Abu Hanifa and Al-Shafi'i, representing one established narration. In all such cases, the master has the option to either surrender the slave for sale to cover the liability or redeem the slave (*fidya*). If the slave is sold and the price obtained is less than the required compensation, the injured party receives only that amount, as the slave is the perpetrator and no one else is liable. If the selling price exceeds the compensation amount, the excess belongs to the master. This ruling is supported by analogy to a mortgaged item where the remaining value after satisfying the debt returns to the owner. The compensation is incumbent upon the slave's essence, not merely a substitution payment.
Supporting text
A narration attributed to Ahmad suggests that the master cannot claim the surplus if the sale price exceeds the *arsh*. This might stem from the view that the sale proceeds are simply compensation for the injury, leaving no remaining right for the master, similar to when an item is given as direct payment for an injury. However, this is deemed incorrect.