What is the ruling on the subsequent enslavement of a non-Muslim slave freed by a Muslim?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Walā' (Patronage)
Primary text
If a Muslim frees a non-Muslim (*Kafir*), and that slave flees to *Dar al-Harb* and is then captured by Muslims, Abu Bakr and the Judge state that it is not permissible to re-enslave him. This is also the position of Al-Shafi'i because re-enslavement invalidates the *Walaa* of the protected Muslim manumitter. Ibn al-Labban argues that the slave possesses a guarantee of safety (*Aman*) due to his manumission by a Muslim.
Supporting text
The correct position, God willing, is that re-enslavement is permissible because he is an original non-believer (*Kafir Asli*), specifically a People of the Book (*Kitabi*), making his enslavement permissible just as the manumitted *Harbi* or any other non-Muslim can be enslaved. Regarding the claim that it invalidates the Muslim's *Walaa*, we maintain this is not the case; rather, when he is freed again, the *Walaa* reverts to the first Muslim manumitter. The effect of the *Walaa* was merely prevented by the intervening state of servitude. If the invalidation of his *Walaa* by killing is permitted, then invalidation by enslavement is likewise permissible, just as kinship ties are nullified by enslavement. The assertion by Ibn al-Labban that the slave has a guarantee of safety is unfounded, because if he had a guarantee, neither his killing nor his capture would be permissible.