He answered:

The wife’s right remains established, and she is entitled to demand it, for two reasons.

The first is that his mere claim to be a slave does not extinguish her right in the circumstances described. The presumption is that people are free. If a man claims to be a slave without evidence, and nothing to the contrary is known, scholars within the school of Ahmad and elsewhere hold three opinions regarding the acceptance of his statement:

The first: it is accepted insofar as it counts against him, but not insofar as it affects his rights against others. This is one position held by Abū Hanīfah, al-Shāfiʿī, and Ahmad.

The second: it is not accepted under any circumstances. This is the position of some Mālikī scholars and one of the two reports from Ahmad.

The third: his statement is accepted without qualification. This is the position of al-Shāfiʿī and a reported position of Ahmad.

If, according to the majority of the imams of Islam, his admission cannot extinguish her right even when another person claims that he is a slave, how could his mere claim to be a slave do so? How much less so when he possesses wealth and a grant, claims a lineage, and previously claimed to be free in order to marry her?

The second reason is that, even supposing he lied, deceived her, and claimed to be free in order to marry her and consummate the marriage, he has thereby committed a wrong through his lies and deception. When a slave commits a wrong, liability for it attaches to his person. She may therefore seek satisfaction of her claim from his value as a slave, unless his master chooses to redeem him by paying her what she is owed; he is entitled to do so.