one of them is a consequence of the other. Rather, the school [of Hanbali] holds that it does not lapse after consummation under any circumstances. As for the purchase occurring before consummation, half of it lapses, just as if he had divorced her before consummating the marriage. Regarding the lapse of the remainder, there are two points: one is that it does not lapse, because the termination of the marriage ownership is only by the act of the seller, so the annulment is from his side; therefore, the entire dowry does not lapse, similar to khul' (divorce initiated by the wife). The second is that it does lapse, because the annulment was completed by the woman's purchase, making it similar to the annulment due to a defect in one of them, her annulment due to his insolvency, or a man's purchase of his wife.

Section: If she buys him with her dowry, it is valid. Ahmad stated this explicitly. Abu Bakr and the Qadi mentioned it, and he [the husband] has a claim against her for half of it if we hold that half of it lapses, or for the whole of it if we hold that the entire amount lapses. It is possible that the sale might not be valid, which is the opinion of the Shafi'i scholars, because its validity necessitates its negation; for the validity of the sale necessitates the annulment of the marriage and the lapse of the dowry, and the lapse of the dowry necessitates the invalidity of the sale, because it is its compensation, and it [the sale] is not valid without compensation. Our argument is that it is permissible for it to be the price for other than this slave, so it is permissible for it to be the price for him, just like other debts, and whatever has lapsed from it, he has a claim against her for it.

1127 - Issue; He said: "If two guardians marry her off, the marriage belongs to the first of them."

In summary, if a woman has two guardians, and she grants permission to each one of them to marry her off,