And her master confirms it, then the statement is hers. Ahmad stated this, and Abu Hanifah and Malik maintained this as well. Abu Yusuf and Muhammad said: The statement is the husband's, and he is more entitled to her; because the acknowledgment of her master is accepted regarding her marriage, so his statement is accepted regarding her revocation, just like a free woman if she acknowledges it. Our evidence is that her statement regarding the expiration of her waiting period is accepted, so it is accepted in her denial of the revocation, just like a free woman. Furthermore, it is a disagreement between them regarding a matter by which the marriage is established, so the one disputing is she, not her master, as if they had disagreed regarding intercourse. The master's statement is only accepted in [the initiation of] marriage because he possesses the power to initiate it, so he possesses the power to acknowledge it, unlike revocation. If she confirms it but her master denies it, her acknowledgment is not accepted because the master's right is attached to her, and she became permissible for him [to remarry] upon the expiration of her waiting period, so her statement in invalidating his right is not accepted, as if she had married [someone else] and then acknowledged that her divorcer had revoked her. It does not follow from the acceptance of her denial that her confirmation is accepted, just like the woman who has married; her denial is accepted, but her confirmation is not. Once this is established, if her master knows the truthfulness of the husband in her revocation, it is not permissible for him to have intercourse with her or to marry her off. And if she knows the truthfulness of the husband in her revocation, she is forbidden to her master, and it is not permissible for her to allow him [the master] to have intercourse with her unless she is coerced, as [was the case] before her divorce.

Section: If she says, "My waiting period has expired," then says, "It has not expired yet," he has the right to revoke her, because she has acknowledged her falsehood regarding a matter by which a right is established against her, so her acknowledgment is accepted. If he says, "She informed me of the expiration of her waiting period, and then I revoked her," and then she acknowledges her falsehood regarding the expiration of her waiting period, or she denies what was mentioned about her and acknowledges that her waiting period did not expire, the revocation is valid; because he did not acknowledge the expiration of her waiting period, but rather reported her own statement regarding that, and she has retracted her statement, so her retraction is accepted, based on what we have mentioned.