establishes the option, like a lease. The second view is that it does not establish the option. This is the view of Abu Bakr and Ibn Hamid, and the school of Malik, because it is a defect that occurred in the subject of the contract after the contract became binding, resembling a defect that occurs in sold goods. This is refuted by a defect that occurs in a lease. The scholars of the Shafi'i school said: If it occurs in the husband, it establishes the option, and if it occurs in the woman, it is likewise, according to one of the two views, while the other holds it does not establish it because the man can divorce her, unlike the woman. Our argument is that they are equal when the defect is pre-existing, so they are equal when it occurs later, just like two contracting parties in a sale.

Section: It is a condition for the establishment of the option for these defects that one is not aware of them at the time of the contract, nor becomes content with them afterwards. If one learns of them during the contract, or afterwards and becomes content, then there is no option for them. We know of no disagreement regarding this because they have consented to it, resembling one who purchases defective goods. If one believes the defect to be minor but it turns out to be major—such as someone who thinks the leprosy is on a small part of their body, but it turns out to be on a large part—then there is no option for them either, because it is of the same category as that which they consented to. If one consents to a defect, but discovers a different one, they have the option because they found a defect they did not consent to, nor to its category, so the option is established for them, like sold goods when one consents to one defect but finds another. If one consents to a defect and it increases after the contract—for example, if there was a little bit of leprosy and it spread on the skin—there is no option for them because their consent to it is consent to what might result from it.

Section: The option of defect is established on a non-immediate basis (tarakhi); it does not lapse as long as there is no manifestation of consent, whether through speech, or enjoyment by the husband, or enabling by the wife. This is the apparent view of al-Khiraqi, due to his statement: If she knew he was impotent (annin) and remained silent regarding the demand, then demanded it