is something that only the elite among people would know, so the apparent [reality] is the truthfulness of her claim regarding it. Al-Shafi'i has two views on accepting her statement in that regard.

Section: If the male slave and the female slave are emancipated simultaneously, she has no option, and the marriage remains as it is, regardless of whether one person emancipated both of them or two people did so. Ahmad explicitly stated this. Another narration from him says she has the option. The first is more appropriate, because freedom that occurs after her emancipation prevents the annulment [of the marriage], so [freedom] that is simultaneous is even more entitled [to prevent it], like the [simultaneous] conversion of both spouses to Islam. There is another narration from Ahmad that says: If they are both emancipated together, the marriage is annulled. Its meaning—and Allah knows best—is that if he gifted a concubine to his slave and gave him permission to have intimate relations with her, then he emancipated both of them, they both become free, and she leaves the ownership of the slave, so he has no right to have intimate relations with her except through a new marriage contract. This is how a group of his companions narrated, concerning one who gifted a concubine to his slave, or purchased a concubine for him, and then emancipated both of them; he does not approach her except through a new marriage contract. Ahmad argued in support of this based on what Nafi' narrated from Ibn Umar, that a slave of his had two concubines, and he emancipated both of them and emancipated him [the slave], and he forbade him from approaching them except through a new marriage contract. This is because by her being emancipated, she has moved beyond being owned, so it was not permitted for him to have intimate relations with her, just like a woman who is free by origin. As for if she was his wife, and they are both emancipated, his marriage is not annulled by that; for if it is not annulled by her emancipation alone, it is more fitting that it is not annulled by the emancipation of both of them. It is possible that Ahmad only intended by his statement "their marriage is annulled" that she has the right to annul the marriage. This is an extrapolation based on the narration that says she has