The condition of insolvency in the emancipator is only stipulated because the emancipation of a solvent person extends to the entire [female slave], such that she becomes entirely free and is granted the option, whereas the emancipation of an insolvent person does not extend. Instead, only the portion he emancipates becomes free, while the remainder of her remains a slave; thus, her freedom is not complete, and consequently, the option is not established for her at that time. This is the view of al-Shafi'i. From Ahmad, there is a narration that she does have the option; Abu Bakr related it and preferred it, because she is more complete than [a slave], as she inherits, is inherited from, and creates a hijab (impediment to inheritance) according to the extent of the freedom she possesses. The reasoning behind al-Khiraqi’s statement is that there is no text regarding one who is partially emancipated, nor is she in the same status as a fully free person, for she is complete in legal rulings. Furthermore, there is the reasoning provided by Ahmad, which is that the contract is valid and therefore cannot be annulled based on a matter that is disputed, and this is a disputed matter.

Section: If someone marries a female slave valued at ten for a dowry of twenty, then emancipates her during his terminal illness after consummation, then dies, and he possesses nothing else [other than her dowry] after it has been fully claimed, she is emancipated because she is accounted for within the third [of the estate], and she has the option. If she had not yet received it, a third of her is emancipated immediately. Regarding the option for her, there are two views. Whenever any portion of her dowry is collected, a portion of her is emancipated equal to a third of that [collected amount]. Once the entire amount is collected, she is emancipated in full, and she has the option at that point according to the one who did not affirm an option for her before that. If her husband had sexual relations with her before the collection of her dowry, then her option is void according to the one who granted her the option at that time, because she forfeited it by allowing him to have relations with her. According to al-Khiraqi, it does not become void, because she allowed him [the relations] before the option was established for her, so it is similar to the case of her allowing him before her emancipation. As for if she is emancipated before consummation, she has no option according to al-Khiraqi, because her annulling the marriage would cause her dowry to lapse, thus the third [of the estate] would be insufficient to cover her full value, resulting in two-thirds of her remaining a slave, and her option would lapse. Therefore, establishing the option for her would lead to its own lapse, so it is forfeited. This is the school of al-Shafi'i. According to Abu Bakr, she has the option. Thus, according to the one who mandates that her master receives half the dowry, if it is fully collected, two-thirds of her are emancipated; and according to the one who considers it lapsed, a third of her is emancipated.