AbulJuwayriyyah al-Jarmi said: I found a red pitcher containing dinars in Byzantine territory during the reign of Mu'awiyah. A man from the Companions of the Prophet (saws) belonging to Banu Sulaym was our ruler. He was called Ma'an ibn Yazid. I brought it to him. He apportioned it among the Muslims. He gave me the same portion which he gave to one of them. He then said: Had I not heard the Messenger of Allah (saws) say: There is no reward except after taking the fifth (from the booty), I would have given you (the reward). He then presented his own share to me, but I refused.

Malik related to me that he had heard that Said ibn al-Musayyab was asked who had the wala' of the children whom a slave had by a free woman. Said said, "If their father dies and he is a slave who was not set free, their wala' belongs to the mawali of their mother."

Malik said, "That is like the child of a woman who is a mawla who has been divorced by lian; the child is attached to the mawali of his mother and they are his mawali. If he dies, they inherit from him. If he commits a crime, they pay the blood-money for him. If his father acknowledges him, he is given a kinship to him and his wala' goes to the mawali of his father. They are his heirs, they pay his blood-money and his father is punished with the hadd-punishment."

Malik said, "It is like that with a free-born woman divorced by lian. If her husband who curses her by lian does not acknowledge her child, the child is dealt with in the same way except that the rest of his inheritance after the inheritance of his mother and his brothers from his mother goes to all the muslims as long as he was not given kinship to his father. The child of the lian is attached to the patronage of the mawali of his mother until his father acknowledges him because he does not have a lineage or paternal relations. If his lineage is confirmed, it goes to his paternal relations."

Malik said, "The generally agreed-on way of doing things among us about a child of a slave by a free woman, while the father of the slave is free, is that the grandfather (the father of the slave), attracts the wala' of his son's free children by a free woman. They leave their inheritance to him as long as their father is a slave. If the father becomes free, the wala' returns to his mawali. If he dies and he is still a slave, the inheritance and the wala' go to the grandfather. If the slave has two free sons, and one of them dies while the father is still a slave, the grandfather, the father of the father, attracts the wala' and the inheritance."

Malik spoke about a slave-girl who was set free while she was pregnant and her husband was a slave and then her husband became free before she gave birth, or after she gave birth. He said, "The wala' of what is in her womb goes to the person who set the mother free because slavery touched the child before the mother was set free. It is not treated in the same way as a child conceived by its mother after she has been set free because the wala' of such a child, is attracted by the father when he is set free."

Malik said that if a slave asked his master's permission to free a slave of his and his master gave permission, the wala' of the freed slave went to the master of his master, and his wala' did not return to the master who had set him free, even if he were to become free himself."

Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab from Said ibn al- Musayyab and from Sulayman ibn Yasar that Tulayha al-Asadiya was the wife of Rushayd ath-Thaqafi. He divorced her, and she got married in her idda-period. Umar ibn al-Khattab beat her and her husband with a stick several times, and separated them. Then Umar ibn al-Khattab said, "If a woman marries in her idda-period, and the new husband has not consummated the marriage, then separate them, and when she has completed the idda of her first husband, the other becomes a suitor. If he has consummated the marriage then separate them. Then she must complete her idda from her first husband, and then the idda from the other one, and they are never to be reunited."

Malik added, ''Said ibn al-Musayyab said that she had her dowry because he had consummated the marriage."

Malik said,"The practice with us concerning a free woman whose husband dies, is that she does an idda of four months and ten days and she does not marry if she doubts her period until she is free of any doubt or if she fears that she is pregnant."

The Prophet said, "While three men were walking, It started raining and they took shelter (refuge) in a cave in a mountain. A big rock rolled down from the mountain and closed the mouth of the cave. They said to each other, "Think of good deeds which you did for Allah's sake only, and invoke Allah by giving reference to those deeds so that He may remove this rock from you." One of them said, 'O Allah! I had old parents and small children and I used to graze the sheep for them. On my return to them in the evening, I used to milk (the sheep) and start providing my parents first of all before my children. One day I was delayed and came late at night and found my parents sleeping. I milked (the sheep) as usual and stood by their heads. I hated to wake them up and disliked to give milk to my children before them, although my children were weeping (because of hunger) at my feet till the day dawned. O Allah! If I did this for Your sake only, kindly remove the rock so that we could see the sky through it.' So, Allah removed the rock a little and they saw the sky. The second man said, 'O Allah! I was in love with a cousin of mine like the deepest love a man may have for a woman. I wanted to outrage her chastity but she refused unless I gave her one hundred Dinars. So, I struggled to collect that amount. And when I sat between her legs, she said, 'O Allah's slave! Be afraid of Allah and do not deflower me except rightfully (by marriage).' So, I got up. O Allah! If I did it for Your sake only, please remove the rock.' The rock shifted a little more. Then the third man said, 'O Allah! I employed a laborer for a Faraq of rice and when he finished his job and demanded his right, I presented it to him, but he refused to take it. So, I sowed the rice many time till I gathered cows and their shepherd (from the yield). (Then after some time) He came and said to me, 'Fear Allah (and give me my right)." I said, 'Go and take those cows and the shepherd.' He said, 'Be afraid of Allah! Don't mock at me.' I said, 'I am not mocking at you. Take (all that).' So, he took all that. O Allah! If I did that for Your sake only, please remove the rest of the rock.' So, Allah removed the rock."

The Messenger of Allah (saws) would not say funeral prayer over a person who died while the debt was due from him. A dead Muslim was brought to him and he asked: Is there any debt due from him? They (the people) said: Yes, two dirhams. He said: Pray yourselves over your companion.

Then AbuQatadah al-Ansari said: I shall pay them, Messenger of Allah. The Messenger of Allah (saws) then prayed over him.

When Allah granted conquests to the Messenger of Allah (saws), he said: I am nearer to every believer than himself, so if anyone (dies and) leaves a debt, I shall be responsible for paying it; and if anyone leaves property, it goes to his heirs.

I heard Allah's Apostle saying, "Three men from among those who were before you, set out together till they reached a cave at night and entered it. A big rock rolled down the mountain and closed the mouth of the cave. They said (to each other), Nothing could save you from this rock but to invoke Allah by giving reference to the righteous deed which you have done (for Allah's sake only).' So, one of them said, 'O Allah! I had old parents and I never provided my family (wife, children etc.) with milk before them. One day, by chance I was delayed, and I came late (at night) while they had slept. I milked the sheep for them and took the milk to them, but I found them sleeping. I disliked to provide my family with the milk before them. I waited for them and the bowl of milk was in my hand and I kept on waiting for them to get up till the day dawned. Then they got up and drank the milk. O Allah! If I did that for Your Sake only, please relieve us from our critical situation caused by this rock.' So, the rock shifted a little but they could not get out." The Prophet added, "The second man said, 'O Allah! I had a cousin who was the dearest of all people to me and I wanted to have sexual relations with her but she refused. Later she had a hard time in a famine year and she came to me and I gave her one-hundred-and-twenty Dinars on the condition that she would not resist my desire, and she agreed. When I was about to fulfill my desire, she said: It is illegal for you to outrage my chastity except by legitimate marriage. So, I thought it a sin to have sexual intercourse with her and left her though she was the dearest of all the people to me, and also I left the gold I had given her. O Allah! If I did that for Your Sake only, please relieve us from the present calamity.' So, the rock shifted a little more but still they could not get out from there." The Prophet added, "Then the third man said, 'O Allah! I employed few laborers and I paid them their wages with the exception of one man who did not take his wages and went away. I invested his wages and I got much property thereby. (Then after some time) he came and said to me: O Allah's slave! Pay me my wages. I said to him: All the camels, cows, sheep and slaves you see, are yours. He said: O Allah's slave! Don't mock at me. I said: I am not mocking at you. So, he took all the herd and drove them away and left nothing. O Allah! If I did that for Your Sake only, please relieve us from the present suffering.' So, that rock shifted completely and they got out walking.

Yahya said that he heard Malik say, "The way of doing things generally agreed upon in our community in the case of a man who dies and has sons and one of them claims, 'My father confirmed that so-and- so was his son,' is that the relationship is not established by the testimony of one man, and the confirmation of the one who confirmed it is only permitted as regards his own share in the division of his father's property. The one testified for is only given his due from the share of the testifier."

Malik said, "An example of this is that a man dies leaving two sons, and 600 dinars. Each of them takes 300 dinars. Then one of them testifies that his deceased father confirmed that so-and-so was his son. The one who testifies is obliged to give 100 dinars to the one thus connected. This is half of the inheritance of the one thought to be related, had he been related. If the other confirms him, he takes the other 100 and so he completes his right and his relationship is established. His position is similar to that of a woman who confirms a debt against her father or her husband and the other heirs deny it. She must pay to the person whose debt she confirms, the amount according to her share of the full debt, had it been confirmed against all the heirs. If the woman inherits an eighth, she pays the creditor an eighth of his debt. If a daughter inherits a half, she pays the creditor half of his debt. Whichever women confirm him, pay him according to this.

Malik said, "If a man's testimony is in agreement with what the woman testified to, that so- and-so had a debt against his father, the creditor is made to take an oath with one witness and he is given all his due. This is not the position with women because a man's testimony is allowed and the creditor must take an oath with the testimony of his witness, and take all his due. If he does not take an oath, he only takes from the inheritance of the one who confirmed him according to his share of the debt, because he confirmed his right and the other heirs denied it. It is permitted for him to confirm it."

Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab from as-Sa'ib ibn Yazid that Abdullah ibn Amr ibn al-Hadrami brought a slave of his to Umar ibn al-Khattab and said to him, "Cut off the hand of this slave of mine. He has stolen." Umar said to him, "What did he steal?" He said, "He stole a mirror belonging to my wife. Its value was sixty dirhams." Umar said, "Let him go. His hand is not to be cut off. He is your servant who has stolen your belongings."

Malik related to me that he had heard that Abdullah ibn Masud used to relate that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "When two parties dispute about a business transaction, the seller's word is taken, or they make an agreement among themselves.

Malik spoke about someone who sold goods to a man, and said at the contracting of the sale, 'I will sell to you provided I consult so-and-so. If he is satisfied, the sale is permitted. If he dislikes it, there is no sale between us.' They made the transaction on that basis. Then the buyer regretted before the seller consulted the person.

Malik said, "That sale is binding on them according to what they described. The buyer has no right of withdrawal, and it is binding on him, if the person whom the seller stipulated to him, permits it."

Malik said, "The way of doing things among us about a man who buys goods from another and they differ about the price, and the seller says, 'I sold them to you for ten dinars,' and the buyer says, 'I bought them from you for five dinars,' is that it is said to the seller, 'If you like, give them to the buyer for what he said. If you like, swear by Allah that you only sold your goods for what you said.' If he swears it is said to the buyer, 'Either you take the goods for what the seller said, or you swear by Allah that you bought them only for what you said.' If he swears, he is free to return the goods. That is when each of them testifies against the other."

Yahya said that he heard Malik say, "If a man buys a garment which has a defect, a burn or something else, which the seller knows about and that is testified against him or he confirms it, and the man who has bought it causes a new tear which decreases the price of the garment, and then he learns about the original defect, he can return it to the seller and he is not liable for his tearing it.

"If a man buys a garment which has a defect of a burn or flaw, and the one who sold it to him claims that he did not know about it, and the buyer has cut the garment or dyed it, then the buyer has an option . If he wishes, he can have a reduction according to what the burn or flaw detracts from the price of the garment and he can keep the garment, or if he wishes to pay damages for what the cutting or dyeing has decreased of the price of the garment and return it, he can do so.

"If the buyer has dyed the garment with a dye which increases the value, the buyer has an option. If he wishes, he has a reduction from the price of the garment according to what the defect diminishes or if he wishes to become a partner with the one who sold the garment he does so. The price of the garment with a burn or flaw is looked at. If the price is ten dirhams, and the amount by which the dyeing increased the value is five dirhams, then they are partners in the garment, each according to his share. In this reckoning is the amount by which the dyeing increases the price of the garment."

Malik said, "If someone advances for goods to be delivered after a time, and those goods are neither something to be eaten nor drunk, he can sell them to whomever he likes for cash or goods, before he takes delivery of them, to some one other than the person from whom he purchased them. He must not sell them to the person from whom he bought them except in exchange for goods which he takes possession of immediately and does not defer."

Malik said, "If the delivery date for the goods has not arrived, there is no harm in selling them to the original owner for goods which are clearly different and which he takes immediate possession of and does not defer."

Malik spoke about the case of a man who advanced dinars or dirhams for four specified pieces of cloth to be delivered before a specified time and when the term fell due, he demanded delivery from the seller and the seller did not have them. He found that the seller had cloth but inferior quality, and the seller said that he would give him eight of those cloths. Malik said, "There is no harm in that if he takes the cloths which he offers him before they separate. It is not good if delayed terms enter into the transaction. It is also not good if that is before the end of the term, unless he sells him cloth which is notthetypeof cloth for which he made an advance.

Malik related to me from Abdullah ibn Abi Bakr ibn Hazm that Amr ibn Sulaym az-Zuraqi informed his father that it had been said to Umar ibn al-Khattab, "There is here an adolescent boy who has not yet reached puberty. He is from the Ghassan tribe and his heir is in ash- Sham. He has property. Here he only has the daughter of one of his paternal uncles." Umar ibn al-Khattab instructed, "Let him leave her a bequest." He willed her a property called the well of Jusham.

Malik added, "That property was sold for 30,000 dirhams, and the daughter of the paternal uncle to whom he willed it was the mother of Amr ibn Sulaym az-Zuraqi."

Yahya related to me from Malik that Yazid ibn Abdullah ibn Qusayt saw Said ibn al-Musayyab sell gold counterpoising for gold. He poured his gold into one pan of the scales, and the man with whom he was counterpoising put his gold in the other pan of the scale and when the tongue of the scales was balanced, they took and gave.

Malik said, "According to the way things are done among us there is no harm in selling gold for gold, and silver for silver by counterpoising weight, even if 11 dinars are taken for 10 dinars hand to hand, when the weight of gold is equal, coin for coin, even if the number is different. Dirhams in such a situation are treated the same way as dinars."

Malik said, "If, when counterpoising gold for gold or silver for silver, there is a difference of weight, one party should not give the other the value of the difference in silver or something else. Such a transaction is ugly and a means to usury because if one of the parties were permitted to take the difference for a separate price, it could be as if he had bought it separately, so he would be permitted. Then it would be possible for him to ask for many times the value of the difference in order to permit the completion of the transaction between the two parties.

Malik said, "If he had really been sold the difference without anything else with it, he would not have taken it for a tenth of the price for which he took it in order to put a 'legal front' on the transaction. This leads to allowing what is forbidden . The matter is forbidden."

Malik said that it was not good when counterpoising to give good old gold coins and put along with them unminted gold in exchange for worn kufic gold, which was unpopular and to then treat the exchange as like for like.

Malik said, "The commentary on why that is disapproved is that the owner of the good gold uses the excellence of his old gold coins as an excuse to throw in the unminted gold with it. Had it not been for the superiority of his (good) gold over the gold of the other party, the other party would not have counterpoised the unminted gold for his kufic gold, and the deal would have been refused.

"It is like a man wanting to buy three sa of ajwa dried dates for two sa and a mudd of kabis dates, and on being told that it was not good, then offering two sa of kabis and a sa of poor dates desiring to make the sale possible. That is not good because the owner of the ajwa should not give him a sa of ajwa for a sa of poor dates. He would only give him that because of the excellence of kabis dates.

"Or it is like a man asking some one to sell him three sa of white wheat for two and a half sa of Syrian wheat, and being told that it was not good except like for like, and so offering two sa of wheat and one sa of barley intending to make the sale possible between them. That is not good because no one would have given a sa of barley for a sa of white wheat had that sa been by itself. It was only given because of the excellence of Syrian wheat over the white wheat. This is not good. It is the same as the case of the unminted gold."

Malik said, "Where gold, silver and food, things which should only be sold like for like, are concerned, something disliked and of poor quality should not be put with something good and desirable in order to make the sale possible and to make a bad situation halal. When something of desirable quality is put with something of poor quality and it is only included so that its excellence in quality is noticed, something is being sold which if it had been sold on its own, would not have been accepted and to which the buyer would not have paid any attention. It is only accepted by the buyer because of the superiority of what comes with it over his own goods. Transactions involving gold, silver, or food, must not have anything of this description enter into them. If the owner of the poor quality goods wants to sell them, he sells them on their own, and does not put anything with them. There is no harm if it is like that."

Yahya related to me from Malik from Yahya ibn Said from Muhammad ibn Yahya ibn Habban from Ibn Abi Amra that Zayd ibn Khalid al-Juhani said, "A man died on the day of Hunayn, and they mentioned him to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace." Zayd claimed that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "You pray over your companion." (i.e. he would not pray himself). The people's faces dropped at that. Zayd claimed that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "Your companion stole from the spoils taken in the way of Allah." Zayd said, "So we opened up his baggage and found some Jews' beads worth about two dirhams."

Malik related to me from Yahya ibn Said from Abu Bakr ibn Muhammad ibn Amr ibn Hazm from Umar ibn Abdal-Aziz from Abu Bakr ibn Abd ar-Rahman ibn al-Harith ibn Hisham from Abu Hurayra that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, "If anyone goes bankrupt, and a man finds his own property intact with him, he is more entitled to it than anyone else."

Malik spoke about a man who sold a man wares, and the buyer went bankrupt. He said, "The seller takes whatever of his goods he finds. If the buyer has sold some of them and distributed them, the seller of the wares is more entitled to them than the creditors. What the buyer has distributed does not prevent the seller from taking whatever of it he finds. It is the seller's right if he has received any of the price from the buyer and he wants to return it to take what he finds of his wares, and in what he does not find, he is like the creditors."

Malik spoke about some one who bought spun wool or a plot of land, and then did some work on it, like building a house on the plot of land or weaving the spun wool into cloth. Then he went bankrupt after he had bought it, and the original owner of the plot said, "I will take the plot and whatever structure is on it." Malik said, "That structure is not his. However, the plot and what is in it that the buyer has improved is appraised. Then one sees what the price of the plot is and how much of that value is the price of the structure. They are partners in that. The owner of the plot has as much as his portion, and the creditors have the amount of the portion of the structure."

Malik said, "The explanation of that is that the value of it all is fifteen hundred dirhams. The value of the plot is five hundred dirhams, and the value of the building is one thousand dirhams. The owner of the plot has a third, and the creditors have two-thirds."

Malik said, "It is like that with spinning and other things of the same nature in these circumstances and the buyer has a debt which he cannot pay. This is the behaviour in such cases."

Malik said, "As for goods which have been sold and which the buyer does not improve, but those goods sell well and have gone up in price, so their owner wants them and the creditors also want to seize them, then the creditors choose between giving the owner of the goods the price for which he sold them and not giving him any loss and surrendering his goods to him.

"If the price of the goods has gone down, the one who sold them has a choice. If he likes, he can take his goods and he has no claim to any of his debtor's property, and that is his right. If he likes, he can be one of the creditors and take a portion of his due and not take his goods. That is up to him."

Malik said about someone who bought a slave-girl or animal and she gave birth in his possession and the buyer went bankrupt, "The slave-girl or the animal and the offspring belong to the seller unless the creditors desire it. In that case they give him his complete due and they take it."

He said: I found a purse which contained one hundred dinars; so I came to the Prophet (saws). He said to me: Make the matter known for a year. I made it known for a year and then came to him. He then said to me: Make the matter known for a year. So I made it known for a year. I then (again) came to him. He said to me: Make the matter known for a year. Then I came to him and said: I did not find anyone who realises it. He said: Remember, its number, its container and its tie. If its owner comes, (give it to him), otherwise use it yourself.

He (the narrator Shu'bah) said: I do not know whether he said the word "make the matter known" three times or once.

Malik related to me from Yahya ibn Said from Abu Bakr ibn Hazm that a boy from Ghassan was dying in Madina while his heir was in Syria. That was mentioned to Umar ibn al-Khattab. It was said to him, "So-and-so is dying. Shall he make a bequest?" He said, "Let him make a bequest."

Yahya ibn Said said that Abu Bakr had said, "He was a boy of ten or twelve years." Yahya said, "He willed the well of Jusham, and his people sold it for 30,000 dirhams."

Yahya said that he heard Malik say, "The generally agreed-on way of doing things in our community is that a simpleton, an idiot, or a lunatic who recovers at times, can make wills if they have enough of their wits about them to recognise what they will. Someone who has not enough wits to recognise what he wills, and is overcome in his intellect, cannot make a bequest."

The Prophet (saws) said to a man: Would you like me to marry you to so-and-so?

He said: Yes. He also said to the woman: Would you like me to marry you to so-and-so?

She said: Yes. He then married one to the other. The man had sexual intercourse with her, but he did not fix any dower for her, nor did he give anything to her. He was one of those who participated in the expedition to al-Hudaybiyyah. One part of the expedition to al-Hudaybiyyah had a share in Khaybar.

When he was nearing his death, he said: The Messenger of Allah (saws) married me to so-and-so, and I did not fix a dower for her, nor did I give anything to her. I call upon you as witness that I have given my share in Khaybar as her dower. So she took the share and sold it for one lakh (of dirhams).

Abu Dawud said: The version of 'Umar b. al-Khattab added in the beginning of this tradition, and his version is more perfect. He reported the Messenger of Allah (saws) as saying: The best marriage is the one that is most easy. The Messenger of Allah (saws) said to the man. The narrator then transmitted the rest of the tradition to the same effect.

Abu Dawud said: I am afraid this tradition has been added later on, for the matter is otherwise.

Abu Dawud said: Al-Thawri narrated it as Malik narrated.

Malik related to me that he heard the like of that from Sulayman ibn Yasar.

Malik spoke about a man who bought out one of the partners in a shared property, by paying the man with an animal, a slave, a slave-girl, or the equivalent of that in goods. Then another partner decided to exercise his right of pre-emption after that, and he found that the slave or slave-girl had died, and no one knew what her value had been. The buyer claimed, "The value of the slave or slave-girl was 100 dinars." The partner with the right of pre-emption claimed, "The value was 50 dinars."

Malik said, "The buyer takes an oath that the value of what he payed was 100 dinars. Then if the one with the right of pre-emption wishes, he can compensate him, or else he can leave it, unless he can bring a clear proof that the slave or slave-girl's value is less than what the buyer said. If someone gives away his portion of a shared house or land and the recipient repays him for it by cash or goods, the partners can take it by pre-emption if they wish and pay off the recipient the value of what he gave in dinars or dirhams. If someone makes a gift of his portion of a shared house or land, and does not take any remuneration and does not seek to, and a partner wants to take it for its value, he cannot do so as long as the original partner has not been given recompense for it. If there is any recompense, the one with the right of pre-emption can have it for the price of the recompense."

Malik spoke about a man who bought into a piece of shared land for a price on credit, and one of the partners wanted to possess it by right of pre-emption . Malik said, "If it seems likely that the partner can meet the terms, he has right of pre-emption for the same credit terms. If it is feared that he will not be able to meet the terms, but he can bring a wealthy and reliable guarantor of equal standing to the one who bought into the land, he can also take possession."

Malik said, "A person's absence does not sever his right of pre-emption. Even if he is a way for a long time, there is no time limit after which the right of preemption is cut off."

Malik said that if a man left land to a number of his children, then one of them who had a child died and the child of the deceased sold his right in that land, the brother of the seller was more entitled to pre-empt him than his paternal uncles, the partners of his father.

Malik said, "This is what is done in our community."

Malik said, "Pre- emption is shared between partners according to their existing shares. Each of them takes according to his portion. If it is small, he has little. If it is great, it is according to that. That is if they are tenacious and contend with each other about it."

Malik said, "As for a man who buys out the share of one of his partners, and one of the other partners says, 'I will take a portion according to my share,' and the first partner says, 'If you wish to take all the preemption, I will give it up to you. If you wish to leave it, then leave it.' If the first partner gives him the choice and hands it over to him, the second partner can only take all the pre-emption or give it back. If he takes it, he is entitled to it. If not, he has nothing."

Malik spoke about a man who bought land, and developed it by planting trees or digging a well etc., and then someone came, and seeing that he had a right in the land, wanted to take possession of it by pre-emption. Malik said "He has no right of preemption unless he compensates the other for his expenditure. If he gives him the price of what he has developed, he is entitled to pre- emption . If not, he has no right in it."

Malik said that someone who sold off his portion of a shared house or land and then, on learning that some one with a right of pre-emption was to take possession by that right, asked the buyer to revoke the sale, and he did so, did not have the right to do that. The pre-emptor has more right to the property for the price for which he sold it.

In the case of some one who bought along with a section of a shared house or land, an animal and goods (that were not shared), so that when any one demanded his right of pre-emption in the house or land he said, "Take what I have bought altogether, for I bought it altogether," Malik said, "The pre-emptor need only take possession of the house or land. Each thing the man bought is assessed according to its share of the lump sum the man paid. Then the pre-emptor takes possession of his right for a price which is appropriate on that basis. He does not take any animals or goods unless he wants to do that."

Malik said, "If someone sells a section of shared land, and one of those who have the right of preemption surrenders it to the buyer and another refuses to do other than take his pre-emption, the one who refuses to surrender has to take all the preemption, and he cannot take according to his right and leave what remains.

In the case where one of a number of partners in one house sold his share when all his partners were away except for one man, the one present was given the choice of either taking the pre-emption or leaving it, and he said, 'I will take my portion and leave the portions of my partners until they are present. If they take it, that is that. If they leave it, I will take all the pre-emption,' Malik said, 'He can only take it all or leave it. If his partners come, they can take from him or leave it as they wish. If this is offered to him and he does not accept, I think that he has no pre-emption.' "