built upon it, or wood in his roof, or a slave-woman whom he has had a child by. This is because when he takes its measure or its value, he is only taking a substitute for his property; it is like the price or the value. It differs from the dyed garment, for he is able to take the substance of that, and likewise the sawiq, so they differ.

Section: If he buys wheat and grinds it, or plants it, or flour and bakes it, or oil and makes it into soap, or a garment and cuts it into a shirt, or yarn and weaves it into a garment, or wood and crafts it into doors, or thread and makes it into needles, or something with which he makes something that removes its name, the right of reclamation lapses. Al-Shafi'i said: There are two opinions regarding this; one of them, which is what I hold, is that he takes the substance of his property and gives the value of the insolvent person's labor on it, because the substance of his property is present, and only its name has changed. This is analogous to the case where the object sold was a lamb and became a ram, or a young palm and became a date tree. We say: He has not found his commodity specifically, so he has no right of reclamation, just as if it had perished, and because he has changed its name and its quality, he does not possess the right of reclamation, just as if it were a seed that grew into a tree. The principle they used for analogy is invalid, and even if it were accepted, its name did not change, unlike our issue.

Section: If it was a grain and became a crop, or a crop and became a grain, or a pit and it grew into a tree, or an egg and it became chicks, the right of reclamation lapses. Al-Qadi said: It does not lapse. This is one of the two views of the companions of Al-Shafi'i that is explicitly stated by him, because the crop is the grain itself, and the chick is the egg itself. We say: He has not found the substance of his property, so he does not reclaim, just as if a destroyer had destroyed it and he took its value. Also, because the grains are substances initiated by Allah the Exalted, which were not present at the time of the sale; likewise are the [crop and the] substances of the chicks. If he rented land, bought seed and water, planted, irrigated, harvested, and then became insolvent, then the lessor and the seller of the seed and water are creditors,