they have no right of reclamation because they did not find the substances of their properties. According to the view of one who says that he has the right of reclamation in the crop, he must pay the wage and the price of the water, or the value thereof.

Section: If he buys a garment and dyes it, or sawiq and mixes it with oil, our companions said: The seller of the garment and the sawiq has the right of reclamation over the substances of their properties. This is the school of Al-Shafi'i because the substance of their property is present and observable, and its name has not changed. The insolvent person is a partner with the owner of the garment and the sawiq for whatever exceeds their value. If there is an increase, it is for him, and if there is a loss, it is upon him. If the value of the garment or the sawiq decreases, if the seller wishes, he may take them in their diminished state, and he has nothing else; if he wishes, he may leave them, and he is treated like the rest of the creditors, because this is a deficiency in quality, so it is like emaciation. It is possible that he does not have the right of reclamation if the value increases, because an increase belonging to the insolvent person has attached to the sold item, thus preventing reclamation, just as if a slave grew fat. Furthermore, reclamation here does not enable the seller to dissociate from the insolvent person, nor does it achieve the purpose of ending the dispute and removing the transaction; rather, it results in the harm of partnership, so it is not within the meaning of the explicitly stated rule, and thus cannot be attached to it.

Section: If he buys dye and dyes a garment with it, or oil and mixes sawiq with it, then their seller is treated like the other creditors. The companions of Al-Shafi'i said: He has the right of reclamation because he found the substance of his property. They said: If he buys a garment and dye, and dyes the garment with the dye, the seller of each item reclaims the substance of his property, and the seller of the dye is a partner to the seller of the garment. If there is a loss, it is borne by the owner of the dye, because it is the one that dissipates, while the garment remains as it is. Thus, if the value of the garment is ten, and the value of the dye is five, and their total value becomes twelve, the owner of the garment has five-sixths of it, and the other has one-sixth, and he claims with the creditors for what was lost, which is three dirhams. Al-Qadi mentioned the like of this in one place. We say: He has not found the substance of his property, so he does not have the right of reclamation, just as if it had perished, and because the buyer occupied it with another thing by way of sale, so its seller does not possess the right of reclamation over it, just as if it were stone that he built upon, or nails with which he fastened a door. If he buys a garment and dye from one person, and dyes it with it, our companions said: There is no difference between that and the case where the dye is from someone other than the seller of the garment. So, according to their opinion, he reclaims only the garment, and the insolvent person is