Furthermore, the duration of the option period is equivalent to the state of the contract, and modifications can be attached to the contract during it, because both parties are still at liberty to choose within that time, just as if it were at the time of the contract. However, if the option period has expired and the contract has become binding, and they then increase or decrease [the price], it cannot be attached to the contract; because the increase after that is a gift for which the conditions of a gift must be observed, and the decrease is an initial remission, and that is not established in relation to the pre-emptor. This is the opinion of al-Shafi'i. Abu Hanifa said: The decrease is established in relation to the pre-emptor, but not the increase, even though he considers both to be attached to the contract; because the increase harms the pre-emptor, so he is not subject to it, unlike the decrease. Malik said: If what remains constitutes a price, he takes it for that; but if the majority is deducted, he takes it for the entire original price. Our position is that this is considered after the contract has been settled, so it is not established in relation to the pre-emptor, like the increase. Furthermore, the pre-emptor became entitled to take it at the original price before the modification, so the modification after that has no effect on him, just like the increase. The excuse they mentioned is not correct, because if that [modification] were to be attached to the contract, it would bind the pre-emptor, even if it harms him, just like an increase during the option period. Moreover, it is a deduction after the contract has become binding, so it resembles the deduction of all or most of it according to Malik.

Section: If the price is something for which its value must be determined, then it is calculated at the time of the sale; because that is the time of entitlement, and there is no consideration after that for any increase or decrease. If there is an option [period] in it, the value is determined at the time of the expiration of the option and the settlement of the contract; because that is the time of the entitlement to pre-emption. This is the opinion of al-Shafi'i. It is narrated from Malik that he takes it for its value on the day of the litigation. This is not correct; because the time of entitlement is the time of the contract, and whatever increases after that comes into the possession of the seller, so it does not count for the purchaser, and whatever decreases is at the expense of the seller, so the right of the purchaser does not decrease because of it.