oppressed him. This is the opinion of al-Shafi'i. Abu Hanifa said: If the judge rules against him for two thousand, the preemptor takes it for that amount, because when the judge rules against him based on evidence, his statement is voided, and what the judge ruled is established. Our position is that the purchaser confesses that this evidence is false and that he [the seller] oppressed him by one thousand, so it is not ruled for him; rather, it is ruled for the seller because he does not deny it. If the purchaser says: "The evidence is truthful, and I was the one who was lying or forgetful," there are two views regarding this. One is that his retraction is not accepted because it is a retraction from a confession to which the right of another person (a human) is attached, so it is similar to if he confessed a debt to him. The second is that his statement is accepted. Al-Qadi said: This is the analogy of the school according to me, as if he reported a price in a murabaha sale and then said: "I made a mistake, and the price is higher"; his statement is accepted with his oath. Indeed, it is even more appropriate here because evidence has been established of his falsehood, and the judge has ruled contrary to his statement, so his retraction from the lie is accepted. If the seller has no evidence, then they both swear oaths, and the preemptor takes it for what the seller swore upon. If he wishes to take it for what the purchaser swore upon, he may not do so, because the seller has the right to rescind the sale, and taking it for what the purchaser said would prevent that, and because it leads to binding the contract to what the purchaser swore, which he does not have the power to do. If the purchaser is satisfied with his taking it for what the seller said, it is permissible, and the preemptor acquires the right to take it for the price the purchaser swore upon because the seller's right to rescind has lapsed. If the purchaser returns and affirms the seller, saying: "The price is two thousand, and I was mistaken," may the preemptor take it for the price he [the purchaser] swore upon? There are two views on this, just as if evidence had been established for it.

Section: If one purchases a share that has two preemptors, and he claims against one of the preemptors that he waived his right of preemption, and the other preemptor testifies for him regarding that—prior to his own waiver of his preemption—his testimony is not accepted.