of the first, and upon him and Zayd rests five ninths of the remaining price, divided between them in thirds. If Amr forgives his preemption of the third, the preemption of the sixth that he bought is divided between him and Zayd in thirds, and Amr comes to possess four ninths of the house, Zayd has two ninths, and Bakr has a third. The problem is correctly resolved from nine. If Bakr sells the sixth to a stranger, it is like his selling it to Amr, except that Amr has the right to forgive his preemption in the sixth, unlike if he were the purchaser, for his forgiveness of his share of it is not valid. If Bakr sells the third to a stranger, Amr has two thirds of the preemption of the first sold property, which is two ninths. He takes two thirds of them from Bakr, and two thirds of them from the second purchaser, which is a ninth and a third of a ninth. There remains in the hand of the second a sixth and a sixth of a ninth, which is ten out of fifty-four, divided between Amr and Zayd in thirds. It is also correctly resolved from one hundred and sixty-two. Amr pays Bakr two thirds of the price of his sold property, and he and Zayd pay the second purchaser the price of five ninths of his sold property, divided between them in thirds, and the second purchaser has recourse against Bakr for the price of four ninths of his sold property. If Amr did not know until he sold a sixth of what was in his hand, his preemption does not become void in one of the opinions, and he may take by it just as if he had not sold anything. The second [opinion]: his entire preemption becomes void. The third: it becomes void in the amount he sold, and remains in what he did not sell. We have already mentioned the justification for these views. As for the preemption of what he sold, there are three views regarding it: one is that it is between the second purchaser, Zayd, and Bakr in fourths; the purchaser has half of it, and each of the two has a quarter of it, according to their ownership at the time of his sale. The second: it is between Zayd and Bakr, based on fourteen shares; Zayd has nine, and Bakr has five, because Zayd has the sixth, and Bakr has a sixth from which he is entitled to four ninths of it by preemption, so five ninths of the sixth remain with him, his ownership being established upon it, so we added it to Zayd's sixth.