The second is that the husband is prioritized; because his right is more emphatic, as it was established by the text of the Qur'an and consensus (ijma'), whereas the right of pre-emption is a matter of ijtihad (legal reasoning), not agreed upon. Based on this, the pre-emptor has the right to take the remaining half for half of the price for which he would have taken the whole.

1204 - Issue: He said: "And if they differ regarding the dowry after the contract as to its amount, and there is no evidence regarding its sum, then the statement is her statement, as she claims the dowry of her peer (mahr al-mithl)."

The entirety of this is that if the spouses differ regarding the amount of the dowry, and there is no evidence regarding its sum, the statement is the statement of whichever of them claims the dowry of the peer (mahr al-mithl). If the woman claims the dowry of her peer or less, her statement is accepted. If the husband claims the dowry of the peer or more, his statement is accepted. This is the opinion of Abu Hanifah, and a similar view is held by al-Hasan, al-Nakha'i, Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman, and Abu 'Ubayd. There is another narration from Ahmad that the statement is always the statement of the husband. This is the opinion of al-Sha'bi, Ibn Abi Layla, Ibn Shubruma, and Abu Thawr. Abu Yusuf also held this view, unless one claims something unreasonable, which is claiming a dowry the likes of which is not customary to be married with; because he is a denier of the excess and a defendant, thus he falls under the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him): "But the oath is upon the defendant." Al-Shafi'i said: "They shall exchange oaths (tahalluf); if one of them swears and the other refuses, what he said is established. If both swear, the dowry of the peer becomes obligatory." This is the view of al-Thawri; because they differed regarding the compensation due in the contract, and there is no evidence, so they must exchange oaths, by analogy to the buyer and seller if they differ regarding the price. Malik said: "If the difference is before consummation, they exchange oaths and the marriage is annulled, and if it is after, the statement is the statement of the husband." He based this on his principle in sales, for he differentiates in exchanging oaths between what is before possession and what is after it, and because when she surrendered herself without witnesses, she was satisfied with his trustworthiness. We argue that the apparent (truth) is the statement of the one who claims the dowry of the peer, so the statement is his/hers, by analogy to the denier in all other claims.