All of this, if it occurs without ruse (30), the right of pre-emption is forfeited. If they employ a ruse (31) to forfeit the right of pre-emption, it is not forfeited, and the pre-emptor shall take the share in the first case for ten dinars or its equivalent in dirhams. In the second, for one hundred dirhams or its equivalent in gold (33). In the third, for the value of the sold slave. In the fourth, for the remainder after the absolution, which is the one hundred received. In the fifth, he takes the portion of the share sold for its proportion of the price; it is possible that he takes the entire share for the entire price, because [the seller] only gifted him the remainder of the share in exchange for the price with which he bought a portion of the share. In the sixth, he takes it for the gifted price (34). In all other cases where the price is unknown (35), he takes it for the equivalent of the price, or its value if it is not something fungible (36), provided the price exists. If its essence is not found, he pays him the value of the share; for it is most common for a contract to occur on items based on their value. The scholars of opinion and al-Shafi'i stated: All of that is permissible, and pre-emption is forfeited thereby, because he did not take it for what the sale occurred upon, so it is not permitted, just as if there were no ruse. Our argument is the saying of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him): "Whoever introduces a horse among two horses, and is not (37) certain that it will not win, it is not gambling, but if he is certain (38) that it will win, it is gambling." Narrated by Abu Dawud and others (39), he made the introduction of the 'muhallil' (the third horse) gambling in the situation where