His statement, “or if its consideration is a dower”: this means that the partner gives his share to his wife as her dower. Here, the consideration is not monetary; he has not received anything of monetary value in exchange for it. The wording is somewhat awkward; what is meant is: “or if its consideration is non-monetary, by being made a dower.” That is, the partner makes his share of the jointly owned property his wife’s dower. His co-owner then has no right of pre-emption, because this partner has received sexual access in exchange for his share, as the Prophet ﷺ said: “She is entitled to the dower in return for what he has made lawful of her private parts.” (1) Thus, the author maintains that there is no right of pre-emption in this case.

However, the stronger view is that he does have the right of pre-emption. The question then is: for what price may the pre-empting partner take it, given that the consideration was non-monetary? Do we say that he takes it for its monetary value—that is, for its market value, as assessed—and takes it on that basis? Or does he take it for an amount equivalent to the woman’s customary dower, since it was made a dower? There are two views. The correct view is that he takes it at its assessed value: it is appraised and taken for that value, whether it exceeds, falls short of, or equals the equivalent of the woman’s customary dower.

His statement, “or a khulʿ settlement”: that is, it is made the consideration for a khulʿ settlement. The husband is the one who gives the dower, whereas the consideration for khulʿ is given by the wife or by someone else. Thus, if it is made the consideration for khulʿ—for example, if a woman jointly owns a piece of land with someone, and she asks her husband for khulʿ, and he agrees to release her in exchange for her share of that land—then the consideration for the share is now non-monetary: it is her ransoming herself from