then, if Zayd says to Amr—while the two of them are the purchasers—“I exercise pre-emption against you,” Amr may say, “I exercise pre-emption against you.” In that case, we say: Neither has a right of pre-emption against the other. You purchased the land, or the share of it, in a single transaction, so you are equal; neither of you has any right over the other. Thus, the ownership of the party exercising pre-emption must precede that of his partner.
If a piece of land belonged jointly to two people, but initially belonged to one of them alone, and the other then bought half of it from him, after which the original owner sold his remaining share to another person, then the right of pre-emption is established. This is because the seller’s ownership preceded that of the purchaser, and the purchaser’s ownership preceded the ownership in respect of which the right of pre-emption arises.
His statement, “nor without ownership,” means that there is no right of pre-emption in a leasehold partnership. For example, if two men lease a house and one of them subleases his share, his partner has no right of pre-emption, because he does not own the property itself; rather, he owns only the usufruct. Ownership belongs to the original lessor, and the right of pre-emption is established by the transfer of ownership.
His statement, “nor does a disbeliever have it against a Muslim,” means that if a piece of land is jointly owned by a Muslim and a Christian, and the Muslim sells his share to another Muslim, does the Christian have the right to exercise pre-emption? The author says: No, because if we enabled him to exercise pre-emption, we would be giving a disbeliever authority over a Muslim, whereas Islam prevails and is not prevailed over.
If both partners are disbelievers and one of them sells his share to a Muslim, may his disbelieving partner take it by pre-emption? No, because the effective cause is the same: the degradation of the Muslim.
Some scholars have said: Rather, a disbeliever does have the right of pre-emption against a Muslim, because pre-emption is a right connected to acquiring ownership, not a right belonging to the owner; and if the disbeliever