If he claims that he forgot or made a mistake, but there is no evidence indicating that he truly forgot or erred, is his statement accepted? According to the madhhab, it is not accepted. The second view is that, if he is known for truthfulness and what he claims is closer to the market value than what he admitted, then his statement is accepted with his oath.

But if he claims error or forgetfulness and is not known for truthfulness, or if he claims error or forgetfulness but alleges an amount far removed from the market value, then his statement is not accepted. If the claimant of pre-emption affirms his statement, however, it is accepted without any difficulty, because the right belongs to him.

His statement, “even if the seller establishes a higher price,” means that if the seller establishes a lower price—the reverse of the case in question—such that the buyer says, “I bought it for one thousand,” while the seller establishes that it was for eight hundred, what do we say? We say that in this case the claimant of pre-emption takes it for the amount established by the seller, because the buyer’s lying, error, or ignorance has become apparent.

“If the seller admits the sale while the buyer denies it, pre-emption becomes binding. The claimant of pre-emption’s recourse is against the buyer, and the buyer’s recourse is against the seller.”

His statement, “If the seller admits the sale while the buyer denies it, it becomes binding,” means that the right of pre-emption becomes binding. Thus, if the seller says to his partner, “I sold my share to so-and-so,” and so-and-so says, “I did not buy it from you,” the author says: “It becomes binding”—that is, the right of pre-emption—because the seller has admitted that ownership transferred to the buyer, and by his admission the right of pre-emption is established. Yet we do not hold the buyer liable on that basis, because the seller has nothing against him but a mere claim. If, however, he produces evidence that he sold it to him, then the matter is clear.

Thus, the seller’s statement contains both an admission and a claim: an admission with respect to the claimant of pre-emption, and a claim with respect to the buyer. The buyer says, “Not at all; I did not buy it.” Therefore, the buyer is free of liability, and nothing is due from him unless the seller produces evidence. More accurately, we should refer to him as “the one against whom the purchase is alleged,” because it has not been established that he is a buyer, and therefore nothing is due from him. Nevertheless, the right of pre-emption is established, and the seller is asked: “For how much did you sell it?”