with respect to what he actually owns. The sounder position is that the buyer has a khiyār (right of option) if he was unaware of the defect; should he ratify the contract, he is responsible only for his proportional share of the named price, calculated according to the relative value of the two items. A second view obliges him to pay the entire price. The seller, however, enjoys no such option.

If a man sells two of his slaves and one of them dies before the buyer takes possession, the sale is not voided for the surviving slave, according to the relied-upon opinion; rather, the buyer may either confirm or cancel. If he confirms, he must pay the corresponding portion of the price—without dispute.

Should a single contract join two transactions governed by different rules—such as a lease and a sale, or a salam (forward sale)—both are valid on the stronger view, and the stated price is apportioned between them in proportion to their respective values. If the contract combines a sale with marriage, the marriage is valid, whereas regarding the sale and the dowry the two well-known opinions apply.

A contract is treated as multiple transactions whenever the price is itemised—e.g. “I sell you this for such-and-such and that for such-and-such”—and also when there is more than one seller. According to the predominant view, the same applies when there is more than one buyer. If both parties appoint a single agent, or each appoints one, the stronger opinion is that the ruling follows the agent.