the copies of Masābīḥ al-Sunnah, and the former wording is the stronger.

• Juristic Disagreement:
  The scholars have differed over whether the right of shufʿah is established when two neighbors share a utility—such as a single access road, a watercourse, a common courtyard, or the like.

The three leading Imams (Mālik, al-Shāfiʿī, and, according to his well-known view, Aḥmad) hold that the neighbor is not entitled to shufʿah on account of any of these shared facilities. In their view, once the boundaries have been demarcated and the roads assigned, no shufʿah remains, even though the parties may still share some benefit.

Their proof is the hadith recorded in the two Ṣaḥīḥs: “When the boundaries have been marked and the roads assigned, there is no shufʿah.” The Imām said, “It is the soundest report transmitted on the subject of shufʿah.”

Imām Abū Ḥanīfah—and Imām Aḥmad according to another report—maintain that shufʿah is established whenever any of these common utilities exists. This opinion was also preferred by Shaykh al-Islām, Ibn al-Qayyim, and our teacher ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Saʿdī—may Allah have mercy on them all.

This position reconciles all the evidences: The hadith “When the boundaries have been marked and the roads assigned…” explicitly negates shufʿah once each owner knows his limit, whereas the hadith “The neighbor has the strongest claim to pre-emption; he is to be waited for, even if he is away, so long as they share a single path” explicitly affirms shufʿah when they share the path and denies it once the path has been divided. Thus, the two texts are in full agreement.

Shaykh al-Islām said: “The most equitable view is that shufʿah is established only when the neighbor is a partner in one of the rights of ownership; otherwise, it is not.”

• Resolution of the Council of Senior Scholars Concerning Shufʿah for the Neighbor:
  The Council of Senior Scholars issued Resolution no. 44, dated 13/4/1396 AH, whose text reads as follows: