The ruling regarding a price decrease after the contract is finalized, according to the supporting view against Abu Hanifa's position.

Primary text

The view supporting the non-applicability of subsequent price changes holds that since the change occurred after the contract was finalized, it does not affect the right of preemption, similar to a price increase. Furthermore, the preemption holder established the right to acquire the property based on the initial price before any change, meaning subsequent modifications do not impact that established right. The justification offered by opponents is invalid because if the subsequent change were legally appended to the contract, it would be binding on the Shafi' even if detrimental, as seen with a price increase during the option period. Moreover, since the remission occurs after the contract is binding, it resembles the remission of the entire price or the majority thereof according to the position of Malik.