Author: Dr. Muhammad Zia-ur-Rehman Azmi (رحمه الله)
Shufa’a (Right of Preemption): The right of forcibly acquiring a neighbor's property as determined by the conditions set by the jurists.
First Opinion:
Shufa’a is not permissible in any case. This is the position of the people of Madinah. Their evidence comes from the narrations related to this issue, such as:
"The right of Shufa’a is only applicable to undivided property. Once the boundaries are defined and pathways are laid, Shufa’a is no longer applicable."
[Saheeh al-Bukhari, Hadith No. 2213]
Additionally, other Hadiths on this matter are cited as evidence.
Second Opinion:
The right of Shufa’a is absolutely applicable to neighbors, regardless of whether the rights and pathways are defined. This view is held by Imam Abu Hanifah and his followers, as well as some Shafi’i and Hanbali scholars. Their proof is based on the narration from Abu Hurayrah:
"The neighbor has a greater right of Shufa’a."
[Al-Tabarani, Hadith No. 6941; Saheeh al-Jami’, Hadith No. 3088]
Third Opinion:
This opinion offers a detailed view and attempts to reconcile the two previous positions. According to this view, if there is any shared right concerning the property, such as a shared path, water source, or passage for water, then the neighbor holds the right of Shufa’a. The scholars who support this opinion, such as those from Basrah, argue that there is no distinction in cases where properties are adjacent to each other with shared rights. This is also the view that Imam Ahmad and Ibn Taymiyyah, along with his student Ibn Qayyim, adopted.
This position is also based on analogy, as the law of Shufa’a was established to prevent harm, which generally arises either from the merging of properties or from issues related to the benefits, interests, or pathways connected with the properties.
[Abdullah bin Aqeel: Fatwa, 283]
Shufa’a (Right of Preemption): The right of forcibly acquiring a neighbor's property as determined by the conditions set by the jurists.
The Right of Shufa’a Due to Neighborliness
There are three opinions among scholars regarding the permissibility of the right of Shufa’a based on neighborliness:First Opinion:
Shufa’a is not permissible in any case. This is the position of the people of Madinah. Their evidence comes from the narrations related to this issue, such as:
"The right of Shufa’a is only applicable to undivided property. Once the boundaries are defined and pathways are laid, Shufa’a is no longer applicable."
[Saheeh al-Bukhari, Hadith No. 2213]
Additionally, other Hadiths on this matter are cited as evidence.
Second Opinion:
The right of Shufa’a is absolutely applicable to neighbors, regardless of whether the rights and pathways are defined. This view is held by Imam Abu Hanifah and his followers, as well as some Shafi’i and Hanbali scholars. Their proof is based on the narration from Abu Hurayrah:
"The neighbor has a greater right of Shufa’a."
[Al-Tabarani, Hadith No. 6941; Saheeh al-Jami’, Hadith No. 3088]
Third Opinion:
This opinion offers a detailed view and attempts to reconcile the two previous positions. According to this view, if there is any shared right concerning the property, such as a shared path, water source, or passage for water, then the neighbor holds the right of Shufa’a. The scholars who support this opinion, such as those from Basrah, argue that there is no distinction in cases where properties are adjacent to each other with shared rights. This is also the view that Imam Ahmad and Ibn Taymiyyah, along with his student Ibn Qayyim, adopted.
This position is also based on analogy, as the law of Shufa’a was established to prevent harm, which generally arises either from the merging of properties or from issues related to the benefits, interests, or pathways connected with the properties.
[Abdullah bin Aqeel: Fatwa, 283]