«لَا أُجِيزُ الْعَقْدَ بِمِائَةِ دِرْهَمٍ، وَلَكِنْ أُجِيزُهُ بِمِائَةٍ وَخَمْسِينَ»
“I do not ratify the contract at one hundred dirhams, but I ratify it at one hundred and fifty.”
The first clause rejects ratification of the contract at one price; the second purports to ratify it at a different price. The legal issue is whether this is a coherent qualification or whether the first rejection has broken the original contractual context.
The source treats such examples as a test of coherence, rather than assuming that lakin alone can repair any inconsistent contractual wording.