«لفلان علي ألف من ثمن جارية باعنيها ولم أقبضها»
“I owe so-and-so one thousand for an enslaved woman he sold to me, but whom I have not received.”
The first part acknowledges an obligation concerning the price. The later assertion introduces non-delivery, which can affect the subsistence of a sale: in the relevant sale-law analysis, destruction before delivery may annul the sale and terminate price liability.
For Abu Hanifa, a subsequent claim of this kind can be classified as an attempt to replace or overturn the established legal effect, not merely to explain an ambiguous word. It illustrates bayan al-tabdil.
ModeControlling question
NecessityDoes the remainder follow inevitably?
CircumstanceIs silence significant at that occasion?
ConjunctionDoes the joined item identify the prior kind?
ReplacementDoes the later statement overturn a prior rule?
The controlling distinction: one mode derives a necessary meaning, another reads legally relevant silence, a third specifies a class through conjunction, and the fourth concerns termination of an earlier rule.