Whose testimony is accepted when the owner and the craftsman disagree regarding the specific item authorized for work (e.g., shirt vs. qaba', or color of dye)?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Leasing
Primary text
The statement of the tailor or the dyer is accepted when there is a disagreement over the specific instruction given, such as whether the garment was a 'qaba' or a 'shirt,' or whether the dye was commanded to be 'red' or 'black.' This position is narrated from Ahmad, held by Ibn Abi Layla, and aligns with the jurists who hold that the claimant of the condition (the craftsman) is believed due to the agreement on the principal act (cutting or dyeing) and the difference being only in the specification. If the craftsman swears to the specific instruction he claims, the liability for damages is waived, and he is due the customary wage (ajr mithl). This is supported by the principle that evidence (the oath) established the authorized act, making the stated compensation due, although the agreed-upon price (al-musamma) is forfeited because it relies solely on the owner's conflicting claim.
Supporting text
Malik, Abu Hanifa, and Abu Thawr hold that the statement of the cloth owner is accepted. Some Shafi'i scholars suggest the owner's word is preferred because disagreement concerns the description of the permission, and the owner's word prevails regarding the basis of permission, and also because the default state is the absence of the disputed permission. Another view among Shafi'is suggests mutual cursing (tahaluf) as in sales contracts where the price is disputed. A third view from Ibn Abi Musa, narrated from Ahmad, holds that if the owner is known not to use the specified item (like a qaba' or black dye), the owner's statement prevails, leading to the craftsman bearing liability for damages and receiving no wage, as the context supports the owner's claim.