His statement, “or a ship”: that is, if he finds a ship carrying passengers and boards it without making an agreement with the boatman—that is, the captain of the ship—this is permissible, and he owes the customary fare. The same applies to a taxi: if he rides in it, reaches his destination, and the driver says to him, for example, “You owe ten riyals,” and he replies, “Ten is too much; I will only give you five,” is he obliged to pay ten? Yes. So long as the customary fare is ten, he is obliged to pay ten.

His statement, “or gives his garment to a washer”: the washer is the one who washes clothes. He gives him the garment to wash, and the washer washes it. Then, when handing it back, he asks for a sum of money, although the owner of the garment had not known of it. It is said that he owes the customary wage, even though they did not contract for it, because this is commonly understood among people.

His statement, “or to a tailor without a contract, it is valid for the customary wage”: similarly, if he gives his garment to a tailor to sew, and when he has finished, the tailor says to him, “The fee is such-and-such,” this is valid even without a contract.

It is understood from the author’s words, “a washer or a tailor,” that the person must have made himself available for such work. If he has not made himself available for it, then he is entitled to nothing unless it was stipulated. For example, if someone gives his garment to another person and says, “Take this and wash it for me,” then, after washing it, he says, “The fee is such-and-such,” the owner of the garment is not obliged to pay him anything, because the person who took it and washed it has not made himself available for that work. The author says, “a washer,” so he is not owed anything.

If the two men dispute, we say to the washer: Why did you not stipulate it for yourself? He assumes that you are doing him a kindness, and a contract must have some indication, either verbal