Al-Kāfī - Ibn Abd al-Barr - (2/716)

and even goes so far as to sew it, but later discovers a defect that had already existed while the cloth was still with the seller, the ruling is as follows:

If the seller had knowingly concealed that defect, the buyer may return the cloth, recover from the seller the cost of the sewing, and take back the full purchase price. He owes nothing for the loss in value caused by having cut the cloth, for the seller himself empowered him to do so by deceiving him and hiding the fault.

This exemption applies only when the buyer cut the cloth in the ordinary, accepted manner. If, however, his cutting was ruinous and he then returns it because of the defect that the seller had fraudulently concealed, he must reimburse the seller for whatever depreciation his cutting has caused.

Should the seller have been unaware of the defect, the buyer is given a choice: he may either

return the cloth and pay for the reduction in value caused by his cutting—the cost of the sewing being counted in that reduction—or
keep the cloth and receive the compensatory allowance (arsh) corresponding to the defect.

In such a case the seller is entitled to require the buyer to swear that he had no knowledge of the defect before cutting the cloth and that he did not wear it after learning of the defect.

If the buyer discovers the defect before cutting the cloth, he again has a choice: he may keep it—with no further claim against the seller—or return it and reclaim the purchase price, regardless of whether or not the seller had been aware of the defect.

Finally, if the buyer uncovers a defect that had existed while the cloth was still with the seller, after he has already dyed the cloth in a way that increases its price or performed some other work that enhances its value, he has two options. He may, if he wishes, claim from the seller the value of the defect and keep the cloth, or he may return the cloth, in which case he and the seller share proportionately in the added value created by his labour. This, says Mālik in the Muwaṭṭaʾ, is the intended meaning of his ruling on the matter.

وخاطه ثم ظهر منه على عيب كان عند البائع فإلإن كان البائع كتمه العيب رده ورجع عليه بقيمة الخياطة وأخذ الثمن موفرا ولا شيء عليه مما نقصه الطقع لأن البائع سلطه على ذلك وأذن له فيه إذا دلس له بالعيب وكتمه ذلك هذا إذا قطعه المشتري قطع مثله وكان قطعه فسادا ثم رده بالعيب الذي دلس به البائع رد قيمة ما نقصه القطع وإن كان البائع لم يعلم بالعيب فالمشتري بالخيار بين أن يرده ويرد ما نقصه القطع وقيمة الخياطة داخلة في قيمته وبين أن يمسكه ويأخذ أرش العيب وللبائع أن يحلف المشتري ما علم بالعيب قبل القطع ولا لبسه بعد العلم وإن ظهر المشتري على العيب قبل القطع كان مخيرا بين أن يمسكه ولا شيء له وبين أن يرده ويأخذ الثمن سواء كان البائع علم بالعيب أو لم يعلم ولو وحج المشتري عيبا بالثوب كان عند البائع وهو قد صبغ الثوب صبغا زاد في ثمنه أو عمل فيه عملا يزيد في قيمته كان بالخيار إن شاء أآخذ من البائع قيمة العيب ولبس الثوب وإن شاء رده وكان شريكا للبائع بما زاد فيه عمله وهذا معنى قول مالك في الموطأ