Colour (lawn): water, cleansing, injury and usurped goods

Lawn, colour, in lexicon is an appearance such as blackness or redness; in fiqh it is a quality of a thing that must be stated in a sale on description, such as whiteness, redness or blackness ¹. Several rulings depend on colour: water changed by an impurity becomes impure, while water changed by a pure substance is treated differently when the change can or cannot be avoided; the colour of an impurity on cloth must be removed if possible; a change of colour in an injury to a tooth, nail or face carries compensation; and dyeing another's goods or disobeying a colour instruction affects liability ².

The jurists agree that water changed in colour by an impurity such as blood becomes impure. Ibn al-Mundhir reports consensus that little or much water changed in colour, taste or smell by impurity remains impure while so changed, relying on the hadith of Abu Umama that water is not made impure by anything except what changes its smell, taste or colour ³. When water is changed by a pure thing that can be kept apart, such as saffron, dates, flour, soap, milk or honey, the Malikis, Shafi'is and one narration of Ahmad (preferred by Abu Ya'la) forbid ablution with it; a second narration allows it ⁴. The Hanafis allow ablution if the added thing is meant for cleanliness, such as soapy or lye-water ⁴. Where the admixture cannot be kept out, such as moss, salt, alum, sulphur, tar or fallen leaves, purification with it is allowed ⁵. Stagnant water changed by long standing without admixture remains absolute in the view of most scholars ⁵.

A visible impurity with colour, such as blood or a dye that has taken impurity, must be removed from cloth or body. The Malikis, Shafi'is and Hanbalis, the majority, hold that removing the colour is required when easy; if it is hard and burdensome, the place is clean after washing and the lingering colour does not matter, on the hadith of Khawla bint Yasar: washing the blood is enough and its trace does not harm you ⁶. The Hanafis have two views; the stronger one requires the colour to go unless it is burdensome, as the majority hold ⁷. No jurist requires soap, lye or hot water to remove a hard colour or smell; the Shafi'is call it recommended unless the trace can only go that way, when it is required; the Hanbalis call using something like salt good ⁸. For cloth dyed with an impure dye: the Hanafis say three washings clean it; the Malikis say washing suffices even if the colour stays; the Shafi'is have a weight test after washing ⁹.

The Hanafis hold that if a tooth is injured and changes colour to black, red or green, full compensation is due because its use is lost; if it turns yellow, a just assessment is due, though Zufar says full compensation for yellow too; Abu Yusuf says full diya if the yellowing is heavy enough to be a defect ⁹. A nail that regrows black carries a just assessment, according to Abu Yusuf; for hair shaved black that grows white, Abu Yusuf requires a just assessment, but Abu Hanifa nothing, since whiteness is not a defect ¹⁰. The Malikis hold that if a white tooth turns black, five camels are due; if it turns red or yellow in a way that destroys beauty as black does, the same; otherwise the sum is pro rata ⁹. The Shafi'is hold that a tooth that turns yellow or red carries a just assessment; if it turns black, full diya when the use is lost and assessment when it is not ¹¹. The Hanbalis hold that a nail that regrows black carries a fifth of the diya of a finger, on the report of Ibn Abbas; blackening a tooth, nail, nose or ear so that it does not go away carries full diya for its loss of beauty; for the tooth there are two views of Ahmad, the first that full diya is due and the second that it depends on whether its use is lost ¹². A blow that blackens the face and it does not clear carries full diya; if it clears, what was taken is returned; a red or yellow face carries a just assessment ¹³.

When a usurper dyes the goods in his own dye, the Malikis and the Hanafi Abu Yusuf and Muhammad say the owner chooses: he may take the cloth and pay the usurper for the added value of the dye, or leave it with the usurper and claim the value of the cloth undyed on the day of usurpation; if the value fell with the dyeing, he may take it with the loss or its value on the day of usurpation ¹⁴. Abu Hanifa distinguishes black: with black the owner may leave the cloth and claim its undyed value, or take it and make the usurper pay the loss, since black is a loss in his view ¹⁵. If a usurper takes both a dye and a cloth from one owner and dyes the cloth, the owner takes the cloth dyed and the usurper is released from liability for the dye and the cloth, as a juristic preference ¹⁶. The Shafi'is hold that where the dye can be separated without great harm, the usurper must separate it; where it cannot, owner and usurper share the cloth in proportion to the added value and the loss ¹⁷. The Hanbalis hold that the usurper pays any loss caused by his act, but not loss from price changes, and the sale proceeds are divided by the two values ¹⁸. Neither party may be forced to sell or to strip off the dye; if the usurper gives the dye to the owner, the owner must accept it ¹⁹.

The Hanafis hold that when a dyer is given cloth to dye a set colour and dyes it another, the owner chooses: he may claim the value of undyed cloth and hand the cloth to the dyer, or take the cloth and pay the added value of the dye; the dyer gets no wage, since he did not do what was contracted ²⁰. The Malikis hold that when they disagree about the colour ordered, the dyer's word is accepted if the colour he used suits the owner's usual use; otherwise the owner swears and chooses; the Shafi'is have both swear; the Hanbalis accept the dyer's word and give him the wage of the like ²¹.