A man worked for a group in digging a well, and he said: My account is two thousand and five hundred, and they objected and said to him: No, your account is only two thousand.

The questioner : Professor, there is a case of a man who worked for a group in digging a well. After he finished the work, the settlement was made between him and the employers. He said that he was owed two thousand and five hundred pounds by them. They argued and said that, according to their calculation, it was only two thousand pounds, and they were not willing to give him anything other than two thousand pounds. So he took the two thousand. They counted out two thousand pounds for him based on the two thousand pounds and handed it to him. He went and counted the money, and then he realized it was two thousand and five hundred. He was owed two thousand and five hundred by them. A five-hundred-pound note was stuck to the two-thousand-pound note, and it came out to two thousand and five hundred. So he sent them a message informing them that his right, which reached him, was two thousand and five hundred. They disputed with him. Is it permissible for him to take this five hundred, or is he obligated to return it, even though he was not satisfied with the two thousand from the beginning?

Another questioner : I mean, they forced him.

The Shaykh : And who ruled that he was owed two thousand and five hundred?

The questioner : He, according to the terms of the agreement between him and them. The work between them—for example—was such-and-such meters, and the price per meter was such-and-such.

The Shaykh : This is not an answer. Who ruled that it was two thousand for them?

The questioner : They ruled that it was two thousand. They paid him only two thousand. I mean, according to their calculation, they told him: It is two thousand for you.

The Shaykh : This is also an answer to the first question. Who ruled that it was?

The questioner : He.

The Shaykh : He. Do not say "according to the terms." The others also say: "According to the terms." So, who makes this worker certain and assured that he is owed two thousand and five hundred? What you say about this person, others can say about those people. Is that correct or not?

The questioner : Yes.

The Shaykh : Therefore, the issue does not depart at all from the previous discussion. This man has two thousand with the consent of these people. If he proves that he is owed two thousand and five hundred by them, not by his own private judgment, but by the ruling of another group of people—meaning he has no interest with him or with them—then in this case, as long as he informed them of the reality, and even if there is still something in the matter, this informing removes from him the ugliness of embezzlement or theft or something similar. But merely because he sees that he is owed two thousand and five hundred by them, and he exploits this counting error to add the five hundred to his share; this does not make it a right or lawful for him.

The questioner : I mean, if he seizes this money and then seeks arbitration?

The Shaykh : Yes, it is permissible.

Another questioner : I mean, he said to them: I am ready for arbitration. If you accept arbitration, please proceed. If you do not accept arbitration, it means...

The Shaykh : He does not have that right. Ah, if they do not accept arbitration, it means... it is permissible in this case, as long as he informed them and told them.
The questioner : Yes, I do.