Cafe of a
Have declared
to be the fon
of his mailer
under circuit)
(lances
which render
thi si/nfej/ible;
or the parent;
or grand parent.
If a perfon ftiould fay "of his (lave “ this'is my ion,” where'the
Have could not poflibly be conceived to 'be the fon of the fpeaker*,
yet the {lave (according to Aboo T'oofaf') is emancipated, indépendant
of his mafter’sjntention.— The two difciples maintain that the flave is
not liberated, although fuch be the intention ; and Shqfëi coincides in
this opinion ; for they argue that the expreflion, in the prefent cafe, is
not at all applicable, and muft be regarded as nugatory, in the fame
manner as if a man were to fay to his flave “ I emancipated you before I
was born,” — or, “ before you were born.” — Haneefa argues, in fupportbf
this opinion, that although the expreflion in queftion cannot be taken in
its literal lenfe, yet it maybe taken in its figurative fenfe, (viz. “ this
“ Jlave is fr e e from the hour I f r f l pojfeffed him, ” )— becaufe, fuppofing
the flave were really the fon of the mafter, his filial relation would
occafion freedom, that being the efFeft of it ; and as it is allowable to
inteijd the effect by a figurative mention of that which isitscâufe, fo
the expreflion now under confideration mull be taken in its figurative
fenfe, in order that it be not rendered nugatory ; contrary to the cafe
of a man faying to his flave “ I releafed you before I was born,”— -or,
“ before you were born,”— becaufe here no figurative fenfe can
be applied, as none can be conveyed or implied under fuch a mode of
expreflion, and hence thofe words are to be regarded as nugatory.
If a man fhould fay of his bondfman “ this is my father,” —-or,
of his female Have, “ this is my mother,” where fuch perfon could
not have been begotten Or born of fuch male or female flave -f, there
is, in this cafe, the fame difference of opinion between Hanéëfds doctrine
and that of the two difciples, às is recorded in the'preceding
cafe.— And i f a man fhbuld fay of his flave, being a boy, this is'fny
“ grandfather,” fome lawyers have faid that here alfo the farAedif-
* As if (for infra nee) the flave were older than his mailer.
t As (for inftance) the perfon fo fpeaking were older than the flave of whom he
Ipeaks.
ference
ference of "opinion obtains: but other authorities aflert that-the flave
in this inftance does -not ftand liberated, according to all the doctors,
becaufe this "expreflion is not the occafion of freedom to a Have, but
through the intermediation of the more immediate relative, namely,
the. father, who is not here mentioned, fo that it cannot bear the con-
ftrudtion offreedom by implication: contrary to where a man fays of his
flave, “ this is my fa th e r f—-or, “ my fo n ," becaufe thefe words
occafion freedom to the flave without including any other intermediate
perfon.
I f a man fay of his flave “ this is my brother,” yet the Have'is
not emancipated, according "to the Zdhir Rawapet.-— It is recorded,-as
an opinion o f Aboo Hatteéfa, that ‘ the flave is rendered Tree.'— The
reafons upon Which the Zahir Rawdyet proceeds are-the fame here as
in the preceding Cafe; and theöpiiïion of Hane f a -is founded upon What
has been already mentioned in the cafe of a man faying to-his flave,
“ O iny fo n '."— or, ‘ ‘ this is -my fon.”
I f a perfon fay of his male flave “ th is ism y daughter, ” "ïome
afithoiities fay that the learned differ in opinion Concerning' the dffeft;
in this cafe: Others, however, affert that all the doftorsdgree in opinion,
that the flave is not emancipated, becaufe the-perfon addrefled
is not of the fox mentioned; aiid -asThe èffèflTs-coimeëtëd with the
thing mentioned, afnd that does not èxift, it follows that the-addrefs
muft be regarded as nugatory. T h e arguments ijn-this point have
been already detailed under the head of Marriage.
I f a man fay to his female flave, “ you arc Amply divorced,”— or,
“ completely divorced,-—or, “ veil yourfelf * , ” by any o f thefe
intending manumiffion, yet The is not emancipated.— Shufei af-
ferts that fhe becomes free, where • lbclf has been the fpeaker’ s in-
*■ Set-Book of Divorce, Chap.'ll .• Seek VI.
A man declaring
his
Have to be
his brother is
not manu-
mi/Jion•
Expreflions.
altogether
inapplicable
are nugatory;
and fo alio,
formulas of
divorce applied
to female
flaves.
tentioiu