The expref-
fions “ I
<tJ k v e a r , ” “ I
w w , ” or
conftitute an
oath, without
the name of
G o d .
Swearing by
the e x i f t e n 'e
o f G o d makes
an o a th .
tion or confirmation of the promife contained in the fpeech, being the
fame as if he were to fay “ I fhall do this indeed..”
If a man fay “ I fiwear,” or “ I vow,” or “ tefiify,” whether
the words “ by G od” be fuperadded or not, it conftitutes an oath,
becaufe fuch words are commonly ufed in fwearing : the ufe of them
in the prefent tenfe is undifputed; and they are alfo fometimes ufed in
thz. fu tu re tenfe, where the context admits of a conftruftion in the
prefent; and atteftation amounts to an oath, as in that fenfe it occurs
in the facred writings: now fwearing by the name o f G od is both cuf-
tomary and conformable to the divine ordinances, but without the
name of G od it is forbidden; when it fo occurs, therefore, it mull be
conftrued into a lawful oath * :— hence fome fay that intention is
not requifite in i t ; others, however, allege that the intention is ef-
fential, becaufe the words here recited bear the conftru&ion of a prg-
mife,— that is, they admit, o f being received as applying to the fu tu re,
and alfo of being taken as a vow without the name of G od,
If a perfon, fpeaking in the Perfian-language, were to fay “ I
“ fwear by G od,” it amounts to an oath, becaufe here the idiom
confines the expreffion folely to the prefent: but if he wer,e to fay
Amply “ I fwear,” fome allege that this does not conftitute an oath.—
I f he tvere to fay “ Ifw ear by the divorce o f my wife,” this is not an
oath, as an oath is not fo exprefled in practice.
If a man, in fwearing, fay “ by the age,” or “ the exifience” (of G od,)
it conftitutes an oath, becaufe the age or exiftence of GoD.fignifies his
eternity, which is one of his attributes. [Several other forms offwearing
are here recited, but o f no confequence, as their validity or nullity
depends altogether upon certain peculiarities in the Arabic idiom. ]
* That is, the fuperaddition of the expreffion cc by G od,” muft be underftood in it, fo
as tamake it appear an oath made conformably to the divine ordinance, left the fpeaker, by
fwearing in a way that is forbidden, be found guilty of an offence.
I f
I f a perfon ftiould fay “ I f I do this may I be a few ,” or “ a
“ Chrifiian,” or “ an infidel,” it conftitutes an oath ; becaufe, as the
fwearer has made the condition a fign of infidelity, it follows that he
is confcious of his obligation to avoid the condition; and this obligation
is poffible, by his making it an oath, in fuch a way as to render
unlawful to himfelf that which is lawful.— And i f the oath relate to
any thing which he has done in the time pajl,— as if he were to lay
I f I have done fo may I be a J ew ,” or “ an infidel,” and fo forth,
this is a Tarnecn Ghamoos, or perjury. T h e fwearer is not, however,
in this cafe made a Jew or an infidel, becaufe the words “ may I be an
“ infidel,” (and fo forth,) relate to fome future indefinite period.—
Some, on the contrary, have alleged that he becomes actually as an
infidel * , becaufe the penalty which the fwearer imprecates upon himfelf
relates to the prefent inftant o f his teftimony, being the fame as if
he were to fay “ I am a Jew , &c.” — But the fa£t is, the fwearer
does not become a Jew or infidel in either o f the cales before us, (that
is, in that o f a vow. with refpeff to the. fu tu re, or an'oath regarding
th t pajlf) provided he confider this merely as a form o f fwearing j-:
but i f he believe that by thus fwearing he fully fubje&s himfelf to the
penalty exprefled, he fuffers accordingly, in either inftance, becaufe
he appears confenting to infidelity, on account of having ventured
upon a thing by the commilfion of which he conceives that he may be
rendered an infidel j .
If a perfon fay “ I f I do thus, may the anger of G od fall upon
“ me, this does not conftitute a vow, as not being a cuftomary
mode of expreffion for that purpofe. And fo alfo, i f a perfon were to
fay “ may I be an adulterer,” or “ a drunkard,” or “ an ufurer,”
becaufe thefe are not generally underftood or received as forms of
fwearing.
* That is, becomes fubjefted to the penalties of aiSual apoftacy from the faith,
f Where no other penalty than that of expiation can be incurred.
J All thefe cafes fuppofe the thing ftvorn to be falfe.
S f f 2
A vow may
be cor.trafted
by the imprecation
o f a
conditional
penalty.
C H A P .