A vow againfl:
reliding in a
city is not
broken by the
vower’s family
continuing
there.
he is forfworn, becaufe fuch afts as are here mentioned are capable of
-continuance, as a man may, with propriety, fay “ I rode a whole
“ day," or “ I wore fuch a robe fo r a d a y contrary to the aft of
entrance; as a man could not fay “ I entered for a day and the pof-
fibility of continuance in fuch acts being thus proved, it follows that
the effeft of the commencement and the continuance is one and the
fame:— but if the fwearer fhould here purely intend the commencement
of the aft, and fay that his defign was to vow that “ he would not
ride again,” (for inftance,) his declaration is to be credited, as his
words admit of that conftruftion.
I f a man make a vow, faying “ I will not refide in this houfe,”
and he fhould himfelf leave the houfe, his family and effefts ftill remaining
in it, although he may have no intention of returning to refide
there, yet he is forfworn, becaufe he is ftill fuppofed to be an inhabitant
of that houfe, from the circumftance of his family and effefts
continuing therein; as merchants, who refide in the Bazars, [that is,
have Jhops there,] fay, notwithftanding, “ they refide in fuch a flr e e tf
meaning the refedence o f their families.
If a man make a vow, faying “ I will not refide in this city,”
and he go forth from it, refolving not to return thither, although his
family fhould ftill continue to refide there, yet he is not forfworn,
and his obfervance of the vow does not depend upon his carrying his
family and effefts out of that city, according to what is recorded from
Aboo Toofcf, becaufe (contrary to the preceding cafe) he is then no
longer confidered as an inhabitant thereof in the cuftomary acceptation
:— and a village is (in the Rawdyet Saheeh') declared to be the fame
as a city, with refpeft to this rule.— Haneefa obferves, upon the preceding
cafe, that the removal", of the whole of the effefts from the
houfe is neceffary, infomuch that i f even a fn g le nail of the vower’s
property be left therein, he is forfworn,— becaufe, as his refidence in
that houfe was underftood from the whole of his effefts being there,
fo
P m
C h a p . V. v o w s .
fo will it ftill be underftood whilft any part of them remains therein.—
Aboo Toofqf alleges that the removal of a principal part o f them is fuf-
ficient, becaufe the removal of the whole is fometimes imprafticable.
Mohammed fays that the removal of fuch quantity only is necefiary,
as might be fufficient for houfekeeping, becaufe any thing beyond
that is not of a rfidentiary nature; and the learned have agreed that
this is the moft laudable diftinftion.— It is here requifite that the
fwearer remove to another houfe, without delay, in order that he may
obferve his v ow ; for i f he ftiould not remove into another houfe, but
into the fr e e t or a mofque, the learned in the law lay that he does
not fulfil his v ow ; the reafon of which is that if a perfon were to remove
out of a city with his family, fo long as he does not fix upon
another place of abode, his firft refidence remains with refpeft to
prayer * ; whence, i f he return to his former abode, he is ftill accounted
an inhabitant; and the fame holds good in the prefeut
cafe.
5 11
C H A P . V.
Of Vows refpefting various A B ion r , fuch as coming, gt
riding, and fo forth.
I f a man fwear that he will not go out of the mofque, and afterwards
defire another to carry him forth from it, and the other do fo,
he is forfworn, becaufe an aft performed by the direftion of any per-
An e'uajton oS
a vow is a.‘violation
o f it.
* That is, he is fuppofed to be included in the public prayers offered up in the mofques
for the welfare of that city and its inhabitants.
1 fo il
I
i A M