I n
IIIf |f|S .
4iftli
1 » fgifl
wards eat the flefh of fifh, he is not forfworn, on a favourable con-
ftru&ion of the law.— Analogy would fuggeft that he is forfworn,
becaufe the meat of filli is termed fiejh, and fo it is denominated in the
Koran: but the reafon for the more favourable conftrufiiou o f the law
is that the meat of fifli is only termed flefh metaphorically, as fiejh is
produced from blood, and there is no blood in fifh , on account of their
inhabiting the-water. If the vower, on thecontrary, were to eat o f the
flefh of a hog or a man, he would be forfworn; becaufe that is actually
fiejh, although the ufe of it be forbidden, and a vow is fometimes made
With refpedt to forbidden things: and in like manner he is forfworn if he
were to eat of the liver or the paunch of any animal, becaufe that is in
reality flefh, as being produced from blood, and is, moreover, ufed in
the fame manner as flefh. Some fay that, in our times, the vower is
not-forfworn by eating of liver or paunch, as thefe articles are not
among us accounted flejh.
If a perfon fwear that “ he will not eat or buy fa t ,” (that isf tallow?)
helsno t forfworn by eating or purchaling fat, unlefsit be the fat
or tallow of the belly.— The two difciples allege that the fwearer would
violate his vow by purchafing-or eating the fat o f the back; bebaufe
the peculiar quality of tallow, which is melting in the fire, exifts in
this fpecies, as well as in that bf the belly.— The argument oiHaneefa'
is that the fat of the back is in reality fiejh, as being produced from
blood-, and it is, moreover, ufed as flefh, and thence the flefh derives
its value and goodnefs.; for which reafon a perfon eating it would violate
his vow, where he had fworn not to eat fiejh , and is not forfworn
by felling the fat of the back, where he had fworn that “ he would
not fell fa t .”— Some allege that this difference fubfifts only where
the vower has fworn concerning fa t, but not where he has fworn
concerning tallow, as that is never ufed in the way offlefh.
if!! If a man make a vow that “ he will neither ea4 nor buy flefh or
“ fat,” and he fhbuld afterwards either eat or purchafe the fat tail of
a fheep, yet he is not forfworn; becaufe this part is altogether diflindt
from
from both flefh and fat, as not being ufed for the fame purpofe as either
o f them.
I f a man fwear that “ he will not eat of this wheat,” he does not
violate his vow, unlefs he chew i t ; and i f he fhould eat bread made
of the wheat, he is not forfworn, according to Haneefa.— T h e two
difciples maintain that by eating the faid bread he is forfworn, fince
by the terms of the vow is alfo underflood wheaten bread, according to
common ufage.— The argument of Hanetfa is that, the eating of
wheat is a thing adually praSifed, as men eat wheat boiled anddrefl-
ed in other modes, and the literal acceptation muff (according to his
tenets) always be preferred to the metaphorical, although that be fanc-
tioned by cuftom.— I f the fwearer fhould chew the wheat, the two
difciples coincide in opinion with our doctors, that he is forfworn;
and this is approved, fince the eating of the wheat comprehends the
chewing of it, in the common form o f Metonymy, as where a man
vows that he will not Jet his foot in the houfe of fuch a perfon, and
afterwards enters that houfe, in which cafe he is forfworn, whether
he rides into the houfe, or goes in on foot.
I f a man make a vow, faying “ I will not eat o f this flour,” and
he fhould afterwards eat bread made thereof, he is forfworn; becaufe
flour is not eaten in its Ample hate, and hence it is conflrued to mean
fuch articles of food as are prepared from it— If, on the contrary, he
were to eat the adual flour, he is not. forfworn; and this is approved ;
becaufe here it is certain that the words were intended in their.metonymical
fenfe, and with that fenfe the eating of flour in its Ample
ftate does not accord.
If a perfon fwear that “ he will not eat bread,” by this is to be
underflood, fuch bread as is commonly eaten in that place; and this
is, in general, either wheaten or barley bread, one or other of which
is almofl univerfally ufed. If, alfo, the fwearer fhould eat walnut or
4 almond