ifi fif fit
pi :B
; m 31$ 1 1
1 $. A
1 1 1 . i
opinion of Haneefa to agree with that of Mohammed. ' Some, alfo
allege, in reply to this objeftion, that what is here advanced from blip
proceeds upon a fuppofition of the magiftrate having decreed the appropriation
to he abfolute, under which circumftance it pafies out of
the poffeflion of the appropriator according to all our doctors.
— The argument of Aboo Toofaf is that the defign of the appropriator
is to perform an act of piety acceptable to GoDq and this is fully an-
fwered in either cafe; becaufe piety on fome occafions may confift in
the appropriation of an article to a terminable objeft,— and it may. at
other times confift in the appropriation of a thing to an /«terminable
object;— the appropriation, therefore, is equally valid in both in-
ftances. Now dome fay that perpetuity is eflential to it. Aboo Toofaf,
however, does not confider the mention of perpetuity as an eflential,
as the terms appropriation or charity do clearly argue thus much, according
to what was before advanced, that “ Appropriation, like ma-
“ numiflion, dignifies an extindion of a right of property without a
If transfer .of that right.” According to Mohammed, on the other
hand, the mention of perpetuity is an eflential; becaufe appropriation
js a charitable donation of the ufe of a thing, or of adtual product; and
as thofe are fometimes temporary and fometimes perpetual, the general
mention of it cannot be underftood as a perpetuation: it is therefore
indilpenfable that perpetuity be exprefsly mentioned.
tioiTof1;»!- T he appropriation of land is lawful; becaufe feveral of the pro-
snow table, phet’s companions appropriated their lands; but the appropriation of
. able property, moveable property is altogether unlawful, whether purpofely, or as a
dependant. This is the opinion of Haneefa. Aboo Toofaf alleges that
if a perfon appropriate lands, together with the cattle, and (laves attached
to them, it is lawful; and the fame of all inftruments of.huf-
..bandry; becaufe thofe are all dependants of the foil in the'fulfilment
o f the defign; the appropriation of thefe, therefore, as dependants
of the land, is lawful ; for many things are-admiflible dependantly,
which are not fopojitively ; thus the (ale of wine (for inftance) by■ itfe
lf is unlawful, whereas, along with land it is lawful,: and in the
(ame manner the appropriation of the beam of a ho ufe is unlawful;
whereas along with the houfe it is clearly legal. T h e opinion of
Mohammed, alfo, accords with that of Aboo Toofaf in this point,
becaufe as he: holds the appropriation of moveables to be lawful
merely in virtue of.the appropriator’s declaration,, it follows that he
admits the appropriation of them as a dependant to be legal a fortiori.
Mohammed is alfo of opinion that if a perfon appropriate horfes, camels,
or arms, to carry on war againft infidels, it is lawful ;— in which
opinion, (as lawyers report,.) Aboo Toofaf coincides with , him, This
proceeds upon a favourable conftru&ion; for analogy would fugged:
that fuch an appropriation Is unlawful, for the reafons already alleged.
The reafon for a more favourable conftruction, however,, is that the
prophet, once, faid “ K h A e i d has appropriated his h o r s e and' a r m o u r
“ in the. way o f G o d ;— and T e l l i h a has. appropriated his h o r s e in
“ the way o f G o d — According to Mohammed, the appropriation is'
lawful of all moveables,., the appropriation of which is commonly
pradbifed, fuch as fpades,Jhovels, axes, faws, planks, coffins (and their
appendages)y?o«£ or brazen veffels, and books: but according to Aboo
Toofaf it is unlawful; becaufe analogy cannot be abandoned but on
the exprefs authority of the facred writings; and,as borfes and armour
only are there mentioned, the admiflion muft be. reftrjdted accordingly.
Mohammed fays that analogy may be abandoned on account of utility,
(as in arts or manufactures, for inftance;) and utility exifts in the articles
in queftion. It is, moreover, recorded of Najfeer Ibn Tehee
that he appropriated.his books,, as conceiving that to be analogous to
the appropriation of a K o r a n ; (in .other words, as the appropriation
of a K o r a n is lawful, fo alfo is the appropriation of any other book :)
and. this .is approved, becaufe other books as well as K o r a n s are kept
for the purpofe of reading and inftrudtion. Moft' lawyers have pafled
decrees according to the opinion. of Mohammed in this particular. It
is written in the Fatdvee-Kdzee-Khdn that there is a difference'of opir
*. T h a t .is, in " s iag in g-w ar -a g a in fi th e infidels, .. ■
nion