Cafe o f op.
tional pur-
chafe o f a
Have related i
to the pur-
chafer ;
and o f a flave
optionally
purchafed
under a vow
o f emancipation
;
or o f a men-
ftruous fem a le
flave j
or o f a pregnant
wife.
If a perfon make an optional purchafe of a flave related to him.
within the prohibited degrees,, the emancipation, in the opinion of the
two difciples, takes place immediately ; whereas,, according to Ha~
neefa, it does not take place untit after the confirmation of. the con-
tract.— If, alfo, a perfon make a vow to emancipate a flave whenever
he becomes proprietor of one, then, according to the two difciples-,
if he make a conditional purchafe of one, the emancipation takes place
immediately; whereas, according, to Haneefa, it does, not take place
till after the. confirmation. If, alfo, a perfon make an optional purchafe
of a female flave, and her monthly courfes. happen during the
term of option, thefe courfes are included in the prefcribed term o f
abftinence * , according to the two difciples; whereas, according to
Haneefa, they are not included. And if the purchafer, availing him-
felf of his optional condition, fhould return her to the feller, the feller
need not obfer.ve the prefcribed term of abftinence, according to Ha-
neefa r whereas, the two difciples hold that fuch obfervance is incumbent
on. him.— If, on the other hand, a. perfon make an optional:
purchafe of his own wife, and if the, during the interval of option,
bring forth a child,, the is not an jhnrWalid to the purchafer, according
to Haneefa-, whereas, according to the two difciples, Ihe is lb.—
If, alfo, a perfon make an optional purchafe of merchandife, and
having, with the confent of the feller, received pofleflion of it, afterwards
give it in depofit to the feller, and it be loft in the interval, in
this cafe, according to Haneefa, the truft is null and void, as the depofit
was not the property of the purchafer., and therefore he is o f
opinion that the lofs refults to the feller; whereas the two difciples,.
holding the faid depofit to be valid, are of opinion that the lofs refults.
to the purchafer, agreeably to the law of depofits.— If, on the other
* The purchafer of a female flave is required to abftain from carnal connexion with her
until {he fhall have had three different courfes from the period of her becoming his property,,
that it may be afcertained whether flie be pregnant or not. (See E d i t . )
hand‘s
hand, a privileged flave make an optional .purchafe, .and the feller,
during the interval of option, exempt him from the .payment, in this made by a
cafe, according .to Haneefa, the condition of option remains in force.; £ave. ^
becaufe .if be fhould return the merchandife, at follows that he does
not chufe to accept of the property, .and a privileged.flave has the
power of accepting or rejecting as he pfeafes:— but,-.according to the
two difciples, the condition of option is annulled .by the exemption of
payment ; becaufe (in their opinion) the property having veiled,from
the beginning, it follows that if be were to return the-merchandife :to ‘
the feller it would be in efeed a g ifl to him, and a privileged flave has
not the power of making a gift.?—If, moreover, a Z itm ee.purchafe
fpirituous liquors from a Zirmnee, on a condition o f option, and the chafe of w«*
■ f - t . _ _ _ . . . - by a Zimmce>
purchafer, in the interval, become a Mujfuiman, m this cafe, ac- wh0 in the
cording-to the two difciples, the conditiqn.of option remains tno longer b"a“™heem'
in force, becaufe ithe purchafer having (agreeably to their tenets) be- faith.'
icome-proprietor of-the liquor, it follows that if he were permitted to
j-ejed it, ihe-would create in another a-right of property with .refped
to liquors which no Mujfuiman -is allowed to ufe.— According to Htb-
neefa, on the contrary, the fale becomes void, becaufe the purchafer,
(agreeably to -his tenets,) not -being then the proprietor, and the cir-
cumftance of becoming a Mujfuiman putting it out of his power to
become the proprietor by removing the condition, the fale is of. necef-
•fity annulled.
In cafe of a fale on a condition of option, it is lawful, >according
Xo Haneefa and Mohammed, for the party pofteffing the option -to annul
the eontrad within the flipulated period, or to -confirm -it; which
latter he may do without the knowledge of the other party-: -but it is
.not lawful for him to arndlit without the knowfedge -of the other,.—
Jlboo Totfaf alleges that the party pofiefling the 'option may annul the
contrad without the knowledge of the other; and fuch, alfo, is »the
»opinion, of Shafe'i.— The argument of-Hhoo Yoofaf -is - that - the party
poflefiing the option is empowered, on the part of the Other, to annul
• D d d 2 ’ the
The pofleflor
o f option
may annul ihe
fale with the
knowledge of
vthe other
party, or
confirm it
without his
knowledge: