."Swearing by
divorce or
emancipation
mull not be
admitted..
Jews muft
fwear by the
Pentateuch,
andGhriftiarts
by the G off el.
direft him, for inftance, to fay “ I fwear by the God than whom
“ there is no other righteous G od, who is acquainted with what is
“ hidden and apparent, that neither by me, nor on my behalf, is the
“ amount due to Omar which he claims, nor any part of it.— The
Kdzee i s . at liberty either to add or diminilh from this oath as he
pleafes:: but he mufl: not fo far extend his caution as to repeat the oath,
becaufe it is not liecefiary to fwear more than once.— I f a perfon
ihould fwear “ by G od, by the merciful, by the mofl merciful, "—
it is eonfidered as three oaths : but if the two laft particles of fwearing
be omitted it is then only oiie.— It is to be obferved that the Kdzee has
-the option either of addingthe corroboration to the oath, or of omit-
ing it, and Amply defiring the defendant to fwear “ by G od. —
Some have fad that it is improper to prefcribe the corroboration to
fuch as are known to be virtuous, but that to all others it is ne'cef-
fary.— Others, again, have faid that the corroboration is necef-
lary in claims to a great amount, but not where the amount is
fmall.
A d e f e n d a n t muft not fwear by divorce or emancipation, (as if
he Ihould fay, “ if the claim preferred againft me be juft, my wife is
divorced,” or “ my flave is emancipated,” ) becaufe of the tradition
before quoted.—Some, however, have faid that, in our times,
if the plaintiff Ihould importunately require it, the Kazee mzy then
adminifter to the defendant an oath by divorce or emancipation; lince
in this age there are many men who feruple not to fwear by the name
of God, but who are, nevetthelefs, averfe from an oath by emancipation
or divorce.
T he Kdzee mufl: adminifter an oath to a Jew, by direfting him to
lay “ I fwear by the G od that revealed the Pentateuch to Mofes',
and to a Chriflinn, by dire&ing him to fay “ I fWear by the G od
“ that fent down the gojpel of Jesus — becaufe the prophet, upon
a certain occafion, adminiftered an oath to a Jew, by faying to him
“ I dejire
“ I dejire you to fwear by the God that hath fen t down the Pentateuch
'•'■ to Moses, that fuch is the law with 'regard to whoredom in your
“ b o o k and alfo, becaufe the Jews believe in the divine miflion of
Moses, and the Chriftians in the divine miflion of J esus C hrist.—
In the adminiftration of oaths to them, therefore, it is neceffary to
corroborate them, by a fpecification of the books which have been received
through their refpedtive prophets.
T he Kdzee muft adminifter an oath to a Majoofee, by directing
him to fay “ I fwear by the G od that ereated fir e ."— This is recorded,
by Mohammed, in the Mabfoot; but it'is related of Haneefa,
in the Nawadir, that he never adminiftered an oath otherwife than in
the name of G od.-—Khafdf, moreover, reports that Haneefa never
gave an oath to any excepting Chriftians and Jews, otherwife than in
the name of G od, becaufe in confounding fire with the name o f G od,
a reverence is Ihewn to it to which it is not entitled: contrary to the
Old or New Tefiament, as thefe are the books o f God, and therefore
entitled to reverence. This dodtrine has been adopted by fevcral o f
our modern doctors.
A n oath cannot be adminiftered to an idolater otherwife than in
the name of G od, becaufe all infidels believe in G od, a.s is evident
from this fentence o f the Koran “ If ye ask o f TijEf^ (the in-
“ fidels) who hath created you, v e r il y Tg.Ey >viee AMWEr,
“ G O D A LM IG H T Y ."
A n oath muft not be adminiftered to infidels in their place
of worlhip, becaufe the Kdzee is prohibited from entering fu.ch a
place.
I t is not neceffary, in adminjftering an oath to Mujfulmsns, to
corroborate >it by means o f .the time or place, (fuch as by the adminiftration
of it oiga Friday, or in the mofquef) becaufe the objeft o f an
oath
Pagans muft
fwear by
G od.
Oaths muft.
not be adminiftered
in an
infidel place
o f worlhip-
The oaths o f
l/lujfulmans
need not be
corroborated
by fwearing