I IO
but they may
join hands.
Dung may be
fold; but not
human excrement,
unlefs mixed
with mud.
A B O M I N A T I O N S . B ook X L IV ,
with refpedt to the circumftance adduced by Aboo Yoofaft it muff be
conftrued as having happened prior to the prohibition. T h e learned,
however, have laid that this difagreement between our doftors concerning
the adt of embracing, refpects only a cafe where men are not
properly dreffed, as where, for inftance, they are in drawers only;
but that thofe adts are allowable, in the opinion of all our doctors,
when the parties are clothed with an under and upper garment.— This
is the moft approved doctrine.
T he joining hands by way of falutation is allowable; for the prophet
has faid, “ Whofoever joins his hand to that o f his brother Mus-
“ sulman, andJhakes it, Jhall be forgiven o f his fens."
S E C T . VI.
O f the Rules to be obferved in Sa l e .
T here is no impropriety in the fale of dung; but is is abominable
to fell human excrement. Shcfe'i maintains that the fale o f dung is
likewife abominable, becaufe of its being adtually filthy; in the fame
manner as .excrement, or the undreffed Ikin o f a dead animal.— The
argument of the Haneefites upon this point is, that dung is capable of
yielding profit, as it is commonly ftrewed upon land, in order to
render it more fertile; and as it thus yields a profit, it is therefore a
valuable property, the fale of which is lawful. It is otherwife with
refpecl to excrement, as that is incapable of profit, unlefs it be mixed
with
with mud, when the fale of it becomes lawful *, according to what is'
reported from Mohammed; which is approved.
If a perfon fee another felling a female flave, he a f the fame time Ap-ftn»*.-
knowing her to be the property of fome other perfon, and he be in- P“rchafea,ld
formed by the feller that “ he has beeil empowered by that other to ne«°n «ith
“ difPofe of her,” it is in that cafe lawful, for him to purchafe her, “ faith'
and have carnal connexion with her; becaufe the word of one man oftbeftlle“ '
although he be not upright^, may be received in temporal matters’ r£a£gh«Y
| provided there be no opponent to fhake the credit o f his teftimony.—.
The fame rule alfo holds i f the feller allege,that he had received her in'
donation from the other, or that he had bought her from him; with,
this difference, however, that he is here required to be of an uprio-ht.
and truftworthy chara&er;— and fo likewife i f he be not truftworthy
provided, the purchafer believe that he fpeaks.truth; but i f he diffie—
. lieve him, it is not lawful for him to purchafe the Have.. T h e law is.
the fame, i f the purchafer, not having previoufly known the female -
Have, be informed by the feller, that “ ffie is the property of another
“ who has empowered him to fell her,” - o r that “ he has purchafed'
1 her from fuch a perfon.”— If, on the other hand, knowing her to
have been in the poffeffion o f another, he do not receive any informa-
I ton from the feller, he cannot in that cafe-lawfully purchafe her until
he know by what means the feller has acquired a property In her; for
her- having been in the poffeffion of another is an argument of her
being the property of another. If, on the contrary, he ffiould not
W u l l ^ t0 ,ha; e. been before the 9 H of another, he may then
1 P7 bafe her’ — — the feller bear a bad c h a r t e r ; .
I u e p0 effion, even with an unjuft man, argues property; and fuf-
picion, or probable conjecture, lofe all force in any cafe where a le<ral
argument can be urged. Where it is evident, however, that a. perfon
U p l ! n t . aUfe m mmurt * the l rt!cle fold> T -Arab. Adil) m oppofition to Faftk, the ordure being merely ä
of