The eating of swine’s flesh is strictly forbidden. The unwholesome effects of that meat in a hot climate would be a sufficient reason for the prohibition; but the pig is held in abhorrence by the Muslim chiefly on[on] account of its extremely filthy habits.[[167]] Most animals prohibited for food by the Mosaic law are alike forbidden to the Muslim. The camel is an exception. The Muslim is “forbidden [to eat] that which dieth of itself, and blood, and swine’s flesh, and that on which the name of any beside God hath been invoked; and that which hath been strangled or killed by a blow, or by a fall, or by the horns [of another beast]; and that which hath been [partly] eaten by a wild beast, except what he shall [himself] kill; and that which hath been sacrificed unto idols.”[[168]] An animal that is killed for the food of man must be slaughtered in a particular manner: the person who is about to perform the operation must say, “In the name of God! God is most great!” and then cut its throat, at the part next the head, taking care to divide the windpipe, gullet, and carotid arteries; unless it be a camel, in which case he should stab the throat at the part next the breast. It is forbidden to utter, in slaughtering an animal, the phrase which is so often made use of on other occasions, “In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful!” because the mention of the most benevolent epithets of the Deity on such an occasion would seem like a mockery of the sufferings which it is about to endure. Some persons in Egypt, but mostly women, when about to kill an animal for food, say, “In the name of God! God is most great! God give thee patience to endure the affliction which He hath allotted thee!”[[169]] If the sentiment which first dictated this prayer were always felt, it would present a beautiful trait in the character of the people who use it. In cases of necessity, when in danger of starving, the Muslim is allowed to eat any food which is unlawful under other circumstances. The mode of slaughter above described is, of course, only required to be practised in the cases of domestic animals. Most kinds of fish are lawful food:[[170]] so also are many birds; the tame kinds of which must be killed in the same manner as cattle; but the wild may be shot. The hare, rabbit, gazelle, etc., are lawful food, and may either be shot, or killed by a dog, provided the name of God was uttered at the time of discharging the arrow, etc., or slipping the dog, and he (the dog) has not eaten any part of the prey. This animal, however, is considered very unclean: the Sháfe’ees hold themselves to be polluted by the touch of its nose, if it be wet; and if any part of their clothes be so touched, they must wash that part with seven waters, and once with clean earth: some others are only careful not to let the animal lick, or defile in a worse manner, their persons or their dress, etc. When game has been struck down by any weapon, but not killed, its throat must be immediately cut: otherwise it is unlawful food.
Gambling and usury are prohibited,[[171]] and all games of chance; and likewise the making of images or pictures of anything that has life.[[172]] The Prophet declared that every representation of this kind would be placed before its author on the day of judgment, and that he would be commanded to put life into it; which not being able to do, he would be cast, for a time, into hell.
The principal civil and criminal laws remain to be stated. Their origin we discover partly in customs of the Pagan Arabs, but mostly in the Jewish Scriptures and traditions.
The civil and criminal laws are chiefly and immediately derived from the Kur-án[[173]]; but, in many important cases, this highest authority affords no precept. In most of these cases the Traditions of the Prophet direct the decisions of the judge.[[174]] There are, however, some important cases, and many of an inferior kind, respecting which both the Kur-án and the Traditions are silent or undecisive. These are determined by the explanations and amplifications derived either from the concordance of the principal early disciples, or from analogy, by the four great Imáms, or founders of the four orthodox sects of El-Islám; generally on the authority of the Imám of that sect to which the ruling power belongs, which sect, in Egypt, and throughout the Turkish Empire, is that of the Hanafees: or, if none of the decisions of the Imám relate to a case in dispute (which not unfrequently happens), judgment is given in accordance with a sentence of some other eminent doctor, founded upon analogy.—In general, only the principal laws, as laid down in the Kur-án and the Traditions, will be here stated.
The laws relating to marriage and the licence of polygamy, the facility of divorce allowed by the Kur-án, and the permission of concubinage, are essentially the natural and necessary consequences of the main principle of the constitution of Muslim society—the restriction of the intercourse between the sexes before marriage. Few men would marry if he who was disappointed in a wife whom he had never seen before were not allowed to take another; and in the case of a man’s doing this, his own happiness, or that of the former wife, or the happiness of both these parties, may require his either retaining this wife or divorcing her. But I hope that my reader will admit a much stronger reason for these laws, regarding them as designed for the Muslims. As the Mosaic code allowed God’s chosen people, for the hardness of their hearts, to put away their wives, and forbade neither polygamy nor concubinage, he who believes that Moses was divinely inspired, to enact the best laws for his people, must hold the permission of these practices to be less injurious to morality than their prohibition, among a people similar to the ancient Jews. Their permission, though certainly productive of injurious effects upon morality and domestic happiness, prevents a profligacy that would be worse than that which prevails to so great a degree in European countries, where parties are united in marriage after an intimate mutual acquaintance. As to the licence of polygamy, which seems to be unfavourable to the accomplishment of the main object for which marriage was instituted, as well as to the exercise and improvement of the nobler powers of the mind, we should remark that it was not introduced, but limited, by the legislator of the Muslims. It is true that he assumed to himself the privilege of having a greater number of wives than he allowed to others; but, in doing so, he may have been actuated by the want of male offspring, rather than impelled by voluptuousness.
The law respecting marriage and concubinage is perfectly explicit as to the number of wives whom a Muslim may have at the same time; but it is not so with regard to the number of concubine-slaves whom he may have. It is written, “Take in marriage, of the women who please you, two, three, or four; but if ye fear that ye cannot act equitably [to so many, take] one; or [take] those whom your right hands have acquired,”[[175]] that is, your slaves. Therefore many of the wealthy Muslims marry two, three, or four wives, and keep besides several concubine-slaves; and many of the most revered characters, even Companions of the Prophet, are recorded to have done the same. The conduct of the latter clearly shows that the number of concubine-slaves whom a man may have is not limited by the law in the opinion of the orthodox.[[176]]
It is held lawful for a Muslim to marry a Christian or a Jewish woman, if induced to do so by excessive love of her, or if he cannot obtain a wife of his own faith; but in this case the offspring must follow the father’s faith,[[177]] and the wife does not inherit when the father dies. A Muslim′eh, however, is not allowed under any circumstances, but when force is employed, to marry a man who is not of her own faith. A man is forbidden, by the Kur-án[[178]] and the Sunneh, to marry his mother, or other ascendant; his daughter, or other descendant; his sister, or half-sister; the sister of his father or mother, or other ascendant; his niece, or any of her descendants; his foster-mother,[[179]] or a woman related to him by milk in any of the degrees which would preclude his marriage with her if she were similarly related to him by consanguinity; the mother of his wife, even if he have not consummated his marriage with this wife; the daughter of his wife if he have consummated his marriage with the latter, and she be still his wife; his father’s wife, and his son’s wife; and to have at the same time two wives who are sisters, or aunt and niece: he is forbidden also to marry his unemancipated slave, or another man’s slave, if he have already a free wife. It is lawful for the Muslim to see the faces of these women whom he is forbidden to marry, but of no others, excepting his own wives and female slaves. The marriage of a man and woman, or of a man and a girl who has arrived at puberty, is lawfully effected by their declaring (which the latter generally does by a “wekeel,” or deputy) their consent to marry each other, in the presence of two witnesses (if witnesses can be procured), and by the payment, or part-payment, of a dowry. But the consent of a girl under the age of puberty is not required; her father, or, if he be dead, her nearest adult male relation, or any person appointed as her guardian by will or by the Kádee, acting for her as he pleases.[[180]] The giving of a dowry is indispensable, and the least sum that is allowed by law is ten “dirhems” (or drachms of silver), which is equal to about five shillings of our money. A man may legally marry a woman without mentioning a dowry; but after the consummation of the marriage she can, in this case, compel him to pay the sum of ten dirhems.[[181]]
A man may divorce his wife twice, and each time take her back without any ceremony, excepting in a case to be mentioned below; but if he divorce her the third time, or put her away by a triple divorce conveyed in one sentence, he cannot receive her again until she has been married and divorced by another husband, who must have consummated his marriage with her.[[182]] When a man divorces his wife (which he does by merely saying, “Thou art divorced,” or “I divorce thee”), he pays her a portion of her dowry (generally one-third), which he had kept back from the first, to be paid on this occasion, or at his death; and she takes away with her the furniture, etc., which she brought at her marriage. He may thus put her away from mere dislike,[[183]] and without assigning any reason; but a woman cannot separate herself from her husband against his will, unless it be for some considerable fault on his part, as cruel treatment, or neglect; and even then, application to the Kádee’s court is generally necessary to compel the man to divorce her; and she forfeits the above-mentioned remnant of the dowry.
The first and second divorce, if made without any mutual agreement for a compensation from the woman, or a pecuniary sacrifice on her part, is termed “talák reg’ee” (a divorce which admits of return); because the husband may take back his wife, without her consent, during the period of her “’eddeh” (which will be presently explained), but not after, unless with her consent, and by a new contract. If he divorce her the first or second time for a compensation, she perhaps requesting, “Divorce me for what thou owest me,” or “—hast of mine” (that is, of the dowry, furniture, etc.), or for an additional sum, he cannot take her again but by her own consent, and by a new contract. This is a “talák báïn” (or separating divorce), and is termed “the lesser separation,” to distinguish it from the third divorce, which is called “the greater separation.” The “’eddeh” is the period during which a divorced woman or a widow must wait before marrying again,—in either case, if pregnant, until delivery; otherwise the former must wait three lunar periods, or three months, and the latter, four months and ten days. A woman who is divorced when in a state of pregnancy, though she may make a new contract of marriage immediately after her delivery, must wait forty days longer before she can complete her marriage by receiving her husband. The man who divorces his wife must maintain her in his own house, or in that of her parents, or elsewhere, during the period of her ’eddeh, but must cease to live with her as her husband from the commencement of that period. A divorced woman who has a son under two years of age may retain him until he has attained that age, and may be compelled to do so by the law of the Sháfe’ees, and by the law of the Málikees, until he has arrived at puberty, but the Hanafee law limits the period during which the boy should remain under her care to seven years: her daughter she should retain until nine years of age, or the period of puberty. If a man divorce his wife before the consummation of marriage, he must pay her half the sum which he has promised to give her as a dowry, or, if he have promised no dowry, he must pay her the half of the smallest dowry allowed by law, which has been above mentioned, and she may marry again immediately.
When a wife refuses to obey the lawful commands of her husband, he may, and generally does, take her, or two witnesses[[184]] against her, to the Kádee’s court, to prefer a complaint against her; and, if the case be proved, a certificate is written declaring the woman “náshizeh,” or rebellious against her husband. This process is termed “writing a woman náshizeh.” It exempts her husband from obligation to lodge, clothe, and maintain her. He is not obliged to divorce her; and, by refusing to do this, he may prevent her marrying another man as long as he lives; but, if she promise to be obedient afterwards, he must take her back, and maintain her, or divorce her. It is more common, however, for a wife whose husband refuses to divorce her, if she have parents or other relations able and willing to support her comfortably, to make a complaint at the Kádee’s court, stating her husband’s conduct to be of such a nature towards her that she will not live with him, and thus cause herself to be registered “náshizeh,” and separated from him. In this case, the husband generally persists, from mere spite, in refusing to divorce her.