|
7.0 TREATMENT OF WIVES
1. If a man has two free-women wives, it is [obligatory] upon him to be just with them in division [of nights, clothing, food and companionship], whether they were both virgins, or both non-virgins, or one a virgin and the other a non-virgin.
2. They have no right to division in the circumstance of travel. The husband may travel with whomever he wishes of them, but the more appropriate [procedure] is that he draw lots between them, and then travel with whichever [wife] has her lot drawn.
3. If one of the wives consents to forgo her share for her co-wife, it is valid, but she is entitled to revoke that.
8.0 SUCKLING
8.1 Period of Suckling
1. A little and a lot of suckling is the same [as far as regulation]. If it occurs in the period of suckling, [the ruling of] prohibition is attached to it.
2. The period of suckling, according to Abu Hanifah, is thirty months. Abu Yusuf and Muhammad said : two years.
3. Then, when the period of suckling has expired, no prohibition is attached to suckling.
4. In suckling, the testimony of women alone is not accepted. [Suckling] is only established by the testimony of two men, or a man and two women.
8.2 Mixing of the Milk with Other Substances
1. If milk is mixed with water, and the milk is predominant, prohibition is attached to it, but if the water is predominant, prohibition is not attached to it.
2. If [milk] is mixed with food, prohibition is not attached to it, even if the milk is predominant according to Abu Hanifah.
3. If [milk] is mixed with medicine and [the milk] is predominant, prohibition is attached to it.
4. If milk is mixed with the milk of a ewe, and the [human] milk is predominant, prohibition is attached to it, but if the ewe’s milk is predominant, prohibition is not attached to it.
5. If the milk of two women is mixed, prohibition is attached to the preponderant of the two according to Abu Hanifah and Abu Yusuf. Muhammad said : It is attached to them both.
8.3 Source of the Milk
1. If milk is extracted from a woman after her death, and an infant is fed with it, prohibition is attached to it.
2. If milk comes forth from a virgin, and she then suckles an infant with it, prohibition is attached to it.
3. If milk comes forth from a man, and he then suckles an infant with it, prohibition is not attached to it.
4. If two infants drink the milk of a [single] ewe, there is no [relationship of] suckling between them.
8.4 Prohibitions through Suckling
1. Suckling makes prohibited all that kinship makes prohibited, except for
The mother of his foster-sister, and so he may marry her, although he may not marry the mother of his sister by kinship, and
The sister of his foster-son; he may marry her, although he may not marry the sister of his son by kinship.
The wife of his foster-son he may not marry, just as he may not marry the wife of his son by kinship.
The wife of his foster-father he may not marry, just as he may not marry the wife of his father by kinship.
2. A man may marry the sister of his foster-brother, just as he may marry the sister of his [half-]brother by kinship. That is, for example, like a paternal brother, if he has a maternal sister; it is permissible for his paternal brother to marry her.
3. Prohibition is attached to the milk due to a man, which is that the wife suckles a girl, and so then this girl is prohibited to her husband, and to his fathers and sons. The husband from whom the milk is derived becomes a [foster-]father to the suckled girl.
4. [For] any two infants that share a breast, it is not permissible for one of them to marry the other.
5. It is not permissible for a suckled girl to marry any one of the sons of the woman who suckled her, nor her son’s sons.
6. A suckled boy may not marry the sister of the foster-woman’s husband, because she is his foster-aunt.
7. If a man marries an infant girl and an adult woman, and then the woman suckles the infant, they both become prohibited to the husband. If he had not consummated with the woman, then there is no mahr for her, but the infant is entitled to half the mahr. The husband may claim it from the woman is she had deliberately used that for invalidation [of the marriage]. If she had not done it deliberately then there is nothing due upon her.
|