Al-Muqaddimāt al-Mumahhidāt - Ibn Rush al-Jadd - (2/500)

Al-Muqaddimāt al-MumahhidātIbn Rush al-Jadd

If, however, she is a woman who is unconcerned about exposing herself to public disgrace, she receives the prescribed punishment for accusing him, without disagreement. If his character is unknown, she does not receive that punishment, without disagreement, provided that she is concerned about exposing herself to public disgrace.

If she is unconcerned about exposing herself to public disgrace and his character is unknown, two positions may be derived concerning whether she must receive the prescribed punishment for accusing him.

As for the first scenario in the second category—where she makes this allegation against a man known for wickedness but does not come clinging to him—she receives neither the prescribed punishment for accusing the man nor the prescribed punishment for unlawful intercourse, unless she proves to be pregnant. She is not entitled to a dower. The ruler investigates the man’s case, imprisoning him, making inquiries about his conduct, and dealing with him according to what emerges. If nothing emerges concerning his case, he is required to swear an oath. If he refuses, the woman swears instead and becomes entitled to a dower commensurate with that of comparable women.

As for the second scenario in the second category—where she makes this allegation against a man known for wickedness and comes clinging to him and holding him fast, bleeding if she is a virgin—both the prescribed punishment for accusing the man and the prescribed punishment for unlawful intercourse are waived in her case, even if she proves to be pregnant. There are three positions concerning whether she is entitled to a dower:

The first is that she is entitled to it. This is Ashhab’s report from Mālik in the Book of Usurpation: since Mālik awards compensation for the diminution in a slave woman’s value, there is all the more reason for him to award a free woman a dower commensurate with that of comparable women.

The second is that she is not entitled to it. This is ʿĪsā’s report from Ibn al-Qāsim in the Book of Prescribed Punishments, in the discussion of accusations of unlawful intercourse. He said: “Even if he were more wicked than ʿAbd Allāh al-Azraq was in his day.”

The third is Ibn al-Mājishūn’s position in al-Wādiha: she is entitled to a dower if she is a free woman, but to nothing if she is a slave woman.

وأما إن كانت ممن لا تبالي بفضيحة نفسها، فتحد له قولا واحدا. وإن كان مجهول الحال لم تحد له قولا واحدا - إذا كانت ممن تبالي بفضيحة نفسها. وإن كانت ممن لا تبالي بفضيحة نفسها - وهو مجهول الحال فيتخرج إيجاب حد القذف عليها له على قولين. وأما الوجه الأول من القسم الثاني وهو أن تدعي ذلك على من يشار إليه بالفسق ولا تأتي متعلقة به، فهذا الوجه لا يجب عليها فيه حد القذف للرجل ولا حد الزنى لنفسها إلا أن يظهر بها حمل، ولا صداق لها وينظر الإمام في أمره فيسجنه ويستخبر عن أمره ويفعل فيه بما ينكشف له منه، فإن لم ينكشف في أمره شيء استحلف، فإن نكل عن اليمين، حلفت المرأة واستحقت عليه صداق مثلها. وأما الوجه الثاني من القسم الثاني وهو أن تدعي ذلك على من يشار إليه بالفسق، وتأتي متعلقة به متشبثة تدمى إن كانت بكرا، فهذا الوجه يسقط عنها فيه حد القذف للرجل وحد الزنى - وإن ظهر بها حمل، واختلف في وجوب الصداق بها على ثلاثة أقوال: أحدها: أنه يجب لها وهي رواية أشهب عن مالك في كتاب الغصب، لأنه إذا أوجب للأمة ما نقصها فأحرى أن يوجب للحرة صداق مثلها. والثاني: أنه لا يجب لها وهي رواية عيسى عن ابن القاسم في كتاب الحدود في القذف، قال ولو كان أشر من عبد الله الأزرق في زمانه. والثالث: قول ابن الماجشون في الواضحة أنه يجب لها الصداق إن كانت حرة ولا يجب لها شيء إن كانت أمة.