Читать книгу A Dictionary of Islam - Thomas Patrick Hughes - Страница 26

Table of Contents

EAR-RINGS; NOSE-RINGS. In the East it is the universal custom of Muḥammadan women to wear ear-rings, and they are not unfrequently worn by young men and children. Gold ear-rings are, however, forbidden in the Traditions; for Abū Hurairah relates that the Prophet said, “Whoever wishes to put into the ear or the nose of a friend a ring of hell fire, let him put in the ear or the nose of his friend a gold ring … let your ornament be of silver.” And Asmāʾ bint Yazīd relates the same tradition. (Mishkāt, book xx. c. 11, part 2.)

EAR AND NOSE RINGS.

EARTH, The. Arabic arẓ (ارض‎). Muḥammad taught his followers that just as there are seven heavens [HEAVEN] one above another, so there are seven earths one beneath another, the distance between each of these regions being five hundred years’ journey. (Mishkāt, book xxiv. c. i. part 3.)

In the Qurʾān the earth is said to be stretched out like a carpet or bed (Sūrah ii. 20; xiii. 3; lxxviii. 6), which expression the ancient commentators understood to imply that the earth was a vast plane, but circular; and (Sūrah xxxix. 67) to be but a handful in the sight of God, which in the last day shall be changed into another earth (Sūrah xiv. 49).

The earth is believed by Muḥammadan writers to be surrounded by a great sea called al-Baḥru ʾl-Muḥīt̤, or the circumambient ocean, which is bounded by the mountains of Qāf. The extent of the earth is said to be equal to a journey of five hundred years; two hundred years’ journey being allotted to the sea, two hundred to the uninhabited desert, eighty to the country of Gog and Magog (Yājūj wa Mājūj) and the rest to the civilised world. Certain terræ incognitæ in the midst of the mountains of Qāf are said to be inhabited by the jinn, or genii. According to some, Makkah (or Jerusalem according to others) is situated in the centre of the earth. On the Muḥīt̤ is the ʿArshu ʾl-Iblīs, or “Throne of Satan.” The western portion of the Muḥīt̤ is often called the Baḥru ʾz̤-Z̤ulmāt, or “Sea of Darkness,” and in the south-west corner of the earth is the Fountain of Life of which al-K͟hiẓr drank, and in virtue of which he still lives, and will live till the Day of Judgment. The mountains of Qāf which bound the great sea Muḥīt̤, form a circular barrier round the whole earth, and are said to be of green chrysolite, the colour of which the Prophet said imparts a greenish tint to the sky. The general opinion is that the mountains of Qāf bound our earth, but some say there are countries beyond, each country being a thousand years’ journey.

The seven earths, which are five hundred years’ journey from each other, are situated one beneath the other, and each of these seven regions has its special occupants. The occupants of the first are men, genii, and animals; the second is occupied by the suffocating wind which destroyed the infidel tribe of ʿĀd (Sūrah lxix. 6); the third is filled with the stones of hell, mentioned in the Qurʾān (Sūrah ii. 22; lxvi. 6) as “the fuel of which is men and stones”; the fourth by the sulphur of hell; the fifth by the serpents of hell; the sixth by the scorpions of hell, which are in size and colour like black mules, and have tails like spears; and the seventh by the devil and his angels. Our earth is said to be supported on the shoulders of an angel, who stands upon a rock of ruby, which rock is supported on a huge bull with four thousand eyes, and the same number of ears, noses, mouths, tongues, and feet; between every one of each is a distance of five hundred years’ journey. The name of this bull is Kujūta, who is supported by an enormous fish, the name of which is Bahamūt.

The above is but a brief outline of the Muḥammadan belief as regards the earth’s formation; but the statements of Muḥammadan commentators are so wild on the subject, that it seems quite useless to quote them as authorities, for they contradict each other in endless variety.

EARTHQUAKE, The. Arabic az-Zalzalah (الزلزلة‎). The title of the XCIXth Sūrah of the Qurʾān, in which it is stated that an earthquake will take place at the commencement of the signs of the last day:—

“When the Earth with her quaking shall quake

“And the Earth shall cast forth her burdens,

“And man shall say, What aileth her?

“On that day shall she tell out her tidings,

“Because thy Lord shall have inspired her.

“On that day shall men come forward in throngs to behold their works,

“And whosoever shall have wrought an atom’s weight of good shall behold it,

“And whosoever shall have wrought an atom’s weight of evil shall behold it.”

EATING. According to the Traditions, Muḥammadans have been enjoined by their Prophet to eat in God’s name, to return thanks, to eat with their right hand, and with their shoes off, and to lick the plate when the meal is finished. The following are some of Muḥammad’s precepts on the subject:—

“The Devil has power over that food which is eaten without remembering God.”

“Repeat the name of God. Eat with the right hand and eat from before you.”

“When a man comes into a house at meal-time, and remembers the name of God, the devil says to his followers, ‘There is no place here for you and me to-night, nor is there any supper for us.’”

“When anyone eats he must not wash his fingers until he has first licked them.”

“Whoever eats a dish and licks it afterwards, the dish intercedes with God for him.”

“When victuals are placed before you, eat them with your shoes off, because taking off your shoes will ease your feet.” (ʿAbdu ʾl-Ḥaqq adds, “and do it out of respect to the food.”)

“Whoever eats from a plate and licks it afterwards, the dish says to him, ‘May God free you from hell as you have freed me from the devils licking me.’”

Qatādah says that Anas said: “The Prophet did not eat off a table, as is the manner of proud men, who do it to avoid bending their backs.” (Mishkāt, Arabic ed., Bābu ʾl-At̤ʿimah.)

The following directions are given for eating, by Faqīr Muḥammad Asʿad, the author of the Ak͟hlāq-i-Jalālī (Thompson’s English Translation, p. 294):—

DINING

“First of all, he should wash his hands, mouth, and nose. Before beginning he should say, ‘In the name of God’ (Bismillāh); and after ending he must say, ‘Glory to God’ (Al-ḥamdu lillāh). He is not to be in a hurry to begin, unless he is the master of the feast; he must not dirty his hands, or clothes, or the table-linen; he must not eat with more than three fingers, nor open his mouth wide; not take large mouthfuls, nor swallow them hastily, nor yet keep them too long unswallowed. He must not suck his fingers in the course of eating; but after he has eaten, he may, or rather ought, as there is scripture warrant for it.

“Let him not look from dish to dish, nor smell the food, nor pick and choose it. If there should be one dish better than the rest, let him not be greedy on his own account, but let him offer it to others. He must not spill the grease upon his fingers, or so as to wet his bread and salt. He must not eye his comrades in the midst of his mouthfuls. Let him eat from what is next him, unless of fruit, which it is allowable to eat from every quarter. What he has once put into his mouth (such as bones, &c.), he must not replace upon his bread, nor upon the table-cloth; if a bone has found its way there, let him remove it unseen. Let him beware of revolting gestures, and of letting anything drop from his mouth into the cup. Let him so behave, that, if anyone should wish to eat the relics of his repast, there may be nothing to revolt him.

“Where he is a guest, he must stay his hand sooner than the master of the feast; and whenever the rest discontinue eating, he must act in concert with them, except he be in his own house, or some other where he constitutes part of the family. Where he is himself the host, he must not continue eating when the rest have stayed their hands, so that something may be left for anyone who chances to fancy it.

“If he has occasion to drink in the course of his meal, let him do it softly, that no noise in his throat or mouth may be audible to others. He must not pick his teeth in the view of the company, nor swallow what his tongue may extract from between them; and so of what may be extracted by the tooth-pick, let him throw it aside so as to disgust no one.

“When the time comes for washing his hands, let him be exceedingly careful in cleansing his nails and fingers. Similar must be his particularity in washing his lips, mouth, and nostrils. He must not void his rheum into the basin; even the water in which his mouth has been rinsed, let him cover with his hand as he throws it away.

“Neither must he take the turn from others in washing his hands, saving when he is master of the entertainment, and then he should be the first to wash.”

WASHING THE HANDS.

EATING WITH JEWS OR CHRISTIANS. In Muḥammadan countries, where the people have not been brought in contact with Hindus, with caste prejudices, Muslims never hesitate to eat with Jews and Christians, provided the drink and victuals are such as are lawful in Islām. Since the British occupation of India, the question has often been raised, and few Muḥammadans will eat with Englishmen. Syud Aḥmad K͟hān, C.S.I., has written a book, in which he proves that it is lawful for Muḥammadans to eat with both Christians and Jews, and his arguments would seem to be in accordance with the teaching of the Qurʾān. Sūrah v. 7: “Lawful for you to-day are the good things, and the food of the people of the Book (i.e. Jews and Christians) is lawful for you, and your food is lawful for them.”

Al-Baiẓāwī, commenting on this verse, says: “This verse includes all kinds of food, that which is slain lawfully (ẕabḥ) or not, and this verse is of common application to all the people of the Book, whether Jews or Christians. But on one occasion K͟halīfah ʿAlī did not observe its injunctions with regard to the Banū Tag͟hlib, a Christian tribe, because he said these people were not Christians, for they had not embraced anything of Christianity except wine-drinking. And he does not include amongst the people of the Book, the Majūsīs, although he included the Majūsīs with the people of the Book when he took the poll-tax from them, according to a tradition which Muḥammad gave regarding the Majūsīs, viz. ‘Treat the Majūsīs as you would treat the people of the Book, but do not marry with them, nor eat what they slay.’” (Tafsīru ʾl-Baiẓāwī, p. 216.)

The commentators, al-Kamālān, say the only question raised was that of animals slain by Jews and Christians, and the learned are all agreed that animals slain by them are lawful. (Tafsīru ʾl-Jalālain wa ʾl-Kamālain, p. 93.)

The following Ḥadīs̤ is given in the Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim on the subject: Abū S̤aʿlabah related, “I said, O Prophet of God! Verily we live in a land belonging to the people of the Book (i.e. Jews or Christians); is it lawful for us to eat out of their dishes? The Prophet replied, The order for dishes is this: if you can get other dishes, then eat of them; but if ye cannot, then wash those of the people of the Book and eat from them.”

The Imām Nawawī, the commentator on the Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, says Abū Dāʾud has given this Ḥadīs̤. in a somewhat different form to that in the text. He says: “Abū S̤aʿlabah relates, we were passing through the country of the people of the Book (i.e. Christians), and they were cooking pigs’ flesh in their dishes, and drinking wine from their vessels.” “For” (continues Nawawī), “the learned are all agreed that it is lawful to eat with Jews and Christians unless their vessels are polluted with wine or pork, in which case they must be washed before they are used.” (Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim wa Sharḥu Nawawī, p. 146.)

ECLIPSE. The Arabic k͟husūf (خسوف‎) is used to denote either an eclipse of the sun or of the moon (vide Mishkāt, book iv. c. li.); but it is more specially applied to an eclipse of the moon; and kusūf (كسوف‎) for an eclipse of the sun (vide Richardson’s Dictionary). Special prayers, consisting of two rakʿahs, are enjoined in the Traditions (Mishkāt, book iv. c. li.) at the time of an eclipse of either the sun or moon.

ʿAbdu ʾllāh ibn ʿAbbās says: “There was an eclipse of the sun in the time of the Prophet, and he recited prayers, and the people recited after him; and he stood up for a long time, as long as anyone would be repeating the Chapter of the Cow (i.e. Sūrah ii.). Then he performed a long rukūʿ, after which he raised up his head and stood a long time, which was under the first standing; after which he did the second rukūʿ, which was the same as the first in point of time; then he raised his head up from the second rukūʿ; and performed two prostrations, as is customary. Then he stood up a long time, in the second rakʿah, and this was shorter than the first standing, in the first rakʿah; after which he did a long rukūʿ in the second rakʿah, and this was under the first rukūʿ, in the first rakʿah. After this, he raised up his head, and stood a long time; and this was shorter than the first, in the second rakʿah. Then he did a long rukūʿ; and this was not so great as the first, in the second rakʿah. Then he rose up, and performed two prostrations; and after repeating the creed, and giving the salām, he concluded his prayers. And the sun was bright. And the Prophet said, ‘Verily, the sun and moon are two signs, amongst those which prove the existence of God, and are not eclipsed on account of the life or death of any person; and when ye see this, remember God.’ The Companions said, ‘O Prophet! We saw you about to take something in the place where you stood in prayer, after which we saw you draw back a little.’ And the Prophet said, ‘I saw Paradise, and gathered a bunch of grapes from it; and if I had taken it and given it to you, verily you would have eaten of it as long as the world lasts. I also saw hell, and never saw such a horrid sight till this day; and I saw that they were mostly women there.’ And the Companions said, ‘O Prophet, why are most of the people of hell women?’ He said, ‘On account of their infidelity; not on account of their disobedience to God, but that they are ungrateful to their husbands, and hide the good things done them; and if you do good to one of them perpetually, after that, if they see the least fault in you, they will say, I never saw you perform a good work.’” (Mishkāt, book iv. c. ii.)

EDEN. Arabic ʿAdn (عدن‎), which al-Baiẓāwī says means “a fixed abode.” The Hebrew ‏עֵדֶן‎ is generally understood by Hebrew scholars to mean “pleasure” or “delight.”

The word ʿAdn is not used in the Qurʾān for the residence of our first parents, the term used being al-jannah, “the garden”; although the Muslim Commentators are agreed in calling it the Jannatu ʿAdn, or “Garden of Eden.” The expressions, Jannatu ʿAdn, “the Garden of Eden,” and Jannātu ʿAdn, “the Gardens of Eden,” occur ten times in the Qurʾān, but in each case they are used for the fourth heaven, or stage, of celestial bliss. [PARADISE.]

According to the Qurʾān, it seems clear that Jannatu ʿAdn is considered to be a place in heaven, and not a terrestrial paradise, and hence a difficulty arises as to the locality of that Eden from which Adam fell. Is it the same place as the fourth abode of celestial bliss? or, was it a garden situated in some part of earth? Al-Baiẓāwī says that some people have thought this Eden was situated in the country of the Philistines, or between Fāris and Kirmān. But, he adds, the Garden of Eden is the Dāru ʾs̤-S̤awāb, or “the House of Recompense,” which is a stage in the paradise of the heavens; and that when Adam and Eve were cast out of Paradise, Adam fell on the isle of Ceylon, or Sarandīb, and Eve near Jiddah in Arabia; and after a separation of 200 years, Adam was, on his repentance, conducted by the Angel Gabriel to a mountain near Makkah, where he knew his wife Eve, the mountain being thence named ʿArafah (i.e. “the place of recognition”); and that he afterwards retired with her to Ceylon, where they continued to propagate their species.

Muḥammad T̤āhir (Majmaʿu ʾl-Biḥār, p. 225), in remarking upon the fact that in the Traditions the rivers Jaihūn and Jaihān are said to be rivers in “the garden” (al-Jannah), says the terms are figurative, and mean that the faith extended to those regions and made them rivers of paradise. And in another place (idem, p. 164) the same author says the four rivers Saiḥān (Jaxartes), Jaihān (Jihon), Furāt (Euphrates), and Nil (Nile), are the rivers of Paradise, and that the rivers Saiḥān and Jaihān are not the same as Jaihūn and Jaihān, but that these four rivers already mentioned originally came from Paradise to this earth of ours.

EDUCATION. Education without religion is to the Muḥammadan mind an anomaly. In all books of Traditions there are sections specially devoted to the consideration of knowledge, but only so far as it relates to a knowledge of God, and of “God’s Book.” (See Ṣaḥīḥu ʾl-Buk͟hārī, Bābu ʾl-ʿIlm.) The people who read the “Book of God” are, according to the sayings of the Prophet, described as “assembling together in mosques, with light and comfort descending upon them, the grace of God covering them, and the angels of God encompassing them round about.” The chief aim and object of education in Islām is, therefore, to obtain a knowledge of the religion of Muḥammad, and anything beyond this is considered superfluous, and even dangerous. Amongst Muḥammadan religious leaders there have always been two classes—those who affect the ascetic and strictly religious life of mortification, such as the Ṣūfī mystics and the Faqīrs [FAQIR]; and those who, by a careful study of the Qurʾān, the Traditions, and the numerous works on divinity, have attained to a high reputation for scholarship, and are known in Turkey as the ʿUlamāʾ, or “learned,” and in India, as Maulawīs.

Amongst Muḥammadans generally, a knowledge of science and various branches of secular learning is considered dangerous to the faith, and it is discouraged by the religious, although some assert that Muḥammad has encouraged learning of all kinds in the Qurʾān, by the following verse, Sūrah ii. 272:—

“He giveth wisdom to whom He will, and He to whom wisdom is given hath had much good given him.”

Mr. Lane, in his Modern Egyptians, says: “The parents seldom devote much of their time or attention to the intellectual education of their children; generally contenting themselves with instilling into their young minds a few principles of religion, and then submitting them, if they can afford to do so, to the instruction of a school. As early as possible, the child is taught to say, ‘I testify that there is no deity but God, and I testify that Muḥammad is God’s Apostle.’ He receives also lessons of religious pride, and learns to hate the Christians, and all other sects but his own, as thoroughly as does the Muslim in advanced age.”

In connection with all mosques of importance, in all parts of Islām whether in Turkey, Egypt, Persia, or India, there are small schools, either for the education of children, or for the training of students of divinity. The child who attends these seminaries is first taught his alphabet, which he learns from a small board, on which the letters are written by the teacher. He then becomes acquainted with the numerical value of each letter. [ABJAD.] After this he learns to write down the ninety-nine names of God, and other simple words taken from the Qurʾān. [GOD.] When he has mastered the spelling of words, he proceeds to learn the first chapter of the Qurʾān, then the last chapter, and gradually reads through the whole Qurʾān in Arabic, which he usually does without understanding a word of it. Having finished the Qurʾān, which is considered an incumbent religious duty, the pupil is instructed in the elements of grammar, and perhaps a few simple rules of arithmetic. To this is added a knowledge of one Hindustanī, or Persian book. The ability to read a single Persian book like the Gulistān or Bostān, is considered in Central Asia to be the sign of a liberal education. The ordinary schoolmaster is generally a man of little learning, the learned Maulawī usually devoting himself to the study of divinity, and not to the education of the young.

Amongst students of divinity, who are called t̤alabatu (sing. t̤ālib) ʾl-ʿilm, or “seekers after knowledge,” the usual course of study is as follows: aṣ-ṣarf, grammatical inflection; an-naḥw, syntax; al-mant̤iq, logic; al-ḥisāb, arithmetic; al-jabr wa ʾl-muqābalah, algebra; al-maʿna wa ʾl-bayān, rhetoric and versification; al-fiqh, jurisprudence; al-ʿaqāʾid, scholastic theology; at-tafsīr, commentaries on the Qurʾān; ʿilmu ʾl-uṣūl, treatises on exegesis, and the principles and rules of interpretation of the laws of Islām; al-aḥādīs̤, the traditions and commentaries thereon. These are usually regarded as different branches of learning, and it is not often that a Maulawī, or ʿĀlim, attains to the knowledge of each section. For example, a scholar will be celebrated as being well educated in al-aḥādīs̤, but he may be weak in al-fiqh. The teacher, when instructing his pupils, seats himself on the ground with his hearers all seated round him in a ring. Instruction in mosques is usually given in the early morning, after the morning prayer, and continues some three or four hours. It is again renewed for a short time after the mid-day prayer.

Students in mosques are generally supported by the people of the parish, (each mosque having its section or parish), who can be called upon for food for all the inmates of a mosque every morning and evening. Not unfrequently mosques are endowed with land, or rents of shops and houses, for the payment of professors. Mr. Lane speaks of a mosque in Cairo, which had an endowment for the support of three hundred blind students. The great mosque al-Azhar, in Cairo, is the largest and most influential seat of learning in Islām. In 1875, when the present writer visited it, it had as many as 5,000 students gathered from all parts of the Muḥammadan world.

In India almost every mosque of importance has its class of students of divinity, but they are not established for the purposes of general education, but for the training of students of divinity who will in time become the Imāms of mosques. Some of the Maulawīs are men held in great reputation as Arabic scholars, but they are, as a rule, very deficient in general knowledge and information. Whether we look to India, or Persia, or Egypt, or Turkey, the attitude of Muḥammadanism is undoubtedly one in direct antagonism to the spread of secular education.

A MUSLIM SCHOOL.

Much has been made by some writers of the liberal patronage extended to literature and science by ʿAbdu ʾr-Raḥmān and his successors as K͟halīfahs of Cordova in the Middle Ages. But there was nothing original, or Islāmic, in the literature thus patronised, for, as Professor Uerberweg remarks in his History of Philosophy, “the whole philosophy of the Arabians was a form of Aristotelianism, tempered more or less with Neo-Platonic conceptions.” The philosophical works of the Greeks and their works of medical and physical science, were translated from Greek into Arabic by Syrian Christians, and not by Arabian Muslims. Muḥammadans cannot be altogether credited with these literary undertakings.

Al-Maqqarī, in his History of the Dynasties of Spain, has an interesting notice of education in that country, in which he writes:—

“Respecting the state of science among the Andalusians (Spaniards), we must own in justice that the people of that country were the most ardent lovers of knowledge, as well as those who best knew how to appreciate and distinguish a learned man and an ignorant one; indeed, science was so much esteemed by them, that whoever had not been endowed by God with the necessary qualifications to acquire it, did everything in his power to distinguish himself, and conceal from the people his want of instruction; for an ignorant man was at all times looked upon as an object of the greatest contempt, while the learned man, on the contrary, was not only respected by all, nobles and plebeians, but was trusted and consulted on every occasion; his name was in every mouth, his power and influence had no limits, and he was preferred and distinguished in all the occasions of life.

“Owing to this, rich men in Cordova, however illiterate they might be, encouraged letters, rewarded with the greatest munificence writers and poets, and spared neither trouble nor expense in forming large collections of books; so that, independently of the famous library founded by the K͟halīfah al-Ḥākim, and which is said by writers worthy of credit to have contained no less than four hundred thousand volumes, there were in the capital many other libraries in the hands of wealthy individuals, where the studious could dive into the fathomless sea of knowledge, and bring up its inestimable pearls. Cordova was indeed, in the opinion of every author, the city in Andalus where most books were to be found, and its inhabitants were renowned for their passion for forming libraries. To such an extent did this rage for collection increase, says Ibn Saʿīd, that any man in power, or holding a situation under Government, considered himself obliged to have a library of his own, and would spare no trouble or expense in collecting books, merely in order that people might say,—Such a one has a very fine library, or, he possesses a unique copy of such a book, or, he has a copy of such a work in the hand-writing of such a one.”

EGGS. According to the Imām Abū Ḥanīfah, if a person purchase eggs and after opening them discover them to be of bad quality and unfit for use, he is entitled to a complete restitution of the price from the seller. (Hidāyah, vol. ii. p. 415.)

EGYPT. Arabic Miṣr (مصر‎). The land of Egypt is mentioned several times in the Qurʾān in connection with the history of Joseph and Moses. In the year A.H. 7 (A.D. 628), Muḥammad sent an embassy to al-Muqauqis, the Roman Governor of Egypt, who received the embassy kindly and presented the Prophet with two female Coptic slaves.

ELEMENTS. Arabic al-ʿAnāṣiru ʾl-arbaʿah (العناصر الاربعة‎). “The four elements” of fire (nār), air (hawā), water (māʾ), and earth (arẓ), from which all creation mineral, animal, and vegetable is produced.

The respective properties of these elements are said to be as follows: Fire, hot and dry; air, hot and cold; water, cold and wet; earth, cold and dry. A knowledge of the properties of the four elements is required in the so-called science of Daʿwah. [DAʿWAH.]

ELEPHANT, The year of. Arabic ʿĀmu ʾl-Fīl (عام الفيل‎). The year in which Muḥammad was born. Being the year in which Abrahatu ʾl-Ashram, an Abyssinian Christian and Viceroy of the King of Ṣanʿāʾ in Yaman marched with a large army and a number of elephants upon Makkah, with the intention of destroying the Kaʿbah. He was defeated and his army destroyed in so sudden a manner, as to give rise to the legend embodied in the CVth Sūrah of the Qurʾān, which is known as the Chapter of the Elephant.

Professor Palmer says it is conjectured that small-pox broke out amongst the army. [ASHABU ʾL-FIL.]

ELIJAH. Arabic Ilyās (الياس‎), Ilyāsīn (الياسين‎); Heb. ‏אֵלִיָּהוּ‎; New Testament, Ἠλίας. A prophet mentioned in the following verses in the Qurʾān:—

Sūrah xxxvii. 123: “Verily Ilyās (Elias) was of the Apostles; and when he said to his people, ‘Will ye not fear, Do ye call upon Baʿl and leave the best of Creators, God your Lord, and the Lord of your fathers in the old time?’ But they called him a liar; verily, they shall surely be arraigned, save God’s sincere servants. And we left him amongst posterity. Peace upon Ilyāsīn (Elias) verily, thus do we reward those who do well; verily he was of our servants who believe.”

Sūrah vi. 85: “And Zachariah and John, and Jesus, and Ilyās, all righteous ones.”

Al-Baiẓāwī says, “It has been said that this Ilyās, is the same as Idrīs, prefather of Noah, whilst others say he was the son of Yāsīn and descended from Aaron, the brother of Moses.” [IDRIS.]

ELISHA. Arabic al-Yasaʿ (اليسع‎). Heb. ‏אֱלִישָׁע‎. Elisha is mentioned twice in the Qurʾān, under the name al-Yasaʿ.

Sūrah xxxviii. 48: “And remember Ishmael and Elisha, and Ẕū ʾl-kifl, for each was righteous.”

Sūrah vi. 85, 86: “And Zachariah, and John, and Jesus, and Elias, all righteousness; and Ishmael and Elisha and Jonah and Lot, each have We preferred above the worlds.”

The Commentators give no account of him except that he was the son of Uk͟htūb, although the Bible says he was the son of Shaphat. Ḥusain says he was Ibnu ʾl-ʿajūz (the son of the old woman).

ELOQUENCE. The Arabic word al-Bayān (البيان‎), which is defined in the G͟hiyās̤u ʾl-Lug͟hah as speaking fluently and eloquently, occurs once in the Qurʾān, Sūrah lv. 3: “He created man: he hath taught him distinct speech.” The word also occurs in the Traditions, and it is remarkable that although the Qurʾān is written in rhythm, and in a grandiloquent style, that in the Traditions the Prophet seems to affect to despise eloquence, as will be seen from the following Aḥādīs̤:—Ibn ʿUmar says the Prophet said, “May they go to hell who amplify their words.” Abū Umāmah relates that the Prophet said, “Eloquence (al-bayān) is a kind of magic.” Ibn Masʿūd relates that the Prophet said, “Vain talking and embellishing (bayān) are two branches of hypocrisy.” ʿAmr ibn al-ʿĀṣī relates that the Prophet said, “I have been ordered to speak little, and verily it is best to speak little.” (Mishkāt, book xxii. c. ix.)

EMANCIPATION OF SLAVES. Arabic Iʿtāq (اعتاق‎). The emancipation of slaves is recommended by the Prophet, but the recommendation applies exclusively to slaves who are of the Muslim faith. He is related to have said: “Whoever frees a Muslim slave God will redeem that person from hell-fire member for member.” (Mishkāt, book xiii. c. xix.) It is therefore laudable in a man to release his slave or for a woman to free her bond-woman, in order that they may secure freedom in the next world. (Hidāyah, vol. i. p. 420.)

ENFRANCHISEMENT. In an orthodox Muḥammadan state, only those persons who have embraced the Muslim faith are enfranchised; all others are called upon to pay a poll tax (jizyah), for which they obtain security (amān). Those residents in a Muslim country who are not Muḥammadans are expected to wear a distinctive dress and to reside in a special part of the village or town in which they live. Slaves who may embrace the Muslim faith do not become ipso facto enfranchised, unless their master be an unbeliever, in which case their becoming Muslims secures their emancipation. Ẕimmīs, or persons not Muslims in a Muslim state, cannot give evidence against a Muslim. (See Durru ʾl-Muk͟htār, in loco.)

ENOCH. [IDRIS.]

ENTERING INTO HOUSES. To enter suddenly or abruptly into any person’s home or apartment, is reckoned a great incivility in all eastern countries. With Muḥammadans it is a religious duty to give notice before you enter a house. The custom is founded upon an express injunction in the Qurʾān, Sūrah xxiv. 57–61:—

“O ye who believe! let your slaves and those of you who have not come of age, ask leave of you, three times a day, ere they come into your presence;—before the morning prayer, and when ye lay aside your garments at mid-day, and after the evening prayer. These are your three times of privacy. No blame shall attach to you or to them, if after these times, when ye go your rounds of attendance on one another, they come in without permission. Thus doth God make clear to you His signs: and God is Knowing, Wise!

“And when your children come of age, let them ask leave to come into your presence, as they who were before them asked it. Thus doth God make clear to you his signs: and God is Knowing, Wise.

“As to women who are past childbearing, and have no hope of marriage, no blame shall attach to them if they lay aside their outer garments, but so as not to shew their ornaments. Yet if they abstain from this, it will be better for them: and God Heareth, Knoweth.

“No crime shall it be in the blind, or in the lame, or in the sick, to eat at your tables: or in yourselves, if ye eat in your own houses, or in the houses of your fathers, or of your mothers, or of your brothers, or of your sisters, or of your uncles on the father’s side, or of your aunts on the father’s side, or of your uncles on the mother’s side, or of your aunts on the mother’s side, or in those of which ye possess the keys, or in the house of your friend. No blame shall attach to you whether ye eat together or apart.

“And when ye enter houses, salute one another with a good and blessed greeting as from God. Thus doth God make clear to you His signs, that haply ye may comprehend them.”

The following are the traditions given in the Mishkāt on the subject (book xxii. c. ii.): Muḥammad is related to have said, “Do not permit anyone to enter your home unless he gives a salam first.” ʿAbdu ʾllāh ibn Masʿūd says the Prophet said, “The signal for your permission to enter is that you lift up the curtain and enter until I prevent you.” ʿAbdu ʾllāh ibn Busr says, “Whenever the Prophet came to the door of a house, he would not stand in front of it, but on the side of the door, and say, ‘The peace of God be with you.’” ʿAt̤āʾ ibn Yasār says the Prophet told him to ask leave to enter even the room of his mother.

ENVY. Arabic Ḥasad (حسد‎). The word occurs twice in the Qurʾān.

Sūrah ii. 103: “Many of those who have the Book would fain turn you again into unbelievers, even after ye have once believed, and that through envy.”

Sūrah cxiii.: “I seek refuge … from the evil of the envious when he envies.”

EPHESUS, The Seven Sleepers of. [ASHABU ʾL-KAHF.]

ESOP. The Luqmān of the Qurʾān is generally supposed by European writers to be Esop. Sale is of opinion that Maximus Planudes borrowed the greater part of his life of Esop from the traditions he met with in the East concerning Luqmān. [LUQMAN.]

ETERNITY OF PUNISHMENT. The Muḥammadan religion teaches that all Muslims (i.e. those who have embraced the religion of their Prophet) will be ultimately saved, although they will suffer for their actual sins in a purgatorial hell. But those who have not embraced Islām will suffer a never-ending torment in “the fire” (an-nār).

Sūrah ii. 37: “Those who misbelieve and call our signs lies, they are the fellows of hell, they shall dwell therein for ever” (k͟hālidūn).

Sūrah xi. 108, 109: “And as for those who are wretched—why in the fire shall they groan and sob! to dwell therein for ever (k͟hālidūn) as long as the heavens and the earth endure.”

Al-Baiẓāwī says the expression “as long as the heavens and the earth endure,” is an Arabic idiom expressing that which is eternal.

Ibn ʿArabī (died A.D. 638), in his book Fuṣūṣu ʾl-Ḥikam, says the word k͟hālid in the verses quoted above does not imply eternal duration, but a period, or age, of long duration. Al-Baiẓāwī, the commentator, also admits that the literal meaning of the word only expresses a period of extended duration; but the Jalālān and Ḥusain both contend that its meaning is that of abadī, or “never ending,” in which no being will be annihilated, and which no one can ever escape.

It is also to be observed that this word k͟hālid is that used for the eternity of bliss of those in Paradise:—

Sūrah xi. 110: “As for those who are glad—why in Paradise! to dwell therein for ever” (k͟hālidūn).

EUCHARIST, or LORD’S SUPPER. It is a singular omission in the Qurʾān, that there is no direct allusion to this Christian institution.

Both Sale and Rodwell think that there is a reference to it in the following passages in the Qurʾān, Sūrah v. 112–114:—

“Remember when the Apostles said:—O Jesus, Son of Mary, is thy Lord able to send down a table (māʾidah, ‘a table,’ especially one covered with victuals) to us out of heaven? He said, Fear God if ye be believers. They said:—We desire to eat therefrom, and to have our hearts assured; and to know that thou hast indeed spoken truth to us, and we be witnesses thereof. Jesus, Son of Mary, said:—‘O God, our Lord! send down a table to us out of heaven, that it may become a recurring festival to us, to the first of us, and to the last of us, and a sign from Thee; and do Thou nourish us, for Thou art the best of nourishers.’”

Muslim commentators are not agreed as to the meaning of these verses, but none of them suggest the institution of the Lord’s Supper as an explanation. The interpretations are as confused as the revelation.

According to the Imām al-Bag͟hawī, ʿAmmār ibn Yāsir said that the Prophet said it was flesh and bread which was sent down from heaven; but because the Christians to whom it was sent were unfaithful, it was taken away, and they became pigs and monkeys!

Ibn ʿAbbās says that after a thirty days’ fast, a table was sent down with seven loaves and seven fishes, and the whole company of disciples ate and were filled (St. Matt. xv. 34). The commentators al-Jalālān also give these two explanations, and the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper is never once suggested by any Muslim doctor in explanation of the above verses.

EUNUCH. Arabic k͟haṣī (خصى‎). Although in all parts of the East it is usual for wealthy Muḥammadans to keep an establishment of eunuchs to guard the female members of the household, it has been strictly forbidden by Muḥammad for any of his followers to make themselves such, or to make others. ʿUs̤mān ibn Maz̤ʿūn came to him and said, “O Prophet! permit me to become a eunuch.” But Muḥammad said, “He is not of my people who makes another a eunuch or becomes so himself. The manner in which my people become eunuchs is to exercise fasting.” (Mishkāt, book iv. c. viii.)

EVE. Arabic Ḥawwāʾ (حـــواء‎). [ADAM.]

EVIDENCE. Arabic Shahādah (شهادة‎). The law of evidence is very clearly laid down in all Muḥammadan books of law, especially in the Hidāyah, and the Durru ʾl-Muk͟htār, and it is interesting to observe the difference between the law of evidence as provided for in the law of Moses, and that laid down in Muḥammadan books. In the Pentateuch two witnesses at least were required to establish any charge (Num. xxxv. 30), and the witness who withheld the truth was censured (Lev. v. 1), whilst slanderous reports and officious witnesses were discouraged (Ex. xxiii. 1; Lev. xix. 16), and false witnesses were punished with the punishment due to the offence they sought to establish (Deut. xix. 16). According to Josephus, women and slaves were not admitted to give evidence. (Ant. iv. c. 8, s. 15.)

The Sunnī law, as explained by the author of the Hidāyah (vol. iii. p. 664), is in many respects the same as the Jewish and is as follows:—

It is the duty of witnesses to bear testimony, and it is not lawful for them to conceal it, when the party concerned demands it from them. Because it is written in the Qurʾān, Sūrah ii. 282, “Let not witnesses withhold their evidence when it is demanded of them.” And again, “Conceal not your testimony, for whoever conceals his testimony is an offender.”

The requisition of the party is a condition, because the delivery of evidence is the right of the party requiring it, and therefore rests upon his requisition of it, as is the case with respect to all other rights.

In cases inducing corporal punishment, witnesses are at liberty either to give or withhold their testimony as they please; because in such case they are distracted between two laudable actions; namely, the establishment of the punishment, and the preservation of the criminal’s character. The concealment of vice is, moreover, preferable; because the prophet said to a person that had borne testimony, “Verily, it would have been better for you, if you had concealed it”; and also because he elsewhere said, “Whoever conceals the vices of his brother Muslim, shall have a veil drawn over his own crimes in both worlds by God.” Besides, it has been inculcated both by the Prophet and his Companions as commendable to assist in the prevention of corporal punishment; and this is an evident argument for the concealment of such evidence as tends to establish it. It is incumbent, however, in the case of theft, to bear evidence to the property, by testifying that “a certain person took such property,” in order to preserve the right of the proprietor; but the word taken must be used instead of stolen, to the end that the crime may be kept concealed; besides, if the word stolen were used, the thief would be rendered liable to amputation; and as, where amputation is incurred, there is no responsibility for the property, the proprietor’s right would be destroyed.

The evidence required in a case of whoredom is that of four men, as has been ruled in the Qurʾān (Sūrah xxiv. 3); and the testimony of a woman in such a case is not admitted; because, az-Zuhrī says, “in the time of the Prophet and his two immediate successors, it was an invariable rule to exclude the evidence of women in all cases inducing punishment or retaliation,” and also because the testimony of women involves a degree of doubt, as it is merely a substitute for evidence, being accepted only where the testimony of men cannot be had; and therefore it is not admitted in any matter liable to drop from the existence of a doubt.

The evidence required in other criminal cases is that of two men, according to the text of the Qurʾān; and the testimony of women is not admitted, on the strength of the tradition of az-Zuhrī above quoted. In all other cases the evidence required is that of two men, or of one man and two women, whether the case relate to property or to other rights, such as marriage, divorce, agency, executorship, or the like. Ash-Shāfiʿī has said that the evidence of one man and two women cannot be admitted, excepting in cases that relate to property, or its dependencies, such as hire, bail, and so forth; because the evidence of women is originally inadmissible on account of their defect of understanding, their want of memory and incapacity of governing, whence it is that their evidence is not admitted in criminal cases.

The evidence of one woman is admitted in cases of birth (as where one woman, for instance, declares that a certain woman brought forth a certain child). In the same manner also, the evidence of one woman is sufficient with respect to virginity, or with respect to the defects of that part of a woman which is concealed from man. The principle of the law in these cases is derived from a traditional saying of the Prophet: “The evidence of women is valid with respect to such things as it is not fitting for man to behold.” Ash-Shāfiʿī holds the evidence of four women to be a necessary condition in such cases.

The evidence of a woman with respect to istihlāl (the noise made by a child at its birth), is not admissible, in the opinion of Abū Ḥanīfah, so far as relates to the establishment of the right of heritage in the child; because this noise is of a nature to be known or discovered by men; but is admissible so far as relates to the necessity of reading funeral prayers over the child; because these prayers are merely a matter of religion: in consequence of her evidence, therefore, the funeral prayers are to be repeated over it. The two disciples, Muḥammad and Abū Yūsuf, maintain that the evidence of a woman is sufficient to establish the right of heritage also; because the noise in question being made at the birth, none but women can be supposed to be present when it is made. The evidence of a woman, therefore, to this noise, is the same as her evidence to a living birth; and as the evidence of women in the one case is admissible, so also is it in the other.

In all rights, whether of property or otherwise, the probity of the witness, and the use of the word ashhadu, “I bear witness,” is absolutely requisite, even in the case of the evidence of women with respect to birth and the like. If, therefore, a witness should say, “I know,” or “I know with certainty,” without making use of the word ashhadu, in that case his evidence cannot be admitted. With respect to the probity of the witness, it is indispensable, because it is written in the Qurʾān, Sūrah lxv. 2, “Take the evidence of two just men”; and also because the probity of the witnesses induces a probability of the truth.

If the defendant throw a reproach on the witnesses, it is in that case incumbent on the Qāẓī to institute an enquiry into their character; because, in the same manner as it is probable that a Muslim abstains from falsehood as being a thing prohibited in the religion he professes, so also is it probable that one Muslim will not unjustly reproach another.

It is not lawful for a person to give evidence to such things as he has not actually seen, excepting in the cases of birth, death, marriage, and cohabitation.

But if a person, in any of the above cases, gives evidence from creditable hearsay, it is requisite that he give it in an absolute manner, by saying, for instance, “I bear testimony that A. is the son of B.,” and not, “I bear testimony so and so, because I have heard it,” for in that case the Qāẓī cannot accept it.

The testimony of any person who is property—that is to say, a slave, male or female—is not admissible; because testimony is of an authoritative nature; and as a slave has no authority over his own person, it follows that he can have no authority over others, a fortiori.

The testimony of a person that has been punished for slander is inadmissible, because it is said in the Qurʾān, Sūrah xxiv. 4, “But as to those who accuse married persons of whoredom, and produce not four witnesses of the fact, scourge them with four-score stripes, and receive not their testimony for ever; for such are infamous prevaricators,—excepting those who shall afterwards repent.”

If an infidel who has suffered punishment for slander should afterwards become a Muslim, his evidence is then admissible; for although, on account of the said punishment, he had lost the degree in which he was before qualified to give evidence (that is, in all matters that related to his own sect), yet by his conversion to the Muslim faith he acquires a new competency in regard to evidence (namely, competency to give evidence relative to Muslims), which he did not possess before, and which is not affected by any matter that happened prior to the circumstance which gave birth to it.

Testimony in favour of a son or grandson, or in favour of a father or grandfather, is not admissible, because the Prophet has so ordained. Besides, as there is a kind of communion of benefits between these degrees of kindred, it follows that their testimony in matters relative to each other is in some degree a testimony in favour of themselves, and is therefore liable to suspicion.

So also the Prophet has said, “We are not to credit the evidence of a wife concerning her husband, or of a husband concerning his wife; or of a slave concerning his master; or of a master concerning his slave; or, lastly, of a hirer concerning his hireling.”

The testimony of one partner in favour of another, in a matter relative to their joint property, is not admissible; because it is in some degree in favour of himself. The testimony, however, of partners, in favour of each other, in matters not relating to their joint property, is admissible, because in it there is no room for suspicion. The testimony of a person who has committed a great crime, such as induces punishment, is not admissible, because in consequence of such crime he is unjust. The testimony of a person who goes naked into the public bath is inadmissible, because of his committing a prohibited action in the exposure of his nakedness.

The testimony of a person who receives usury is inadmissible; and so, also, of one who plays for a stake at dice or chess. The evidence of a person guilty of base and low actions, such as making water or eating his victuals on the high road, is not admissible; because where a man is not refrained, by a sense of shame, from such actions as these, he exposes himself to a suspicion that he will not refrain from falsehood.

The evidence of a person who openly inveighs against the Companions of the Prophet and their disciples is not admissible, because of his apparent want of integrity. It is otherwise, however, where a person conceals his sentiments in regard to them, because in such case the want of integrity is not apparent.

The testimony of ẕimmīs with respect to each other is admissible, notwithstanding they be of different religions.

The Imām Abū Ḥanīfah is of opinion that a false witness must be stigmatised, but not chastised with blows. The two disciples are of opinion that he must be scourged and confined; and this also is the opinion of ash-Shāfiʿī.

The mode of stigmatising a false witness is this:—If the witness be a sojourner in any public street or market-place, let him be sent to that street or market place; or, if otherwise, let him be sent to his own tribe or kindred, after the evening prayers (as they are generally assembled in greater numbers at that time than any other); and let the stigmatiser inform the people that the Qāẓī salutes them, and informs them that he has detected this person in giving false evidence; that they must, therefore, beware of him themselves, and likewise desire others to beware of him.

If witnesses retract their testimony prior to the Qāẓī passing any decree, it becomes void; if, on the contrary, the Qāẓī pass a decree, and the witnesses afterwards retract their testimony, the decree is not thereby rendered void.

The retraction of evidence is not valid, unless it be made in the presence of the Qāẓī.

EVIL EYE. Iṣābatu ʾl-ʿAin (اصابة العين‎). Muḥammad was a believer in the baneful influence of an evil eye. Asmāʾ bint ʿUmais relates that she said, “O Prophet, the family of Jaʿfar are affected by the baneful influences of an evil eye; may I use spells for them or not?” The Prophet said, “Yes, for if there were anything in the world which would overcome fate, it would be an evil eye.” (Mishkāt, book xxi. c. i. part 2.)

EXECUTION. The Muḥammadan mode of execution is as follows:—The executioner (jallād) seizes the condemned culprit by the right hand, while with a sharp sword or axe he aims a blow at the back of the neck, and the head is detached at the first stroke. This mode of execution is still, or was till lately, practised in Muḥammadan states in India.

If a Qāẓī say, I have sentenced such a person to be stoned, or to have his hand cut off, or to be killed, do you therefore do it; it is lawful for that person to whom the Qāẓī has given the order to carry it out.

And according to Abū Ḥanīfah, if the Qāẓī order the executioner to cut off the right hand, and the executioner wilfully cut off the left, he is not liable to punishment. But other doctors do not agree with him.

EXECUTOR. Arabic Waṣī (وصى‎), a term also used for the testator; wakīl ʿalā ʾl-waṣīyah (وكيل على الوصية‎). An executor having accepted his appointment in the presence of the testator, is not afterwards at liberty to withdraw, and any act indicative of his having accepted the position of executor binds him to fulfil his duties.

A Muslim may not appoint a slave, or a reprobate (fāsiq) or an infidel as his executor, and in the event of his doing so, the Qāẓī must nominate a proper substitute. But if none of the testator’s heirs have attained their majority, a slave may be appointed as executor until they are of age.

If joint executors have been appointed and one of them die, the Qāẓī must appoint a substitute in office.

In the cases of infants or absent heirs, the executor is entitled to possess himself pro tem. of their property, but he cannot trade with his ward’s portion.

If a person die without appointing an executor, the next of kin administers the estate, and it is an arrangement of Muslim law that his father is his executor and not his eldest son. (Hidāyah, vol. iv. p. 554.)

EXILES, The. [MUHAJIRUN.]

EXISTENCES. The Arabic word wujūd (وجود‎), expresses a substance, or essence, or existence. According to Muḥammadan writers (see G͟hiyās̤u ʾl-Lug͟hah), existences are of three kinds: Wājibu ʾl-wujūd, “a necessary existence,” e.g. Almighty God; mumkinu ʾl-wujūd, “a possible existence,” e.g. the human kind; mumtaniʿu ʾl-wujūd, “an impossible existence,” e.g. a partner with the Divine Being.

These terms are used by Muḥammadan scholars when discussing the doctrine of the Eternal Trinity with Christian Evangelists.

EXORCISM. [DAʿWAH.]

EXPIATION. The doctrine of expiation or atonement for neglected duties, sins of omission and commission, is distinguished in the Muslim religion from the doctrine of sacrifice; sacrifices being strictly confined to the ʿIdu ʾl-Aẓḥā, or Feast of Sacrifice in the month of pilgrimage.

There are two words employed in the Qurʾān to express the doctrine of expiation: kaffārah (كفارة‎), from kafr, “to hide”; and fidyah (فدية‎), from fidāʾ, “to exchange, or ransom.”

(1) Kaffārah occurs in the following verses:—

Sūrah v. 49:—

“And therein (Ex. xxi. 23) have we enacted for them, ‘Life for life, an eye for eye, and nose for nose, and ear for ear, and tooth for tooth, and for wounds retaliation:’—Whoso shall compromise it as alms shall have therein the expiation of his sin; and whoso will not judge by what God hath sent down—such are the transgressors.”

Sūrah v. 91:—

“God will not punish you for a mistaken word in your oaths: but he will punish you in regard to an oath taken seriously. Its expiation shall be to feed ten poor persons with such middling food as ye feed your own families with, or to clothe them; or to set free a captive. But he who cannot find means, shall fast three days. This is the expiation of your oaths when ye shall have sworn.”

Sūrah v. 96:—

“O believers! kill no game while ye are on pilgrimage. Whosoever among you shall purposely kill it, shall compensate for it in domestic animals of equal value (according to the judgment of two just persons among you), to be brought as an offering to the Kaʿbah; or in expiation thereof shall feed the poor; or as the equivalent of this shall fast, that he may taste the ill consequence of his deed. God forgiveth what is past; but whoever doeth it again, God will take vengeance on him; for God is mighty and vengeance is His.”

(2) Fidyah occurs in the following verses:—

Sūrah ii. 180:—

“But he amongst you who is ill, or on a journey, then let him fast another number of days; and those who are fit to fast and do not, the expiation of this shall be the maintenance of a poor man. And he who of his own accord performeth a good work, shall derive good from it: and good shall it be for you to fast—if ye knew it.”

Sūrah ii. 192:—

“Accomplish the Pilgrimage and Visitation of the holy places in honour of God: and if ye be hemmed in by foes, send whatever offering shall be the easiest: and shave not your heads until the offering reach the place of sacrifice. But whoever among you is sick, or hath an ailment of the head, must expiate by fasting, or alms, or an offering.”

Sūrah lvii. 13:—

“On that day the hypocrites, both men and women, shall say to those who believe, ‘Tarry for us, that we may kindle our light at yours.’ It shall be said, ‘Return ye back, and seek light for yourselves.’ But between them shall be set a wall with a gateway, within which shall be the Mercy, and in front, without it, the Torment. They shall cry to them, ‘Were we not with you?’ They shall say, ‘Yes! but ye led yourselves into temptation, and ye delayed, and ye doubted, and the good things ye craved deceived you, till the doom of God arrived:—and the deceiver deceived you in regard to God.’

“On that day, therefore, no expiation shall be taken from you or from those who believe not:—your abode the fire!—This shall be your master! and wretched the journey thither!”

(3) In theological books the term kaffāratu ʾẕ-ẕunūb, “the atonement for sins,” is used for the duties of prayer, fasting, almsgiving, and pilgrimage. There is also a popular saying that ziyāratu ʾl-qubūr is kaffāratu ʾẕ-ẕunūb, i.e. the visiting of shrines of the saints is an atonement for sins.

Theologians define the terms kaffārah and fidyah as expressing that expiation which is due to God, whilst diyah and qiṣāṣ are that which is due to man. [FINES, SACRIFICES.]

For that expiation which is made by freeing a slave, the word taḥrīr is used, a word which implies setting a slave free for God’s sake, although the word does not in any sense mean a ransom or atonement for sin. It occurs in the Qurʾān, Sūrah iv. 94, “Whosoever kills a believer by mistake let him FREE a believing neck” (i.e. a Muslim slave).

EXTRAVAGANCE. Arabic Isrāf (اسراف‎). An extravagant person or prodigal is musrif, or mubaẕẕir, and is condemned in the Qurʾān:—

Sūrah xvii. 28, 29: “Waste not wastefully, for the wasteful were ever the brothers of the devil; and the devil is ever ungrateful to his Lord.”

Sūrah vii. 29: “O sons of men, take your ornaments to every mosque; and eat and drink, but be not extravagant, for He loves not the extravagant.”

EYES. Arabic ʿAyn (عين‎); pl. ʿUyūn, Aʿyun, Aʿyān. “If a person strike another in the eye, so as to force the member with its vessels out of the socket, there is no retaliation in this case, it being impossible to preserve a perfect equality in extracting an eye. But if the eye remain in its place, and the sight be destroyed, retaliation is to be inflicted, as in this case equality may be effected by extinguishing the sight of the offender’s corresponding eye with a hot iron.” (Hidāyah, iv. 294.)

There is a tradition by Mālik that the diyah or “fine” for blinding one eye is fifteen camels. (Mishkāt, book xiv. 167.) [EVIL EYE.]

EZEKIEL. Arabic Ḥizqīl. Not mentioned by name, but there is generally supposed to be an allusion to Ezekiel’s vision of the dry bones (Ezek. xxxvii. 1) in the Qurʾān, Sūrah ii. 244:—

“Dost thou not look at those who left their homes by thousands, for fear of death; and God said to them ‘Die,’ and He then quickened them again?”

Al-Baiẓāwī says that a number of Israelites fled from their villages either to join in a religious war, or for fear of the plague, and were struck dead, but Ezekiel raised them to life again.

The Kamālān say he is perhaps the same as Ẕū ʾl-Kifl. [ZU ʾL-KIFL.]

EZRA. Arabic ʿUzair. The son of Sharaḥyāʾ, the scribe. Mentioned only once by name in the Qurʾān, Sūrah ix. 30:—

“The Jews say ʿUzair (Ezra) is a son of God.”

Al-Baiẓāwī says that during the Babylonish captivity the taurāt (the law) was lost, and that as there was no one who remembered the law when the Jews returned from captivity, God raised up Ezra from the dead, although he had been buried a hundred years. And that when the Jews saw him thus raised from the dead, they said he must be the son of God.

This story is supposed to have been revealed in the Qurʾān, Sūrah ii. 261:—

“[Hast thou not considered] him who passed by a city (which was Jerusalem), riding upon an ass, and having with him a basket of figs and a vessel of the juice of grapes and he was ʿUzair, and it was falling down upon its roofs, Nebuchadnezzar having ruined it? He said, wondering at the power of God, How will God quicken this after its death?—And God caused him to die for a hundred years. Then He raised him to life: and He said unto him, How long hast thou tarried here?—He answered I have tarried a day, or part of a day.—For he slept in the first part of the day, and was deprived of his life, and was reanimated at sunset. He said Nay, thou hast tarried a hundred years: but look at thy food and thy drink: they have not become changed by time: and look at thine ass.—And he beheld it dead, and its bones white and shining.—We have done this that thou mayest know, and that We may make thee a sign of the resurrection unto men. And look at the bones of thine ass, how We will raise them; then We will clothe them with flesh. So he looked at them, and they had become put together, and were clothed with flesh, and life was breathed into it, and it brayed. Therefore when it had been made manifest to him he said, I know that God is able to accomplish everything.”