Custom and sharī‘a in the bedouin family according to legal documents from the judaean desert

Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies

Volumn 42, Issue 1, 1979, Pages 29-45

  Layish, Aharon ^a   Shmueli, Avshalom ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 1842568720     PISSN: 0041977X     EISSN: 14740699     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0041977X00108420     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. For the historical background of the contest between sharī‘a and custom see A. Layish, ‘Sharī‘a u-minhag ba-mishpaha ha-Muslimit be-Yisra’el’, Ha-Mizrah he-Hadash, xxiii, 4, 1974, 377 ff., and the sources indicated there.
2. For more detail see A. Shmueli, Hitnahalüt ha-Bedewīm shel Midbar Yehüdah, Tel Aviv, 1970; idem, ‘Shevet ha-‘Ubaydiyya—ha-shinnūyīm ba-mesheq uva-heverah ‘im ha-hitnahalūt’, in Ha-Bedewīm, Bureau of the Adviser on Arab Affairs, Prime Minister’s Office, Jerusalem, 1971, 100-75 ; idem, Hitnahalüt naurwadīm be-merhav Yerūshalayim ba-me’ah ha-’esrīm, unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Hebrew University, Jerusalem, 1973 ; idem, ’ Ha-reqa’ le-hitnahalūt nawwadīm be-merhav Yerūshalayim ’, Merhavīm (Tel Aviv), i, 1974, 70-9 ; M. Sharon, ’ Ha-Bedevīm shel Har Hevrön ’, in A. Shmueli, D. Grossman, and K. Zeevi (ed.), Yehūdah ve-Shömrön ; praqīm be-geographia yeshūvīt, Jerusalem, 1977, 548-57 ; M. von Oppenheim, Die Beduinen, II, Leipzig, 1943 ; Erwin Gräf, Das Rechtswesen der heutigen Beduinen, Walldorf-Hessen, [1952].
3. See, e.g., Nimr ’Awda al-Mubärak ’Ashirat al-Nabähin al-Ta’ämira, sakk tahkīm of 29 September 1963 ; Ibrāhim ’Abd Allah al-Dar’äwi ’Ashirat al-Shawäwira al-Ta’ämira, sanad tahkīm of 14 November 1975 ; and Muhammad Sälim al-Dhuwayb ’Ashirat al-Sharäyi’a al-Ta’ämira, divorce of 25 September 1964 (awräq).
4. J. Schacht, The origins of Muhammadan jurisprudence, Oxford, 1950, 188 ; idem, An introduction to Islamic law, Oxford, 1964, 78, 72, 193 ; Herbert J. Liebesny, The law of the Near and Middle Hast ; readings, cases, and materials, New York, 1975,244 ff., and the sources indicated there ; E. Tyan, Histoire de l’organisation judiciaire en pays d’Islam, deuxième édition, Leiden, 1960, 236 ff. ; Jeanette A. Wakin (ed.), The function of documents in Islamic law : the chapters on sales from Tahäwī’s Kitäb al-shurūt al-kabīr, Albany, N.Y., 1972, 4 ff. ; N. J. Coulson, A history of Islamic law, Edinburgh, 1964, 125, 148 ; idem, ‘Muslim custom and case-law’. Die Welt des Islams, NS, vi, 1-2, 1959, 21.
5. Muhammad ’Abduh, Taqrīr fīislah al-mahäkim al-shar’iyya, ed. Muhammad Rashid Ridä, Cairo, 1900, 34 ; A. Layish, ‘Terümat ha-modernistim le-hillün ha-mishpat hu-Muslimt’, Ha-Mizrah he-Hadash, xxvr, 1-2, 1976, 2, 9, 10; Coulson, History, 172 f. ; J. N. D. Anderson, Law reform in the Muslim world, London, 1976, 43 ff.
6. H. Laoust, Essai sur les doctrines sociales et politiques de Takī-d-Dīn Ahmad b. Taimīya, Le Caire, 1939, 519 ff. ; idem, Les schisme dans l’Islam; inXroduclion à une étude de la religion musulmane, Paris, 1965, 323, 324 ; W. C. Smith, Islam in modem history, third printing, New York, New American Library, 1963, 48 ff. ; Ignaz Goldziher, Vorlesungen über den Islam, tr. into Hebrew by J. J. Rivlin, ed. M. Plessner, Jernsalem, 1951, 188 ff.
7. Gabriel Baer, Population and society in the Arab East, London, 1964, 132, and the sources indicated there ; idem, Studies in the history of modern Egypt, Chicago and London, 1969, 13, 14. Cf. J. Henninger, ‘La religion bédouine préislamique ’, in F. Gabrieli (ed.), L’antica società beduina (Università di Borna. Centro di Studi Semitiei. Studi Semitici, 2), Roma, 1959), 125 ff., and the sources indicated there.
8. Tyan, Histoire, 48 ff. ; idem, art. ‘Hakam’, EI, second ed., 72 ; Schacht, Introduction, 189 ; Joseph Chelhod, Le droit dans la société Bédouine : recherches ethnologiques sur le ’orf ou droit coutumier des Bédouins, Paris, 1971, 144 ff.
9. Schacht, Introduction, 8, 25 f., 73, 83; Anderson, Law reform, 8, 10 f.; J. Chelhod, ‘Le Bédouin et le droit’, Bévue de l’Occident Musulman et de la Méditerranée (Aix-en-Provence), 11, 1972, 157.
10. Schacht, Origins, 58 ff. and the passages referred to there in the works of Goldziher and Margoliouth ; idem, Introduction, 8, 17 ; Ignaz Goldziher, Muslim studies, éd. S. M. Stern, II, London, 1971, 25 ff. ; A. J. Wensinck, art. ‘Sunna’, EI, 555 ; cf. R. B. Serjeant, ‘Haram and hawtah, the sacred enclave in Arabia’, in ‘Abd al-Rahmän Badawi (ed.), Mélanges Taha Husain, Le Caire, 1962, 47-52.
11. Interview with the qädī of 6 July 1975 ; ’Ärif al-’Ärif, al-Qadä’ bayn al-Badw, Jerusalem, 1933, 130 ; Chelhod, Le droit, 104. On the meaning of the term qasala see Clinton Bailey, ‘Bedouin weddings in Sinai and the Negev’, Studies in Marriage Customs (Jerusalem), iv, 1974, pp. 113, n. 21, 114.
12. Lavish, ‘Shari’a u-minhag’, 380 ff., 399 ; we are obliged to Dr. Clinton Bailey, who is doing research on legal maxims of the Sinai Bedouin, for helping us to form an opinion as to this question.
13. e.g. Druze Division, Ministry of Religious Affairs, File DB/18 of 16 January 1960, 19 January 1960 ; Druze Religious Court, Haifa, Taläq, File 42/67 ; Nafaqa, File 42/73 ; Kamäl Mu’adī, ’ Shu’ün al-täifa al-Durziyya’, Majaüat al-Akhbär al-Durziyya (Jerusalem), III, 3-4, 1968, 5 ; A. Lavish, ‘Ma’amad ha-Isläm ba-mishpahah ha-Drüzīt be- Yisra’el ’, Ha-Mizrah he-Hadash, xxvi, 3-4, 1977, 152, 164 ff., 161, 199.
14. Schacht, Origins, 98 ff. ; idem, Introduction, 37, 46, 53, 69 f.
15. W. Robertson Smith, Kinship and marriage in early Arabia, 1903, repr., Boston, Beacon Press, n.d., 92 if., 112 ff. ; Anderson, Law reform, 10-11. For more detail on khul’ see below, § 3, pp. 37-8.
16. e.g. Muhammad Sälim al-Dhuwayb ‘Ashirat al-Sharäyi‘a al-Ta‘äniira, divorce of 25 September 1964; interview with Shaykh Muhammad Sälim al-Dhuwayb of 14 November 1975; Sulaymän Sälim Muhammad ‘Ashirat Saläh al-Ta‘ämira, khvl’ of 10 December 1966. Cf. Tyan, Histoire, 64, 65; Schacht, Introduction, 10, 11.
17. Sulaymän Sälim Muhammad ‘Ashirat Saläh al-Ta‘ämira, tchul’ of 10 December 1966. Cf. Tyan, ‘ Hakam ’, 72 ; idem, Histoire, 53-7, 60 ; Chelhod, Le droit, 171 ff., idem, ‘ Le Bédouin ’, 153 ff.
18. Interviews with Shaykh Sulaymän Muhammad ‘Ashīrat Salät al-Ta‘ämira and Shaykh Müsä ‘Awdat Allah al-‘Ubaydiyya of 3 June 1975 and 6 October 1975. Cf. al-‘Arif, op. cit., 130 ; Bailey, art. cit., 114, 117; A. Kennett, Bedouin justice ; law and customs among the Egyptian Bedouin, new impression, London, 1968, 100 ; Reuben Levy, The social structure of Islam, repr., Cambridge, 1962, 113. The pronouncement of the bismiUdh and reading of the Fätiha are usual also among the Druzes, perhaps by way of taqiyya; see Amin Muhammad Tali‘, Asl al-muwahhidīn al-Durüz wa-usūluhum, Beirut, 1961, 132, 133.
19. N. J. Coulson, Succession in the Muslim family, Cambridge, 1971, 11, 12; Schacht, Introduction, 161, 162 ; Levy, 110, 111. For more detail see Muhammad Abu Zahra, al-Ahwäl al-shahhsiyya, Cairo, n.d., 123 f.
20. e.g. Müsä ‘Awdat Allah al-‘Ubaydiyya, certificate of marriage for presentation to the court, n.d. ; marriage contract, Court of Bethlehem, No. 38426 ; Muhammad Ahmad Abu ‘Ämiriyya ‘Ashīrat al-Sharäyi‘a al-Ta‘ämira, obedience, n.d. Cf. al-‘Ärif, op. cit., 127 f.
21. A. Layish, Women and Islamic law in a non-Muslim state ; a study based on decisions of the sharī‘a courts in Israel, New York, 1975, 51 ; Chelhod, Le droit, 125 ; Emanuel Marx, Bedouin of the Negev, Manchester, 1967, 104, 105, 159 ; interview with Shaykh Sulaymän Sälim Muhammad ‘Ashīrat Saläh al-Ta‘ämira of 6 October 1975.
22. ‘Ali Muhammad Hasan Hamülat al-Radäyida al-‘Ubaydiyya, dower of 24 June 1940. Cf. al-‘Ärif, op. cit., 130 ff. ; Gideon M. Kressel, ‘ Bride-price reconsidered ‘, Current Anthropology, xvIII, 3, 1977, 450.
23. For more detail see Layish, Women, 47, and the sources indicated there. Robertson Smith, op. cit., 112. Cf. Chelhod, ‘ Le Bédouin ‘, 157-8.
24. e.g. Sharī‘a Court of Bethlehem, Sijitt faläq 3, p. 59, nos. 3/75, 4/76. Interview with Shaykh al-Rifä‘ī of 19 May 1975. Cf. al-‘Ärif, op. cit., 131, 132; Layish, ‘Sharī‘a u-minhag ‘, 383 ff. ; Marx, op. cit., 120, 121, 150, 160; Gideon M. Kressel, Pratiyüt le-‘ūmat shivtiyūt: dinamiqah shel qehīlat Bedewim be-tahalīkh hit‘ayrūt, Tel Aviv, 1976,161, 162, 223, 224 ; Chelhod, Le droit, 105, 106.
25. Layish, Women, 159 ff. ; Robertson Smith, op. cit., 112, 113.
26. Muhammad Sälim al-Dhuwayb ‘Ashīrat al-Sharäyi‘a al-Ta‘ämira, divorce agreement of 29 June 1959 and divorce of 25 September 1964. Cf. Robertson Smith, op. cit., 113.
27. Layish, ‘ Sharī‘a u-minhag ‘, 386, 387 ; J. N. D. Anderson, Islamic law in Africa, new impression, London, 1970, 320, 321; idem, Law reform, 11; Coulson, History, 136, and the source indicated there.
28. For more detail see Layish, Women, 173.
29. Interviews with Shaykh Ibrahim ‘Abd Allah al-Dar‘äwī and Shaykh Sulaymän Sälim Muhammad of 5 August 1975, 6 October 1975, and 3 June 1975. See Lavish, ‘ Sharī‘a u-minhag ‘, 382, 383, 387, 388. Cf. Chelhod, Le droit, 130.
30. Layish, Women, 279, and the sources indicated there ; Robertson Smith, op. cit., 65 ff.
31. Sulaymän Sälim Muhammad ‘Ashirat Saläh al-Ta‘ämira, succession of 10 January 1955 ; Yüsuf ‘Ato‘yya ‘Alayän al-‘Ubaydiyya, disposition of estate inter vivos of 4 October 1962 ; and Mahmud Musallim Ibrajiyya ‘Ashirat al-Zawähira al-Ta‘ämira, disposition of estate inter vivos of A.H. 1331 [1912], respectively. Cf. Lavish, Women, 105; Marx, op. cit., 185, 186; Kennett, op. cit., 99, 104, 106 ; Chelhod, Le droit, 134-6 ; Baer, Population, 39, and the sources indicated there.
32. Rizq al-Sa‘īd Rizq ‘Ashirat al-Shawäwira al-Ta‘ämira, basr irth of 18 November 1954. Cf. al-‘Ärif, op. cit., 126 ; Chelhod, Le droit, 136.
33. Sharäri Muhammad al-A‘raj al-Sawähira, wasl tanäzul of 29 May 1956. Cf. Lavish, Women, 290 f. ; Anderson, Law reform, 11.
34. Ahmad Dakhl Allah al-Makh^üb al-Mis‘äd al-Ta‘ämira, wasiyya of 29 May 1956. Cf. A. Lavish, ‘ Women and succession in the Druze family in Israel ‘, Asian and African Studies, xi, 1, 1976, 111.
35. ‘ Id Jum‘a Sulaymän al-Dhuwayb ‘Ashīrat al-Sharäyi‘a al-Ta‘ämira, wasiyyat irth of 27 April 1975. Interviews with Shaykh Muhammad Sälim al-Dhuwayb of 29 December 1975 and with Shaykh Sulaymän Sälim Muhammad ‘Ashīrat Saläh of 29 December 1975. Cf. Lavish, ‘ Women and succession ‘, 111. Cf., as against this, Layiah, Women, 292 f.
36. For more detail, see Lavish, ‘ Shart‘a u-minhag ‘, 377-8, and the sources indicated there.
37. e.g. Sulaymän Sälim Muhammad ‘Ashīrat Saläh al-Ta‘ämira and Ibrähīm ‘Abd Allah al-Dar‘äwi ‘Ashīrat al-Shawäwira al-Ta‘ämira, family dispute of 11 May 1972 ; Sälim Muhammad Ismä‘il Abu ‘Ulyä ‘Ashīrat al-‘Abayät al-Ta‘ämira, succession of 10 January 1955 ; Mahmud Musallim Ibrajiyya ‘Ashīrat al-Zawähira al-Ta‘ämira, disposition of estate inter vivos of a.h. 1331 [1912]. The Qur‘än quotations are from the translation by Mohammed Marmaduke Pickthal], The meaning of the glorious Koran, New York, New American Library, 1953.
38. Tyan, Histoire, 35, 42, 43, 59, 61 ; Schacht, Introduction, 8, 10.
39. For more detail see Tor Andrae, Muhammad—the man and his faith, New York, 1960, 24 ff. ; S. D. Goitein, Ha-Isläm shel Muhammad : keitzad hithawetah dot hadashah be-tzel ha- Yahadüt, Jerusalem, 1956, 92, 93 ; F. Gabrieli, Muhammad and the conquest of Islam, London, 1968, 40 ; L. Gardet, art. ‘ Allah ‘, EI, second ed., 406 ; Henninger, art. cit., 133 ff., 139, and the sources indicated there.
40. Sulaymàn Sälim Muhammad ‘Ashīrat Saläh al-Ta‘ämira, khuV of 10 December 1966. Article 30 of the law, which deals with obedience, is based on Hanafi variants. See J. N. D. Anderson, ‘ Recent developments in shari‘a law vm. The Jordanian Law of Family Rights, 1951 ‘, Muslim World, xlii, 3, 1952, 196.
41. Rizq al-Sa‘id Rizq al-Shawäwira al-Ta‘ämira, Tfasr irth of 18 November 1954 ; Muhammad Sälim al-Dhuwayb ‘Ashīrat al-Sharäyi‘a al-Ta‘ämira, wasiyyat irth of 27 April 1975. Cf. Coulson, Succession, 216, 217.
42. Sharī‘a Court of Bethlehem, Sijill JVrfäg 3, p. 176, no. 13 (ibrä‘) ; Sulaymän Sälim Muhammad ‘Ashīrat Salah al-Ta‘ämira, ibrä‘ of 20 October 1974 ; idem, khvl’ of 10 December 1966 ; Ibrahim ‘Abd Allah al-Dar‘äwī ‘Ashīrat al-Shawäwira al-Ta‘ämira, family dispute of 26 August 1970.
43. Tyan, Histoire, 50,56, 57, 60, 61 ; idem, ‘ Halcam ‘, 72 ; Schacht, Inirodudion, 189 ; Shaykh Muhammad Sa‘id Jamal al-Bifä‘i, wakīl qädī of Bethlehem, thinks that an arbitral award is not binding and requires confirmation by the qädī in each case (interview of 16 October 1975).
44. ef. Schacht, Introduction, 62, 77, 78, 84 ; G.-H. Bousquet, ‘ Ada ’, El, second ed., 170, 171 ; Anderson, Law reform, 188.