Her other question states that one day an event occurred that angered her greatly, so she said, “If that event comes to pass, I will fast for Allah one month every year,” and it did come to pass.
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : Her other question states that one day an event occurred that angered her greatly, so she said, “If that event comes to pass, I will fast for Allah one month every year.” It did come to pass, praise be to Allah, and she began to fast. However, she heard that a vow made in anger is not valid. She is now confused and her soul does not agree to leaving off the fasting. A year has passed and she did not fast the vowed month in it. What is the ruling?
The Shaykh : The ruling is that anger is divided into two, or rather three, categories.
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Anger that reaches the extreme where a person does not feel what he is saying and does not know what he is saying; in this case, his words have no ruling because he is not aware of what he is saying. His will is closed off to him, so his words are mere nonsense.
The questioner : Meaning, like one who has lost his mind?
The Shaykh : ...his words are mere nonsense, that is what we say. As for the second category, it is anger in its beginning, where a person feels what he is saying and controls himself, so he is able to act with complete control. In this case, anger has no effect whatsoever; anger has no effect on his right.
The third category is a middle ground between these two states, where a person is angry, feels what he is saying, and knows what he is saying, but he has lost complete control over his actions. This is a matter of disagreement among the scholars. The woman should know herself: if she is of the first category, then her vow is nonsense and she is not obligated to fast one month every year. If she is of the second category, which is slight anger, then her vow is valid and she is obligated to fulfill what she vowed. As for if she is of the middle category, there is disagreement among the scholars. The more apparent view, and Allah knows best, is that she is not obligated, because the original state is the innocence of the conscience until it becomes clear to us that she was able to act as she wished. And Allah knows best.
The Shaykh : The ruling is that anger is divided into two, or rather three, categories.
The questioner : Yes.
The Shaykh : Anger that reaches the extreme where a person does not feel what he is saying and does not know what he is saying; in this case, his words have no ruling because he is not aware of what he is saying. His will is closed off to him, so his words are mere nonsense.
The questioner : Meaning, like one who has lost his mind?
The Shaykh : ...his words are mere nonsense, that is what we say. As for the second category, it is anger in its beginning, where a person feels what he is saying and controls himself, so he is able to act with complete control. In this case, anger has no effect whatsoever; anger has no effect on his right.
The third category is a middle ground between these two states, where a person is angry, feels what he is saying, and knows what he is saying, but he has lost complete control over his actions. This is a matter of disagreement among the scholars. The woman should know herself: if she is of the first category, then her vow is nonsense and she is not obligated to fast one month every year. If she is of the second category, which is slight anger, then her vow is valid and she is obligated to fulfill what she vowed. As for if she is of the middle category, there is disagreement among the scholars. The more apparent view, and Allah knows best, is that she is not obligated, because the original state is the innocence of the conscience until it becomes clear to us that she was able to act as she wished. And Allah knows best.