The Expiation for the One Who Swears an Oath
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
Consecutiveness in the Expiation for an Oath
Question: I had a duty to fast the days for the expiation of an oath, so I asked one of my sisters in whom I have confidence because she has a degree of knowledge. I asked her whether the fasting must be consecutive or can be separated.So she said to me: Consecutiveness is not required, so her fasts were separated.But I heard from the program: "Light on the Path" on the radio from one of the noble scholars, stating that consecutiveness is required. So I went back to her, and she brought out for me the Tafsir of Ibn Kathir,And in it is the statement of Malik: stating that consecutiveness is not required. So, is there anything upon me, and what is the correct opinion in this matter?
Answer: As you mentioned, there is scholarly disagreement among the scholars regarding whether consecutiveness is obligatory in the fasting for the expiation of an oath or not. However, the stronger position is what Imam Ahmad, Abu Hanifa, and al-Shafi'i held in one of his two views, which is that consecutiveness is obligatory;Because it was recited that Allah the Exalted said: (so fasting three days consecutively), therefore this reading is an explicit text regarding the obligation of consecutiveness, and Allah knows best.
[The Expiation for the One Who Swears an Oath]
Question: If a person swears an oath to another person that he will not perform a certain act, but this second person performs that act, on whom does the expiation for this oath fall?
Answer: The expiation falls on the one who swore the oath. If he swears to a person that he will not do something, or that he will do it, and then he contradicts what was sworn upon, then the expiation is upon the one who swore the oath at that time.
Question: And if the one to whom the oath was sworn does that while knowing about the oath, does sin fall upon him?
Answer: The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) commanded the fulfillment of the oath-taker's oath. It is incumbent upon the one to whom the oath was sworn to fulfill the oath of the one who swore. If he contradicts him, it is contrary to what is best and most preferable.
Question: I had a duty to fast the days for the expiation of an oath, so I asked one of my sisters in whom I have confidence because she has a degree of knowledge. I asked her whether the fasting must be consecutive or can be separated.So she said to me: Consecutiveness is not required, so her fasts were separated.But I heard from the program: "Light on the Path" on the radio from one of the noble scholars, stating that consecutiveness is required. So I went back to her, and she brought out for me the Tafsir of Ibn Kathir,And in it is the statement of Malik: stating that consecutiveness is not required. So, is there anything upon me, and what is the correct opinion in this matter?
Answer: As you mentioned, there is scholarly disagreement among the scholars regarding whether consecutiveness is obligatory in the fasting for the expiation of an oath or not. However, the stronger position is what Imam Ahmad, Abu Hanifa, and al-Shafi'i held in one of his two views, which is that consecutiveness is obligatory;Because it was recited that Allah the Exalted said: (so fasting three days consecutively), therefore this reading is an explicit text regarding the obligation of consecutiveness, and Allah knows best.
[The Expiation for the One Who Swears an Oath]
Question: If a person swears an oath to another person that he will not perform a certain act, but this second person performs that act, on whom does the expiation for this oath fall?
Answer: The expiation falls on the one who swore the oath. If he swears to a person that he will not do something, or that he will do it, and then he contradicts what was sworn upon, then the expiation is upon the one who swore the oath at that time.
Question: And if the one to whom the oath was sworn does that while knowing about the oath, does sin fall upon him?
Answer: The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) commanded the fulfillment of the oath-taker's oath. It is incumbent upon the one to whom the oath was sworn to fulfill the oath of the one who swore. If he contradicts him, it is contrary to what is best and most preferable.