Explanation of the author's statement: "And whoever is bound by oaths before declaring someone a disbeliever, and their consequence is one, then he owes one expiation"
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh :"And whoever is bound by oaths before declaring someone a disbeliever, and their consequence is one, then he owes one expiation" is a conditional clause and the answer to the condition "then he owes one expiation".
And his statement "whoever is bound by oaths before declaring someone a disbeliever, and their consequence is one" is like if he says, "By Allah, I will not speak to so-and-so," "By Allah, I will not enter the house," "By Allah, I will not go to the market." These are oaths. How many?
The questioner : Three.
The Shaykh : Three. Their consequence, meaning their expiation, their consequence, that is, what is obligatory because of them or what they make obligatory, is one. Is it?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Their consequence is one. What is it?
The questioner : Feeding.
The Shaykh : Feeding, or clothing, or freeing a slave. If he does not find the means, then fasting. They all agree on the consequence, meaning their expiation is one. Yes. So what is required of him if he breaks all three?
The questioner : One expiation.
The Shaykh : He is required to pay one expiation, by analogy to the case where multiple causes occur but only one ablution is required. Like a man who slept, defecated, urinated, passed wind, and ate camel meat. Yes, these are five. How many times must he perform ablution?
The questioner : One.
The Shaykh : Five times?
The questioner : No.
The Shaykh : No, once. They said, these are multiple causes but the result is one, so he is only required to pay one expiation. This is if it is before declaring someone a disbeliever. If it is after declaring someone a disbeliever, he said, "By Allah, I will not speak to so-and-so," then he spoke to him and then declared him a disbeliever, and he had said this before. Yes, after that he said, "By Allah." Let us repeat the example a second time. He said, "By Allah." Pay attention... Yes, do not write while you have... Stay with us. All right, if it is after declaring someone a disbeliever, like if he said, "By Allah, I will not speak to so-and-so," "By Allah, I will not enter the house," "By Allah, I will not go to the market." How many are these?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Three oaths. So he spoke to so-and-so, then declared him a disbeliever for speaking to him. Is this oath finished or not?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : All right, he went to the market and entered the house. Does the first expiation suffice for him?
The questioner : No.
The Shaykh : Does it not suffice?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes, it does not suffice, because the expiation for the other two oaths did not become obligatory for him until after he paid the expiation for the first one. Is this clear? All right, if he intended with the expiation for the first one, the expiation for the first one and the release from the second and the third.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : It suffices for him, because the consequence.
The questioner : One.
The Shaykh : is one. All right, and this is what the author followed, and it is the well-known position in the school of Imam Ahmad. And the majority of scholars held that he is required to pay an expiation for each oath if the thing sworn about and the oath are multiplied. If the thing sworn about and the oath are multiplied, then he is required to pay an expiation for each one. Like, "By Allah, I will not speak to Zayd," "By Allah, I will not enter the house," "By Allah, I will not go to the market." So the oaths are multiplied and the thing sworn about.
The questioner : One.
The Shaykh : No, it is also multiplied. They said, so he is required to pay an oath expiation for each oath. In this case, he is required to pay three expiations. They justified this by the generality of the verse[Al-Ma'idah 5:89]. These are multiple oaths, so he is required to pay as many as their number, just as if a person in the state of ihram kills game. If he kills game, for example, ten pigeons. Is the consequence one or not? One, and it is like what he killed from livestock. How many sheep is he required to pay?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Ten sheep. They said, so this is like it, because the cause of the consequence is multiplied, and each oath is independent by itself, due to the noble verse[Al-Ma'idah 5:89] to the end. All right, and this is what the majority of scholars are upon. And this issue needs, or has, three cases. This issue has three cases: either the oaths are multiplied and the thing sworn about is one, ... Muhammad, the oaths are multiplied and the thing sworn about?
The questioner : ... I do not remember this ... .
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes, correct. The oaths are repeated and the thing sworn about is one thing. Yes, or for example, his mother said to him, "Put on the woolen garment today, it is cold." Put on the woolen garment. He said, "By Allah, I will not put it on." His older brother agreed with him and said, "My son, this is the garment of an orphan. You are wearing it. Put on your woolen garment, it is right..." He said, "By Allah, I will not put it on." These are two. His father called him and said, "My son, this is the garment of an orphan. It is cold. Put on the winter garment so the cold does not affect you." He said, "By Allah, I will not put it on." The oaths are multiplied, but the thing sworn about?
The questioner : One.
The Shaykh : is one thing. There is no doubt, unanimously, that one expiation suffices for him. ... The opposite of this issue is that the oath is one and the thing sworn about is multiplied. Yes, what is its example, Yahya?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Wrong. The oath is one and the thing sworn about is multiplied.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Denial, correct? Correct. He was told, "Go to your friend. He has invited you to his wedding feast. Go to him, eat from his food, and congratulate him on the marriage." He said, "By Allah, I will not go to him, nor congratulate him on the marriage, nor eat from his food." Is that right? How many things are sworn about?
The questioner : Three.
The Shaykh : Three. But the oath?
The questioner : One.
The Shaykh : is one. This also suffices for him with one expiation, unanimously, because the oath is one. All right.
The third case is that the oaths are multiplied and the thing sworn about is multiplied. And this is the point of disagreement among scholars. Some said that one expiation suffices for him, and some said that each oath must have an expiation. This second view is the position of the majority, and the first is the well-known position in the school of Imam Ahmad. The apparent view is what the majority held: if the oath is on actions, then each action has a ruling, unless it falls under the two previous categories. The author said "their consequence is one". And you know the consequence. What is the consequence?
The questioner : Its expiation.
The Shaykh : Its expiation, meaning what is obligatory because of it.
And his statement "whoever is bound by oaths before declaring someone a disbeliever, and their consequence is one" is like if he says, "By Allah, I will not speak to so-and-so," "By Allah, I will not enter the house," "By Allah, I will not go to the market." These are oaths. How many?
The questioner : Three.
The Shaykh : Three. Their consequence, meaning their expiation, their consequence, that is, what is obligatory because of them or what they make obligatory, is one. Is it?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Their consequence is one. What is it?
The questioner : Feeding.
The Shaykh : Feeding, or clothing, or freeing a slave. If he does not find the means, then fasting. They all agree on the consequence, meaning their expiation is one. Yes. So what is required of him if he breaks all three?
The questioner : One expiation.
The Shaykh : He is required to pay one expiation, by analogy to the case where multiple causes occur but only one ablution is required. Like a man who slept, defecated, urinated, passed wind, and ate camel meat. Yes, these are five. How many times must he perform ablution?
The questioner : One.
The Shaykh : Five times?
The questioner : No.
The Shaykh : No, once. They said, these are multiple causes but the result is one, so he is only required to pay one expiation. This is if it is before declaring someone a disbeliever. If it is after declaring someone a disbeliever, he said, "By Allah, I will not speak to so-and-so," then he spoke to him and then declared him a disbeliever, and he had said this before. Yes, after that he said, "By Allah." Let us repeat the example a second time. He said, "By Allah." Pay attention... Yes, do not write while you have... Stay with us. All right, if it is after declaring someone a disbeliever, like if he said, "By Allah, I will not speak to so-and-so," "By Allah, I will not enter the house," "By Allah, I will not go to the market." How many are these?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Three oaths. So he spoke to so-and-so, then declared him a disbeliever for speaking to him. Is this oath finished or not?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : All right, he went to the market and entered the house. Does the first expiation suffice for him?
The questioner : No.
The Shaykh : Does it not suffice?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes, it does not suffice, because the expiation for the other two oaths did not become obligatory for him until after he paid the expiation for the first one. Is this clear? All right, if he intended with the expiation for the first one, the expiation for the first one and the release from the second and the third.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : It suffices for him, because the consequence.
The questioner : One.
The Shaykh : is one. All right, and this is what the author followed, and it is the well-known position in the school of Imam Ahmad. And the majority of scholars held that he is required to pay an expiation for each oath if the thing sworn about and the oath are multiplied. If the thing sworn about and the oath are multiplied, then he is required to pay an expiation for each one. Like, "By Allah, I will not speak to Zayd," "By Allah, I will not enter the house," "By Allah, I will not go to the market." So the oaths are multiplied and the thing sworn about.
The questioner : One.
The Shaykh : No, it is also multiplied. They said, so he is required to pay an oath expiation for each oath. In this case, he is required to pay three expiations. They justified this by the generality of the verse
So its expiation is the feeding of ten needy people
فكفارته إطعام عشرة مساكينThe questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Ten sheep. They said, so this is like it, because the cause of the consequence is multiplied, and each oath is independent by itself, due to the noble verse
So its expiation is the feeding of ten needy people
فكفارته إطعام عشرة مساكينThe questioner : ... I do not remember this ... .
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes, correct. The oaths are repeated and the thing sworn about is one thing. Yes, or for example, his mother said to him, "Put on the woolen garment today, it is cold." Put on the woolen garment. He said, "By Allah, I will not put it on." His older brother agreed with him and said, "My son, this is the garment of an orphan. You are wearing it. Put on your woolen garment, it is right..." He said, "By Allah, I will not put it on." These are two. His father called him and said, "My son, this is the garment of an orphan. It is cold. Put on the winter garment so the cold does not affect you." He said, "By Allah, I will not put it on." The oaths are multiplied, but the thing sworn about?
The questioner : One.
The Shaykh : is one thing. There is no doubt, unanimously, that one expiation suffices for him. ... The opposite of this issue is that the oath is one and the thing sworn about is multiplied. Yes, what is its example, Yahya?
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Wrong. The oath is one and the thing sworn about is multiplied.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Yes.
The questioner : ... .
The Shaykh : Denial, correct? Correct. He was told, "Go to your friend. He has invited you to his wedding feast. Go to him, eat from his food, and congratulate him on the marriage." He said, "By Allah, I will not go to him, nor congratulate him on the marriage, nor eat from his food." Is that right? How many things are sworn about?
The questioner : Three.
The Shaykh : Three. But the oath?
The questioner : One.
The Shaykh : is one. This also suffices for him with one expiation, unanimously, because the oath is one. All right.
The third case is that the oaths are multiplied and the thing sworn about is multiplied. And this is the point of disagreement among scholars. Some said that one expiation suffices for him, and some said that each oath must have an expiation. This second view is the position of the majority, and the first is the well-known position in the school of Imam Ahmad. The apparent view is what the majority held: if the oath is on actions, then each action has a ruling, unless it falls under the two previous categories. The author said "their consequence is one". And you know the consequence. What is the consequence?
The questioner : Its expiation.
The Shaykh : Its expiation, meaning what is obligatory because of it.