wearing tailored clothing is not explicitly stated to require an expiation. Thus, the view that he is not bound to offer an expiation rests on two considerations:

First: there is no definitive proof that expiation is obligatory for wearing tailored clothing.

Second: by analogy with the waiver of an obligation for one occupied with serving the interests of the pilgrims.

However, if we were to say that he should offer an expiation as a precaution, that would be preferable. The expiation is easy: feeding six needy persons, giving each one half a sa‘; or fasting for three days; or slaughtering a sheep.

The third category is that a person has an excuse due to ignorance, forgetfulness, or coercion. According to the established position of the school, a distinction is made between prohibited acts: for some of them, the expiation is not waived by forgetfulness, ignorance, or coercion—namely, those involving destruction, or tantamount to destruction—whereas for others it is waived. The details of this have already been mentioned.

The correct view is that all of them are waived, and that nothing whatsoever follows from the act of one excused by ignorance, forgetfulness, or coercion: not in sexual intercourse, hunting, trimming the nails, wearing tailored clothing, or anything else. We have previously mentioned the evidence for this from the Quran, the sunnah, and rational consideration.

The same applies to all prohibited acts in acts of worship: no legal consequence follows from them when they are committed out of ignorance, forgetfulness, or coercion, owing to the generality of the texts and because the penalty, expiation, or atonement was prescribed only to ransom oneself from the violation or to expiate the sin. But one who is ignorant, forgetful, or coerced did not deliberately commit the violation; had he remembered, known, or acted voluntarily, he would not have done so.