[al-Tawbah]. It is well known that a vow contingent upon a condition is a vow subject to a qualification. Yet they distinguish between a vow whose condition is intended to occur and a vow whose condition is intended not to occur, which is expressed in the form of an oath. [Likewise], a distinction must be made between divorce whose qualification is intended—as in khulʿ, where the compensation is intended—and divorce used as an oath, where neither the divorce nor its condition is intended to occur. For only like cases may be analogized to what is found in the Quran and the Sunnah. The distinction between an intended qualification and a qualification made the subject of an oath, whose nonoccurrence is intended, is clearly established—just as the same distinction is made between them in the case of vows. The evidence for this position is found in the Quran, the Sunnah, transmitted reports, and sound reasoning.

As for the Quran, there are His words, glory be to Him:

“O Prophet! Why do you prohibit what Allah has made lawful for you, seeking to please your wives? Allah is All-Forgiving, Most Merciful. Allah has already ordained for you a means of release from your oaths. Allah is your Guardian, and He is the All-Knowing, All-Wise.” [al-Tahrīm: 1–2] [al-Tahrīm].

The point of evidence is that Allah said, “Allah has already ordained for you a means of release from your oaths.” [al-Tahrīm: 2] This is an explicit, general text stating that Allah has ordained a means of release from every oath sworn by Muslims. He—glory be to Him—addressed the community in the plural after first addressing the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, in the singular, while knowing—glory be to Him—that the community would swear many different kinds of oaths. If even one kind of oath were presumed to have no means of release, that would contradict the verse. How could this be, when the verse is general and not a single case is excluded from it by either a revealed text or consensus? Indeed, its generality in meaning accompanies its generality in wording. A binding oath [requires] that the legally accountable person be restrained with respect to an act. It is therefore fitting that a means of release from this bond should be prescribed, because of the relief and latitude it affords. This is also present in an oath sworn by manumission