The answer is: In our law, there is no sin which, once committed, leaves a person no way out through repentance except at the cost of immense harm. Allah has not laid upon us a burden such as He laid upon those before us. Suppose, then, that by swearing by divorce this man committed a major sin and subsequently repented of it. How could it accord with the principles of our law for the effects of that sin to remain upon him, with no way of escape? This differs from a man who directly pronounces divorce rather than swearing by it, for he does so only when he intends divorce—whether because he dislikes his wife, is angry with her, or for some similar reason.
Allah has established divorce as three pronouncements. Thus, if a man pronounces divorce only of his own free choice and [does so successively] on three separate occasions, harm will rarely arise in such a case. This differs from the former case, for that man never intended divorce; he intended only to perform—or refrain from performing—the act to which his oath related. The Sacred Law may then command him, or necessity may compel him, to perform or refrain from that act, whereupon divorce becomes binding upon him even though he chose neither the divorce nor the cause leading to it.
Moreover, the teaching with which Allah sent Muhammad (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) regarding oaths was to lighten them through expiation, not to make them more burdensome by imposing obligations or prohibitions. During the pre-Islamic period, people regarded zihār as divorce, and they continued to do so at the beginning of Islam, until Aws ibn al-Sāmit (may Allah be pleased with him) pronounced zihār against his wife.
A further proof is the analogy with a vow made in obstinacy and anger. There is no distinction between the two except what we have already mentioned, and, if Allah wills, we shall show that it has no legal effect. Analogy based on the absence of a legally relevant distinction is among the soundest forms of analogical reasoning, by agreement of the authoritative scholars.
This is because, if a man says, “If I eat or drink, I must emancipate