enter into transactions and those who may not, whether virgins or otherwise. We now return to discussing the legal effects of acts undertaken by financially imprudent adults whose transactions are invalid, having already discussed the legal effects of children’s acts. We shall mention whatever we can recall and cover, keeping to our undertaking to be concise and brief, without lengthy or excessive discussion—Allah willing. His help we seek.
Know—may Allah guide us and you—that a financially imprudent adult remains bound by all the duties Allah has imposed upon His servants concerning their persons and wealth. He is also subject to any prescribed punishment or legal retribution incurred by his person. His divorce takes effect, whether resulting from an oath he has broken or pronounced without an oath. The same applies to zihār (declaring his wife forbidden to him by comparison with a forbidden relative). His guardian must consider his best interests in this matter. If he considers it best to free a slave on his behalf so that he may retain his wife, he should do so. If he considers it best not to free a slave on his behalf, he may refrain, even if this leads to the couple’s separation. Neither fasting nor feeding the needy suffices if the man has sufficient wealth to free a slave. Muhammad ibn al-Mawwāz said that if his guardian does not consider it appropriate to expiate on his behalf by freeing a slave, the man may himself expiate by fasting.
According to his position, a divorce may not be decreed against him until he has been granted the period prescribed for īlā (sworn abstinence from marital intercourse), if his wife requests this, since he may expiate by fasting. According to the first position, she is granted a divorce without his being given the period prescribed for īlā, if she brings the matter before the judge. This is Asbagh’s view. Ibn al-Qāsim sets no fixed period for this.
Ibn Kināna said that his guardian should free a slave on his behalf only the first time. If he repeats the pronouncement of zihār, the guardian should not free a slave on his behalf, for a single lapse may befall the prudent and the imprudent alike. Muhammad ibn al-Mawwāz also adopted this view.
As for īlā, its rules apply to him if he comes under them through a divorce oath whose breach he must avoid, or because his guardian refuses to expiate on his behalf for zihār. If, however, he has sworn to refrain from intercourse, the nature of his oath must be examined. If it entails freeing a slave, giving charity, or a similar act that he is not entitled to undertake and from which his guardian restrains him, īlā does not apply to him on account of it. If he has sworn by Allah Most High, īlā applies if he has no wealth, but not if he has wealth; and if