and Umm Salama, Ibn ‘Abbās, and Abū Hurayra. This is also the view of leading Successors, such as Tāwūs, ‘Atā’, and others. No contrary view is established from any Companion, whether concerning oaths involving divorce or oaths involving emancipation. Indeed, if the Companions hold that someone who swears an oath involving emancipation is not bound to emancipate, then, in their view, someone who swears an oath involving divorce is even less bound to divorce.

This is like swearing an oath by means of a vow, such as saying, “If I do such-and-such, I must perform Hajj,” or “fast for a year,” or “give a third of my wealth in charity.” According to Companions of the Messenger of Allah (may Allah bless him and grant him peace), such as ‘Umar, Ibn ‘Abbās, ‘Ā’isha, and Ibn ‘Umar, this is an oath for which expiation suffices. This is also the view of the great majority of the Successors, including Tāwūs, ‘Atā’, Abū al-Sha‘thā’, ‘Ikrima, al-Hasan, and others. It is al-Shāfi‘ī’s explicitly stated position and Ahmad’s position, with no disagreement over its attribution to him. It is also one of the two views reported from Abū Hanīfa, and was adopted by Muhammad ibn al-Hasan. A group of Mālik’s followers, such as Ibn Wahb and Ibn Abī al-Ghamr, likewise held this view, and Ibn al-Qāsim gave his son a fatwa to this effect.

The position known from the majority of the early generations—the Companions, the Successors, and those after them—is that there is no distinction between swearing an oath involving divorce, emancipation, or a vow: either expiation suffices for every such oath, nothing is required of the person, or he is bound to carry out what he swore to do.

Indeed, if saying, “If I do such-and-such, I must free a slave,” with the intention of swearing an oath does not oblige him to emancipate a slave, but expiation for an oath suffices instead—even though saying it as a vow would make it binding upon him