falsely, it is one of the major sins. If he uses it to acquire property protected by the Law, he will have no share in the Hereafter; Allah will neither speak to him on the Day of Resurrection nor purify him, and he will have a painful punishment. Yet the Lawgiver knows that someone who swears that he will or will not do something does not intend to dishonour the sanctity of Allah’s name or invoke it for the purpose pursued by someone swearing a deliberately false oath. He therefore prescribed expiation for him, allowing this bond to be dissolved. He waived expiation for an unintentional oath, because the person’s heart had formed no resolve involving an offence against his faith, so there is no need for expiation.

Once it becomes clear that the wording of an oath entails binding the act to that oath—which is his faith in Allah—then, if the act does not occur, his wording would entail the absence of his faith. This would be so were it not for the expiation Allah has prescribed. Similarly, when someone says, “If I do such-and-such, such-and-such becomes obligatory upon me,” doing the former would make the latter obligatory, were it not for the expiation Allah has prescribed.

This is clarified by the Prophet’s statement, may Allah bless him and grant him peace:

“Whoever swears an oath invoking a religion other than Islam is as he has said.”

Both al-Bukhārī and Muslim recorded it in their Sahīh collections. Thus, a deliberately false oath expressed by someone saying that he is a Jew or a Christian if he has done such-and-such is treated like the deliberately false oath, “By Allah, I have not done such-and-such.” In both cases, he has severed his covenant with Allah, having made faith contingent upon something that is not the case, and disbelief upon something that is the case. This differs from an oath concerning the future.

Pursuing this reasoning consistently entails that, when a deliberately false oath involves a vow, divorce, or emancipation, the stipulated consequence takes effect and expiation does not undo it—just as disbelief results from such an oath according to one of the two scholarly views.

This also provides the answer to their statement: “What is meant is an oath sanctioned by the Law.”