shall be binding upon me—I shall certainly do such-and-such,” or “If I have done such-and-such, my slaves are free,” or “If I have done such-and-such, then I am a Jew or a Christian.”

The scholars hold “three views” on this question. One view is that if he breaks the oath, he must repent. Another is that nothing is required of him. A third is that he must offer expiation for an oath. This is the strongest view, as has been explained at length elsewhere.

If someone uses one of these forms to swear a deliberately false oath, then those who require expiation for a deliberately false oath and consider these forms of oath subject to expiation require expiation in this case.

As for those who say that a deliberately false oath is too grave to be expiated, they hold “two views.”

The “first” is that he incurs whatever he has pledged, whether a vow, divorce, manumission, or disbelief—even if it is held that these consequences do not follow from a forgivable oath, namely an oath concerning the future. This is the position of a group of the followers of Abū Hanīfah and Ahmad. They cite as evidence the saying of the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace:

“Whoever swears falsely by a religion other than Islam is as he has said.”

They argue that this oath does not take binding effect; rather, its breach coincides with pardon, so no expiation is due for it. Moreover, he has pledged what he pledged while knowing that he was lying. He must therefore be held to it as punishment for his lying and as a deterrent to anyone who swears a false oath. This differs from a binding oath, whose maker is obeying Allah, not disobeying Him.