and no expiation is due. An exception counts only when it is uttered aloud, and—according to Mālik and his companions—adding the phrase “if Allah wills” is effective solely in an oath sworn by Allah Himself; it has no effect in oaths that hinge on the emancipation of a slave, a divorce, a vow to walk to Mecca, or any other type of pledge apart from an oath by Allah.

If a defendant, when required by a claimant to swear concerning a right he owes, inserts the exception only inwardly, or merely moves his tongue and lips with it, or even pronounces it out of the claimant’s hearing, that exception does him no good. For in Mālik’s view the operative intention is that of the one for whose benefit the oath is taken, because the oath is his right. Accordingly, the oath is determined by whatever the judge exacts on the claimant’s behalf, not by the choice of the swearer, since it is being extracted from him. This is the distilled position of Mālik.

Later Mālikīs differed over the matter. Some said that the exception is valid, thereby narrowing the scope of what he swore about, yet he wrongs the claimant by doing so; they maintain its validity because oaths are judged by intentions. Others held that it is not valid unless he moves his tongue and lips so that he actually speaks, for an exception is a form of speech and cannot take effect without being spoken.