Does entering a dwelling owned by another, but occupied by the person named in the oath, constitute breaking an oath sworn not to enter 'that person's house'?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Expiations
Primary text
If one swears an oath not to enter the house (*dar*) of a specific person, entering a dwelling owned by that person, or one occupied by that person through rent, loan (*'ariyah*), or usurpation (*ghasb*), breaks the oath (*hanith*). This view is held by Abu Thawr and the Hanafi scholars (Ashab al-Ra'y). The evidence for this ruling rests on the understanding that the dwelling is associated with the occupant, similar to its association with the owner. This is supported by Quranic verses indicating association through residence, such as "Do not make them leave their houses" (Quran 65:1), referring to the houses of their husbands where they reside, and "And abide in your houses" (Quran 33:33). Furthermore, affiliation is established through exclusivity (*ikhtisas*), as demonstrated by relating a person to a brother through brotherhood, a father through sonship, and a wife through marriage. Since the resident has exclusivity over the dwelling, the attribution to the resident is valid and established in common usage, necessitating that entering it breaks the oath just as entering an owned dwelling would.
Supporting text
Al-Shafi'i holds that the oath is only broken upon entering a dwelling owned by the named person, arguing that the attribution in the oath refers truly to ownership, citing the analogy that stating "This house belongs to so-and-so" is an admission of ownership. He suggests that explaining the intent as mere occupancy would not be accepted.