Does an oath based on contingent actions (like divorce or manumission) qualify as Iila'?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of the Oath of Abstention (Ila')
Primary text
The dominant view asserts that oaths contingent upon an action, such as saying 'If I approach you, you are divorced,' are considered Iila' if they imply a binding consequence upon breach. This is supported by the reasoning that such conditional statements function as an oath, evidenced by the consequence (divorce) taking effect immediately if one claims, 'If I swore by your divorce, you are divorced,' and then says, 'If I approach you, you are divorced.' Furthermore, the consequential penalty (like divorce or manumission) involves a right of a human being, making the breach binding.
Supporting text
Abu Bakr stated that any oath requiring expiation (Kaffarah) makes the swearer an Iila'-maker. However, oaths of divorce or manumission do not qualify as Iila' under this specific criterion because they relate to a human right, whereas Iila' fundamentally concerns an oath triggering a right of Allah (like Kaffarah). The view rejecting these as Iila' is also supported by the fact that the standard definition of Iila' relates strictly to the Qasam (oath), as evidenced by the Qur'anic passage concerning forgiveness {Then if they reconcile, indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful} [Al-Baqarah: 226], which applies to swearing by Allah, and Hadith prohibiting swearing by anything other than Allah.