Is it permissible to render the expiation (Kaffarah) for ordinary oaths before the oath is broken (*Hanith*)?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Oaths
Primary text
The expiation for all other oaths, whether it is by fasting or by other means, is permissible before breaking the oath and after breaking it, according to the opinion of the majority of scholars. This view is held by Malik, and among those reported to have permitted advancing the expiation are Umar ibn al-Khattab, his son, Ibn Abbas, Salman al-Farisi, and Muslama ibn Mukhlad—may Allah be pleased with them. It is also the opinion of Al-Hasan, Ibn Sirin, Rabi'a, Al-Awza'i, Al-Thawri, Ibn al-Mubarak, Ishaq, Abu Ubayd, Abu Khaythama, and Sulayman ibn Dawud. The evidence for this permissibility is the hadith narrated by Abd al-Rahman ibn Samurah, where the Prophet (peace be upon him) instructed him: 'If you swear an oath, and then see something else better than it, expiate for your oath, then do what is better.' This is also supported by the narration where the Prophet (peace be upon him) said, 'I will not swear an oath, and then see something else better than it, except that I will expiate for my oath and do what is better, or do what is better and expiate for my oath.' Furthermore, expiation is deemed valid because it occurs after the cause exists, similar to expiating after an injury but before death.
Supporting text
The Hanafi scholars (Ashab al-Ra'y) rule that expiation is not valid before the oath is broken because it is an expiation before the cause (the breaking of the oath, which is the violation of the revered name) has occurred, thus resembling expiating before taking the oath itself. Al-Shafi'i aligns with the majority concerning manumission, feeding, and clothing, but aligns with the Hanafis regarding fasting, treating it as a bodily act of worship that cannot be performed before its obligation is due without undue hardship, similar to obligatory prayer.