What is the ruling on an oath made under duress or anger (Nadhar al-Lajaj wal-Ghadab)?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Oaths
Primary text
When a person prevents themselves or others from something, or incites an action by saying, 'If I speak to Zayd, then upon me is Hajj, or the charity of my wealth, or a year of fasting,' this constitutes an oath. The jurist has the choice between fulfilling what was sworn to, in which case nothing is incumbent, or breaking the oath (tahneeth). If the oath is broken, they may choose between performing the vowed act or expiating it with the expiation of an oath. Fulfillment is not strictly obligatory, as only the vow of pure devotion (Nadhar al-Tibarar) is mandatory. This opinion is held by Umar, Ibn Abbas, Ibn Umar, Aisha, Hafsa, Zaynab bint Abi Salama, Ata, Tawus, Ikrimah, Al-Qasim, Al-Hasan, Jabir bin Zayd, Al-Nakha'i, Qatadah, Abdullah bin Shurayk, Al-Shafi'i, Al-Anbari, Ishaq, Abu Ubayd, Abu Thawr, and Ibn al-Mundhir. The basis for this ruling is the Hadith where the Prophet, peace be upon him, said, 'There is no vow in anger, and its expiation is the expiation of an oath,' as narrated by Sa'id bin Mansur and Al-Jawzajani. Furthermore, an oath of this nature is covered by the general ruling in the Quran: 'But Allah will hold you accountable for what you have undertaken in oaths,' [Quran 5:89].
Supporting text
Sa'id bin Al-Musayyib stated that there is nothing incumbent in swearing by Hajj. Al-Sha'bi, Al-Harith Al-Ukli, Hammad, and Al-Hakam hold that there is no liability for swearing by the charity of one's wealth, because expiation is only required for swearing by the Almighty's name due to the sanctity of the Name itself, and this was not an oath by God's name, nor is the stipulated act obligatory because it was made as a consequence of censure, not an act of piety. A second narration from Ahmad suggests that expiation is mandatory and fulfilling the vowed act is insufficient, a view held by some Shafi'is, based on the premise that it is an oath. Another view concerning oaths by God's name suggests that the primary obligation is fulfilling the vowed act unless the oath was by God's esteemed Name, in which case expiation is due upon violation.