Is swearing by the Name of Allah without using an oath particle (Baa', Waw, or Taa') considered a valid oath?
General Chapter
Al-Mughni
Book of Oaths
Primary text
If one swears using the name Allah followed by a construction in the accusative (*nasb*) or genitive (*jarr*), such as *Allaha la'aqumann* or *Allah la'aqumann*, it is a valid oath. This is supported by usage in Arabic and established practice in the Shariah, evidenced by narrations where 'Abdullah ibn Mas'ud swore this way to the Prophet (peace be upon him) regarding killing Abu Jahl, and the Prophet (peace be upon him) did the same to Rikanah ibn 'Abd Yazid. The oath is confirmed by two supporting factors: the response given is the response to an oath, and the use of *nasb* or *jarr* on the name of Allah, similar to saying *Wallah*.
Supporting text
Al-Shafi'i holds that it is not an oath unless the speaker forms the intention (*niyyah*), as mentioning the name of Allah without an oath particle is not explicit. If the construction is in the nominative (*raf'*)—*Allahu la'af'alun*—and the speaker intends an oath, it is valid but grammatically flawed, similar to saying *Wallahu* with *raf'* (nominative). Some jurists argue that if the nominative form is used without intention, it is not an oath because it violates the grammatical structure established for oaths in Arabic, unless the speaker is a commoner unfamiliar with grammar, in which case the response to the oath may still suffice.