Importance of Prayer & Ruling of its Abandonment
Facing the Qiblah & Intention in the Prayer
Etiquettes of Walking to Prayer and its Description
Description of Prayer Continued
Description of Prayer Continued
Description of Prayer Continued
Pillars and Mandatory Acts of Prayer
Two Prostrations of Forgetfulness
Supererogatory (Voluntary) Prayers
Supererogatory (Voluntary) Prayers Continued
Times of Prohibition of (Supererogatory) Prayer
Congregational Prayers & Latecomers
Jumu'ah (Congregational Friday) Prayer
Introduction & Commercial and Selling
Selling of Primary & Secondary Commodities
Cancellation Options in Transactions
Cancellation Options Continued
Debt Transference & Guarantor-ship
Mortgaging & Security Deposits
Partnership & Companies Continued
Reviving Barren Lands & Per-Job Wage
Lost and Found Property & Foundlings
Prize Money & Deposits for Safekeeping
Interpretation of Oaths
[Implication of Oaths Is Contingent on Intentions]
The implication of the oath depends on the intention, as long as the wording accommodates that.
If one swears to not speak to a man, intending a certain man, or to not have lunch, intending a certain lunch, the oath will apply to that only. 1544
وَيُرْجَعُ فِيْهَا إِلَى النِّيَّةِ، فِيْمَا يَحْتَمِلُهُ اللَّفْظُ. فَإِذَا حَلَفَ لاَ يُكَلِّمَ رَجُلاً، يُرِيْدُ وَاحِدًا بِعَيْنِهِ، أَوْ لاَ يَتَغَدَّى، يُرِيْدُ غَدَاءً بِعَيْنِهِ، اخْتَصَّتْ يَمِيْنُهُ بِهِ.
If one swears to not drink someone’s water to quench one’s thirst, intending to reject all things that count as favors, it will breach the oath to accept any favors from him. 1545
وَإِنْ حَلَفَ لاَ يَشْرَبُ لَهُ الْمَاءَ مِنَ الْعَطَشِ، يُرِيْدُ قَطْعَ مِنَّتِهِ، حَنِثَ بِكُلِّ مَا فِيْهِ مِنَّةٌ.
If he swears to not wear a garment that she wove, intending to not take favors from her, but then he sells it and makes use of its price, then he has breached his oath.
وَإِنْ حَلَفَ لاَ يَلْبَسُ ثَوْبًا مِنْ غَزْلِهَا، يُرِيْدُ قَطْعَ مِنَّتِهَا، فَبَاعَهُ وَاْنتَفَعَ بِثَمَنِهِ، حَنِث.
1544. This is discussed under the following maxim:
Do intentions (play a role in) specifying a general expression or generalizing a specific expression?
هَل النِّيَّةُ تُخَصِّصُ اللَّفْظِ الْعَامِّ أو تُعَمِّمُ اللَّفْظِ الْخَاصَّ؟
Which is a subordinate maxim of the first universal maxim:
Matters are (judged) by their objectives.
الأمُورُ بِمَقَاصِدِهَا
(A) + (+M): The intention generalizes the specific and specifies the general.
(-S): When it comes to oaths, the intention specifies the general expression but does not generalize the specific.
(-H): The intention specifies the general in the scope of religious liability but not judicially. In other words, his claim of specification is not accepted in court, but in the sight of Allah, he is only liable for what he intended.
1545. (A) + (+M): True, because the intention generalizes the specific. (-H, -S): He does not break his vow by taking food or clothing from that person because the intention does not generalize the specific.
If he swears to pay someone tomorrow, intending to pay no later than tomorrow, but he pays him today, he has not breached his oath. 1546
وَإِنْ حَلَفَ لَيَقْضِيَنَّهُ حَقَّهُ غَدًا، يُرِيْدُ أَنْ لاَ يَتَجَاوَزَهُ، فَقَضَاهُ الْيَوْمَ، لَمْ يَحْنَثْ.
مَنْ نَذَرَ نَذْرًا لَمْ يُسَمِّهِ ، فَكَفَّارَتُهُ كَفَّارَةُ يَمِينٍ ، وَمَنْ نَذَرَ نَذْرًا فِي مَعْصِيَةٍ ، فَكَفَّارَتُهُ كَفَّارَةُ يَمِينٍ ، وَمَنْ نَذَرَوَإِنْ حَلَفَ أَنْ لاَ يَبِيْعَ ثَوْبَهُ إِلاَّ بِمِئَةٍ، فَبَاعَهُ بِأَكْثَرَ مِنْهَا، لَمْ يَحْنَثْ، إِذَا أَرَادَ أَنْ لاَ يَنْقُصَهُ عَنْ مِئَةٍ. وَإِنْ حَلَفَ لَيَتَزَوَجَنَّ عَلَى امْرَأَتِهِ، يُرِيْدُ غَيْظَهَا، لَمْ يَبَرَّ إِلاَّ بِتَزْوِيْجٍ يَغِيْظُهَا، وَإِنْ حَلَفَ لَيَضْرِبَنَّهَا، يُرِيْدُ تَأْلِيْمَهَا، لَمْ يَبَرَّ إِلاَّ بِضَرْبٍ يُؤْلِمُهَا، وَإِنْ حَلَفَ لَيَضْرِبَنَّهَا عَشْرَةَ أَسْوَاطٍ، فَجَمَعَهَا فَضَرَبَهَا بِهَا ضَرْبَةً وَاحِدَةً، لَمْ يَبَرَّ.
[In the Absence of a Defined Intention]
If there was no intention, then the implication of the oath will depend on the reason for taking it; this will take the place of the intention in determining the implication.
فَإِنْ عَدِمَتِ النِّيَّةُ، رَجَعَ إِلَى سَبَبِ الْيَمِيْنِ وَمَا هَيَّجَهَا، فَيَقُوْمُ مَقَامَ نِيَّتِهِ، لِدِلاَلَتِهِ عَلَيْهَا.
If that is also unknown, then the oath will be interpreted according to its apparent implication. If there is a Sharia-based implication, such as in ṣalât or zakat, the oath will be understood according to it and will infer the valid form of it. 1547 So if he swears to not sell, and then he enters into an invalid sales contract, he has not breached his oath – unless he makes an oath to not sell a freeman or wine, in which case his oath will apply to that type of sale.
فَإِنْ عُدِمَ ذٰلِكَ، حُمِلَتْ يَمِيْنُهُ عَلَى ظَاهِرِ اللَّفْظِ، فَإِنْ كَانَ لَهُ عُرْفٌ شَرْعِيٌّ، كَالصَّلاَةِ وَالزَّكَاةِ، حُمِلَتْ يَمِيْنُهُ عَلَيْهِ، وَتَنَاوَلَتْ صَحِيْحَهُ. فَلَوْ حَلَفَ لاَ يَبِيْعُ، فَبَاعَ بَيْعًا فَاسِدًا، لَمْ يَحْنَثْ، إِلاَّ أَنْ يُضِيْفَهُ إِلَى مَالاَ يَصِحُّ بَيْعُهُ، كَالْحُرِّ وَالْخَمْرِ، فَتَتَنَاوَلَ يَمِيْنُهُ
1546. Unless one intends to pay on that specific day, in which case it must be done on that day.
1547. (A) + (+M, +s): If there was no accompanying intention or circumstantial evidence to reveal the intent of the oath, and one swore to not eat meat, the oath would be breached by eating fish, because Allah called it meat in the Qur’an. (a) + (-H, -S): The oath is not breached, because ‘meat’ is not customarily used to refer to fish.
There is no disagreement concerning common terminology in Sharia, such as ‘salât’ and ‘zakat’. They will be always understood according to their Sharia-based implication.
صُوْرَةَ الْبَيْع.
If there is no Sharia-based implication, but there is a customary one, such as dâbbah (beast of burden) or dha‘eenah (woman traveler), the oath will be understood according to the customary implication. For example, if he swears to not ride a dâbbah, then his oath will apply (only) to horses, mules, and donkeys. 1548
وَإِنْ لَمْ يَكُنْ لَهُ عُرْفٌ شَرْعِيٌّ وَكَانَ لَهُ عُرْفٌ فِي الْعَادَةِ، كَالدَّابَّةِ وَالظَّعِيْنَةِ، حُمِلَتْ يَمِيْنُهُ عَلَيْهِ، فَلَوْ حَلَفَ لاَ يَرْكَبُ دَابَّةً، فَيَمِيْنُهُ عَلَى الْخَيْلِ وَالْبِغَالِ وَالْحَمِيْرِ.
وَإِنْ حَلَفَ لاَ يَشَمُّ الرَّيْحَانَ، فَيَمِيْنُهُ عَلَى الْفَارِسِيْ، وَإِنْ حَلَفَ لاَ يَأْكُلُ شِوَاءً، حَنِثَ بِأَكْلِ اللَّحْمِ الْمَشْوِيِّ دُوْنَ غَيْرِهِ، وَإِنْ حَلَفَ لاَ يَطَأُ امْرَأَتَهُ، حَنِثَ بِجِمَاعِهَا، وَإِنْ حَلَفَ لاَ يَطَأُ دَارًا، حَنِثَ بِدُخُوْلِهَا كَيْفَ مَا كَانَ، وَإِنْ حَلَفَ لاَ يَأْكُلُ لَحْمًا وَلاَ رَأْسًا وَلاَ بَيْضًا، فَيَمِيْنُهُ عَلَى كُلِّ لَحْمٍ وَرَأْسِ كُلِّ حَيَوَانٍ وَبَيْضِهِ، وَالأُدْمُ كُلُّ مَا جَرَتِ الْعَادَةُ بِأَكْلِ الْخُبْزِ بِهِ، مِنْ مَائِعٍ وَجَامِدٍ، كَاللَّحْمِ، وَالْبَيْضِ، وَالْمِلْحِ، وَالْجُبْنِ، وَالزَّيْتُوْنِ . وَإِنْ حَلَفَ لاَ يَسْكُنُ دَارًا، تَنَاوَلَ مَا يُسَمَّى سَكَنًا، فَإِنْ كَانَ سَاكِنًا بِهَا، فَأَقَامَ بِهَا بَعْدَ مَا أَمْكَنَهُ الْخُرُوْجُ مِنْهَا، حَنِثَ، وَإِنْ أَقَامَ لِنَقْلِ قُمَاشِهِ، أَوْ كَانَ لَيْلاً، فَأَقَامَ حَتَّى يَصْبَحَ، أَوْ خَافَ عَلَى نَفْسِهِ، فَأَقَامَ حَتَّى أَمِنَ، لَمْ يَحْنَثْ.
1548. The order that should be followed in interpreting people’s oaths is:
- Their intention
- The context of taking the oath
- The Sharia-based implication (for common Sharia-based terminology)
- The customary implication
- The apparent linguistic implication
In cases of litigation, the claimed intention is not accepted without proof.
( Page : no 142)