Ash-Shāfiʿī. Abū Ḥanīfah said: Fasting suffices him, because he is not a 'finder' [of means], so fasting is sufficient for him, acting upon the saying of the Almighty: {Whoever cannot find [the means], then a fast of three days}. It is also by analogy to one who is in a state of insolvency. The evidence that he is not a 'finder' is that if a Mutamattiʿ (one performing Hajj Tamattuʿ) lacks the sacrificial animal in his location, he shifts to fasting; if he lacks water in his location, he shifts to Tayammum; and if one engaging in Zihār lacks the wealth in his location, he shifts to fasting. The shift in these instances is conditional upon the lack of finding [the means], and because he is not in a position to perform expiation with wealth, he is analogous to these foundational cases. Our view is that this is a right of wealth that is obligatory as an act of purification, so absence [of the wealth] does not prevent its obligation, like Zakat. Furthermore, it is not time-bound, and there is no harm in delaying it, so it does not lapse by its absence, unlike Zakat. It differs from the Hady (sacrificial animal), for that has a time that is lost by delay; Tayammum, for its delay leads to the loss of prayer; and the expiation of Zihār, for its delay leads to the abandonment of intercourse, which involves harm, unlike our issue. We do not concede the lack of ability [to possess the wealth]; for this reason, the sale of absent property is valid, even though the ability to deliver it is a condition.

1822 - Issue: He said: (Whoever possesses a house that he cannot do without for his residence, or a mount that he needs to ride, or a servant that he needs for his service, fasting for the expiation is sufficient for him).

The sum of the matter is that expiation is only obligatory regarding what is in excess of his primary needs. Housing is among the primary needs, as is the mount that he needs to ride, because he cannot endure walking to what he needs, or because it is not his custom [to do so]. Likewise, the servant whose service he needs because he is someone who cannot serve himself due to illness, old age, or because it is not his custom to do so. These three are among the primary needs and do not prevent expiation by fasting [nor taking from Zakat and expiation]. Ash-Shāfiʿī said the same. Abū Ḥanīfah and Mālik said: Whoever possesses a slave that would suffice for expiation, fasting is not sufficient for him, even if he needs him for his service; because he is a 'finder' of a slave he can emancipate, so it becomes binding upon him, due to His saying, the Almighty: {Or the emancipation of a slave. Whoever cannot find [the means], then a fast of three days}. Thus, He stipulated for fasting that he must not find it. Our evidence is that it is...