of obedience. And because the oath is like a vow, and there is no vow in disobedience to Allah the Almighty. Our argument is the statement of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him): "Whoever swears an oath, then sees another that is better than it, let him perform what is better and make atonement for his oath" (3). He also said: "By Allah, if Allah wills, I do not swear an oath and then see another that is better than it, except that I perform what is better and make atonement for my oath." Recorded by al-Bukhari (3). Their report does not contradict our report, because our report is more authentic and established. Furthermore, it is possible that abandoning it acts as an atonement for the sin of the swearing, and the disputed atonement is the atonement for the violation. Regarding their claim that the breach is an act of obedience, we say: The oath itself is not an act of obedience, thus atonement is required of him due to the violation and to honor the name of Allah the Almighty when one swears by it and does not fulfill the oath. Once this is established, we examine his oath; if it was regarding the abandonment of something and he performed it, he has breached the oath and atonement becomes obligatory. If it was regarding the performance of something and he did not do it, and his oath was time-bound by his words, intention, or circumstantial evidence, then if the time passes, he has breached it and must make atonement. If it was absolute, he does not breach it except by the expiration of the time of possibility, because as long as he is within the time and the act is possible, it is possible that he might perform it and thus not breach it. For this reason, Umar said to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him): "Did you not inform us that we would go to the House and circumambulate it?" [He said: "Did I inform you that you would go to it this year?" He said: "No." He said: "Then you will come to it and circumambulate it"] (6). Allah the Almighty said: {Say: "Yes, by my Lord, you will surely be resurrected"} (7). This is true, yet it has not happened yet.

1779 - Issue; He said: (And if he does it out of forgetfulness, there is nothing upon him, provided that the oath was not related to divorce or manumission).

The sum of this is that whoever swears not to do something, then does it out of forgetfulness, no atonement is upon him. This was reported from Ahmad by the group, except in matters of divorce and manumission, for which he would be in breach. This is the manifest view of the school (Madhhab). It was chosen by al-Khallal and his companion. It is also the view of Abu Ubayd. There is another narration from Ahmad that he does not breach the oath in divorce