Question
I made a vow that if I do this thing i will give 250 rupees for the first time if do it again I will add 250 to previous amount everytime I do this thing. The problem is I don’t remember if I made this vow verbally or in the heart. I am more inclined towards the thought that I did it in the heart and not verbally. I remember calculating money but not the vow and I think I made vow in heart so what is the status of this vow. Secondly I made a second vow because I cannot fulfill first vow it would be difficult so I said Allah I will give 500 for every time. But I got to know that one cannot change a vow so is the second vow valid or not because I intended to change the first vow. I did take the second vow verbally but niya was to change first vow. And In the beginning I though that my first vow was valid and second was not valid. So I gave money according to first vow. I gave 250 for first time, 500 for second time…. 1750 for seventh time .If my first vow is invalid and my second vow is valid will I give money again according to second vow or the money given for first vow will makeup for the second vow as the money intended for first vow was more than the money intended for the money for second vow. Will it makeup as I thought that first vow was valid and second was invalid. But if second is valid will I give money again or the first will makeup. Or any vow is not valid and I don’t have to do anything Jazakallah khair
Answer
At this moment, nothing is due upon you, although were you to break the oath again, 500 rupees would be due upon you or expiation (if the action upon which the vow was conditioned was something you did not want to occur). The reason this is the case is because of the following.
One of the conditions for an oath or vow to be valid is that it must be verbalised, and not remain merely in the mind. Since your predominant thought is that the first vow was not verbalised, but was only uttered in your mind, it will not be effectual.
As for the second vow, you mentioned that you did verbalise it, therefore it will be effective. Thereafter, if the action upon which the vow was conditioned is something that you did not want to occur (as suggested by your question), then you have a choice to carry out what you had vowed or give expiation for an oath. This is because such an utterance has both features of a vow and features of an oath, and therefore you have a choice to either fulfil it or complete the expiation. Thus, you would either fulfil the vow by giving 500 rupees in charity for each time you did the action, or you could give expiation. To expiate, you can either feed 10 poor people morning and evening, or give them clothing. If you are unable to do that, then you may fast for three days.
As for if the action upon which the vow was conditioned is something that you did want to occur, then this is a vow and must be fulfilled. You cannot give expiation as was possible in the previous case.
Finally, from your question it is apparent that you gave money for the first vow after having verbalised the second vow, thinking that you are changing your first vow. Since there is effectively only one vow and you have paid for this one vow after its cause was found, the money that you have given for it will suffice for the vow. You have mentioned that the money you have given exceeds the total due upon you and thus at this moment in time, there is nothing further due upon you, neither money, nor expiation.
الدر المختار وحاشية ابن عابدين (رد المحتار) (3/ 738)
وفي الدر: (ثُمَّ إنَّ) الْمُعَلَّقَ فِيهِ تَفْصِيلٌ فَإِنْ (عَلَّقَهُ بِشَرْطٍ يُرِيدُهُ كَأَنْ قَدِمَ غَائِبِي) أَوْ شُفِيَ مَرِيضِي (يُوَفِّي) وُجُوبًا (إنْ وُجِدَ) الشَّرْطُ (وَ) إنْ عَلَّقَهُ (بِمَا لَمْ يُرِدْهُ كَإِنْ زَنَيْت بِفُلَانَةَ) مَثَلًا فَحَنِثَ (وَفَّى) بِنَذْرِهِ (أَوْ كَفَّرَ) لِيَمِينِهِ (عَلَى الْمَذْهَبِ) لِأَنَّهُ نَذْرٌ بِظَاهِرِهِ يَمِينٌ بِمَعْنَاهُ فَيُخَيَّرُ ضَرُورَةً.
وفي الرد: (قَوْلُهُ ثُمَّ إنَّ الْمُعَلَّقَ إلَخْ) اعْلَمْ أَنَّ الْمَذْكُورَ فِي كُتُبِ ظَاهِرِ الرِّوَايَةِ أَنَّ الْمُعَلَّقَ يَجِبُ الْوَفَاءُ بِهِ مُطْلَقًا: أَيْ سَوَاءٌ كَانَ الشَّرْطُ مِمَّا يُرَادُ كَوْنُهُ أَيْ يُطْلَبُ حُصُولُهُ كَإِنْ شَفَى اللَّهُ مَرِيضِي أَوْ لَا كَإِنْ كَلَّمْت زَيْدًا أَوْ دَخَلْت الدَّارَ فَكَذَا، وَهُوَ الْمُسَمَّى عِنْدَ الشَّافِعِيَّةِ نَذْرَ اللَّجَاجِ وَرُوِيَ عَنْ أَبِي حَنِيفَةَ التَّفْصِيلُ الْمَذْكُورُ هُنَا وَأَنَّهُ رَجَعَ إلَيْهِ قَبْلَ مَوْتِهِ بِسَبْعَةِ أَيَّامٍ وَفِي الْهِدَايَةِ أَنَّهُ قَوْلُ مُحَمَّدٍ وَهُوَ الصَّحِيحُ. اهـ. وَمَشَى عَلَيْهِ أَصْحَابُ الْمُتُونِ كَالْمُخْتَارِ وَالْمَجْمَعِ وَمُخْتَصَرِ النُّقَايَةِ وَالْمُلْتَقَى وَغَيْرِهَا، وَهُوَ مَذْهَبُ الشَّافِعِيِّ، وَذَكَرَ فِي الْفَتْحِ أَنَّهُ الْمَرْوِيُّ فِي النَّوَادِرِ وَأَنَّهُ مُخْتَارُ الْمُحَقِّقِينَ وَقَدْ انْعَكَسَ الْأَمْرُ عَلَى صَاحِبِ الْبَحْرِ، فَظَنَّ أَنَّ هَذَا لَا أَصْلَ لَهُ فِي الرِّوَايَةِ، وَأَنَّ رِوَايَةَ النَّوَادِرِ أَنَّهُ مُخَيَّرٌ فِيهِمَا مُطْلَقًا وَأَنَّ فِي الْخُلَاصَةِ قَالَ: وَبِهِ يُفْتَى وَقَدْ عَلِمْت أَنَّ الْمَرْوِيَّ فِي النَّوَادِرِ هُوَ التَّفْصِيلُ الْمَذْكُورُ، وَذَكَرَ فِي النَّهْرِ أَنَّ الَّذِي فِي الْخُلَاصَةِ هُوَ التَّعْلِيقُ بِمَا لَا يُرَادُ كَوْنُهُ فَالْإِطْلَاقُ مَمْنُوعٌ. اهـ.
وَالْحَاصِلُ: أَنَّهُ لَيْسَ فِي الْمَسْأَلَةِ سِوَى قَوْلَيْنِ الْأَوَّلُ ظَاهِرُ الرِّوَايَةِ عَدَمُ التَّخْيِيرِ أَصْلًا وَالثَّانِي التَّفْصِيلُ الْمَذْكُورُ وَأَمَّا مَا تَوَهَّمَهُ فِي الْبَحْرِ مِنْ الْقَوْلِ الثَّالِثِ وَهُوَ التَّخْيِيرُ مُطْلَقًا وَأَنَّهُ الْمُفْتَى بِهِ فَلَا أَصْلَ لَهُ كَمَا أَوْضَحَهُ الْعَلَّامَةُ الشُّرُنْبُلَالِيُّ فِي رِسَالَتِهِ الْمُسَمَّاةِ تُحْفَةُ التَّحْرِيرِ فَافْهَمْ
الفتاوى الهندية (2/ 61)
[الفصل الثاني في الكفارة]
وهي أحد ثلاثة أشياء إن قدر عتق رقبة يجزئ فيها ما يجزئ في الظهار أو كسوة عشرة مساكين لكل واحد ثوب فما زاد وأدناه ما يجوز فيه الصلاة أو إطعامهم والإطعام فيها كالإطعام في كفارة الظهار هكذا في الحاوي للقدسي.
وعن أبي حنيفة وأبي يوسف رحمهما الله تعالى إن أدنى الكسوة ما يستر عامة بدنه حتى لا يجوز السراويل وهو صحيح كذا في الهداية.
فإن لم يقدر على أحد هذه الأشياء الثلاثة صام ثلاثة أيام متتابعات وهذه كفارة المعسر والأولى كفارة الموسر وحد اليسار في كفارة اليمين أن يكون له فضل على كفافه مقدار ما يكفر عن يمينه وهذا إذا لم يكن في ملكه عين المنصوص عليه أما إذا كان في ملكه عين المنصوص عليه وهو أن يكون في ملكه عبد أو كسوة أو طعام عشرة لا يجوز أن يصوم
الدر المختار وحاشية ابن عابدين (رد المحتار) (3/ 741)
وَقَدَّمْنَا هُنَاكَ الْفَرْقَ وَهُوَ أَنَّ الْمُعَلَّقَ عَلَى شَرْطٍ لَا يَنْعَقِدُ سَبَبًا لِلْحَالِ كَمَا تَقَرَّرَ فِي الْأُصُولِ بَلْ عِنْدَ وُجُودِ شَرْطِهِ، فَلَوْ جَازَ تَعْجِيلُهُ لَزِمَ وُقُوعُهُ قَبْلَ سَبَبِهِ فَلَا يَصِحُّ، وَيَظْهَرُ مِنْ هَذَا أَنَّ الْمُعَلَّقَ يَتَعَيَّنُ فِيهِ الزَّمَانُ بِالنَّظَرِ إلَى التَّعْجِيلِ، أَمَّا تَأْخِيرُهُ فَالظَّاهِرُ أَنَّهُ جَائِزٌ إذْ لَا مَحْذُورَ فِيهِ، وَكَذَا يَظْهَرُ مِنْهُ أَنَّهُ لَا يَتَعَيَّنُ فِيهِ الْمَكَانُ وَالدِّرْهَمُ وَالْفَقِيرُ لِأَنَّ التَّعْلِيقَ إنَّمَا أَثَّرَ فِي انْعِقَادِ السَّبَبِيَّةِ فَقَطْ، فَلِذَا امْتَنَعَ فِيهِ التَّعْجِيلُ، وَتَعَيَّنَ فِيهِ الْوَقْتُ أَمَّا الْمَكَانُ وَالدِّرْهَمُ وَالْفَقِيرُ فَهِيَ بَاقِيَةٌ عَلَى الْأَصْلِ مِنْ عَدَمِ التَّعْيِينِ، وَلِذَا اقْتَصَرَ الشَّارِحُ فِي بَيَانِ الْمُخَالَفَةِ عَلَى التَّعْجِيلِ فَقَطْ حَيْثُ قَالَ: فَإِنَّهُ لَا يَجُوزُ تَعْجِيلُهُ فَتَدَبَّرْ.
Answered by:
Ifta Research Fellow
Checked & Approved by:
Mufti Abdul Rahman Mangera
Mufti Zubair Patel