حَدَّثَنَا خَلَفُ بْنُ هِشَامٍ، وَقُتَيْبَةُ بْنُ سَعِيدٍ، وَيَحْيَى بْنُ حَبِيبٍ الْحَارِثِيُّ، - وَاللَّفْظُ لِخَلَفٍ - قَالُوا حَدَّثَنَا حَمَّادُ بْنُ زَيْدٍ، عَنْ غَيْلاَنَ بْنِ جَرِيرٍ، عَنْ أَبِي بُرْدَةَ، عَنْ أَبِي مُوسَى، الأَشْعَرِيِّ قَالَ أَتَيْتُ النَّبِيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم فِي رَهْطٍ مِنَ الأَشْعَرِيِّينَ نَسْتَحْمِلُهُ فَقَالَ ‏"‏ وَاللَّهِ لاَ أَحْمِلُكُمْ وَمَا عِنْدِي مَا أَحْمِلُكُمْ عَلَيْهِ ‏"‏ ‏.‏ قَالَ فَلَبِثْنَا مَا شَاءَ اللَّهُ ثُمَّ أُتِيَ بِإِبِلٍ فَأَمَرَ لَنَا بِثَلاَثِ ذَوْدٍ غُرِّ الذُّرَى فَلَمَّا انْطَلَقْنَا قُلْنَا - أَوْ قَالَ بَعْضُنَا لِبَعْضٍ - لاَ يُبَارِكُ اللَّهُ لَنَا أَتَيْنَا رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم نَسْتَحْمِلُهُ فَحَلَفَ أَنْ لاَ يَحْمِلَنَا ثُمَّ حَمَلَنَا ‏.‏ فَأَتَوْهُ فَأَخْبَرُوهُ فَقَالَ ‏"‏ مَا أَنَا حَمَلْتُكُمْ وَلَكِنَّ اللَّهَ حَمَلَكُمْ وَإِنِّي وَاللَّهِ إِنْ شَاءَ اللَّهُ لاَ أَحْلِفُ عَلَى يَمِينٍ ثُمَّ أَرَى خَيْرًا مِنْهَا إِلاَّ كَفَّرْتُ عَنْ يَمِينِي وَأَتَيْتُ الَّذِي هُوَ خَيْرٌ ‏"‏ ‏.‏
Translation
Abu Huraira reported

A person sat late in the night with Allah's Apostle (ﷺ), and then came to his family and found that his children had gone to sleep. His wife brought food for him. but he took an oath that he would not eat because of his children (having gone to sleep without food) He then gave precedence (of breaking the vow and then expiating it) and ate the food He then came to Allah s Messenger (ﷺ) and made mention of that to him, whereupon Allah's Messenger (may peace he upon him) said: He who took an oath and (later on) found something better than that should do that, and expiate for (breaking) his vow.

Comment

The Book of Oaths - Sahih Muslim 1650a

This narration from Sahih Muslim concerns a companion who took an oath not to eat after finding his children asleep without food, yet later broke this oath after his wife brought him sustenance, subsequently seeking guidance from the Prophet Muhammad (ﷺ).

Scholarly Commentary on the Hadith

The jurists derive from this hadith that when a person takes an oath to abstain from a permissible act, then finds a greater benefit in breaking that oath, it becomes recommended to break the oath and perform the expiation (kaffārah). This demonstrates the flexibility and mercy in Islamic law regarding personal vows.

The wisdom behind this ruling is that maintaining rigid adherence to an oath that causes harm or prevents benefit contradicts the spirit of Islamic law, which aims to facilitate ease and avoid unnecessary hardship for believers.

Legal Implications and Expiation

The expiation (kaffārah) for breaking such an oath is clearly established in Islamic jurisprudence: feeding ten needy persons, clothing them, or freeing a slave. If unable to perform these, one must fast for three consecutive days.

This ruling applies specifically to oaths involving permissible matters (mubāhāt). Oaths concerning obligatory acts or prohibitions follow different rulings, as breaking them may involve committing sins rather than merely breaking vows.

Moral and Spiritual Lessons

This teaching emphasizes that Islam values practical wisdom over rigid formalism. The Prophet's guidance prioritizes family harmony and personal nourishment over strict adherence to unnecessary oaths.

The incident illustrates the compassionate nature of Islamic law, where divine legislation considers human needs and circumstances, encouraging believers to choose what brings benefit while maintaining proper spiritual accountability through expiation.