Islamic Fiqh > Oaths and vows > The seller's oath and the cheated buyer
Swearing to sell: what the Sunna says of commercial oaths, the cheated buyer and his option, with the Maghboot hadith.
Contents
Updated on 06 October 2026 at 10:50 PM
The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) set the rule: the proof is upon the claimant and the oath upon the one who denies. Applied to the dispute over the price: the seller claims to have sold for 10 and the buyer denies it; the buyer claims to have bought for 9 and the seller denies it; the oath is prescribed to both.
Shafi'is (apparent view) and Hanbalis: the seller starts: "I sold it for such a price"; if the buyer accepts it, well, otherwise he swears: "I did not buy it for this price". A Shafi'i view: the buyer first, for the seller claims an addition and the principle is the absence of debt, and the goods are with the buyer, which strengthens his position. A third view: the 2 are equal, each being claimant and defendant, the judge chooses who starts or draws lots. Malikis: the word of the buyer with his oath, for the seller claims an addition that is denied and the word belongs to the denier.
A narration from Ahmad: the word of the seller, or the rescission by mutual consent.
"If the 2 partners disagree without proof, the word is that of the holder of the goods, or they rescind the contract."
Ahmad ; Abu Dawud ; an-Nasai ; Ibn Majah
A reported addition specifies: the contract remains as it is. After the oath, each of the 2 may rescind if he does not accept the word of the other. Hanbalis: the mutual oath does not by itself break the contract, which remains valid; if there is agreement, or if one swears and the other stays silent, the contract is confirmed. Shafi'is and one Maliki view: each may rescind without a judgment, by the word of the hadith "or they rescind the contract".
In case of disagreement over a price without proof, the prophetic way is simple: require the proof, otherwise the oath, and prefer rescission to stubbornness. These rules serve the judge as well as the friendly arbitration between merchants.
Al-Mughni by Ibn Qudama · Hanbali school
He said: "Whoever swears by manumission, or by divorce, not to do something, then does it forgetfully, transgresses".
Upon this agreed Mujahid, Sa'id ibn Jubayr, al-Zuhri, Qatada, Rabi'a, Malik, Abu Ubayd and the proponents of reasoned opinion. And it is the famous view of al-Shafi'i. And Ata, Amr ibn Dinar, Ibn Abi Najih, Ishaq and Ibn al-Mundhir said: he does not transgress. And it is a transmission from Ahmad; for the forgetful one bears no responsibility during his forgetfulness, so transgression is not due from him, like the one who swears by Allah, the Most High. And for us (the Hanbalis), a human right attaches to it, so the ruling attaches to it together with forgetfulness, like destruction of property (itlaf); and because it is a ruling suspended upon a condition: it comes into being with the existence of its condition, like the prohibition of praying after asr, and this question has already preceded.