Bukhari

Hadith Commentary:
(1)
Abdullah bin Umar radi Allahu anhu narrated this hadith in the context of a particular incident. That incident has been mentioned by Imam Hakim rahimahullah: Sa'id bin Harith says that I was with Ibn Umar radi Allahu anhu when Mas'ud bin Amr, the son of Amr bin Ka'b, came to him and said:
Abu Abdur-Rahman! My son is in the land of Iran with Umar bin Ubaidullah, and there is an outbreak of plague there.
I have made a vow (nadhar) that if my son returns safely, I will travel to the House of Allah (Baytullah) on foot.
He came to us in a state of illness, lived for a few days, and then passed away. Now, what is your opinion regarding this vow? At that time, Ibn Umar radi Allahu anhu narrated the aforementioned hadith.
('Umdat al-Qari: 15/737) (2)
Hafiz Ibn Hajar rahimahullah has written, quoting Allamah Qurtubi, that the best vow (nadhar) is that a person obligates upon himself an act of worship without any condition, such as if a person recovers from an illness and says that, as a form of gratitude, he will fast.
He makes this vow for the sake of Allah Ta'ala.
On the contrary, if someone considers his slave a burden upon himself and makes a vow to free him in order to be rid of him, then this type of vow is not for seeking closeness to Allah Ta'ala.
And Allah knows best. (Fath al-Bari: 11/702)

Sahih Bukhari Hadith Number: 6693 Chapter: «بَابُ الْوَفَاءِ بِالنَّذْرِ:»
Relationship between the Chapter and the Hadith:
The translation of the chapter is based on the fulfillment of vows (nadhar) and pledges, that fulfilling them is obligatory. Under this chapter, Imam Bukhari rahimahullah has mentioned three hadiths. The meanings of all three hadiths are similar to each other, but there is no explicit evidence in the hadiths for the obligation of fulfilling vows. Therefore, how is the relationship between the chapter and the hadith possible?
Ibn al-Munir rahimahullah, while establishing the relationship between the chapter and the hadith, writes:
«موضع الاستشهاد قوله: ”يستخرج به من البخيل“ (و انما يخرج البخيل) ما يجب عليه، لا ما هو مبتدع به، و إلا كان جودًا.» (1)
“That is, the relevance of the hadiths to the chapter on fulfilling vows is in the statement: «يستخرج به من البخيل», that a miser only gives out his wealth when it becomes obligatory upon him; if he were to spend voluntarily, then why would he be called a miser?”
Badr al-Din ibn Jama‘ah rahimahullah, while establishing the relationship between the chapter heading and the hadith, states:
“The conformity of the hadith with the chapter heading is in the statement: «يستخرج، لأن البخيل لا يستخرج منه», that the act of a miser fulfilling and completing (his vow) is obligatory, and if he were to spend without it being obligatory, then why would he be called a miser?”
That is, when a miser fulfills his vow—even though it may be burdensome for him—and he is compelled to give out his specified wealth, then in this regard, giving out wealth with difficulty is evidence for the obligation of fulfilling vows. From here, the relationship between the chapter and the hadith is established.

Hadith Commentary:
Although money does not leave his heart easily, when some calamity befalls him, he makes a vow (nazr), and if by coincidence his objective is fulfilled, then now he has to spend money; reluctantly, at that time, he is compelled to spend. In short, all matters are carried out under the domain of divine decree (taqdeer).
This is precisely what Hazrat Imam, rahimahullah, intends to establish.

Hadith Commentary:
Benefits and Issues:
The purpose of this hadith is to prohibit that type of vow (nazr)
which is conditional,
which is called a suspended vow (nazr mu‘allaq),
for example, if someone says,
“If Allah grants recovery to our sick person, then we will give a goat in charity,”
or holds the belief that a vow can avert calamity,
and that it has an effect on divine decree (taqdeer ilahi),
therefore the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) said:
“It does not avert any decree,
rather, through it something is extracted from the miser.”

Benefits and Issues:
This prohibition and disapproval pertains to this type of vow (nadhr):
that a person says, “If such-and-such of my tasks is accomplished, then I will give such-and-such amount in charity.”
Because what happens is only what is decreed, but the result of this is that a person who does not spend for the pleasure of Allah in normal circumstances, ends up spending when he is faced with some difficulty.
In short, it is not liked to make spending wealth in the way of Allah conditional upon the fulfillment of one’s own needs.

Permissible vows (nazr) are not a major sin or an act of disobedience, but they are also not recommended, because in them charity (sadaqah) and good deeds are made conditional. That is, if I recover, then I will perform a good deed or give charity. Clearly, making conditions with Allah Ta’ala is not a good thing, but making a condition for a voluntary good deed or charity is also not prohibited; therefore, it has not been considered commendable, but fulfilling it has been declared necessary. The correct way instead of making a vow (nazr) is that one should, of one’s own accord and without any condition, give charity or perform a good deed and then supplicate for one’s need, because supplication (dua) can even change destiny, whereas nothing is gained from a vow (nazr). A generous person hastens to give charity and does so without seeking anything in return, whereas a miserly person does not give charity otherwise, but gives charity in exchange for something; thus, by making a vow (nazr), he is compelled to give charity. It is implicitly understood that making a vow (nazr) is the practice of a stingy and miserly person. Clearly, this is not a good example. Some researchers have said that making a vow (nazr) has been discouraged because it is possible that later it may not be fulfilled. In reality, this is an emphasis on fulfilling the vow. And Allah knows best.

Takhrij:
«أخرجه البخاري، القدر، باب إلقاء العبد النذرإلي القدر، حديث:6608، ومسلم، النذر، باب النهي عن النذر...، حديث:1639..»©Explanation:
➊ The purpose of prohibiting vows (nadhar) is actually to guide towards a more virtuous action and to clarify that making charity and alms, etc., conditional upon the attainment of a desired outcome is not befitting for a person of dignity and nobility.
➋ This is an act typically done by a miserly person who never spends. If he does spend, he desires something superior in return, and such an action is taken by someone whose heart is not inclined towards charity and alms except when he is rendered speechless by circumstances and faces hardship. Then, in order to rectify his situation, he makes a vow to give charity and alms. When his objective is achieved, only then does he give charity; otherwise, he does not. For example: he says, “If Allah grants me cure from my illness or grants health and well-being to my patient, then I will spend such-and-such amount in the way of Allah.” And he only spends that wealth when he attains health and well-being from that illness, even then his heart feels constricted at the time of spending. Therefore, the prohibition of vows is due to the baseness inherent in it, which is not hidden from anyone.
➌ Furthermore, the one who makes a vow seemingly holds the belief that by making a vow, he will obtain something which Allah, exalted is He, has not decreed for him. However, if the one making the vow does not hold such a belief, then making a vow is permissible.