Muslim

In the previous ahadith, the mention of expiation (kaffarah) comes before breaking the oath, whereas in this hadith (and the forthcoming ahadith), breaking the oath is mentioned first and expiation afterwards. Thus, both are permissible. There is no explicit statement making either sequence obligatory. If one particular method were necessary, the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) would have explicitly instructed to adopt it, but he did not do so. In any case, this is the position of the majority of the scholars, and it is the correct one. Acting upon authentic ahadith is far better than acting upon analogical reasoning (qiyas).

Hadith Commentary: Benefits and Issues: "You ask me for a hundred dirhams? And I am the son of Hatim"—according to Imam Qurtubi, the purpose of this statement is that "I am the son of Hatim, who is well-known and famous for his abundance of generosity and liberality, and yet you are asking me for such a small amount." And according to Qadi Iyad, the beggar asked Adi (radi Allahu anhu) at a time when he knew that at present he had nothing to give. The beggar's intention was to express Adi's miserliness and his refusal to give anything. That is why Adi (radi Allahu anhu) said this in a state of displeasure: "You are deliberately asking me this question to disgrace me, so that it may be said that the son of Hatim is miserly and stingy, even though you know that at this moment I have nothing to give. Go, I will write to my family, and they will fulfill your request." But the beggar was not satisfied with this, so Adi (radi Allahu anhu) swore an oath not to give anything.