Is refraining from negotiating with the current bank—regarding a modification of employment status based on a job offer from another company—due to an oath sworn to the other company not to negotiate, considered extremism in religion, taking into account the noble verse: "Indeed, those who exchange the covenant of Allah and their [own] oaths for a small price - those will have no share in the Hereafter, and Allah will not speak to them or look at them on the Day of Resurrection, nor will He purify them; and for them is a painful punishment (77)"?

Whoever swears an oath concerning a permissible matter is given a choice between remaining steadfast on his oath without expiation, or doing what he swore against while offering expiation. The majority of scholars prefer remaining steadfast on the oath. However, if doing what was sworn against is better than abandoning it, then breaking the oath (al-hinth) is recommended, and expiation becomes obligatory. This is based on the saying of the Prophet (peace be upon him): "By Allah, if Allah wills, I will not swear an oath and then see something better than it, except that I will expiate for my oath and do what is better, or do what is better and expiate for my oath." Therefore, there is no harm in not negotiating with the bank to uphold the oath. However, if negotiation is better, then one may negotiate along with expiation, in accordance with the Hadith (definition) and the verse: "And do not make [your oath by] Allah an obstacle against your doing good and guarding [against evil] and making peace among people."