Is it permissible to adopt the opinion of someone who ruled a single expiation for a repetitive oath (yamin al-lajaj) that was intended for walking thousands of steps, given the existence of other fatwas requiring expiations equal to the number of steps, and that is to avoid concessions?

An oath of obstinacy prevents the swearer from doing something or urges him to do something. The one who takes such an oath has the choice between fulfilling what he swore to or offering expiation for the oath. Adopting concessions is blameworthy if it is a person's habit to always choose the easiest option in every matter. However, there is no harm for someone who takes the easier option in one or two matters due to necessity. Al-Subki favored the permissibility of adopting concessions when there is a need.