Is the ruling that the utterance of a vow is not considered without mentioning what is vowed a consensus opinion or the opinion of the majority of scholars, and does intention have an effect on an unspecified vow, and does the failure to mention what is vowed lead to the complete annulment of the vow, or does it make it an unspecified vow for which expiation is due?

The intention is not considered by the majority of jurists in the case of a vague vow (nadhr mubham), and they are liable for an expiation for breaking an oath (kaffarat yamin). The Shafi'i school holds that the person owes an unspecified act of devotion and can choose whatever they wish. As for the Hanafis, they consider the intention; if he intended something, he is bound by what he intended, otherwise, he must offer an expiation for breaking an oath.

The preponderant opinion is that of the majority of jurists. Ibn Qudamah stated in Al-Mughni: "The vague vow, which is when someone says: 'I owe a vow to Allah.' This necessitates an expiation, according to the majority of scholars." He cited as evidence the hadith: "The expiation for a vow when it is not specified is the expiation for an oath."