អ៊ុមដាតុល រីអាយ៉ះ (ការពន្យល់ក្បួនច្បាប់វីកាយ៉ះ ហាណាហ្វី)

Eating is what makes bread delicious, makes it good, and gives pleasure to eating. It covers both liquid and non-liquid foods. As for dyeing (1), it is specific (2) to liquid (3), which is what the bread is dipped in and colored with.

(And he does not break his oath in not eating from this soft meat (4)[(5)] and he ate fresh fruits[(6)], or from this fresh meat or milk and he ate (7) dates or shiraz[(8)](9), or (10) with soft fruits and he ate (11) fresh dates): That is, he does not break the oath in the case of not eating soft fruits and then he ate fresh dates, and know that there is no difference[(12)] between our saying: He does not eat from this soft food and he ate it fresh, and between Our saying: He does not eat fresh fruits, so he ate fresh fruits, based [(1)] on the fact that al-busr and fresh fruits are among the names of the genera, so when they become fresh, they become another essence, as we have shown (2) in He does not enter a house (3). (4) (or meat[(1)] so he ate fish)(2): That is, he does not break the oath in He does not eat meat, so he ate fish, (or meat or fat, so he ate fresh meat[(3)], nor in He does not buy fresh fruits. So he bought a press(4)[(5)] with dates in it(6).

And he broke his oath if he swore not to eat fresh or soft food, or not to eat fresh food, and then he ate guilty [(1)]): That is, he swore not to eat fresh food and then ate guilty, or he swore not to eat fresh food or soft food and ate guilty, or he swore not to eat fresh food or soft food and then ate guilty, he broke his oath. This is according to Abu Hanifa [(2)] - may God be pleased with him -; Because part of the sinner is fresh and some is soft, so whoever eats it [eats](3) the fresh [(4)] and the soft. He said in ((Al-Hidaya)): In their view [(5)] if he swears not to eat fresh meat, he does not break the guilty sin, and if he swears not to eat secret, he does not break the guilty fresh meat (6).

He said in ((Al-Maghrib))[(1)]: The guilty secretion: He has sinned if the moisture began to occur to him before his sin, which is what is lower on the part of the suppressed (2) and the relationship (3)[(4)].

There is no doubt that wetness is only from one side, and it is the one that does not have to be suppressed or related. This side is sin. If you know this [(1)] then how is what he said in ((Al-Hidaya)) correct: A guilty wet person is that which has little secret in his sin, and guilty guilty pleasure is the opposite(2): that is, what is in his sin is little wet.

So I say [(1)]: The types of dates that we saw from Baghdad[(2)], Persian, and Kerman(3) begin their moistening from the side (4) that is not on the funnel. In other countries, if the moistening begins from the side of the funnel, then what the author of ((Al-Hidaya)) said is correct.

And if the wetness is not from the side of the funnel, then the reason for its validity is that the guilty wetness is that which is mostly wet, and the guilty wetness is that which is the most wetness. Then, since the wetness is from the end of the funnel, then the head of the wetness is what is next to the funnel, and its tail is the other end, and since the wetness is the other end, then the head of the wetness is the tip of the funnel, and its tail is the tip of the funnel, then this is the reason for its validity.

(Or he does not eat meat and eats liver[(1)] or tripe or pork or human flesh): It was said: He does not break his oath by eating liver and tripe according to our custom(2)[(3)]; Because in our custom they are no longer meat, and as for pork and human flesh, they are real meat[(4)] so they are perjured. (And lunch[(1)] is food[(2)] from dawn[(3)] until noon[(4)], and dinner from there until midnight(5)[(6)], and suhoor[(7)] from there until dawn(8).

And if you wear, eat, or drink, and he intends to do something specific, then he will not be confirmed at all [(1)])(2): [i.e.] (3) [If] (4) he intends to wear a specific garment, or a specific food, or a specific drink, then he will not be authenticated in a decree or religion; Because the negative is the essence of clothing[(5)], and it has no indication of clothing except as a requirement[(6)], and the requirement[(7)] has no generality, so the specific intention is not valid in it. (Even if it includes[(1)] a garment(2), or food, or drink[(3)] a debt): that is, the truth of a debt[(4)] not a judiciary; Because the wording is general, the technicality of the specification [(5)] is contrary to what is apparent, so it is not valid in the judiciary.

(He imagined [(1)] righteousness as a condition for the validity of an oath, unlike Abu Yusuf - may God be pleased with him - so whoever swears that I will drink the water from this jug today, and there is no water in it, or if it was poured on that day, he will not break his oath. (2) Know that the ability to be righteous is a condition for the validity of an oath according to Abu Hanifa and Muhammad - may God be pleased with them - whether it is by God Almighty, or by divorce, or by emancipation, and according to Abu Yusuf - may God be pleased with him - it is not a condition, so if he swears: By God I will drink the water that is in this jug today [(3)], and there is no water in it[(4)], or he swore that if I did not drink the water that was in this jug today, then his wife is divorced, and there is no water in it, he will not break his oath according to them, and according to Abu Yusuf - may God be pleased with him - he will break his oath[(5)], and if he swears and there is (1) water in it that day, then the ruling is what was mentioned[(2)].

(And if he releases [(1)] (2), then so on the first [(3)] without the second): That is, if he does not say today, he will not break his oath as long as there was no water in the jug with them, contrary to Abu Yusuf - may God be pleased with him -, and if he did, then he will break his oath, unanimously; This is because if there is no water in the jug, then righteousness is not possible[(4)] whether the day is mentioned or not, and if there is water in it, then the day is mentioned, then righteousness is only obligatory for him[(5)] in the last part of the day, so if it pours[(6)] righteousness is not conceivable.

And if he does not mention the day, then righteousness [(1)] is only obligatory upon him when he has finished speaking, but it is expanded on the condition that he does not miss it during his life, and righteousness is envisioned when he has finished speaking and the oath is taken, and according to Abu Yusuf - may God be pleased with him - he breaks it in all [(2)], in a temporary one after the time has passed, and in a non-temporary one he breaks it immediately.

(And to ascend to the sky[(1)], or to turn[(2)] this stone into gold, or to kill so-and-so knowing[(3)] of his death. [The oath][(4)](5) was made out of the idea of ​​righteousness, and he broke it[(6)] due to inability, and if he did not know it[(7)] then not.(8). And there is a disagreement with Zafar - may God be pleased with him -, so in him the oath is not valid; Because righteousness is usually impossible [(9)]. We said: These things are possible in themselves, so this is sufficient for the oath to be taken, and it is broken immediately[(1)] without interruption until the time of death due to incapacity[(2)] usually. But we said [knowing] of his death; Because then [(3)] it is intended to kill him after God Almighty revives him, which is possible but not a reality, so the oath is taken and he is broken immediately. But if he was not aware of his death, then what is meant is customary killing[(4)], and since he was dead, customary killing was abstained, so it became like the issue of a cup[(5)].

(He stretched her hair[(1)], strangled her, and bit her, like hitting her(2). [Separating the oath regarding wearing clothes and other things]

And the cotton is his property[(3)](4) after you wore(5) of your spinning, so he gave it, so you spun it, he wove it, and he wore(6) Hady: cotton: a noun, and sacrificial: a predicate, and the meaning of the sacrifice is what is given to Mecca in charity, and according to them, if the cotton was his possession[(7)] on the day of the oath, then you spun it, wove it, and wore it, it must be given to Mecca, and if the cotton was not his property on the day of the oath, then no[(8)]. (And a gold ring is an ornament [(1)] not a silver ring (2) [(3)], and they have [(4)]: a pearl necklace that is not studded [(5)] as an ornament, and a fatwa is given regarding it (6).

Whoever swears that he will not sleep[(1)] on this bed, but sleeps on a pile(2)[(3)] above it, has broken his oath, not the one who places another bed above it. Because the dirt belongs to the bed, not the other bed [(4)].

(Or he swore[(1)] not to sit on the ground, so he sat on a rug, or a mat [above him](2)), where he would not break his oath; Because he did not sit on the ground, (and if his clothing prevented him from it, he would break his oath); Because he sat on the floor and his clothes followed[(3)] him, (like someone who swore[(4)] not to sit on this bed[(5)], so he sat on a rug above it); Because sitting on this bed is not accustomed to without a rug being placed on it, so sitting on the rug is sitting on the bed. (Unlike sitting on another bed above him, sitting on the other bed is not sitting on that bed.

And he does not do it, it will happen forever [(1)] [(2)], and he will do it once (3), know that his saying: He will not do this according to custom is a negation of his saying: He will do it, and his saying: He will do it, it will happen once[(4)], so his saying: He will not do it will be forever. [Separating the oath in Hajj, prayer and fasting]

(And I have to walk to the House of God Almighty[(1)], or to the Kaaba, Hajj or Umrah[(2)] is obligatory by walking[(3)], and blood[(4)] if riding, and nothing is required of me going out, or going to the House of God Almighty, or walking to the Sanctuary), this[(5)] according to Abu Hanifa - may God be pleased with him -, but according to Abu Yusuf[(1)] and Muhammad - may God be pleased with them - he is obligated to (2) Hajj, or Umrah by walking, (or (3) the Sacred Mosque, or (4) Al-Marwa (5). [(6)] A slave who is told: If I do not perform Hajj this year, then you are free, will not be emancipated, so they bear witness(7) that he will be slaughtered(8) in Kufa(9)). This is according to [Abu Hanifa and](10) Abu Yusuf - may God be pleased with them -, but according to Muhammad - may God be pleased with him - he is emancipated; Because their testimony was based on a known matter, which is sacrificing Kufa, and among its necessity is the absence of Hajj, which is a condition for emancipation.

They said (1): This (2) is testimony to the denial, [and testimony to the denial is not acceptable] (3).