If the intercourse occurred after the expiation of multiple intercourse before it, that was the first or one

( consideration )

The one soul manages multiple bodies if it has the power to do so, and this is for the guardian by breaking the habit, and in the Hereafter the upbringing of man gives that.

[ The one spirit manages all the parts of the body ]

Just as a single soul manages all the other parts of the body, including the hand, the foot, the hearing, the sight, and so on, just as the soul is held accountable for the actions of the prey for what falls from it, so are the many bodies that one soul manages. An action is like what happens from the other body, so what he needs from the blame for the action of one of the two bodies obliges him for the action of the other, even if it is like it.

[ What is necessary for a single soul to repeat the action with a plurality of bodies ]

And the madhhabs divided according to this limit regarding what is required of a single soul from the repetition of the act with a multiplicity of bodies equivalent to the multiplicity of time in the right of the congregations in Ramadan, so know that

( Arrived in the chapter on Is it obligatory for him to feed if he is able and he is insolvent at the time of obligation )

Whoever says there is nothing against him, and with him I say, and whoever says he disbelieves if it is easy

( consideration )

The one who is deprived of the actions is by witnessing and revealing insolvent and has nothing, then nothing is required of him. If he is withheld from this witness and this is proven by means of knowledge after witnessing, as the sensible imaginer after what he had perceived by sense, then the legal rulings undoubtedly obligate him and it is not forbidden to rule in his right by the presence of knowledge and he refuses to exist. Watching, for he sees the truth as a mover and a dwelling place for him, and likewise if his station is higher than this, which is that the truth be his hearing and his sight upon disclosure and witnessing, so among us are those who said his ruling is the ruling of the owner of knowledge, for God has enjoined upon himself and does not fall under the limit of duty, and among us is he who has the right to witness actions from Him, the Most High, as We have presented it, so he is not required to rule just as he is not required there. Sometimes the name of the servant is called the right and sometimes the name of the servant is given to him despite these different conditions, and in each of these ranks he is required to rule in one way and negate it in another way.

( He arrived in the chapter on those who did in his fast what is different about it, such as cupping, vomiting and swallowing pebbles, and the traveler breaks his fast on the first day he goes out when he sees that he does not have to break his fast

Everyone who enjoins breaking the fast in these and similar actions differed, so who among them says it is obligatory to make up for it, and who says among them that it is obligatory to make up for it and expiate, and so on. Everyone differs in it. What I go to from what we have mentioned is that abstaining from it is due to the news. The consideration of what we have mentioned of these actions has been presented before. So whoever breaks his fast on a day when it is permissible for him to break his fast Like a woman who breaks the fast before she menstruates and then menstruates on that day, and the sick and traveler break their fast before illness and before travel, then he falls ill on that day or travels. She did not menstruate, did not get sick, or did not travel, never make up that day, and do a lot of voluntary fasts, and with this, he commanded them to God, because they broke their fast on a day when it is permissible for them to break their fast with God. As for the apparent, what we said

( consideration )

In this act there is a smell of revelation of souls and exploration of the unseen from where it is not felt, and the reason is that it is from the world of the unseen, and if the physical genesis is its mother, then the divine spirit is its father, it has access from behind a thin veil, so that if the owner of this act enters the path of the people of God, he will hasten to reveal him because of his readiness and qualification Therefore, and such like this is not called consensus, if the matter of agreement with us is not correct, because the whole matter is for God and God does not happen anything by agreement, but he tells it from true knowledge, will, unseen judgment and destiny, so it must be what is in His knowledge.

[ The legal ruling is related to the owner of revelation and metaphysical reconnaissance ]

What remains is whether it is related to someone who has committed such a divine act as sin or not, then we have sin related to it, even if he had the correct knowledge that on a day when it is permissible for him to break his fast and did not wear the reason, then it is not prescribed for him to break the fast except with the confusion in the condition in which he is called a menstruating woman, a sick person or a traveler. In the apparent tongue, this is the doctrine of the investigators from among the people of God, and it is our doctrine on such a matter, and the ruling in its owner is God s if He wills pardon, and if He wills He will take grace and justice, unless his condition is one of those whom I know of the crimes that occur from him by witnessing and revealing. That is with God, and if he does not see it, then he does not take the initiative, and he has no action in it unless he knows God s knowledge of it.