Fasting is abandonment, and abandonment is something that has an existential quality that occurs, for abandonment is not an existential thing that occurs because it is a negative attribute, and taste is the opposite of it. This is why it is forbidden for the fasting person to eat food that is eaten because it removes the rule of fasting from him .

As for the drink, it is the manifestation of a medium, and the middle is confined between two extremes for the one who is in the middle of them, and the restriction requires specification of what is confined, and fasting is a divine attribute, and God does not require restriction, nor is He characterized by it, nor is it limited, nor is He distinguished by that in our view, so the drink contradicts the fast, so for this reason He forbade the drink to the fasting person, and then the drink is not what it was. A manifestation that authorized the existence of the Other Who is manifested for Him, and the Other in the fasting person has no eye, because fasting is for God and not for us, and I am the one who is attributed to Him. The Truth has revealed to me this attribute and its status, and the thing does not manifest itself for itself, so the fasting person does not drink and it is forbidden for him to do so .

As for intercourse, it is due to the presence of pleasure according to the Shafi’iyyah, so each of the spouses has pleasure in it, so each one is like the other in intercourse, and that is why it is called intercourse because of the meeting of the spouses, and the fasting person has no equal, because it is characterized by a quality that has no equal, so intercourse is forbidden to the fasting person. This is the place of meeting on these three that invalidate the fast and does not The person described with one or all of them is fasting

They differed regarding what enters the stomach from something that is not food, such as stones and other things, and regarding what enters the stomach without access to food and drink, such as an injection, and regarding what rejects the inside of the organs but does not reject the stomach, such as that which rejects the brain but does not reject the stomach. So who says that this breaks the fast and who says that it does not break the fast

The wise and thoughtful people share with the people of God in what is opened to them of the knowledge of revelation through solitude and exercise through sight, and the people of God Almighty share them with them through the path of faith, and they are united in the result. Who among our companions differentiates between them by taste, and that he is aware of this, is not aware of this, even if they share in the form. He said, “It does not break the fast.” And whoever says that the realization is the same and the path is different, that is the consideration of the one who said, “It breaks the fast.”

As for considering the inside of the organs, except for the stomach, it is that if the fasting person is in a divine presence, then he is placed in an ideal presence, such as his saying, “Worship God as if you see him.” So can anyone among God’s servants who has departed from the rule of resemblance and representation in his taste influence it ?

The legislator says: “Worship God as if you see him ”

Then he abandons his knowledge and taste and descends to this position, with etiquette with the law and truth from revelation, so he has broken his fast or not. He descends and says, “I am a collection of different realities,” and in what keeps me as I am, and in what you require, watching. This descent, which is that I am imaginative or imaginative, so he knows that the truth has asked me to witness it in this presence, from this truth and from every truth in me, so this perfect manifestation of me must be this truth that demands it and maintains what I am in terms of

This issue is the opposite of the issue of Moses, peace be upon him, for he asked for vision after he had spoken. Seeing and speaking do not come together other than the Barzakh manifestation, and this was the place of Shihab al-Din Omar al-Suhrawardi, who died in Baghdad, may God have mercy on him, for it was narrated to me by someone I trust in his transmission of His companions said that vision and speech come together, and from here I know that his appearance is isthmus, otherwise it cannot be, and the kiss is from the approach and the acceptance of the imaginary is from the presence of the tongue, for it is the place of speech, and the approach to it was also with the audible speech if it is in the ideal view and whoever is in it imagines him asking for the turn. On Al-Fahwaniyah, so if he spoke to him, he did not witness it, and this place of Moses I tasted in the place that Moses, peace be upon him, tasted it, except that I tasted it in wetness in the sand as much as th

Rather, we said that if he spoke to him, he did not witness it, because the seeking soul devoted itself to understanding the speech and failed to witness it. He is in the same position as one who hates the qiblah, since the fasting person is the owner of witnessing, because fasting has no equal and witnessing has no equal. As for the one who permitted it, he said, “The manifestation is perfect,” so I do not care, for the self is behind that manifestation. Manifestation is not valid except from the position of the One being manifested for Him. However, if the manifestation is in a position other than the position of the One being manifested for Him, it is not valid to seek anything other than what is in it, because witnessing the truth is annihilation, and with annihilation, a request is not conceivable, for pleasure is closer to seeking speech for the soul of the viewer. However, the viewer does not get pleasure in the state of viewing . /p>