It is not said in the fourth of the four that he has interceded for the servant’s Witr, for the slave does not have a Witr in his own eyes, for he is a compound, and every compound is poor, so he needs a Witr to rely on. He is not unique in having an intercession in himself, so he will never be anything but a Witr of three, five, or seven, and infinitely more. Of the individuals, if it is a fourth or a sixth, then it is the fourth of three, not the fourth of four, and the sixth of five, not the sixth of six, so it is of the same origin added to a string, so its ascription is only to its essence, as it is the essence of every string, because with its appearance, the name of the string remained on whoever was added to it, so it was said that the fourth of three, not the fourth of four, and the fourth of three. There can only be one