The matter may come to him suddenly, for Moses walked to touch fire, and his Lord spoke to him, and he had no intention of doing so. The basic principle in all acts of worship is that they are from God to begin with, not intended for those in charge, except for what is an exception from that, such as the verse about the hijab and others regarding Omar ibn Discourse only precludes intent in the considered interior because the truth gives that there is nothing outside the truth or abandoned by the truth until he intends it in a matter in which it is, rather it is in the relation of all to it one relation, so where do I go when it is with me wherever I am and in whatever state I am, so what remains. The intention is the direction of closeness to God. Rather, the intention is related to a specific state with God. I intended it about a specific state with God through which I came out of it and to Him. The conditions are different. So whoever takes into account the difference in

Sharia scholars differed regarding the intention of the imam and the person praying behind him. Is it a condition for the intention of the person being led to pray that it agrees with the intention of the imam in prayer? I mean in specifying the prayer and in its obligation. So who says that it is obligatory and who says that it is not obligatory, and each one who says has an argument that does not belong here?

Consideration The soul in that

The correct view is that it is not obligatory because it is an unseen matter, and trust can only be based on what the sense relates to, such as hearing or seeing. This is why the legislator explained what he summed up regarding trust, so he mentioned the actions perceived by the sense by any sense that perceived them, and he did not mention intention, for it is an action. The heart, for it is the responsibility of what cannot be known. And whoever knows that divine breadth makes it impossible for the truth to be revealed to o

Know that prayer includes words and actions, and its ruling depends on the circumstances. All acts of worship are based on the circumstances, and they are what the legislator considers. So the ruling is directed at the accountable person from the standpoint of the situation they are in, and the names are dependent on the circumstances, and that is why the legislator takes them into account in judging the accountable person. It was said to Malik. Ibn Anas, what do you say about the water pig? He gave a fatwa declaring its prohibition. He was asked, “Is it not a type of sea fish?” He said, may God be pleased with him, “You called it a pig.” This did not add to that. Likewise, the wine that is forbidden to be drunk, if it is mixed, is no longer called “khamr” due to the disappearance of the condition that necessitated the name “wine,” so it is called vinegar because of another condition that has arisen. Accordingly, the substance is the same as the substance, so the ruling moved

Sharia scholars differed regarding the takbir in prayer in three schools of thought. Some are of the opinion that it is all obligatory in prayer, and those are of the opinion that all of it is not obligatory. The opposite of the first, and those who are of the view that it is not obligatory except the opening takbeer only

Considering the self in This is

Takbir of Allah is obligatory in every situation, but one of its conditions is that a person should see himself. If he sees no one but Allah and does not see anything other than Allah with an eye, then takbir is not obligatory, because there is no obligation upon whom, for Allah does not oblige him to do anything, and takbir is not obligatory. It is only possible for the existence of the Gentiles or the estimation of the existence of the Gentiles. Then, those who say that there is nothing to be witnessed except God as a witness, a witness, and a testimony. And more general than this situation in annihilation is wha