I will mention of that what is desirable in the situation, such as fasting in jihad, and in time, such as fasting on Mondays, Thursdays, Arafah, Ashura, the ten days, Shaban, and the like, and what is specific in itself, without being restricted to a specific day of Fridays, such as Ashura and Arafah. Since it is a specific month, we have attached it to time. Because it is unknown on Fridays, we did not restrict it to time. Some of it is specific in months, such as the month of Sha’ban. Some of it is absolute in days, restricted to months, such as the white days and fasting three days of each month. Some of it is absolute, such as fasting any day he wants, and some is restricted to timing, such as David’s fast, fasting on a day and breaking the fast. A day and this is not the case. As for fasting on the day of Arafat in Arafat, there is disagreement about it, and in non-Arafah it is desirable, except that in any case it expiates the year before it and the year after it. As for

Muslim narrated in Al-Sahih on the authority of Abu Saeed Al-Khudri, who said that the Messenger of God, may God’s prayers and peace be upon him, said: “There is no servant who fasts a day for the sake of God except that God removes his face on that day from Hellfire for seventy years.

So he mentioned the fasting of slaves, not the fasting of free people. ” The slaves are few in status and by belief they are all, and fasting is a divine analogy and that is why He denied it from the slave.

By God Almighty’s saying, “Fasting is for me, and the slaves have nothing from fasting except hunger. ”

So the exaltation in fasting is for God and hunger is for the servant .

So if the servant is established in the resemblance to God, which is expressed by creation in the names, in the attribute of oppression and victory over the adversary, which is the enemy, and for this reason he included it in jihad, I mean fasting, because the path here in the apparent sense is jihad. We define this by the evidence of the circumstances, not the absolute wording. If we take it according to the absolute wording, not according to custom, which is a matter of theory. People of God in names take into account what God has restricted and what He has released, so the speech occurs according to what was mentioned, so he came with the indefinite word in the way, then defined it in addition to God Almighty .

And God is the name that brings together all the truths of all the names, and they all have specific righteousness and a path to them. Any righteousness that the servant has is in the path of righteousness and is the path of God. For this reason, he came with the comprehensive name, so it is general as the indefinite noun is general, that is, it is not specific. Likewise, he denied a day and what he knew, in order to expand all of that to his servants. In closeness to God, then he denied seventy autumns, so he brought distinction, and distinction is only an indefinite noun, and he did not specify a time. We do not know whether seventy autumns are from the time of the days of the Arabs, or the days of Dhul-Ma’raj, or the days of one’s status among the houses, or the days of one of the maidservants who promiscuously and sweeping, or from the days of great movement, or from the days of one’s status among the houses. These days we have information, so the matter is vague, so it is equ

Likewise, when he said his face is his face, is it his face that is the same or his usual face in custom? Likewise, when he said “from the fire” with the alif and the lam, did he mean by it the well-known fire or the house in which the fire is? Because he may be doing a deed that deserves to enter that house and the fire will not hit him. In reality, what of us? Except for those who want it, for it is the path to Paradise, even if there is nothing in the meaning except that the path to it in the Hereafter and in this world is fraught with hardship. I have placed you on the stage of investigation in looking into the words of God and in the words of the interpreter on the authority of God, whether a sent messenger or a narrated guardian.

So it is similar to what is obligatory in one sense, and if he chooses it and accepts the choice, his ruling regarding him is the ruling on what is permissible and he has the choice to do it and leave it, so it is similar to voluntary action, and doing what is recommended to him is better than abandoning it, and that is why he said about it, and that you fast is better for you.

It came out. Muslim, on the authority of Salamah bin Al-Akwa’, said: “We were in Ramadan during the time of the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace. Whoever wished fasted, and whoever wished broke his fast and ransomed food for a poor person, until this verse was revealed. So whoever of you witnesses the month, let him fast it. Some of them made that an abrogation, and some of them made it specific.

This is our doctrine, so the ruling of the verse remains regarding the pregnant and breastfeeding woman if they fear for their child and God calls him. They volunteered