Answer regarding the oath: We said that it is obligatory to break the *in* (if), even if it is not accompanied by the *lam* (the). What is the ruling if the verb is mentioned but the *lam* is not?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : We said that it is obligatory to break the *in* (if), even if it is not accompanied by the *lam* (the)
The Shaykh : by the *lam* (the) if the verb is not mentioned
The questioner : if the verb is not mentioned
The Shaykh : Yes
The questioner : And if the verb is mentioned but it is not accompanied by the *lam* (the)
The Shaykh : And if the verb is mentioned but it is not accompanied by the *lam* (the), it is permissible, and both views are valid. If the *lam* (the) is attached, breaking the *in* (if) is obligatory. Thus, breaking the *in* (if) in the oath is obligatory in two cases: when the verb is not mentioned, and when the verb is mentioned and the *lam* (the) is attached. Yes.
The questioner : Is it not that if you assume... the hamzah of *an* (that), even if...
The Shaykh : by the *lam* (the) if the verb is not mentioned
The questioner : if the verb is not mentioned
The Shaykh : Yes
The questioner : And if the verb is mentioned but it is not accompanied by the *lam* (the)
The Shaykh : And if the verb is mentioned but it is not accompanied by the *lam* (the), it is permissible, and both views are valid. If the *lam* (the) is attached, breaking the *in* (if) is obligatory. Thus, breaking the *in* (if) in the oath is obligatory in two cases: when the verb is not mentioned, and when the verb is mentioned and the *lam* (the) is attached. Yes.
The questioner : Is it not that if you assume... the hamzah of *an* (that), even if...