regarding the ruling on breaking the *in* after an oath?
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The Shaykh : Because the bare oath, regarding which it was previously stated that the *in* is broken,
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : No, this one has no oath and no oath verb, so breaking the *in* is required. The summary regarding the oath is: if the verb is not mentioned, breaking the *in* is obligatory; if the verb is mentioned and it is accompanied by the *lam*, breaking the *in* is obligatory; if the verb is mentioned and it is not accompanied by the *lam*, both options are permissible.
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : No, this one has no oath and no oath verb, so breaking the *in* is required. The summary regarding the oath is: if the verb is not mentioned, breaking the *in* is obligatory; if the verb is mentioned and it is accompanied by the *lam*, breaking the *in* is obligatory; if the verb is mentioned and it is not accompanied by the *lam*, both options are permissible.