such as saying, “Uff!” aloud. This invalidates his prayer, because two letters have become distinct. There is, however, something questionable in this reasoning, for speech may be complete even with a single letter—as in imperative forms derived from defective assimilated triliteral verbs.

An assimilated verb is one whose first root letter is weak, while a defective verb is one whose final root letter is weak. The imperative of a verb combining these two features may consist of one letter while still constituting complete speech. For example, you may say to your companion, “ʿi!”—from waʿā (“to comprehend”). This “ʿi!” is complete speech. Likewise, “fi!”—from waffā (“to fulfil”)—is also complete speech, although it consists of only one letter. Conversely, there may be three letters that do not constitute speech. Thus, the claim that whatever consists of two letters is speech, whereas anything less is not speech, is open to question.

Therefore, regarding blowing, we say: if it is done frivolously, it invalidates the prayer, because it is frivolity. But if it is done out of a need, it does not invalidate the prayer, even if two letters become distinct, because it is not speech. For example, a person may blow an insect that has crawled onto his hand in order to remove it, since this is gentler for the insect than touching it with his hand; if he were to touch it, it might be harmed, and blowing is easier for it. Thus, the criterion in this matter is frivolity: if he does it frivolously, the prayer is invalidated because frivolity is incompatible with it; but if it is done for a need, it is not invalidated.

His statement, “or sobs”: that is, if two letters become distinct. Sobbing is raising one’s voice while weeping.

His statement, “without fear of Allah, Exalted is He”: for example, while a person is praying, he receives news that someone has died and begins to sob. His sobbing in this case is not out of fear of Allah,