and wears it as a wrap, like an iḥrām garment, he has broken his oath, because it is the very same item. Or if he makes it into a turban and wears it, he has broken his oath by virtue of the specification. This is because the man has neither a particular intention nor an occasion prompting the oath; rather, he has specified this item and said, “I will not wear it.” The oath therefore attaches to this item, whatever form it may take.

His statement, “Or: ‘I will not speak to this boy,’ and he then becomes an old man”: kallama is a past-tense verb, but when the negative particle lā enters it in the context of an oath, it gives it a future sense. This is one of the cases in which the past tense takes on a future meaning. Just as it does so in a conditional statement—for example, “If Zayd rises, I will rise”—it likewise does so here in the chapter of oaths. Thus, the meaning of “I will not speak” is: “I will not speak.” So if he says, “By Allah, I will not speak to this boy,” and then the boy grows up and becomes an elderly man, and he speaks to him, he has broken his oath on account of the specification.

His statement, “Or”: he says, “I will not speak to ‘the wife of so-and-so here,’” thereby specifying her.

His statement, “Or”: he says, “I will not speak to ‘his friend, so-and-so,’” meaning this particular person.

His statement, “Or his slave, Sa'id,” meaning this particular person.

His statement, “Then the marriage, ownership, or friendship ceases, and he speaks to them”: the marriage ceases through divorce or death, such that she is no longer his wife. If he then speaks to her, he has broken his oath on account of the specification. The same applies to his friend if the friendship ceases: for example, if this man was so-and-so’s friend and he says, “By Allah, I will not speak to this man’s friend,” then the person ceases to be his friend, and he speaks to him; he has broken his oath.