That is, “I gave her cool water to drink.”

Or if this milk becomes cheese and he eats the cheese, he has broken his oath, because it is the same substance. Likewise, if it becomes kishk—wheat cooked with milk, which we call jarīsh, while some call it burghul—then, if he says, “By Allah, I will not drink this milk,” and makes it into kishk and eats it, he has broken his oath, because the taste of the milk remains, even though kishk is not called milk.

His statement, “then eats it, he has broken his oath in all cases,” means: in the eight preceding issues, on the basis that the oath referred to the specific item.

His statement, “unless he intended it only so long as it remained in that particular state”: if he intended it only so long as it remained in that state, then, as has preceded, intention is the primary point of reference in oaths. Thus, if he says, “When I said, ‘By Allah, I will not wear this shirt,’ I did not mean this particular shirt itself; rather, I meant its state—that is, I would not wear it so long as it remained a shirt,” and he tears it up and makes it into trousers, then he has not broken his oath.

Likewise, if he says, “I will not speak to this boy,” and says, “I did not mean his particular person; rather, I meant only so long as he remained a boy,” then speaks to him after he has become an old man, he has not broken his oath. Or if he says, “I will not drink this milk,” intending only so long as it remains milk—“but if it changes, that was not what I intended”—then he has not broken his oath. The proof is the Prophet’s ﷺ statement: “Actions are only by intentions, and every person shall have only what he intended” (1). So long as you intended it with respect to that particular state, your intention is upheld. The reason is that, before all else, the point of reference in oaths is the intention of the one who swears.