fourth he should look at the one who was sworn to. if the wording of the one who broke the oath is what we have mentioned in the copy of their covenants which is their saying keep the secret of the friend of god and support him and do not oppose him then he should reveal the secret however he wants and not be a perjurer because he swore to keep the secret of the friend of god almighty and he kept it hidden and what he revealed was the secret of the enemy of god. likewise their saying his relatives and followers will be christians so all of that goes back to the friend of god and does not go back to the one whom the one who swore intended because he is the enemy of god and not his friend. but if he named a person by gesture or knew him by the name by which he is known he said keep my secret or he said keep the secret of soandso. and the guardian of god or the secret of this person who is the guardian of god someone said that he does not break his oath when divulging the secret considering the description and ignoring the indication. and they said that it is as if he said i sold you this sheep and the one indicated was a sheep then it is not valid. and the preferred opinion among us is that the oath is obtained and the indication is the specific knowledge that is not subject to lying in a higher and more common state than the aforementioned description a lie out of curiosity with selfsufficiency and this is not like if he said by god i will drink water. this instrument and there is no water in it the oath is not binding because there is no object of the oath. likewise if he left out the addition to the instrument and mentioned his saying this water and pointed with his hand it is not binding because of the absence of the object here. if he limited himself to saying do not divulge the secret of this person or the secret of zaid it is binding even if he was silent about his saying that he is a friend of god. however the oath is binding in this manner divulging the secret is permissible rather it is obligatory to divulge the secret then the expiation is obligatory the expiation of an oath and it is sufficient for him to feed ten. poor people each one of them should be given a measure of food. if he is unable to do so he should fast for three days. how trivial the matter is in that case and there is no need to be vain in seeking a way out for salvation.
الرابع أن ينظر إلى المحلوف عليه فإن كان لفظ المخلف فيه ما حكيناه في نسخة عهودهم وهو قولهم تكتم سر ولى الله وتنصره ولا تخالفه فليظهر السر مهما اراد ولا يكون حانثا لانه حلف على كتمان سر ولى الله تعالى وقد كتمه وانما الذي افشاه سر عدو الله وكذا قولهم تنصر اقاربه واتباعه فكل ذلك يرجع إلى ولى الله ولا يرجع إلى من قصده المحلف لانه عدو الله لا وليه فاما إذا عين شخصا بالاشارة او عرفه باسمه الذي يعرف به قال تكتم سرى او قال تكتم سر فلان ولى الله او سر هذا الشخص الذي هو ولى الله فقد قال قائل لا يحنث عند افشاء السر نظرا إلى الصفة واعراضا عن الاشارة وقالوا هو كما لو قال بعت منك هذه النعجة والمشار اليه رمكة فإنه لا يصح والمختار عندنا أن الحنث يحصل والاشارة المعرفة المعينة التي لا يتطرق اليها الكذب بحال اعلى واغلب من الوصف المذكور كذبا على وجه الفضول مع الاستغناء وليس هذا كما لو قال والله لأشربن ماء هذه الإداوة ولا ماء فيها أن اليمين لا تعنقد لانه لا وجود لمتعلق اليمين وكذلك لو ترك الاضافة إلى الاداوة وذكر قوله هذا الماء واشار باليد لم ينعقد لفقد المتعلق ها هنا ولو اقتصر على قوله لا يفشى سر هذا الشخص او سر زيد انعقد وأن سكت عن قوله انه ولى الله ومهما انعقدت اليمين على هذا الوجه فيباح افشاء السر بل يجب افشاء السر ثم تلزم الكفارة كفارة يمين ويكفيه أنيطعم عشرة مساكين كل مسكين مدا من الطعام فإن عجز عن هذا صام ثلاثة ايام وما اهون الخطب في ذلك ولا حاجة إلى التانق في طلب الحيلة للخلاص