فهذا حديث شاذ نادر ومخالف لفتيا مشائخنا كلهم، ولعل الراوي وهم في قوله في آخر الخبر: ويصوم يوما مكان يوم، لان متضمن الخبر يدل عليه، ألا ترى انه شرع في الفرق بين أن يكون امذى من مباشرة حرام وبين ان يكون الامذاء من مباشرة حلال، وعلى الفتيا الذي رواه لا فرق بينهما، فعلم انه وهم من الراوي، ومن باشر امرأته فامنى وجب عليه ما يجب على من جامع، يدل على ذلك ما رواه:
This is an anomalous rare hadith, and it is contrary to the verdict (fatya) of all of our shaykhs. Perhaps the narrator erred (wahm) in his statement at the end of the report: “and he fasts a day in place of a day,” because the content of the report indicates that. Do you not see that Imam عليه السلام began to distinguish between whether he emitted pre-seminal fluid (amdha) due to unlawful physical contact (mubasharah haram) and whether the emission of pre-seminal fluid (imdha) was due to lawful physical contact (mubasharah halal)? According to the verdict that he narrated, there is no difference between the two. Thus it is known that it was an error (wahm) from the narrator. And whoever has physical contact (bashara) with his wife and emits semen (amna), it is obligatory upon him what is obligatory upon one who has intercourse. What indicates that is what he narrated (in the following hadith):
