Spontaniety and quick observance both come from one matter, which is quick understanding. However, spontaniety comes together with its results, such as when the woman said to Omar that her husband stood the night praying and fasted the day; also when the woman gave the apple to the Messenger  and he divided it into two parts and gave her one part. In the example of the woman that complained to Omar, the Bedouin who was with Omar understood that she complained about her husband and did not praise him.

The understanding that this is a complaint and not praise is spontaniety. As for the woman who gave the apple to the Messenger , she intended to know about menstruation, so the Messenger understood her purpose and answered her. This example is quick observance and not spontaniety. This is because the Messenger understood from the apple that she meant menstruation, so this was quick observance, though it was based on quick understanding.

Quick observance is to understand the purpose of the speaker or the doer quickly, whereas spontaniety is to understand the purpose of the speaker and the doer quickly but with a difference. In spontaniety, one understands the purpose of the speaker from the speech. However, the speech may have many meanings, if one understood the correct meaning then this is spontaniety. While quick observance is that the speaker or the doer obscures his speech, while he aims at one particular meaning that you grasp.

Thus, your understanding of him is quick observance and not spontaniety. Thus, the speech or the action is understood quickly; spontaniety and quick observance share that aspect, but they then depart from each other. If the purpose of the speaker or the doer is only one thing, but he obscures his words or action, then this is quick observance. However, when he means many matters, but he obscures these matters, then you should use spontaniety and not quick observance. Thus, obscuring the speech or the action leads to quick observance, while obscuring the purpose leads to spontaniety.

The two matters, spontaniety and quick observance, can’t exist except with quick thinking. Therefore, both can only exist in intelligent people. However, this quick understanding only leads to one thing, either to quick observance or to spontaniety. If the obscurity or vagueness were in the speech or the action itself, it would be quick observance. If the obscurity or vagueness were in the purpose of the speech or action, it would be spontaniety.

Therefore, in her statement to Omar about her husband, the woman obscured her purpose and made it vague. While the woman who gave an apple to the Messenger obscured the action but did not obscure the purpose. Therefore, the action regarding the woman with the Messenger was quick observance, while the action regarding the woman with Omar was spontaniety. This is the difference between making the purpose vague, so it would be spontaniety, and making the speech or the work vague, so it would be quick observance. What is hoped for is the development of spontaniety and not quick observance.