在解释了“哈昆·泰克利菲”（Hukm At-Takleefiy）及其五种类型——瓦吉卜（Al-Waajib）、曼杜卜（Al-Mandoob）、哈兰（Al-Haraam）、麦克鲁（Al-Makrooh）和穆巴赫（Al-Mubaah）；并解释了“哈昆·瓦德อี”（Hukm Al-Wad’iy）及其五种类型——赛卜卜（As-Sabab）、沙尔特（Ash-Shart）、马阿尼耶（Al-Maani’）、塞哈（As-Sihhah）、布特兰（Al-Butlaan）与法萨德（Al-Fasaad），以及“鲁赫萨”（Ar-Rukhsah）和“阿兹米耶”（Al-‘Azeemah）之后，我们注意到两者之间存在差异，其中最重要的有：

After having explained the Hukm At-Takleefiy and its five types which are Al-Waajib, Al-Mandoob, Al-Haraam, Al-Makrooh and Al-Mubaah, and after having explained the Hukm Al-Wad’iy and its five types which are As-Sabab, Ash-Shart, Al-Maani’, As-Sihhah, Al-Butlaan And Al-Fasaad, and Ar-Rukhsah and Al-‘Azeemah, after that, we have noticed that there are differences between the two; the most important of which are:

1 – 拒绝性质的规定（Al-Hukm At-Takleefiy）直接关乎仆人（'Abd）的行为，因此立法者的训令（Khitaab Ash-Shaari'）指向要求去做某项行为、要求放弃某项行为，或给予在做与不做之间的选择。

1 – Al-Hukm At-Takleefiy is related to the action of the ‘Abd directly and so the Khitaab Ash-Shaari’ (address of the legislator) is directed towards the request to do an action or the request to leave an action, or to provide the choice between doing and leaving.

至于设立性的裁决（Hukm Al-Wad'iy），它与责任性裁决（Ahkaam of At-Takleef）相关，但并不直接关乎受责者（Mukallaf）的行为。原因在于，设立性的裁决的表述并不代表要求去做、要求不做，也不代表在做与不做之间的选择许可。它仅限于表示：某事是责任性裁决存在的原因（Sabab），或是其条件（Shart）之一，或是阻碍其要求或其履行，或两者兼有的障碍（Maani'），或是对责任性裁决从有效、无效与瑕疵角度的描述，或是对责任性裁决在常规情况下或特殊情况下发生的解释，法学家分别称之为"常规"（'Azeemah）与"变通"（Rukhsah）。

As for the Hukm Al-Wad’iy, then it is related to the Ahkaam of At-Takleef and not the action of the Mukallaf directly. That is because the address of Al-Wad’i does not represent a request to do or a request to leave or a provision of choice between doing and leaving. Rather it is restricted to representing a Sabab for the presence of a Hukm At-Takleefiy, or a Shart from amongst its Shuroot (conditions), or a Maani’ from its request or from its performance or both, or it represents a description for the Hukm At-Takleefiy from the perspective of Sihhah, Butlaan and Fasaad, or an explanation for the occurrence of the Hukm At-Takleefiy in the ordinary case or situation or in an extraordinary situation which the Fuqahaa’ named the ‘Azeemah and Rukhsah respectively.

2 – 责任性的律令（حكم التكليف）在于是否在受约束者（المكلف）的能力范围之内。因此，他既可以去做，也可以不去做，例如礼拜、经商、圣战（الجهاد）、传播伊斯兰教义（الدعوة）等行为。这是因为真主（سبحانه وتعالى）只会要求人们去做他们力所能及的事。真主（سبحانه وتعالى）说：

2 – The Hukm At-Takleefiy is within the capability of the Mukallaf and so it is possible for him to do it or not do it like the Salaah, conducting trade, Al-Jihaad and carrying the Da’wah amongst other acts. That is because Allah (swt) does not charge the people except with that which they are capable of undertaking. Allah (swt) said:

至于“حكم الوضع”（Hukm Al-Wad’iy），则可以属于mukallaf（应负责任者）的能力范围之内，即他有能力去做。例如，洗小净（Wudoo’）是拜功（Salaah）有效的Shart（条件）；盗窃是砍断窃贼之手的Sabab（起因）；而故意杀人则是阻碍继承亲属遗产的Maani’（障碍）。

As for the Hukm Al-Wad’iy, then it can fall within the capability of the Mukallaf where he is capable of doing it. This is like the Wudoo’ being a Shart for the validity of the Salaah, the theft being the Sabab for cutting the hand of the thief and the deliberate or intentional killing representing a Maani’ (preventer) for inheriting from the relative.

《伍卜利式的判定》也可能超出mukallaf（应负责者）的能力范围，即他无法做到，也对其产生没有任何作用。这就像太阳从天空正中偏移，成为zuhr（晌礼）存在的sabab（因由）一样，这是依据安拉的话：

The Hukm Al-Wad’iy can also be beyond the capability of the Mukallaf in the case where he is incapable of doing it and has no input in bringing it about. That is like the Zawaal of the sun from the middle of the sky being the Sabab for the existence of the Zhohr prayer due to the Qawl of Allah Ta’Aalaa: