Section: If he apostatizes, his I'tikaf is corrupted, due to the saying of Allah the Almighty: {If you were to associate partners with Allah, your deeds would surely become worthless}. This is because, through apostasy, he exits the state of being among those eligible for I'tikaf. If he consumes something that intoxicates him, his I'tikaf is corrupted, because he exits the state of being among those who are to remain in the mosque.

Section: In every instance where his I'tikaf is corrupted, if it was voluntary, there is no make-up (qada') required of him, because voluntary acts do not become binding by merely commencing them, except for Hajj and 'Umrah. If it was a vow, we must look: if he vowed consecutive days, then what has passed of his I'tikaf is corrupted, and he must start over, because continuity is a quality of the I'tikaf, and he was capable of fulfilling it, so it became binding upon him. If he vowed specific days, such as the last ten days of the month of Ramadan, there are two views regarding it: The first is that what has passed is invalidated and he must start over, because he vowed consecutive I'tikaf, and it is invalidated by exiting it, just as if he had stipulated continuity in his wording. The second is that it is not invalidated, because in the part that has already passed, he performed the act of worship correctly, so it does not become invalidated by abandoning it in another part, just as if he broke his fast during the month of Ramadan. Continuity here occurred as a necessity of the specification, and the specification is explicitly stated. If there is no way to avoid a breach in one of them, then in that which occurred by necessity it is more appropriate. Also, the obligation of continuity is with respect to the time, not with respect to the vow; therefore, exiting during part of it does not invalidate what has already passed, similar to the fast of Ramadan if one breaks it during it. According to this view, he only makes up for what he corrupted during it. He is liable for the expiation under both views because he is one who abandoned part of what he vowed. The basis for these two views is the case of one who vows a specific fast and breaks it during part of it, as there are two narrations regarding that, similar to the two views we have mentioned.

Section: If he vows I'tikaf for consecutive days with fasting, and he breaks his fast one day, he has corrupted his continuity.