What is the ruling on the follower`s prayer if the Imam stands for a fifth rak`ah?
Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
If the Imam stands up for an extra unit (rak‘ah) of prayer out of forgetfulness, he must return to the sitting position as soon as he remembers, and he should perform the prostration of forgetfulness (Sujud al-Sahw). It is the duty of the congregants (Ma’mumin) behind him to remind him. However, if the Imam is in a state of doubt regarding the extra unit (and not certainty), it is not permissible for him to return.
As for the congregants: anyone who is certain that the Imam has stood for an extra unit is forbidden from following him. In this case, the follower has two choices: either intend to separate from the Imam (Mufaraqah) and finish the prayer alone, or wait for the Imam in the sitting position and perform the final salams with him—the latter being the preferred option. If a follower knowingly follows the Imam into an extra unit, their prayer becomes invalid. However, if a follower is in doubt and not certain of the mistake, they must continue following the Imam, as the Imam was appointed to be followed.
It is stated in Al-Majmu’ (Vol.4/P.145): 'If [the Imam] stands for a fifth rak‘ah, the follower should not follow him, even if it is assumed that the Imam might have omitted a pillar from a previous unit; because if the reality is known, following him is impermissible since the follower has certainly completed their own prayer. Even if the follower had missed a previous unit (Masbuq) or was in doubt about performing a pillar like the Fatihah, and the Imam stood for the fifth, it is not permissible for the latecomer to follow him in it. This is because we know that this unit is not counted for the Imam and that he is mistaken in performing it.' And Allah the Exalted knows best.
What is the ruling of Islamic Law on wearing energy stones?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
There is no objection to a woman adorning herself with precious and semi-precious stones — such as ruby, carnelian, or the like — so long as these are stones that women customarily wear as adornment.
As for what are known as "energy stones," if they are used with the intention of seeking remedy and healing, then such matters are governed by experimentation and scientific study — which either establishes that they have a tangible effect or does not — and all of this operates by the permission and will of Allah, Glorified and Exalted. If studies or practical experience do establish that such stones carry a beneficial effect upon human health, then there is no objection to using them. They are, after all, part of Allah's creation, much like medicinal substances extracted from plants or derived from other created things — provided that the Muslim does not believe that the stone itself is the source of benefit or harm. It is nothing more than a means among the many means that Allah has placed in this world, and the reality of all affairs belongs to Allah alone. And Allah the Almighty knows best.
What is the ruling on wiping over socks?
It is not permissible to wipe over most common socks today because the conditions for wiping are not met. The concession was reported for wiping over leather socks (khuff) and socks (jowrab) with conditions: They must be thick, not allowing poured water to penetrate, enable one to walk in them, be worn while in a state of purity (from ablution), cover the entire foot up to the ankles (meaning covering the protruding ankle bones), and not be torn. And Allah the Almighty knows best.
What is the ruling of Islamic Law regarding one who purchases a sacrificial animal (uḍḥiyah) and it then develops a defect before slaughter?
Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If a defect that invalidates the sacrifice (uḍḥiyah) arises after its purchase — for example, if one purchased a sound, defect-free animal, and it then developed a limp, blindness in one eye, or a similar defect before slaughter — it does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah, according to the Shāfi'ī school.
It is stated in Asnā al-Maṭālib fī Sharḥ Rawḍ al-Ṭālib (Vol.1/P.535): "Even if the limp develops [in the animal] while the knife is upon it, it still does not fulfill the requirement, because it is lame at the moment of slaughter — this is analogous to a case where a sheep's leg breaks and one hastens to slaughter it [in that condition]."
The Ḥanbalī school, however, held that if the one offering the sacrifice purchased the animal while it was sound and defect-free, and a defect then befell it afterward, the sacrifice remains valid and there is no obligation to replace it.
It is stated in Masā'il al-Imām Aḥmad, one of the Ḥanbalī reference works (Vol.8/P.4021): "I said: If a person purchases the sacrificial animal while it is sound, and it is then afflicted with illness, blindness in one eye, or a broken limb [before slaughter]? He [Imam Aḥmad] said: It is said that it still fulfills the requirement. Isḥāq said likewise, because he purchased it while sound, and the defect befell it only afterward, so it remains sufficient on his behalf." [End of quote]
Accordingly, a sheep afflicted with a defect that invalidates the sacrifice does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah — whether the defect arose after purchase or during the slaughter itself — according to the Shāfi'ī school. However, there is no objection to following the Ḥanbalī position on this matter [as a valid alternative]. And Allah, the Most High, knows best.
