What is the ruling on water that contains ornamental fish — does it become impure on account of their waste?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The water in a pond containing ornamental fish is pure so long as it has not been altered, for a small amount of fish waste (rawth) is pardoned and overlooked — provided it does not change the water.
It is stated in Ḥāshiyat al-Jamal ʿalā Sharḥ al-Manhaj (Vol.1/P.178): "A small amount of hair from a non-edible animal is pardoned, as is a small amount of hair from a riding animal — on account of the hardship involved in avoiding it — and likewise a small amount of fish waste is pardoned, unless it alters the water." And Allah the Almighty knows best.
Is "Bismillāhir-Raḥmānir-Raḥīm" a verse (āyah) of Sūrat al-Fātiḥah?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The basmalah ("Bismillāhir-Raḥmānir-Raḥīm") is, without question, a verse (āyah) of the Noble Qur'an, and according to the Shāfi‘ī school, it constitutes a verse of Sūrat al-Fātiḥah itself. Al-Fātiḥah is a pillar of the prayer, and it consists of seven verses, of which the basmalah is one. The prayer is not valid without reciting it, nor if any of the Fātiḥah's verses, letters, or shaddahs (consonant doublings) are omitted or altered.
It is stated in Bushrā al-Karīm (Vol.1/p.202), from the books of the Shāfi‘ī school: "The basmalah is a complete verse of it [i.e., of al-Fātiḥah] in practice — and it suffices, for this to be established, that there be strong probability (ẓann), especially given that this has come very close to certainty (yaqīn), due to the consensus (ijmā‘) of the Companions on its inclusion in the muṣ-ḥaf [the written text of the Qur'an] in its script, despite their extreme diligence in excluding from it anything that did not genuinely belong to it — to the point that they even [carefully regulated] its diacritical dots and vowel markings." And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.
"If the fidyah becomes obligatory upon a pregnant or nursing woman because she broke her fast out of fear for her child, is it obligatory from her own wealth, or from her husband's wealth?"
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The fidyah (ransom/compensation payment for breaking the fast) is obligatory from the wife's own wealth, and is not obligatory upon the husband unless he voluntarily chooses to pay it on her behalf.
It is stated in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vol.2/P.174): "If the two [the pregnant woman and the nursing mother] fear for the child alone — such as a pregnant woman fearing miscarriage, or a nursing mother fearing that her milk supply would decrease, thereby endangering the child — then both the qaḍā' (making up the missed fast) and the fidyah become obligatory upon them, to be paid from their own wealth." And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.
Must a person refrain from eating for the rest of the day if they break a fast of a vow (nadhr) or a make up fast (qada)?
Whoever observes a vowed fast (nadhr) or a makeup fast (qada) is prohibited from breaking it without a valid excuse. If they break it without a legitimate reason, they are sinful.
However, they are not required to refrain from eating for the rest of the day, because such restraint is only required out of respect for the month of Ramadan, not for other types of fasting.
