"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.
What is the ruling on someone who eats or drinks while uncertain about the arrival of dawn, then later finds out that dawn had not yet broken?
If a person does this, their fast remains valid, as it is confirmed that they ate during the night. Similarly, if someone eats while uncertain and remains unsure whether they ate before or after dawn, their fast is still valid. This is based on the maxim of Sharia Law, which states: "Certainty is not removed by doubt." Certainty, here, is the presence of night, and the doubt concerns the arrival of dawn. Therefore, one relies on certainty and disregards doubt.
What is the validity of the formula for sending blessings upon our master Muḥammad ﷺ: *"Allāhumma ṣalli wa sallim wa bārik ‘alā sayyidinā Muḥammad wa ‘alā ālihi, ‘adada kamāli-Llāhi wa kamā yalīqu bikamālihi"* ("O Allah, send blessings, peace, and grace upon our master Muḥammad and his family, by the number of Allah's perfection, and as befits His perfection")?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is permissible to send blessings upon our master, the Prophet ﷺ, using the formula mentioned in the question, since sending blessings upon the Prophet ﷺ is an act of devotion legislated in its basic essence, without a specific prescribed wording required outside of the formal prayer itself. It is therefore valid to perform it outside of prayer using any formula. This particular formula involves multiplying the blessings sent upon the Chosen Prophet ﷺ to the number of the perfections of Allah, the Exalted — which are limitless — so that, by Allah's permission, its reward and benefit never cease.
The meaning of "the number of Allah's perfection" is that it is without limit, making the blessings sent boundless, corresponding to His perfection, Glorified is He, which cannot be enumerated or counted. This formula is analogous to the words of our Greatest Prophet ﷺ, as related in the authentic ḥadīth narrated by Imam Muslim: the Prophet ﷺ said to Sayyidah Juwayriyyah (raḍiyallāhu ‘anhā): "Indeed, I said four phrases after you [left], three times, which, if weighed against everything you have said since this morning, would outweigh them: Subḥān Allāhi wa biḥamdihi, ‘adada khalqihi, wa riḍā nafsihi, wa zinata ‘arshihi, wa midāda kalimātihi" (Glory be to Allah, and praise be to Him, by the number of His creation, by His pleasure, by the weight of His Throne, and by the extent of His words). And Allah, the Exalted, 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.
