What is the ruling of Islamic Law on the prayer of zawal?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is recommended (sunnah) to pray four rakʿāt — either with a single tasleem or as two separate sets of two rakʿāt — immediately following the sun's decline from its zenith (zawāl). This prayer is distinct from the regular Sunnah prayer of Ẓuhr (sunnat al-ẓuhr al-rātibah), as explicitly stated by the Shāfiʿī jurists.
It is mentioned in Nihāyat al-Muḥtāj: "The prayer of zawāl is offered after the sun's decline — so were one to perform it before that, it would not count. It consists of two or four rakʿāt and is distinct from the Sunnah of Ẓuhr, as is evident from the fact that it is mentioned separately after the regular Sunnah prayers, and it becomes a make-up prayer (qaḍāʾ) if a long period of time passes by customary reckoning... Al-ʿAlqamī stated: 'Scholars refer to this as the Sunnah of Zawāl, and it is distinct from the four rakʿāt that constitute the Sunnah of Ẓuhr.' Our shaykh said: Al-Ḥāfiẓ al-ʿIrāqī stated that among those who explicitly affirmed its recommendation was al-Ghazālī in al-Iḥyāʾ, in the chapter on devotional litanies, noting that there is no tasleem between them — meaning there is no break between each pair of rakʿāt."
The time of the sun's decline (zawāl) marks the very beginning of the time for the Ẓuhr prayer.
And Allah the Almighty knows best.
Does an internal medical examination for a woman affect her fast?
An internal medical examination for a woman invalidates the fast because it involves the entry of a foreign object into the body cavity (jauf) while fasting.
In this case, the woman must refrain from eating and drinking for the rest of the day out of respect for Ramadan and make up for the missed fast after Ramadan.
Such an examination should be avoided in Ramadan and other months unless absolutely necessary, as exposing the private parts is only permissible in cases of necessity.
If necessary, a woman should seek a Muslim female doctor first. If one is unavailable, she may see a female doctor from the People of the Book (Jews and Christians). If neither is available, she may consult a trustworthy and competent Muslim male doctor.
What is the ruling on swearing an oath by the Prophet ﷺ, and does such an oath take effect according to Imām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, requiring expiation upon its breach?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Swearing an oath by a created being is disliked (makrūh) in our Shāfiʿī school. Shaykh al-Islām Imām al-Nawawī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "Swearing by a created being is disliked — such as swearing by the Prophet, the Kaʿbah, Jibrīl, the Companions, or the Prophet's family. Al-Shāfiʿī, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: 'I fear that swearing by other than Allah the Almighty may constitute an act of disobedience.' The scholars of the school explained this to mean: that is, something forbidden and sinful — indicating that he had some hesitation in the matter. Al-Imām stated: the established position of the school is that it is categorically not forbidden, but rather disliked. Furthermore, whoever swears by a created being, his oath does not take effect and no expiation (kaffārah) is required if he breaks it." [Rawḍat al-Ṭālibīn wa ʿUmdat al-Muftīn, Vol. 11/P.6]
According to the Ḥanbalī school, however, expiation becomes obligatory upon one who swears by our master the Prophet ﷺ and then breaks his oath. Imām al-Bahūtī al-Ḥanbalī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "No expiation is required for swearing by other than Allah the Almighty, even if the oath is broken — because expiation was made obligatory for swearing by Allah and His attributes, out of reverence for His names, and nothing else is equal to Him in this regard... except in the case of swearing by our Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ, for expiation becomes obligatory when one swears by him and then breaks the oath. This was explicitly stated in the narration of Abū Ṭālib, because he is one of the two conditions of the two testimonies of faith by which a disbeliever becomes a Muslim. Ibn ʿAqīl held the view that swearing by any of the other prophets, peace and blessings be upon them all, carries the same ruling." [Sharḥ Muntahā al-Irādāt, Vol. 3/P.441]. 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.
