Is it obligatory to make up all missed prayers?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Making up missed prayers (qaḍāʾ) is a sharʿī obligation, established by the practice of the Prophet ﷺ himself — when the disbelievers preoccupied him on the Day of the Trench and he missed the ʿAṣr prayer, he made it up afterward. This is further affirmed by the ḥadīth: "Fulfil what you owe to Allah, for Allah is most deserving of being fulfilled." (Reported by al-Bukhārī.)
Accordingly, a person who has missed prayers should set aside his voluntary and Sunnah prayers and replace them with make-up prayers in their stead. There is no objection to making up one missed prayer alongside each obligatory prayer that is performed — praying the equivalent missed prayer together with each current obligatory prayer as a practical and manageable way of gradually clearing one's debt of missed prayers. And Allah the Almighty knows best.
What is the ruling on forgetting an integral of the prayer?
Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
Whoever forgets an integral (Rukn) of the prayer and remembers it before reaching the equivalent point in the subsequent unit (Rak'ah), must return to it (i.e., perform it) and complete his prayer, then perform the prostration of forgetfulness (Sujud al-Sahw) at the end of his prayer. However, if he remembers it after reaching the equivalent point in the subsequent unit, the Rak'ah in which the integral was forgotten is invalidated, and the current unit takes its place; he then completes a full Rak'ah to compensate and performs the prostration of forgetfulness.
It is stated in Nihayat al-Muhtaj ila Sharh al-Minhaj (Vol.1/P.543): 'If he becomes certain at the end of his prayer, or after the Salam—provided the interval is not long according to custom and he has not stepped on an impurity—that he omitted a prostration from the final Rak'ah, he must perform it and repeat the Tashahhud, as his previous Tashahhud occurred before its proper place. If the omission was from a Rak'ah other than the final one, he must perform a full Rak'ah, because the deficient unit was completed by a prostration from the subsequent one, rendering the rest of that subsequent unit void.' And Allah the Exalted knows best.
Is it permissible for a wife to give her money to her family as a charity, or a gift without asking her husband, or seeking his consent?
The wife has the right to give her money as a charity, or a gift to her family, or to other people after consulting her husband out of respect, and this is the meaning of treating on footing of kindness and equity. Therefore, if he wanted to stop her from helping her family, then there is no harm in not telling him.
Is the Saying "Whatever is Taken by the Sword of Shyness is Forbidden" an Authentic Ḥadīth?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The saying "Whatever is taken by the sword of shyness is forbidden" is not an authentic ḥadīth, though its underlying meaning is sound. The established sharʿī principle is that a Muslim's wealth is not lawful for anyone to take except with his wholehearted consent, as Allah the Almighty says {what means}: "O you who have believed, do not consume one another's wealth unjustly, but only [in lawful] business by mutual consent." [Al-Nisā/ 29] And the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: "Listen to me and you will live well: do not wrong others, do not wrong others, do not wrong others. Indeed, a man's wealth is not lawful except with his full, willing consent." (Reported by Aḥmad in his Musnad.) Whatever is taken through the pressure of shyness or social embarrassment runs directly counter to genuine, wholehearted consent.
The jurists have explicitly stated that whatever is taken by means of the "sword of shyness" carries the same ruling as that which is taken by coercion — it must be returned to its rightful owner.
Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states in al-Fatāwā al-Kubrā (Vol.3/P.30): "Do you not see the reported scholarly consensus that whoever has something taken from him purely out of shyness, without his genuine consent, does not pass ownership of it to the one who took it? They reasoned that this constitutes a form of coercion through the 'sword of shyness,' comparable to coercion at the point of an actual sword. Indeed, many people would rather submit to the literal sword and endure the pain of its wound than submit to this first kind of coercion, out of fear for their dignity and standing — which people of sound judgment hold dear and guard most fiercely." And Allah the Almighty knows best.
