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 ruling on praying seated due to severe obesity, given that I experience hardship in performing the prayer — especially when rising from the ground after sujūd to perform the next rak‘ah?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Standing, when one is able to do so, is a pillar of the prayer. However, whoever would experience severe, intolerable hardship, or fears harm to himself or to a limb due to obesity, or finds that standing causes him to lose his khushū‘ (humble focus and concentration) in prayer, then there is no objection to his praying seated on a chair or on the ground, performing rukū‘ (bowing) and sujūd (prostration) through gesture — provided that the gesture for sujūd is made lower than that for rukū‘. Whoever is able, at any point, to properly perform any one of these pillars, is obligated to perform it in full; for omitting it is a concession that applies only in cases of genuine inability. The Prophet ﷺ said: "When I command you to do something, do of it whatever you are able." (Related by al-Bukhārī). As the scholars of fiqh have established: what remains possible is not waived on account of what is difficult.
The criterion for determining genuine inability, as chosen by Imam al-Ḥaramayn al-Juwaynī (raḥimahullāh), is that the worshipper experiences hardship that causes him to lose his khushū‘.
As for voluntary (nafl) prayer, there is no objection to performing it while seated, even if one is able to stand. However, rukū‘ and sujūd must still be performed [in their proper physical form] by anyone who is able to do so. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.
Is it permissible to slaughter a single sheep with the combined intention of both the uḍḥiyyah and the 'aqīqah?
All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
According to Shaykh al-Islām Imam Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī, it is not permissible to combine the intention of the uḍḥiyyah and the 'aqīqah in a single animal, as each of the two has a distinct and separate cause that differs from the other.
However, Shaykh al-Islām Imam al-Ramlī permitted the combining of both intentions in a single animal — and this position offers a degree of latitude and ease. And Allah Almighty knows best.
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.
