What is the ruling on combining more than one intention in the prayer, such as combining the *sunnah* of wuḍūʾ with the pre-Dhuhr *sunnah*, or combining the *sunnah* of greeting the mosque (*taḥiyyat al-masjid*) with the pre-Dhuhr *sunnah*?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
Combining two intentions in a single act of worship, which some jurists call the “overlapping of acts of worship”, has several cases and precise rules. These can be consulted in the books of legal maxims, such as al-Manthūr fī al-Qawāʿid al-Fiqhiyyah by al-Zarkashī and al-Ashbāh wa’l-Naẓāʾir by al-Suyūṭī. Among the most important of these rules:
First: If all of the acts of worship that one wishes to combine under one intention are obligatory, the intentions do not overlap. An example is combining the intention of the obligatory ʿAṣr prayer with that of the obligatory Dhuhr prayer. The intentions do not overlap in this case.
Second: If the two acts are specified supererogatory prayers (nawāfil muqayyadah) that are aimed at in themselves because of a particular time, occasion, or cause, or if they are an obligatory prayer and a specified supererogatory prayer, the intentions again do not overlap. An example is the Duha prayer, which may not be combined with, for instance, the regular sunnah of Dhuhr.
It is stated in Bushrā al-Karīm: “Whatever is not, in meaning, an absolute voluntary prayer, such as the Duha sunnah… is not subsumed under another. Rather, if he intends something else along with it… the prayer is not validly entered. This is because combining two obligations, two specified supererogatory prayers, or an obligation and a specified supererogatory prayer invalidates the prayer in cases not built upon overlapping, as ritual purification (ṭahārah) is.”
Third: If the two acts are absolute voluntary prayers (nawāfil muṭlaqah), or one of them is, where the texts of the Sharīʿah show that the aim of the voluntary act is to fill the time with worship, then overlapping of intentions is permissible. An example is the obligatory Dhuhr prayer together with the sunnah of greeting the mosque (taḥiyyat al-masjid). And Allah Almighty knows best.
What is the Islamic ruling on the aqiqa?
All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
The 'aqīqah is a confirmed Sunnah (sunnah mu'akkadah). Two sheep are to be slaughtered for a newborn boy, and one sheep for a newborn girl. This is established by numerous Prophetic traditions, among them:
The narration of Samurah ibn Jundub, may Allah be pleased with him, who reported that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: "Every child is held in pledge for his 'aqīqah, which is slaughtered on his behalf on the seventh day, and he is named, and his head is shaved." — Narrated by al-Tirmidhī, who graded it as ḥasan ṣaḥīḥ.
And the narration of 'Ā'ishah, may Allah be pleased with her, who said: "The Messenger of Allah ﷺ commanded us to slaughter one sheep as 'aqīqah for a girl, and two sheep for a boy." — Narrated by Aḥmad and Ibn Mājah.
The imperative in these narrations is understood to denote recommendation rather than obligation, based on the ḥadīth of 'Amr ibn Shu'ayb, on the authority of his father, on the authority of his grandfather, who said: The Messenger of Allah ﷺ was asked about the 'aqīqah, whereupon he said: "Allah does not love 'uqūq" — as though he disliked the name itself — and then said: "Whoever has a child born to him and wishes to offer a sacrifice on their behalf, let them do so: two equivalent sheep for a boy, and one sheep for a girl." — Narrated by Aḥmad and Abū Dāwūd.
The legal inference drawn from this narration is that the Prophet ﷺ linked the slaughter to the wish and willingness of the individual, saying: "whoever wishes to offer a sacrifice... let them do so" — thereby indicating that the 'aqīqah is recommended (mustaḥabb) and not obligatory (wājib).
And Allah Almighty knows best.
Is it permissible for a wife to boycott (not to attend to his different needs) her husband?
It isn`t permissible for the woman to boycott her husband unless he is the reason behind that, and it is recommended that both spouses seek the advice of righteous people to make reconciliation.
Is it permissible for someone who is unable to fast to pay the fidyah (ransom/compensation payment) to himself, due to his own poverty?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is not permissible, nor does it fulfill the obligation, for a sick person who is currently and permanently unable to fast to pay the fidyah (ransom/compensation payment) to himself, since it is a financial obligation owed by him, established as a standing debt upon him — much like any other debt he owes. If he were to pay it to himself, it would not thereby be discharged. So if he cannot find [anyone eligible to] pay it to, it remains a standing obligation upon him, and is not thereby waived. If Allah, the Mighty and Majestic, later grants him wealth, it becomes obligatory upon him to pay it out to the poor and needy.
Imam al-Khaṭīb ash-Shirbīnī (raḥimahullāh) said: "There is no difference in the obligation of the fidyah between the wealthy and the poor person; its benefit lies in its remaining established as a standing debt upon the poor person [until he is able to pay it] — and this is the more correct position (al-aṣaḥḥ), as indicated by the wording of ar-Rawḍah and its source text." [Mughnī al-Muḥtāj, Vol.2/P.174]
Accordingly: it is not permissible for a Muslim to pay the fidyah to himself while he remains poor. If the sick person is poor, he is not obligated to pay the fidyah immediately, and it remains a standing debt upon him until a time when he has sufficient means and wealth. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.
