Is it permissible for the person who hasn`t made wudu` (state of minor ritual impurity) to perform the Adhan?
Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is disliked (Makruh) for a person in a state of minor ritual impurity (Hadath Asghar) to perform the Adhan. However, if he does so, his Adhan is considered valid and fulfills the sunnah of the Adhan despite it being disliked. And Allah the Exalted knows best.
The imam recited a verse containing a prostration of recitation (*sajdat al-tilāwah*) but did not prostrate. After the imam's *salām*, a follower (*maʾmūm*) performed a prostration of forgetfulness (*sujūd al-sahw*) because the imam had not performed the prostration of recitation. Is it permissible to go against the imam in this way?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
There is no sin on the imam if he omits the prostration of recitation (sujūd al-tilāwah), even deliberately. The maʾmūm (the one following the imam) is obliged to follow the imam in the prayer, so if the imam does not perform the prostration of recitation, it is not permissible for the follower to prostrate, because the imam is appointed only to be followed.
If the follower introduces a prostration after the imam’s salām but before his own salām, in a case where there is no prostration of forgetfulness (sujūd al-sahw), his prayer is invalidated if he knew it to be prohibited. Otherwise, he is excused on account of his ignorance and his prayer is not invalidated.
It is stated in Ḥāshiyat al-Imām al-Jamal ʿalā Fatḥ al-Wahhāb: “His statement: ‘So the omission of the hayʾāt (the non-essential sunnahs of the prayer) is not compensated for by prostration; if one prostrates for any of them deliberately, his prayer is invalidated, unless he is excused due to his ignorance.’”
Since this issue is one that is hidden from the laymen, as it is among the subtleties of knowledge, and the laymen are excused for ignorance of whatever is of such a nature, and their act of obedience is not invalidated because of it, it may be said that the prayer of one who has not acquired knowledge of this issue is not invalidated, with the necessity of learning the rulings remaining. As for after knowing it, the prayer is invalidated. And Allah Almighty knows best.
What is the ruling of Islamic Law on applying perfume before entering the state of ihram
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
Applying some perfume (ṭīb) before entering the state of iḥrām does not affect the validity of the Ihram, even if its trace remains after the iḥrām has begun. Indeed, it is sunnah for the pilgrim performing Ḥajj or ʿUmrah to perfume himself before iḥrām.
The scholar Nawawī al-Jāwī (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “The third of them is applying perfume to the body shortly before it, that is, before iḥrām, whether the one entering iḥrām is male or otherwise, young or old, married or unmarried. The recommendation applies after performing the ritual bath (ghusl), and it is fulfilled with any perfume whatsoever, though the best is musk, mixed with rose water or the like. There is no objection to the perfume remaining on the body after iḥrām; however, if a woman becomes bound by the mourning observance (iḥdād) after entering iḥrām, she must remove it. As for perfuming the garment, it is merely permissible, not recommended, according to the reliable position (al-muʿtamad). But if one removes his perfumed garment while the scent is still present in it and then wears it again, he is liable for the fidyah (expiation).” [Nihāyat al-Zayn, Vol.1/212]. And Allah Almighty knows best.
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.