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.
Is it permissible for a woman to sit with her brothers-in-law?
It is impermissible for a woman to sit with her brothers-in-law, and it is also impermissible for a person to have a Khulwa (seclusion) with his sister-in-law.
Does the intention (niyyah) of the principal (muwakkil) suffice for the sacrifice (dhabḥ) of the udhiyyah?
Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If a person appoints an agent (wakīl) to perform the slaughter (dhabḥ) on their behalf, the intention (niyyah) of the principal (the one appointing the agent) suffices, and there is no need for the agent to have this intention himself. In fact, even if the agent is unaware that he is performing the sacrifice on someone's behalf as an udhiyyah (sacrificial offering), this does not affect its validity. And Allah, the Most High, knows best.
What is the ruling on performing the Witr prayer as a single rak`ah?
Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is permissible to perform the Witr prayer as a single unit (rak‘ah). It was narrated from Ibn ‘Umar that a man asked the Messenger of Allah ﷺ about the night prayer, and the Messenger of Allah ﷺ replied: 'The night prayer is offered two by two (mathna mathna). If one of you fears the approach of dawn, let him pray a single rak‘ah to make what he has prayed odd-numbered (Witr) for him.' (Related by al-Bukhari & Muslim)). However, limiting the prayer to only one rak‘ah is considered 'contrary to the preferred way' (Khilaf al-Awla).
It is stated in Al-Minhaj al-Qawim Sharh al-Muqaddimah al-Hadramiyyah (p. 137): 'The minimum of Witr is one rak‘ah, but limiting it to that is contrary to what is best.'
The most complete form of Witr is eleven units, while the minimum level of 'perfection' is three units. It is stated in ‘Umdat al-Salik (p. 60): 'The minimum of Witr is one rak‘ah, and its maximum is eleven, performing the taslim (salutation) after every two units. The lowest level of perfection is three units with two separate taslims (meaning 2+1).' And Allah the Exalted knows best.
