What is the ruling on praying behind a disliked Imam?
Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is mildly disliked (Makruh Tanzihan) for a man—other than the permanent designated Imam (Imam Ratib)—to lead people in prayer if the majority of them dislike him due to a religiously blameworthy reason (Amr Madhmum Shar‘an), such as associating with open sinners (Fussaq), for example. As for the followers who dislike him, the prayer behind him is not disliked for them. However, if less than the majority dislike him, or if the majority dislike him for a reason that is not religiously blameworthy, then his leading the prayer is not disliked. And Allah the Exalted 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.
Is Zakah (obligatory charity) due on articles of merchandise even if they were stacked in the merchant`s stores for years?
Yes, Zakah is due on goods even if they were stacked in merchant`s stores for years, in this manner Islam struggle against monopoly.
What is the ruling on deliberately breaking the fast while being capable of fasting?
Whoever intentionally breaks their fast in Ramadan without a valid excuse has committed a major sin and bears great guilt. They must repent, seek forgiveness, refrain from eating and drinking for the rest of the day, and make up for that day after Ramadan.
They have lost an immense reward, which cannot be compensated even by fasting an entire lifetime as a voluntary act, because an obligatory fast cannot be equaled by voluntary fasting.
If the fast was broken through sexual intercourse, the person must:
● Make up for the missed fast (qada), and
● Perform kaffarah by fasting two consecutive months.
● If they are unable to do so, they must feed sixty needy people.
