and to strike him or her for it at the age of ten? (1) Would a person be struck for something that is not obligatory upon him?

The answer is that the parent is required to instruct his children and strike them because this is part of complete care and the proper discharge of the responsibility entrusted to him; a father is fit to bear such responsibility. It is not because prayer is obligatory upon the child. This is why he is not required to make up the prayers if he neglects them.

Even if a child is six years old but perceptive and intelligent, the apparent meaning of the hadith is that he should not be instructed to pray, because the Lawgiver set the age at seven, since this is generally the age at which discernment is attained; and exceptional cases carry no legal ruling.

If we say that discernment is not defined by a particular age but rather by its meaning—and that discernment means understanding what is said and giving an answer, as the word’s derivation indicates—then should the ruling concerning instructing him to pray be made contingent upon this, even if he is under seven, or not? This is a matter for consideration. It may be said that we make the ruling contingent upon discernment; or we may say that it is contingent upon the age of seven, as stated in the sunnah. The Lawgiver is wiser than we are; therefore, instructing him to pray and striking him for it must be restricted to what the sunnah has stipulated.

Not a menstruating woman or a woman experiencing postnatal bleeding, ………

His statement, “Not a menstruating woman or a woman experiencing postnatal bleeding”: this is how it appears in the manuscripts, in the accusative case,