as they likewise argued that circumcision is obligatory: they said that cutting off any part of a human being is prohibited, and what is prohibited can only become permissible on account of an obligation. Similarly, some of them inferred the obligation of greeting the mosque from the Prophet’s command to do so while the sermon was being delivered (1). They said: listening to the sermon is obligatory, and one may not be diverted from an obligation except by another obligation.

In any case, if one is satisfied with deriving proof from this hadith, especially as it is supported by the other evidences, there is no harm in doing so. Otherwise, so long as we have a clear proof, there is no need to debate an obscure one. For one of the proper manners of debate is that, when there is a clear proof, we do not resort to an ambiguous proof open to argument. Thus, when Abraham, peace be upon him, said to the one who denied the Lord, “My Lord is the One who gives life and causes death,” he replied, “I give life and cause death.” This was deceptive and invalid. So Abraham said to him: “Indeed, Allah brings the sun from the east, so bring it from the west.” [al-Baqarah 2:258] There is no room for argument in this.

THE PERIOD OF MOURNING FOR EVERY WOMAN WHOSE HUSBAND DIES WHILE SHE IS IN A VALID MARRIAGE, EVEN IF SHE IS A DHIMMI WOMAN, ........

His statement, “the period of mourning”: “period” is an adverbial expression, meaning the duration of the waiting period, whether long or short. If she is not pregnant, her waiting period is four months and ten days, and her mourning is likewise four months and ten days. If she is pregnant, her waiting period lasts until she gives birth, and her mourning lasts until she gives birth. If she does not learn of her husband’s death until after the waiting period has ended, then she is not required to observe mourning, because it is ancillary to the waiting period.

His statement, “every woman whose husband has died”: “has died” is a passive participle, because it is