Types of wujoob

وحكم الأمر نوعان أداء و هو تسليم عين الواجب بالأمر و قضاء و هو تسليم مثل الواجب به

The ruling of (wujoob for) amr is of two types. (The first is) Adaa, which is to carry out the command (as it has been commanded), (and the second is) Qadaa, which is to carry out a likeness of that (command) which was made wajib.  

The jamhoor are of the view that amr is divided into two types only when it is restricted by time, such as salah. In this case, amr can be divided in to adaa and qadaa. On the other hand, the Ahnaf are of the view that amr is divided into adaa and qadaa regardless of whether the command is restricted by time or not. Adaa is to safeguard the command, by carrying it out, whilst qadaa is to carry out the command by producing a likeness to it. For example, in the case of Salah, if one performs it in its specified time then this will be adaa, whereas if one performs salah outside of its specified time, then this will be qadaa, as it is a likeness of the command, and not what was expected. 

ويستعمل احدهما مكان الآخر مجازا حتى يجوز الأداء بنية القضاء و بالعكس 

One of the two (adaa and qadaa) can be used in the place of the other metaphorically, such that it is permissible to do adaa with the intention of qadaa and vice versa. 

The usage of the words adaa and qada are interchangeable such that if one can use the word adaa with intention of qadaa, and likewise one can use the word qadaa with the intention of doing adaa. For example one may say نويت أن أقضي ظهر اليوم , i intend to do qadaa of Zuhr today i.e. i intend to pray (do adaa) of zuhr. Likewise, one may say نويت أن أؤدي ظهر الأمس meaning i intend to to adaa of yesterday’s Zuhr i.e. i intend to make up (do qadaa) for (the) zuhr (which I missed) yesterday. 

The usage of the word qadaa in the place of adaa is many such as the saying of Allah {فَإِذَا قُضِيَتِ الصَّلَاةُ فَانتَشِرُوا فِي الْأَرْضِ}[1].

Imam Bazdawi says that the word adaa is generally used to mean both adaa and qadaa. This is in contrast to qadaa which is only reserved for its meaning i.e. it is not used to mean adaa. 

An objection may arise, as the use of the word qadaa with the intention of adaa is permissible, why is it not allowed for the case where a person fasts in Sha’ban thinking it to be Ramadan? For example, if one said I am doing qadaa (intending the meaning of adaa) of Ramadan, the fasting of Ramadan will not be done in this case. The Ahnaf say that this is not due to the meaning of the sentence being rejected, nor the interchangeability of the words adaa and qadaa being rejected, rather it is because adaa of an action cannot occur before its sabab has come into effect. Therefore, as Ramadan has not started, its sabab has not been found, therefore one cannot do adaa of it. 

In contrast, if a person fasts in Shawwal thinking it to be Ramadan, then this is permissible i.e. A person has a few qadaa of Ramadan which they need to make up from before, now they fast in Shawwal thinking it to be Ramadan, i.e. they say I am doing adaa of Ramadan, then their qadaa will be done[2].

 و القضاء يجب بما يجب به الأداء عند المحققين خلافا للبعض

Qadaa is made wajib with that (sabab) which makes adaa wajib, (this is the view) according to the muhaqiqeen, as opposed to some (who disagree). 

According to the Ahnaf, qadaa is automatically made wajib when the sabab of the original amr for adaa is found, such that there is no need for a new evidence to indicate that qadaa has been made wajib. This the view of some Shawafi and the famous view of Hanabila. Qadi Abu Ya’la says Imam Ahmad also indicates towards this view. On the other hand, most of the Shawafi’, Abu Bakr Jassas, Abu al-Yusr Bazdawi the brother of Fakhr al-Islam Imam Bazdawi as well as the the Ahnaf from the Iraq region, all say that qadaa is not wajib by adaa becoming wajib, rather they rely on additional evidence to show that qadaa has been made wajib. 

For example, the Ahnaf will say that if a person missed their salah, and the time for salah has gone, then qadaa becomes wajib by default. They do not look for additional evidence to prove that qadaa has become wajib. On the other hand, others argue that qadaa is not made wajib by the ayah on its own, rather it has been made wajib due to the hadith of the Prophet ﷺ that مَنْ نَسِيَ صَلاَةً فَلْيُصَلِّهَا إِذَا ذَكَرَهَا, He who forgets the prayer should say it when he remembers it[3]. The Ahnaf will say that this hadith, and those similar to it[4], come for warning to clarify that adaa of salah is still due and its obligation is not dropped due to having it missed. 

This is similar to the case if one is ill or travelling and therefore misses the fasting of Ramadan. The Ahnaf hold that the ayah of the Quran indicates wujoob for adaa and qadaa in itself; On the other hand, the Shawafi’ and others hold that, qadaa would not have been made if the following part of the ayah had not been revealed { وَمَن كَانَ مَرِيضًا أَوْ عَلَىٰ سَفَرٍ فَعِدَّةٌ مِّنْ أَيَّامٍ أُخَرَ }[5]. They say that this part of the ayah makes qadaa wajib, and not the original command.

In both cases above, the outcome is the same, in that if a person misses their prayer or fast, then they must make it up. The only difference is the reason why they need to make it up. However, there are instances where this little technicality can have differing effects on the outcome of a fiqhi ruling.

For example; a person made an oath that they will fast on a certain day, now during the keeping of this fast, they fell ill or became unconscious such that they were unable to keep the fast. In this case the Ahnaf will say the person will need to do qadaa of the fast, whilst the Shawafi’ will say that they do not need to do qadaa. As the Ahnaf are of the opinion that qadaa becomes wajib by default[6], they will say that as soon as the person began their fast it became wajib on them to complete it, therefore as they could not complete it, they must do qadaa of it on another day. On the other hand, as the Shawafi hold that qadaa does not become wajib by default, they will say that the person does not need to do qadaa of their fast as qadaa only becomes wajib due to an additional evidence which is not found in this case. 

There are other examples where the difference is apparent between both madhahib. For example, the Ahnaf hold that the qadaa of a hadr salah should be four rakats in safar, and likewise the qadaa of a safar salah in hadr should be two rakats. This differs from the view of the Shawafi’[7]and Hanabila whom say that for qada of a safar salah, then if in hadr four should be read. Ibn Hazm holds a third view, that if one is doing their qadaa in safar they should pray two rakats, whilst if they are doing so in hadr they should pray four. 

Likewise, it is also the view of the Ahnaf that qadaa of a jahri[8] salah in the day should be done loudly, and qadaa of a sirri[9] salah at night should be done quietly. This is even though it is not the norm for jahri salah to be prayed during the day nor for sirri salah to be prayed at night. 

An objection may arise, which seems as though the Ahnaf do not hold onto their principle that that which makes adaa wajib is the same for qadaa. Consider this example; The time for salah enters and a person is sick, therefore it is wajib upon them to perform salah as a mareedh. Now when the time expires, they need to do qadaa. It seems as though doing qadaa like a mareedh should be sufficient even for a healthy person, however the Ahnaf hold that they should pray their salah normally. 

Those who object will say as adaa would have been complete if they performed their salah as a mareedh, then even when healthy their qadaa should be complete if they perform it as a mareedh. Whereas the Ahnaf point of view[10] indicates that the sabab which made adaa wajib is not the same which is making qadaa wajib[11]. The Ahnaf answer that when the amr came, it was wajib to complete the full salah as a mareedh with dispensation given for those who were sick. Therefore, when the time expires and qadaa is due, salah should be completed in full, again with the dispensation that if one is ill, they may perform their salah as a mareedh. 

وفيما إذا نذر أن يعتكف شهر رمضان فصام و لم يعتكف إنما وجب القضاء بصوم مقصود لعود شرطه إلي الكمال لا لأن القضاء وجب بسبب آخر

As for the case where one takes an oath that they will do i’tikaf in the month of Ramadan, and they fast[12], but do not do i’tikaaf, (then in this case) qadaa is only made wajib with an intended (nafl) fast. (That is because) the condition (of i’tikaaf, which is fasting) returns to its original, not because qadaa is made wajib due to another sabab.  

This is a well-known question posed by the Shawafi; If a person makes an oath to do i’tikaaf in Ramadan, and he fasts but does not do his i’tikaaf due to illness, the Ahnaf hold that they do not need to do qadaa of the i’tikaaf in another Ramadan. Rather they say that the person will need to do another i’tikaaf as soon as possible, however they must also fast. The objection which arises is why must another fast be kept even though it has been done the first time round. It seems as though there is an qadaa of an adaa which was completed. Why not just do qadaa of an i’tikaaf?

The Ahnaf reply that in this case as the condition of wajib i’tikaaf is Ramadan[13], to do i’tikaaf without fasting in Ramadan will not be valid. Therefore, when one is unable to complete their i’tikaaf due to illness, as they have completed their fasting, qadaa of fasting will be done. However as fasting is condition of wajib i’tikaf, when they made their oath for i’tikaaf it is as if they made an oath for fasting as well, therefore it becomes necessary to complete a nafl fast with the qadaa of i’tikaaf. 

This is similar to the example when one makes oath to pray two rakat salah. Now they must ensure they have wudhu when carrying out their two rakat of salah, as wudhu is a necessary prerequisite of salah. If they performed their salah without wudhu it would not be accepted from them, and their oath will remain unfulfilled. 

Another objection which arises is that if the Ahnaf are of the opinion that qadaa becomes wajib with the sabab of adaa, which is the ayah { وَلْيُوفُوا نُذُورَهُمْ }[14], then it should be wajib to do qadaa in a different Ramadan, as is the view of Zufar. If not, then the obligation of qadaa should be dropped in this case, as is the view of Abu Yusuf[15]. The Ahnaf reply that the period from one Ramadan to another Ramadan is a very long period, and a person is not guaranteed to reach the next Ramadan and complete their qadaa, therefore they should make qadaa as soon as possible. 


[1] Quran 62:10

[2] This is as long as it is not the day of Eid, as fasting is not permissible nor accepted on this day. 

[3] Sahih Muslim 684 a

[4] Sahih Muslim 684 b, 684 c, 684 d

[5] Quran 2:185

[6] I.e. as soon as the sabab for the amr is found

[7] Shawafi Jadeed

[8] Like Maghrib and Isha

[9] Like Dhuhr and Asr

[10] That they should pray their salah normally

[11] Similarly if a sick person is doing qadaa for salah which they missed when they were healthy, then they may lighten the prayer as is normally permitted according to the Ahnaf.

[12] Allamah al-Nasafi mentions to fast and not to do i’tikaaf, as if they did not fast due to an illness, then in this case it is permissible to do qadaa of i’tikaaf in the coming Ramadan. 

[13] There is some ikhtilaf whether fasting is a condition of I’tikaaf cf. Qamar al-Aqmar

[14] Quran 22:29

[15] cf. Qamar al-Aqmar

Scroll to Top