ibn ʿAbbās, that they both said regarding the menstruating woman who becomes pure before the break of dawn by the duration of one rakʿah: She shall pray the Maghrib and the ʿIshāʾ. And if she becomes pure before the sun sets, she shall pray the Ẓuhr and the ʿAṣr together. This is because the time of the second prayer is a time for the first prayer in the state of excuse, so if the excused person reaches it, its obligation becomes binding upon him, just as the obligation of the second prayer becomes binding upon him.

Section: The amount by which the obligation is connected is the duration of the opening takbīr. Al-Shāfiʿī said: It is the duration of one rakʿah, because that is what was narrated from ʿAbd al-Raḥmān and Ibn ʿAbbās, and because it is an attainment to which the attainment of the prayer is connected, so it is not less than one rakʿah, like the attainment of the Jumuʿah. Mālik said: It is five rakʿahs. Our evidence is that the second prayer becomes obligatory by less than a rakʿah, so the first prayer becomes obligatory by it, just as it is with the rakʿah and the five according to Mālik. Furthermore, it is an attainment, so the small and the large are equal in it, like the traveler's attainment of the resident's prayer. As for the Jumuʿah, the rakʿah was considered in its entirety because the congregation is a condition for it, so the attainment of a rakʿah was considered so that its condition would not be missed in most of it, unlike our issue.

Section: If a legally responsible person attains from the time of the first of the two combined prayers an amount by which it becomes obligatory, then becomes insane, or—if it is a woman—she begins to menstruate or experiences postpartum bleeding, and then the excuse ceases after its time, the second prayer does not become obligatory in one of the two narrations, nor is its performance (qaḍāʾ) required. This is the choice of Ibn Ḥāmid. The other narration is: It becomes obligatory and its performance is required, because it is one of the two combined prayers, so it becomes obligatory by attaining a part of the time of the other, like the first. The reasoning for the first is that he did not attain a part of its time, nor the time of its follower, so it did not become obligatory, just as if he had not attained anything from the time of the first. He differs from one who attains the time of the second, for he has attained the time of the follower of the first, since the first is performed in the time of the second as a followed, intended prayer that must be prioritized and begun with, unlike the second with the first. And because whoever does not permit combining except in the time of the second, the time of the first is not, according to him, a time