What is the meaning of Abu Hanifa's opinion being "disfavored" regarding feeding one poor person the food of sixty poor people? And is the interpretation of "poor person" as "a mudd" rejected, even though some schools of thought permit feeding by the mudd? And what is the extent of the validity of the saying that expiation is not obligatory for one who delays making up missed Ramadan fasts without an excuse, and that it does not multiply with the number of years?

The "marjooh" (weaker opinion) is the opposite of the "rajih (definition)" (stronger opinion). It is what the mujtahid (independent jurist) does not find strong evidence for. An example of this is Abu Hanifa's interpretation of "mudd" (a measure) as referring to a poor person ("miskin") in the context of expiation (fidyah (definition)), as the term "miskin" does not linguistically or legally apply to a "mudd." The rajih opinion is what the majority of scholars have adopted, and it is permissible to give multiple fasting expiations to a single poor person. However, in expiations that stipulate a specific number, such as the expiation for breaking an oath, dhihar (a form of divorce), or intercourse during Ramadan (definition), the stipulated number must be fulfilled. Regarding delaying the make-up fasts of Ramadan without a valid excuse until the next Ramadan arrives, the majority of scholars hold that both feeding (expiation) and making up the fasts are obligatory, which is the more cautious approach. The expiation does not multiply with the passage of years.