What is the ruling on ablution if vaginal discharge is expelled, and is it impure?
If these discharges exit from the external genitalia (apparent part of the vagina), they are not impure and do not invalidate ablution. If they exit from the internal part, they are impure and do invalidate ablution. If it is uncertain whether they are from the internal or external part, they are not impure and do not invalidate ablution.
The apparent part is what becomes visible when sitting, and what the husband's penis reaches during intercourse is considered part of the apparent. The internal part is what is beyond that. And Allah the Almighty knows best.
Is a person rewarded for refraining from all that breaks their fast when required to do so, and is it considered a valid fast?
If a person eats or drinks thinking that Fajr has not yet arrived, but then someone informs them that Fajr had already begun, they must refrain from eating for the rest of the day and make up the fast later.
If they observe the required restraint (imsak), they will be rewarded for obeying the command because fulfilling an obligation brings reward.
However, this is not considered a valid fast in terms of rulings. For example:
● It is not disliked (makruh) for them to use a miswak after noon.
● They are not encouraged to hasten the breaking of the fast at sunset.
● Other fasting-related rulings do not apply to them.
What is the ruling on making up the regular pre-Dhuhr *sunnah* (*al-sunnah al-rātibah al-qabliyyah*) for one who missed it in the Dhuhr prayer?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
Every timed supererogatory prayer (nāfilah) is recommended (mandūb) to be made up if its time passes. As for a nāfilah that precedes the obligatory prayer, performing it before the farḍ is a matter of proper etiquette (adab); if it is prayed after the farḍ, it is still considered adāʾ (performed within its time). If the time of the farḍ has ended, it is recommended to make up (qaḍāʾ) the nāfilah for one who did not pray it.
Whoever misses the sunnah before Dhuhr, whether with an excuse or without one, it is recommended for him to pray it after the obligatory Dhuhr prayer, within the time of Dhuhr, even at its end, and it counts as adāʾ, not qaḍāʾ. It is also recommended for one who missed the pre-Dhuhr sunnah to pray it before the post-Dhuhr sunnah, in observance of the proper order. It is stated in ʿUmdat al-Sālik wa ʿUddat al-Nāsik (Vol.1/p.60): "What precedes the obligatory prayer has the same time as the obligatory prayer, and performing it before the farḍ is a matter of etiquette; after it, it is adāʾ. What follows the farḍ has its time begin with the performance of the farḍ and end with the end of its time."
If the time of Dhuhr has ended, it is recommended for him to pray both the pre- and post-Dhuhr sunnahs, and they count as qaḍāʾ for both. It is stated in ʿUmdat al-Sālik (1/61): "Every timed nafl, such as the ʿĪd prayer, Duha, Witr, and the regular rawātib of the obligatory prayers, if it is missed, it is recommended to make it up forever." And Allah Almighty knows best.
What is the ruling of Islamic Law regarding one who purchases a sacrificial animal (uḍḥiyah) and it then develops a defect before slaughter?
Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If a defect that invalidates the sacrifice (uḍḥiyah) arises after its purchase — for example, if one purchased a sound, defect-free animal, and it then developed a limp, blindness in one eye, or a similar defect before slaughter — it does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah, according to the Shāfi'ī school.
It is stated in Asnā al-Maṭālib fī Sharḥ Rawḍ al-Ṭālib (Vol.1/P.535): "Even if the limp develops [in the animal] while the knife is upon it, it still does not fulfill the requirement, because it is lame at the moment of slaughter — this is analogous to a case where a sheep's leg breaks and one hastens to slaughter it [in that condition]."
The Ḥanbalī school, however, held that if the one offering the sacrifice purchased the animal while it was sound and defect-free, and a defect then befell it afterward, the sacrifice remains valid and there is no obligation to replace it.
It is stated in Masā'il al-Imām Aḥmad, one of the Ḥanbalī reference works (Vol.8/P.4021): "I said: If a person purchases the sacrificial animal while it is sound, and it is then afflicted with illness, blindness in one eye, or a broken limb [before slaughter]? He [Imam Aḥmad] said: It is said that it still fulfills the requirement. Isḥāq said likewise, because he purchased it while sound, and the defect befell it only afterward, so it remains sufficient on his behalf." [End of quote]
Accordingly, a sheep afflicted with a defect that invalidates the sacrifice does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah — whether the defect arose after purchase or during the slaughter itself — according to the Shāfi'ī school. However, there is no objection to following the Ḥanbalī position on this matter [as a valid alternative]. And Allah, the Most High, knows best.
