Does using a gargling medicine break the fast?
If the medicine reaches the body cavity (jauf), the fast is invalidated. However, if it does not enter the body cavity, the fast remains valid.
Therefore, it is advisable to avoid using it during the day in Ramadan.
Is it permissible to offer an Udhiyah on behalf of the deceased?
In the Name of Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
Offering an Udhiyah (sacrificial animal) on behalf of a deceased person is permissible. This is the official position of the Hanbali school (as stated in Kashshaf al-Qina’ by al-Bahuti,Vol.6/P.428) and was also upheld by the prominent Shafi'i scholar Al-’Abbadi (mentioned in Bidayat al-Muhtaj by Ibn Qadi Shuhbah,Vol. 4/P.358). It has likewise been narrated as a valid view among some Maliki and Hanafi scholars.
In fact, Imam Abu Dawud dedicated an entire chapter in his Sunan collection entitled, "Chapter on Sacrificing on Behalf of the Deceased." In it, he recorded a narration from Hanash, who said: "I saw 'Ali sacrificing two rams, so I asked him, 'What is this?' He replied, 'The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) commanded me to offer a sacrifice on his behalf, so I am sacrificing on his behalf.'"
Imam Abu Dawud also narrated from Jabir (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: "O Allah, this is from You, for You, and on behalf of Muhammad and his Ummah (community). In the Name of Allah, and Allah is the Greatest," and he then slaughtered the animal.
The textual evidence here lies in the fact that our Master, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), offered a sacrifice on behalf of his entire community—and it is well-established that his community includes those who have already passed away.
Furthermore, there is an abundance of sacred texts demonstrating that the rewards of righteous deeds reach the deceased. For instance, it is permissible to fast on behalf of a deceased person who passed away with missed obligatory fasts, and it is equally permissible to perform Hajj on their behalf, both of which are firmly established in authentic Hadiths. Therefore, if the reward of fasting (which is a purely physical act of worship) and Hajj (which is a joint physical and financial act of worship) can reach the deceased, then the reward of an Udhiyah reaches them with greater reason (by way of A Fortiori argument). This is because it is a purely financial act of worship, falling under the general category of charity (Sadaqah).
Additionally, scholars have reached a consensus (Ijma') that the rewards of charity reach the deceased, and since the Udhiyah is inherently an act of charity, it falls under the same ruling. Consequently, based on all the aforementioned evidence, we hold the view that offering a sacrifice on behalf of the deceased is entirely permissible. And Allah the Almighty Knows Best.
What is the ruling on using the *subḥah* (prayer beads) to count during *tasbīḥ* and *dhikr*?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is recommended to use the ordinary or electronic subḥah (prayer beads or counter) to count tasbīḥ, dhikr, and istighfār, because it helps one to remember Allah. Many reports have been transmitted from the Companions and the Followers (tābiʿūn) showing that they continued to use strings of date pits as an aid to dhikr and tasbīḥ.
It is one of the lawful means of worship. Indeed, what is established from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), namely that he counted tasbīḥ on his right hand, shows that it is permissible to count tasbīḥ with whatever helps a Muslim keep track of the number. There is therefore no basis for calling it an innovation (bidʿah), and we know of no jurist who said so.
Al-Ḥāfiẓ al-Suyūṭī (may Allah have mercy on him) wrote a dedicated treatise on the subject titled al-Minḥah fī al-Subḥah, printed within al-Ḥāwī li’l-Fatāwī (vol. 4–6).
Shaykh al-Islām Imam Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī (may Allah have mercy on him) was asked: Does the subḥah have a basis in the Sunnah? He replied: “Yes, and al-Ḥāfiẓ al-Suyūṭī wrote on this. Among the evidence is what is authentically reported from Ibn ʿUmar (may Allah be pleased with them both): ‘I saw the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) counting tasbīḥ on his hand.’ Ibn Abī Shaybah, Abū Dāwūd, and al-Tirmidhī also narrated: ‘Hold fast to tasbīḥ, tahlīl, and taqdīs, and do not be heedless, lest you forget the affirmation of Allah’s oneness (tawḥīd). Count them on the fingertips, for they will be questioned and made to speak.’ Counting tasbīḥ with pebbles, date pits, and a knotted string has also been reported from a group of the Companions and those after them. Some scholars held that counting on the fingertips is better than the subḥah, based on the ḥadīth of Ibn ʿUmar. Others distinguished, saying: if the one reciting is safe from miscounting, counting on the fingertips is better; otherwise the subḥah is better.” [al-Fatāwā al-Fiqhiyyah al-Kubrā, Vol.1/p.152]. And Allah Almighty knows best.
My father has debts and asked me to repay them years ago, and I promised him I would do so upon his death — is it permissible for me to go back on my promise given that I am unable to repay them, especially since he refuses to contribute to repayment on the grounds that the debt has become my responsibility by virtue of my promise?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The established principle is that a father's debt is to be repaid from his own wealth, if he possesses sufficient means. As for the promise made by the son to repay it on his father's behalf, fulfilling such a promise is strongly recommended, and breaking it is considerably disliked. Shaykh al-Islām Imām al-Nawawī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "Fulfilling a promise is emphatically recommended, and breaking it is severely disliked. The evidences for this from the Qurʾān and the Sunnah are well known." [Rawḍat al-Ṭālibīn,Vol. 2/P.278] Shaykh al-Islām Imām Zakariyyā al-Anṣārī, may Allah have mercy upon him, further states: "The reason fulfilling a promise is not obligatory and breaking it is not forbidden is that a promise is in the nature of a gift, and a gift does not become binding except upon receipt." [Asnā al-Maṭālib fī Sharḥ Rawḍ al-Ṭālib,Vol. 2/P.487]
Given that the son does not possess the financial means to fulfil his promise to his father, breaking this promise falls beyond his capacity — and Allah does not burden a soul beyond what it can bear. Since the father himself possesses sufficient wealth to settle his own debt, repayment must be made from his own funds. Should he pass away before doing so, the debt is to be settled from his estate. And Allah the Almighty knows best.
