What is the ruling of Islamic Law on wudu (ablution) when there is an adhesive substance on the hand that is difficult to remove?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
The general principle is: if what is applied to the limbs of wudu' (ablution) does not form a barrier substance preventing water from reaching the skin, then the wudu' is valid despite its presence. However, if these substances prevent water from reaching the skin, the wudu' is not valid with their presence, and they must be removed so that water reaches the hair or skin without any barrier.
Shaykh al-Islam, the Imam an-Nawawi, may Allah have mercy on him, says: "If there is wax, dough, henna, or similar substances on some of his limbs [of wudu'], and this prevents water from reaching any part of the limb, then his purification (tahara) is not valid — regardless of whether the amount is much or little. But if there remains on the hand or elsewhere only the trace and color of the henna, without its substance [i.e., the physical residue itself], or the trace of a liquid oil such that the water touches the skin of the limb and flows over it, though it does not remain [as a barrier] — then his purification is valid." [Al-Majmu' , Vol.1/P.529]. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.
I broke my oath and am now obligated to pay the expiation for a broken oath (kaffārat al-yamīn). Would it be valid to fulfill this by inviting the poor and needy to a meal for them to eat from?
Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
The expiation for a broken oath (kaffārat al-yamīn) is given to the poor (fuqarā') and needy (masākīn), and it must be given in the form of ownership (tamlīk) transferred to them of the required amount — namely, one mudd of the staple food of the locality, or its equivalent monetary value. It isn`t valid to invite the poor or needy to a meal prepared for them to eat from, as this does not constitute "ownership" (tamlīk) but merely "permission to partake" (ibāḥah).
Imam al-Shirbīnī (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "What is intended is that ownership be transferred to them; therefore, providing them with lunch or dinner [as a meal to eat from] isn`t valid." [Summarized from Mughnī al-Muhtāj,Vol. 5/P.50]. And Allah the Almighty knows best.
What are the disliked (makruh) acts of fasting?
● Excessive rinsing of the mouth and nose (during ablution), as it may lead to swallowing water.
● Tasting food or doing anything that may risk breaking the fast.
● Engaging in idle talk, and it is even more emphasized to avoid lying, backbiting, and gossiping.
What are the Sharia consequences when the sacrificial time for the uḍḥiyyah comes to an end?
In the Name of Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
If the sun sets on the final day of Tashriq (the 13th of Dhu al-Hijjah) and the Udhiyah (sacrificial animal) has not yet been slaughtered, its designated time has expired. Should a person slaughter it after this point, it will not be counted as an Udhiyah.
However, if the sacrifice was a vowed one (Mandhurah), they are strictly obligated to slaughter it as a makeup act (Qada’), and its meat must be distributed entirely according to the rules governing vowed sacrifices.
It is stated in Bushra al-Karim (p. 702): "If one slaughters after sunset on the final day [of Tashriq]... it does not count as an Udhiyah, unless it was a vowed sacrifice, in which case it is fulfilled as a makeup act (Qada’)." And Allah the Almighty Knows Best.
