What are the legal and religious consequences for a charitable organization in the event that a sacrificial animal is damaged or spoiled after slaughter?
All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
Charitable organizations entrusted with slaughtering sacrificial animals (uḍḥiyyah) and distributing their meat on behalf of their owners are obligated to safeguard the meat from spoilage, damage, theft, and any other harm. This is because such organizations act as agents (wukalā') on behalf of those offering the sacrifice, and an agent holds what is entrusted to them in trust (amānah) — whether they receive a wage for their work or act on a voluntary basis.
If the sacrificial animal is damaged after slaughter during the processes of packaging, transportation, or storage due to negligence or oversight — whether on the part of the organization's own staff overseeing the operation, or on the part of third parties contracted by the organization such as transport or shipping companies — then liability falls upon the negligent party, who is required to compensate for the value of the sacrifice. It is not permissible to cover such compensation from the organization's other donor funds.
However, if the damage to the sacrificial animal occurs without any negligence in its preservation and storage on the part of any party involved in the transportation, shipping, or storage process, and is instead attributable to force majeure circumstances beyond their control, then no financial liability is borne by any party in such a case. And Allah Almighty knows best.
What is the ruling on the white discharge (*Al-Qassat al-Bayda'*) if it is in a very small amount—is it considered a sign of purity?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
Among the signs of purity (Tahr) for a woman is the white discharge (Al-Qassat al-Bayda'), which is a clear, pure white fluid, regardless of whether it is minimal in quantity, or complete dryness (Jafaf), wherein secretions cease entirely such that if a white cotton cloth is inserted, it comes out completely clean. Once a woman observes either of these two signs, she has attained ritual purity.
Furthermore, another sign of purity is when the duration of the menstrual period exceeds the maximum limit of menstruation, which is fifteen days. If it exceeds this period, it becomes evident that she is experiencing non-menstrual bleeding (Istihadah).
Is it enough to say Tasbeeh (Saying Subhaana Rabbiya Al-‘Atheem during Rukoo`, and saying Subhaana Rabbiya Al-A‘laa during Sujood ) once, or twice during Rukoo`(Bowing in prayer) and Sujood (Prostration)?
All perfect praise be to Allah, The Lord of The Worlds Yes, saying Tasbeeh once during Rukoo` and Sujood is enough, provided that the worshiper`s attentiveness of the heart isn`t undermined during each. As regards the recompense, it depends on the number of Tasbeeh. And Allah Knows Best.
What is the ruling on making up the regular *rawātib* (sunnah) prayers together with a missed obligatory prayer?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is obligatory to make up (qaḍāʾ) a missed obligatory prayer (farḍ). As for the timed supererogatory prayers (al-sunan al-muʾaqqatah) or the regular rawātib prayers, it is recommended (mandūb) to make them up, even if a long time has passed. Ibn Ḥajar (may Allah have mercy on him) said in his Fatāwā: "It is established in our school that it is sunnah to make up the timed voluntary prayers, by night or by day, even if congregation is not prescribed for them, whether much time has passed or little."
Accordingly, it is recommended to make up the sunan together with the obligatory prayer. And Allah Almighty knows best.
________________________________________
Note on terminology: Al-nawāfil al-muʾaqqatah (timed voluntary prayers) refers to supererogatory prayers tied to a specific time or cause, such as the rawātib (regular prayers before and after the obligatory ones), Duha, and the like. The ruling given here reflects the Shāfiʿī position.
