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.
Is it permissible for a wife to give her money to her family as a charity, or a gift without asking her husband, or seeking his consent?
The wife has the right to give her money as a charity, or a gift to her family, or to other people after consulting her husband out of respect, and this is the meaning of treating on footing of kindness and equity. Therefore, if he wanted to stop her from helping her family, then there is no harm in not telling him.
What is the ruling on discharging one's zakāh obligation through the provision of a specific benefit (manfa‘ah) — such as performing a surgical operation for a patient, or providing housing to a tenant, and counting the value of this service as zakāh?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is obligatory to pay zakāh from the actual asset (‘ayn al-māl) upon which zakāh is due, except in the case of zakāh on trade goods ('urūḍ at-tijārah), which is paid based on their monetary value. In all cases, zakāh must be given in the form of tamlīk (a full transfer of ownership), based on the words of Allah, the Mighty and Majestic (which mean): "Zakāh expenditures are only for the poor and for the needy, and for those employed to collect [zakāh], and for bringing hearts together [for Islam], and for freeing captives [or slaves], and for those in debt, and for the cause of Allah, and for the [stranded] traveler — an obligation [imposed] by Allah. And Allah is Knowing and Wise" [at-Tawbah/60]. The letter "lām" (لِ) in this verse — as in "lil-fuqarā'" ("for the poor") — indicates possession/ownership (lām al-milk).
It is not permissible to fulfill one's zakāh obligation by providing a benefit or service (manfa‘ah) — such as housing, education, or medical treatment — in place of the zakāh itself. This is because zakāh must be paid as wealth (māl) that is transferred into the ownership of the poor recipient, whereas such services are intangible benefits that are not, in themselves, capable of being formally transferred in ownership (ghayr qābilah lit-tamlīk). And Allah, the Exalted, 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.
