Is the one offering the sacrifice liable if its meat spoils?
Praise be to Allah, and prayers and peace be upon our Master the Messenger of Allah.
If the meat (of the sacrifice) spoils due to the negligence of the one offering the sacrifice in preserving it, or due to improper storage, then he is liable to compensate for the portion due to the poor (which is estimated as half a kilogram of meat). If the sacrifice was a vowed (mandatory) one, then he is liable for all of it.
However, if he was not negligent, then there is no liability upon him, because its ruling is the ruling of a trust (like an item left in someone's care). And Allah Almighty knows best.
What is the ruling of Islamic Law on continuity (muwalah) in the ritual bath?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Continuity (muwālāh) means washing each part of the body immediately after the previous one, without leaving a gap long enough for the first part to dry before the second is washed. According to the Shāfiʿī school, continuity is a recommended act (sunnah) in both the ritual bath (ghusl) and ablution (wuḍūʾ) — it is not obligatory.
It is stated in Nihāyat al-Muḥtāj ilā Sharḥ al-Minhāj: "Likewise, continuity in the ritual bath is recommended, just as it is in ablution."
Accordingly, continuity in the ritual bath is a sunnah. And Allah the Almighty knows best.
What are the categories of the livestock permissible for Udhiyah?
In the Name of Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
An Udhiyah (sacrificial offering) is only valid if it is selected from Al-An'am (livestock), which includes: camels, cattle, and sheep or goats—whether male or female, and even if castrated. Allah Almighty says {what means}: "And for all religion We have appointed a rite [of sacrifice] that they may mention the name of Allah over what He has provided for them of [sacrificial] livestock." (Al-Hajj/ 34)
In terms of preference, camels are considered the best choice, followed by cattle, then sheep, and finally goats.
A single sheep or goat is valid as a sacrifice on behalf of one person. However, a single camel or cow can be shared by up to seven people. This is based on the narration of Jabir (may Allah be pleased with him), who said: "In the year of Al-Hudaybiyah, we sacrificed along with the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) a camel on behalf of seven people, and a cow on behalf of seven people." (Narrated by Muslim)
(Note: The term "Badanah" used in the original Arabic text specifically refers to a camel in this context). And Allah the Almighty Knows Best.
Is the Saying "Whatever is Taken by the Sword of Shyness is Forbidden" an Authentic Ḥadīth?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The saying "Whatever is taken by the sword of shyness is forbidden" is not an authentic ḥadīth, though its underlying meaning is sound. The established sharʿī principle is that a Muslim's wealth is not lawful for anyone to take except with his wholehearted consent, as Allah the Almighty says {what means}: "O you who have believed, do not consume one another's wealth unjustly, but only [in lawful] business by mutual consent." [Al-Nisā/ 29] And the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: "Listen to me and you will live well: do not wrong others, do not wrong others, do not wrong others. Indeed, a man's wealth is not lawful except with his full, willing consent." (Reported by Aḥmad in his Musnad.) Whatever is taken through the pressure of shyness or social embarrassment runs directly counter to genuine, wholehearted consent.
The jurists have explicitly stated that whatever is taken by means of the "sword of shyness" carries the same ruling as that which is taken by coercion — it must be returned to its rightful owner.
Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states in al-Fatāwā al-Kubrā (Vol.3/P.30): "Do you not see the reported scholarly consensus that whoever has something taken from him purely out of shyness, without his genuine consent, does not pass ownership of it to the one who took it? They reasoned that this constitutes a form of coercion through the 'sword of shyness,' comparable to coercion at the point of an actual sword. Indeed, many people would rather submit to the literal sword and endure the pain of its wound than submit to this first kind of coercion, out of fear for their dignity and standing — which people of sound judgment hold dear and guard most fiercely." And Allah the Almighty knows best.
