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.
Must a person refrain from eating for the rest of the day if they break a fast of a vow (nadhr) or a make up fast (qada)?
Whoever observes a vowed fast (nadhr) or a makeup fast (qada) is prohibited from breaking it without a valid excuse. If they break it without a legitimate reason, they are sinful.
However, they are not required to refrain from eating for the rest of the day, because such restraint is only required out of respect for the month of Ramadan, not for other types of fasting.
What are the nullifiers of fasting?
1. Anything that enters the body cavity intentionally, even in small amounts, through an open passage such as the mouth, nose, ears, front, or back private parts.
2. Intentional vomiting.
3. Sexual intercourse.
4. Masturbation.
5. Menstruation and postnatal bleeding.
6. Insanity.
7. Apostasy.
8. Fainting if it lasts for the entire day.
What is the ruling of Islamic Law on opening an account in a commercial bank in order to deposit a sum and use it for personal purposes, such as transfers and electronic payments?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is forbidden for a Muslim, if he has a choice, to open an account in an interest-based (ribawī) bank, even if the account earns no interest, because doing so assists in ribā, based on the saying of Allah the Exalted (which means): “And cooperate in righteousness and piety, but do not cooperate in sin and aggression.” [al-Māʾidah/2]
This is because such banks invest deposited funds in forbidden ribā-based transactions, and depositing with them is therefore a form of assisting them in what is unlawful. Assisting in what is unlawful is prohibited by the Sharīʿah. However, if there is a pressing need to open an account in an interest-based bank and it is not possible to open one in an Islamic bank, there is no objection to doing so.
The ruling on bank interest and the prizes distributed by interest-based banks was previously explained in Fatwa no. (
471). And Allah Almighty knows best.
