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.
Who is the one deemed "able" (al-qādir), for whom the uḍḥiyah (sacrificial offering) is sunnah?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The one who is deemed "able" (al-qādir) [to perform the uḍḥiyah, i.e., the sacrifice] is someone who possesses wealth sufficient to acquire the sacrificial animal, over and above what is needed to cover his own living expenses and the living expenses of his wife and children — or of anyone else whose financial support (nafaqah) is legally obligatory upon him — for the day of ‘Eid and the three days of Tashrīq [that follow it], since this is the designated time period for the sacrifice. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.
Is it permissible for a suitor to go out with his fiancé upon the conclusion of the marriage contract?
Upon the conclusion of the marriage contract, the woman becomes lawful for her husband. However, the customary practice should be observed in this regard since rights could be lost in case of divorce, or death.
What is the ruling on someone who eats or drinks while uncertain about the arrival of dawn, then later finds out that dawn had not yet broken?
If a person does this, their fast remains valid, as it is confirmed that they ate during the night. Similarly, if someone eats while uncertain and remains unsure whether they ate before or after dawn, their fast is still valid. This is based on the maxim of Sharia Law, which states: "Certainty is not removed by doubt." Certainty, here, is the presence of night, and the doubt concerns the arrival of dawn. Therefore, one relies on certainty and disregards doubt.
