What is the ruling on a mother giving the Zakat of her wealth to her children?
Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is permissible for a mother to give her children from the Zakat if they are among those who are eligible for it—such as being poor (Fuqara), possessing no wealth, and not being sufficiently provided for by the maintenance (Nafaqah) of others. This is based on the statement of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ regarding Zaynab, the wife of 'Abdullah ibn Mas'ud (may Allah be pleased with them both): (Your husband and your children are the most deserving of those upon whom you spend in charity) [Narrated by Al-Bukhari].
It is stated in [Al-Hawi al-Kabir, Vol. 8/P.537]: 'As for the wife, it is permissible for her to pay her Zakat to her husband from all the designated shares... Our evidence is the generality of the saying of Allah the Almighty: "Zakat expenditures are only for the poor and for the needy", and the Hadith of Abu Hurairah that the Prophet ﷺ said to Zaynab, the wife of 'Abdullah ibn Mas'ud: (Your husband and your children are the most deserving of those upon whom you spend), and this is taken in its general sense.' And Allah the Exalted knows best.
I broke my oath and am now obligated to pay the expiation for a broken oath (kaffārat al-yamīn). Would it be valid to fulfill this by inviting the poor and needy to a meal for them to eat from?
Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
The expiation for a broken oath (kaffārat al-yamīn) is given to the poor (fuqarā') and needy (masākīn), and it must be given in the form of ownership (tamlīk) transferred to them of the required amount — namely, one mudd of the staple food of the locality, or its equivalent monetary value. It isn`t valid to invite the poor or needy to a meal prepared for them to eat from, as this does not constitute "ownership" (tamlīk) but merely "permission to partake" (ibāḥah).
Imam al-Shirbīnī (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "What is intended is that ownership be transferred to them; therefore, providing them with lunch or dinner [as a meal to eat from] isn`t valid." [Summarized from Mughnī al-Muhtāj,Vol. 5/P.50]. And Allah the Almighty knows best.
What is the ruling on one who wiped over his leather socks (*khuff*) while resident and then traveled, or wiped while traveling and then became resident? And likewise, what is the ruling on one who incurred a minor ritual impurity (*ḥadath aṣghar*) while resident, then traveled and wiped while traveling?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
Whoever wipes over his leather socks (khuffayn) while resident and then travels, or wipes while traveling and then becomes resident, before a day and a night have passed in both cases, completes the wiping period of a resident. If he wipes while resident and then travels after a day and a night have passed, he must remove the socks, because the period has ended. Likewise, if he wipes while traveling and then becomes resident after a day and a night have passed, he must remove them as well.
Whoever breaks his wuḍūʾ while resident and then wipes while traveling takes the ruling of a traveler as regards the duration of wiping, so long as he does not become resident. It is stated in ʿUmdat al-Sālik wa ʿUddat al-Nāsik (Vol.1/p.15): “If he wipes over both [socks] or one of them while resident and then travels, or wipes while traveling and then becomes resident, or doubts whether he began the wiping while traveling or while resident, he completes only the wiping period of a resident. But if he broke his wuḍūʾ while resident and wiped while traveling, he completes the period of a traveler, whether or not the full time of a prayer had passed over him while resident.” And Allah Almighty knows best.
What is the Islamic ruling on the aqiqa?
All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
The 'aqīqah is a confirmed Sunnah (sunnah mu'akkadah). Two sheep are to be slaughtered for a newborn boy, and one sheep for a newborn girl. This is established by numerous Prophetic traditions, among them:
The narration of Samurah ibn Jundub, may Allah be pleased with him, who reported that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: "Every child is held in pledge for his 'aqīqah, which is slaughtered on his behalf on the seventh day, and he is named, and his head is shaved." — Narrated by al-Tirmidhī, who graded it as ḥasan ṣaḥīḥ.
And the narration of 'Ā'ishah, may Allah be pleased with her, who said: "The Messenger of Allah ﷺ commanded us to slaughter one sheep as 'aqīqah for a girl, and two sheep for a boy." — Narrated by Aḥmad and Ibn Mājah.
The imperative in these narrations is understood to denote recommendation rather than obligation, based on the ḥadīth of 'Amr ibn Shu'ayb, on the authority of his father, on the authority of his grandfather, who said: The Messenger of Allah ﷺ was asked about the 'aqīqah, whereupon he said: "Allah does not love 'uqūq" — as though he disliked the name itself — and then said: "Whoever has a child born to him and wishes to offer a sacrifice on their behalf, let them do so: two equivalent sheep for a boy, and one sheep for a girl." — Narrated by Aḥmad and Abū Dāwūd.
The legal inference drawn from this narration is that the Prophet ﷺ linked the slaughter to the wish and willingness of the individual, saying: "whoever wishes to offer a sacrifice... let them do so" — thereby indicating that the 'aqīqah is recommended (mustaḥabb) and not obligatory (wājib).
And Allah Almighty knows best.
