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.
My father has debts and asked me to repay them years ago, and I promised him I would do so upon his death — is it permissible for me to go back on my promise given that I am unable to repay them, especially since he refuses to contribute to repayment on the grounds that the debt has become my responsibility by virtue of my promise?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The established principle is that a father's debt is to be repaid from his own wealth, if he possesses sufficient means. As for the promise made by the son to repay it on his father's behalf, fulfilling such a promise is strongly recommended, and breaking it is considerably disliked. Shaykh al-Islām Imām al-Nawawī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "Fulfilling a promise is emphatically recommended, and breaking it is severely disliked. The evidences for this from the Qurʾān and the Sunnah are well known." [Rawḍat al-Ṭālibīn,Vol. 2/P.278] Shaykh al-Islām Imām Zakariyyā al-Anṣārī, may Allah have mercy upon him, further states: "The reason fulfilling a promise is not obligatory and breaking it is not forbidden is that a promise is in the nature of a gift, and a gift does not become binding except upon receipt." [Asnā al-Maṭālib fī Sharḥ Rawḍ al-Ṭālib,Vol. 2/P.487]
Given that the son does not possess the financial means to fulfil his promise to his father, breaking this promise falls beyond his capacity — and Allah does not burden a soul beyond what it can bear. Since the father himself possesses sufficient wealth to settle his own debt, repayment must be made from his own funds. Should he pass away before doing so, the debt is to be settled from his estate. And Allah the Almighty knows best.
I work overtime after regular working hours and may become occupied with my phone or the work computer for personal matters — what is the ruling on this?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is obligatory upon an employee to abide by the instructions and regulations governing overtime hours, and equally obligatory to uphold honesty and avoid all forms of deception and dishonesty. Allah the Almighty says {what means}: "O you who have believed, be mindful of Allah and be with the truthful." [Al-Tawbah/ 119]
Whoever is assigned to work overtime must be present at his workplace — even if he has no specific tasks to carry out at that time. In such a case, he should strive as best he can to spend that time in a manner that benefits the institution he works for. If there is genuinely no work for him to do, there is no objection to occupying his time with something beneficial — such as reciting the Holy Qurʾān, reading, or listening to educational lessons — provided he has already completed all the responsibilities assigned to him.
If, however, he does have work to complete, he must spend that time fulfilling it. He may attend to phone calls or other personal matters to the extent that is customarily acceptable, as long as this does not result in delaying or postponing his work. If he delays his work on account of personal preoccupations, the wages he received for that wasted time are not lawfully his to keep, and he is obliged to return the equivalent amount to the institution by whatever means available to him. And Allah the Almighty knows best.
Is an elderly or chronically ill person required to pay additional fidyah if they delay it beyond the first year?
An elderly person or someone permanently unable to fast must pay fidyah by feeding one needy person for each missed day.
However, if they delay paying fidyah beyond the first year, no additional fidyah is required.
This differs from someone who delays making up missed Ramadan fasts (qada) without a valid excuse until the next Ramadan begins—such a person is required to pay an additional fidyah for the delay.
