military expeditions (ghazw), which is a collective obligation (fard kifayah), so a supererogatory act is even more deserving of that status. If he enters into ihram without his permission, he does not have the authority to force him to exit from it, because it became obligatory upon entering into it; thus, it became like an initially obligatory act or like a vowed act.

693 - Issue: He said: "Whoever drives an obligatory sacrificial animal (hady), and it becomes disabled before reaching its destination, he may do with it as he wishes, and he is responsible for its replacement."

The obligatory sacrificial animal is of two types: First, that which became obligatory through a vow upon one's own liability (dhimmah). Second, that which became obligatory through something else, such as the sacrificial animal for Tamattu' or Qiran, and the blood sacrifices (dima') obligatory due to omitting an obligation or committing a prohibited act. All of these are of two categories: The first is that he drives it, intending with it the obligatory act that is upon him, without specifying it by word. In this case, ownership of it does not depart from him except by slaughtering it and delivering it to its rightful recipients. He may dispose of it as he wishes—by selling, gifting, consuming, or otherwise—because no right of another has attached to it. He is entitled to its growth, and if it becomes disabled, it perishes from his own wealth. If it develops a defect, its slaughter does not suffice for him, and he still owes the sacrificial animal that was originally obligatory, as its obligation remains upon his liability. He is not absolved of it except by delivering it to those entitled to it, similar to one who owes a debt and carries it to the one entitled to it, intending to hand it over to him, but it is destroyed before he can deliver it to him. The second category is that he specifies the obligatory animal by word, saying: "This is the sacrifice obligatory upon me." In this case, the obligation becomes attached to it specifically, without the liability being absolved; because if he were to make a sacrifice obligatory when he had none due upon him, it would become specific. Thus, when it is already obligatory and he specifies it, the same applies, except that it is guaranteed by him. If it becomes disabled, is stolen, gets lost, or the like, it does not suffice for him, and the obligation returns to his liability, just as if a man owed a debt and purchased a measured commodity from his creditor with it, but it perished before he took possession of it; the sale is rescinded, and the debt returns to his liability. This is because his liability was not absolved of the obligation by specifying it; rather, it