Is it permissible to pay for a financial deficit incurred at work—resulting from various causes such as theft or errors—from the percentage allocated monthly for charities and good deeds?

If the undertaker's intention is unspoken, he is not obligated to continue. However, if he pronounces a vow, the preponderant opinion is that it becomes a nadhr (definition) (vow) and an yamin (definition) (oath) if it is an act of closeness to God and obedience. He is obligated to fulfill it unless it conflicts with the repayment of a debt or an obligatory maintenance payment, in which case he should begin with the obligation and then offer expiation for the remainder. It is not permissible for the questioner to pay anything from his vow to cover the aforementioned deficit if he is able to cover the deficit from his own money while also fulfilling the vow. The questioner's hand on what is beneath it is a hand of trust; therefore, he is not liable unless there is transgression or negligence.