عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

"Resolution No. (246): "Ruling on Zakah of Associations and Unions' Funds"

Date Added : 04-12-2017

Resolution No. (246) by the Board of Iftaa', Research and Islamic Studies:

"Ruling on Zakah of Associations and Unions' Funds"

Date 2/Rabi' Al-Thani/1439 AH, corresponding to 21/11/2017 AD

 

All perfect praise be to Allah, The Lord of The Worlds, and may His peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Muhammad and upon all of his family and companions.

During its 13th session held on the above date, the Board of Iftaa', Research and Islamic Studies reviewed the letter sent from the Chairman of Jordan Housing Developers Association, and reads as follows:" We would like to ask about the Sharia Ruling on the Zakah's Nisaab {Minimum amount liable for Zakah}of the nonprofit funds of the Associations and Unions such as Jordan Housing Developers Association whose incomes consist of membership fees and other members' annual subscriptions. Moreover, these funds are distributed on the association's activities, employees' salaries, rents and many other activities. Yet, the aforementioned association is a nonprofit party and aims to develop the career of constructing apartments and buildings as is the case with many other unions. The statute of the Association is included in the letter?

After prolonged deliberations, the Board decided the following:

Zakah is a commandment of Allah to a Muslim with the conditions clarified by the scripts of Sharia and the first of which is "Possession" referred to, by jurists, as "Specific owner" since it is stated in [Nihayat Al-Muhtaj vol.3/pp.127]: "Being possessed by a specific owner is among the conditions that make Zakah on wealth obligatory."

Similar to endowment funds, the Zakah condition (Specific owner or owners) doesn't apply to the afore parties. 

Moreover, Zakah is due on co-operative associations and other organizations that have a specific owner

or multiple shareholders. And Allah Knows Best. 

 

Chairman of Iftaa` Board,

Grand Mufti of Jordan,

Dr. Mohammad Al-Khalayleh

Vice Chairman, Sheikh Abdulkareem Al-Khasawneh

Prof. Abdullah Al-Fawaz, Member

Dr. Ahmad Al-Hasanat, Member

Dr. Mohammad Khair Al-Esa, Member

Dr. Majid Darawsheh, Member

Sheikh Sa`eid Al-Hijjawi, Member

Judge Khalid Woraikat, Member

Dr. Mohammad Al-Zo`bi, Member

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

Should a person feel pleased, or have a virtuous vision after offering Istikhara (guidance prayer) in order to do what he/she had offered it for?

The result of the Istikhaarah is not necessarily that a person sees something (in his dream), or feels pleased, but the most important result of the Istikhaarah is whether a person is enabled to do a given matter or not.

Is it permissible for someone who is unable to fast to pay the fidyah (ransom/compensation payment) to himself, due to his own poverty?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is not permissible, nor does it fulfill the obligation, for a sick person who is currently and permanently unable to fast to pay the fidyah (ransom/compensation payment) to himself, since it is a financial obligation owed by him, established as a standing debt upon him — much like any other debt he owes. If he were to pay it to himself, it would not thereby be discharged. So if he cannot find [anyone eligible to] pay it to, it remains a standing obligation upon him, and is not thereby waived. If Allah, the Mighty and Majestic, later grants him wealth, it becomes obligatory upon him to pay it out to the poor and needy.
Imam al-Khaṭīb ash-Shirbīnī (raḥimahullāh) said: "There is no difference in the obligation of the fidyah between the wealthy and the poor person; its benefit lies in its remaining established as a standing debt upon the poor person [until he is able to pay it] — and this is the more correct position (al-aṣaḥḥ), as indicated by the wording of ar-Rawḍah and its source text." [Mughnī al-Muḥtāj, Vol.2/P.174]
Accordingly: it is not permissible for a Muslim to pay the fidyah to himself while he remains poor. If the sick person is poor, he is not obligated to pay the fidyah immediately, and it remains a standing debt upon him until a time when he has sufficient means and wealth. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

I vowed to give a specific charity if a certain matter came to pass — what is the ruling on giving that charity before the matter is realised?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Fulfilling a vow (nadhr) is obligatory, in accordance with the word of Allah the Almighty: "And let them fulfil their vows." [Al-Ḥajj/ 29] And the saying of our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ: "Whoever vows to obey Allah, let him obey Him; and whoever vows to disobey Him, let him not disobey Him." (Reported by al-Bukhārī.)
The Shāfiʿī scholars distinguished between a financial vow (nadhr mālī) and a bodily vow (nadhr badanī). They permitted the fulfilment of a financial vow to be brought forward — before the stipulated condition is met — but did not permit the same for a bodily vow, which may only be fulfilled after the condition has actually been realised.
Shaykh al-Islām Imām Zakariyyā al-Anṣārī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "It is permissible to bring forward the fulfilment of a financial vow before the condition stipulated in it is met — such as saying: 'If I am healed, I vow to free a slave' or 'to give such-and-such in charity' — just as it is permissible to pay zakāh in advance. This is unlike a bodily vow, such as fasting." [Asnā al-Maṭālib, vol. 4/P.246]
Imām al-Bājūrī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "Like expiation other than fasting, a financial vow — such as saying: 'If Allah heals my sick one, I vow to free a slave for the sake of Allah,' or 'If Allah heals my sick one, I vow to free a slave on the Friday following the recovery' — it is permissible to bring it forward before the recovery in the first case, and before the Friday following the recovery in the second case." [Ḥāshiyat al-Bājūrī ʿalā Sharḥ Ibn Qāsim, Vol.2/P.596] And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on performing ṭawāf on the upper floors of al-Masjid al-Ḥarām, given that these floors are situated above the level of the Ka‘bah, and that the one performing ṭawāf passes by certain barriers, such as pillars and walls, during the ṭawāf?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
There are numerous conditions for the validity of ṭawāf (circumambulation around the Ka‘bah), among them: that the one performing ṭawāf be inside the Masjid (al-Masjid al-Ḥarām) — even if the Masjid has been expanded, so long as the expansion does not extend out into al-ḥill (land outside the sanctuary boundaries). It suffices for the ṭawāf to be performed in the airspace of the Masjid or upon its roof, even if that roof is higher than the Ka‘bah (the House) itself.
Al-Khaṭīb ash-Shirbīnī (raḥimahullāh) said: "It [ṭawāf] is valid upon the roof of the Masjid, even if the roof of the Masjid is higher than the House — just as prayer [is valid] upon Mount Abū Qubays despite its elevation above the House. This is the relied-upon (mu‘tamad) position." [Mughnī al-Muḥtāj, Vol.2/P.246]
The validity of the tawaf isn`t affected by the pillars and walls standing between the one performing ṭawāf and the House, since the condition is only that the person performing ṭawāf be within the boundaries of the Masjid and outside the boundaries of the Ka‘bah itself.
Ash-Shirbīnī said: "It [ṭawāf] is valid inside the Masjid, even if it is expanded, and even if a barrier stands between the one circumambulating and the House — such as a water-supply structure (saqāyah) or pillars (sawārī)." [Mughnī al-Muḥtāj, Vol. 2/P.246]
Accordingly, ṭawāf performed on the upper floors is valid, and the presence of barriers such as pillars and walls during the ṭawāf does not affect its validity. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

See More