عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(247): "Establishing a Private Investment on Endowed Land"

Date Added : 05-12-2017

Resolution No.(247)(16/2017) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies:

"Establishing a Private Investment on Endowed Land"

Date: 2/Rabi` Al-Thani/1439, corresponding to 21/11/2017.

 

 

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 his family and companions.

During its 13th session held on the above date, the Board reviewed the question sent from His Excellency the General Manager of Awqaf Properties Investment Fund, and reads as follows:

We would like to bring to Your Grace`s attention that the Ministry of Awqaf owns the endowed lands (175,206,226) located in Irbid, and estimated at (3355 square kilometers). They were endowed in 1984 in exchange for a piece of land, given to Irbid`s Greater Municipality, to be used as a graveyard. In the same year, the afore pieces were allocated for building a Masjid and an Islamic center, as determined by the resolution of the Awqaf Board and the approval of the Municipality. However, an investor has requested establishing a private investment on that land along with building the Masjid and the Islamic center from his own pocket. What`s the ruling of Sharia in this case, knowing that there is already a Masjid which is only 270 meters away from that land.

After deliberating, the Board arrived at the following decision:

If the purpose for which the land was endowed in the first place was achieved, there is no harm in investing the rest of that land for the benefit of the Waqf/endowment. And Allah Knows Best.

 

Chairman of Iftaa` Board,

Grand Mufti of Jordan,

Dr. Mohammad Al-Khalayleh

Sheikh Abdulkareem Al-Khasawneh, Member

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

Is it permissible to eat from an Udhiyah slaughtered on behalf of a deceased person?

Praise be to Allah, and prayers and peace be upon our Master the Messenger of Allah.
 
It is permissible to eat from the sacrifice (uḍḥiyyah) that is offered on behalf of a deceased person. This is the madhhab (school of thought) of the Hanbalis. In this case, the heirs take the place of the deceased as if he were alive, with the same rights to eat from it, give it in charity, and offer it as a gift.
 
It is stated in Maṭālib Uli al-Nuhā (Vol.2/P.472): "Offering a sacrifice on behalf of a deceased person is better than offering one on behalf of a living person, because the deceased is unable (to perform deeds) and is in need of reward. It is to be treated like a sacrifice on behalf of a living person in terms of eating, giving charity, and giving gifts." And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on swallowing phlegm while fasting?

If a fasting person intentionally swallows phlegm, their fast is invalid, as it is possible to avoid it.
However, if they swallow it unintentionally, their fast remains valid.
Phlegm is impure and should be avoided.

Is the son of the sister by breastfeeding considered a mahram in Islam, and is it permissible for a woman to go for Hajj with him?

Everything that is prohibited by lineage is also prohibited by breastfeeding. The son of the sister by breastfeeding is considered a mahram, just like the son of the sister by blood, and it is permissible for him to be her mahram for Hajj and Umrah. And Allah Knows Best.

Must a woman seek her husband's permission to fast a make up fast (qada)?

● If there is ample time to make up for the missed fasts, a woman should seek her husband's permission before fasting.
● However, if the time is running out—such as when only the remaining days of Sha'ban are sufficient to complete the qada—she does not need his permission and must fast, because Allah’s command takes precedence over the husband's consent.

See More