عربي
Home


Articles

Articles

A Statement on Al-Aqsa Mosque
Author : The General Iftaa` Department
Date Added : 24-12-2014

All perfect praise be to Allah, the Lord of the Worlds; and may His blessings and peace be upon our Prophet Mohammad and upon all His family and Companions.

The General Iftaa` Department of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan denounces the untrue views circulated by some media websites, calling for dedicating a place of worship for the Jews within the yard of Al-Aqsa mosque, because they were expressed by a person who holds no degree in religious sciences, his views are unfounded in Sharia and he enjoys no consideration in all juristic schools.

Al-Aqsa mosque is a purely Islamic endowment (Waqf) that will remain until the Day of Resurrection, it can`t be made otherwise by the ignorance of an ignorant, or the aggression of a usurper. It is mentioned in the Holy Quran at the beginning of Al-Isra chapter (Al-Aqsa mosque) and it is referred to as Al-Haram Ash-Sharif in Jerusalem: both words are synonymous, so any of them covers the whole Islamic site located in the far southern-eastern corner of the Old City stretching over a hundred and forty four dunums. It covers Al-Jamie` Al-Quibli, the dome of the rock mosque, Al-Mosala Al-Marawani and many other Islamic endowments. Each inch of Al-Aqsa mosque, constructed or not, is an integral part of its sanctity as it is the place from where our Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) embarked on His nocturnal journey. In fact, an Islamic endowment covers the area below and above it. It also covers all properties pertaining to Al-Aqsa mosque even those beyond its walls such as: Sahat Al-Bouraq, Harat Al-Magharibah and Tareeq Bab Al-Magharibah.

None can deny that Umar Bin Al-Khatab treated non-Muslims with mercy and justice (Pact of Umar), and by doing so, he has preserved the holy sites and the Islamic endowments. He made a condition, as stated in history books, that no places of worship for non-Muslims are to be built in an Islamic endowment (Waqf). He recognized the built churches at that time and on their own land, so justice was accomplished by respecting the already built sacred places. Any violation of this is simply an act of aggression and tyranny based on unlawful occupation and suppression of people.

Accordingly, that person`s views have neither Islamic nor historical foundations, and they have no consideration by former and contemporary scholars, jurisprudence assemblies, religious organizations and Islamic conferences.

On its part, the General Iftaa` Department emphasizes that each inch of Al-Aqsa mosque is sacred, and none has the right to abdicate it, or take it out of its mosque character. It also emphasizes the Hashemite's religious and historical guardianship over Al-Aqsa mosque and the holy sites of Jerusalem; therefore, it will initiate legal action against the previously mentioned person. And All praise be to Allah, The Lord of The Worlds.

 

Article Number [ Previous | Next ]

Read for Author




Comments


Captcha


Warning: this window is not dedicated to receive religious questions, but to comment on topics published for the benefit of the site administrators—and not for publication. We are pleased to receive religious questions in the section "Send Your Question". So we apologize to readers for not answering any questions through this window of "Comments" for the sake of work organization. Thank you.




Summarized Fatawaa

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.

What is the ruling on swearing an oath by the Prophet ﷺ, and does such an oath take effect according to Imām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, requiring expiation upon its breach?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Swearing an oath by a created being is disliked (makrūh) in our Shāfiʿī school. Shaykh al-Islām Imām al-Nawawī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "Swearing by a created being is disliked — such as swearing by the Prophet, the Kaʿbah, Jibrīl, the Companions, or the Prophet's family. Al-Shāfiʿī, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: 'I fear that swearing by other than Allah the Almighty may constitute an act of disobedience.' The scholars of the school explained this to mean: that is, something forbidden and sinful — indicating that he had some hesitation in the matter. Al-Imām stated: the established position of the school is that it is categorically not forbidden, but rather disliked. Furthermore, whoever swears by a created being, his oath does not take effect and no expiation (kaffārah) is required if he breaks it." [Rawḍat al-Ṭālibīn wa ʿUmdat al-Muftīn, Vol. 11/P.6]
According to the Ḥanbalī school, however, expiation becomes obligatory upon one who swears by our master the Prophet ﷺ and then breaks his oath. Imām al-Bahūtī al-Ḥanbalī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "No expiation is required for swearing by other than Allah the Almighty, even if the oath is broken — because expiation was made obligatory for swearing by Allah and His attributes, out of reverence for His names, and nothing else is equal to Him in this regard... except in the case of swearing by our Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ, for expiation becomes obligatory when one swears by him and then breaks the oath. This was explicitly stated in the narration of Abū Ṭālib, because he is one of the two conditions of the two testimonies of faith by which a disbeliever becomes a Muslim. Ibn ʿAqīl held the view that swearing by any of the other prophets, peace and blessings be upon them all, carries the same ruling." [Sharḥ Muntahā al-Irādāt, Vol. 3/P.441]. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

Does collecting saliva and swallowing it break the fast?

Swallowing collected saliva does not break the fast, but it is an unnecessary and meaningless act.

Is bleeding that lasts for nine or ten days considered menstruation (Hayd)?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
If the duration of the bleeding does not exceed fifteen days, then all of it is considered menstruation (Hayd), even if the regular cycle ('Adah) has changed. And Allah the Exalted knows best.

See More