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

Is it incumbent on a husband to pay the alimony of his wife if she had left him and stayed at her parent`s without his permission?

When a wife leaves her house, and stays at her parent`s without asking her husband, she is considered a Nashiz (wife who refuses to abide by her husband’s orders), and so she doesn`t deserve an alimony.

I broke my oath and am now obligated to pay the expiation for a broken oath (kaffārat al-yamīn). Would it be valid to fulfill this by inviting the poor and needy to a meal for them to eat from?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
The expiation for a broken oath (kaffārat al-yamīn) is given to the poor (fuqarā') and needy (masākīn), and it must be given in the form of ownership (tamlīk) transferred to them of the required amount — namely, one mudd of the staple food of the locality, or its equivalent monetary value. It isn`t valid to invite the poor or needy to a meal prepared for them to eat from, as this does not constitute "ownership" (tamlīk) but merely "permission to partake" (ibāḥah).
Imam al-Shirbīnī (may Allah have mercy on him) said: "What is intended is that ownership be transferred to them; therefore, providing them with lunch or dinner [as a meal to eat from] isn`t valid." [Summarized from Mughnī al-Muhtāj,Vol. 5/P.50]. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on purchasing sacrificial animals and authorizing their slaughter via telephone?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
It is preferable for the one offering a sacrifice (udhiyah) to slaughter the animal himself, in adherence to the Sunnah, or to be present at the slaughter if possible.
 
It is valid to authorize a butcher to purchase a sacrificial animal on his behalf and slaughter it, regardless of whether the animal is owned by the butcher or the butcher is acting as an agent in its sale—according to the Hanbali school—provided that the butcher specifically designates and purchases the animal for the person offering the sacrifice before slaughtering it. And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on waiving a debt owed by a debtor and counting it toward zakāh?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Waiving a debt owed by a debtor, with the intention of counting it toward zakāh, does not fulfill the zakāh obligation. Rather, it constitutes an ordinary act of charity, for which Allah rewards the giver generously — since one of the conditions for the validity of zakāh is that the person paying it must form the intention of zakāh at the actual moment the wealth is paid out. In this case, the debt has already been established as a standing obligation upon the borrower, so it is not valid to simply redirect the intention toward zakāh after the fact.
It is preferable, instead, for the creditor to first collect the debt from the debtor, and then return to him the amount of money he is required to pay as zakāh — or a portion of it — if the debtor happens to fall under one of the eight categories that Allah, the Exalted, has commanded be given from zakāh.
It is stated in ‘Umdat as-Sālik, from the books of the Shāfi‘ī school: "If someone gives [money] to a poor person, stipulating that the recipient return it to him in payment of a debt owed to him, or says, 'I am making what you owe me into zakāh, so take it [as such]' — this is not valid. But if he gives it to him with the [unstated] intention that the recipient will use it to repay him, or says, 'Repay what you owe me, so that I may [then separately] give it to you as zakāh,' or the debtor himself says, 'Give it to me, so that I may [then] repay you with it' — this is valid, and there is no binding obligation for the recipient to actually fulfill this [informal understanding]." And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.