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 "Bismillāhir-Raḥmānir-Raḥīm" a verse (āyah) of Sūrat al-Fātiḥah?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The basmalah ("Bismillāhir-Raḥmānir-Raḥīm") is, without question, a verse (āyah) of the Noble Qur'an, and according to the Shāfi‘ī school, it constitutes a verse of Sūrat al-Fātiḥah itself. Al-Fātiḥah is a pillar of the prayer, and it consists of seven verses, of which the basmalah is one. The prayer is not valid without reciting it, nor if any of the Fātiḥah's verses, letters, or shaddahs (consonant doublings) are omitted or altered.
It is stated in Bushrā al-Karīm (Vol.1/p.202), from the books of the Shāfi‘ī school: "The basmalah is a complete verse of it [i.e., of al-Fātiḥah] in practice — and it suffices, for this to be established, that there be strong probability (ẓann), especially given that this has come very close to certainty (yaqīn), due to the consensus (ijmā‘) of the Companions on its inclusion in the muṣ-ḥaf [the written text of the Qur'an] in its script, despite their extreme diligence in excluding from it anything that did not genuinely belong to it — to the point that they even [carefully regulated] its diacritical dots and vowel markings." And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

What is the ruling on offering a sheep as a sacrifice (Udhiyah) if its fat-tail is sound, except that when it was young, the tip of its fat-tail was cut so that it would grow larger? And what is the ruling in case of doubt regarding the amount that was cut?

 
In the Name of Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Cutting a minor, insignificant portion from the tip of an animal's fat-tail (al-alyah) to encourage it to grow larger is not considered a defect, and it does not prevent the animal from being valid for sacrifice (Udhiyah).
 
It is stated in Tuhfat al-Muhtaj (Vol.9/P.352): "There is some scholarly deliberation regarding the common practice of cutting the tip of the fat-tail so that it grows larger. It could potentially be likened to a partial cut of the ear—supported by the jurists' general rule: 'even if it is a small amount.' On the other hand, if it is an exceptionally minor cut, it might have no effect on validity. This is explicitly clarified by the juristic exception to the general rule, which states that cutting a tiny piece from a large limb causes no harm. This latter view is more well-founded.
 
Furthermore, I found that some scholars investigated this matter and concluded: 'It should not affect validity if a custom-sanctioned portion of its fat-tail is removed during its youth to make it grow larger and look better, just as castrating a male animal causes no harm.' However, applying this unconditionally contradicts the established texts of the jurists, as understood from what I have laid out; thus, the restriction I specified is what must be relied upon."
 
Similarly, it is mentioned in Nihayat al-Muhtaj (8/135): "If a small piece is cut from the fat-tail to help it grow larger, the most well-founded view is that the sacrifice remains valid, as was given in a formal legal verdict (Fatwa) by my father [Shihab al-Din al-Ramli], may Allah be pleased with him. This is proven by the jurists' maxim: 'The loss of a tiny piece from a large limb causes no harm.'"
 
In cases where there is doubt as to whether the portion cut was large or small, the animal is still deemed valid for sacrifice. It is noted in Hashiyat al-Shubramallisi ‘ala Nihayat al-Muhtaj (Vol.8/P.135):
 
"This matter requires careful consideration, but the closer and more correct view is that it is valid. This is because soundness is the default state for the animal from which the piece was cut, and it aligns with what usually occurs—namely, that the part removed to help the fat-tail grow larger is naturally very small." And Allah the Almighty Knows Best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on one who died owing debts and left no wealth? Is it obligatory upon the heirs to settle these debts?

 

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
The general rule is that if a person dies owing rights to other people, such as debts, these are settled from his estate, if he left any wealth, before the estate is divided. The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “The believer's soul is suspended by his debt until it is settled for him.” Graded ḥasan by al-Tirmidhī. Repayment of debts takes precedence over the heirs’ right to inheritance.
If the deceased left no estate, or left wealth that was insufficient to cover his debts, it is not obligatory for the heirs to pay from their own wealth, but it is recommended for them to do so, because the deceased’s dhimmah (legal liability) remains occupied by the debt. It is reported in some narrations that he remains held in suspension until his debt is paid, and it is not part of filial righteousness for a child to leave his father’s dhimmah burdened with debt.
All of the children may contribute to settling the debt on behalf of their father and cooperate in doing so, even in installments, according to their ability. And Allah Almighty knows best.

Must a person refrain from eating for the rest of the day if they break a fast of a vow (nadhr) or a make up fast (qada)?

 

Whoever observes a vowed fast (nadhr) or a makeup fast (qada) is prohibited from breaking it without a valid excuse. If they break it without a legitimate reason, they are sinful.
However, they are not required to refrain from eating for the rest of the day, because such restraint is only required out of respect for the month of Ramadan, not for other types of fasting.