عربي
Home


Articles

Articles

Answer from the General Iftaa` Department on what was Published in "Al-Ra'y" Newspaper.
Author : The General Iftaa` Department
Date Added : 06-07-2023

Answer from the General Iftaa` Department on what was Published in "Al-Ra'y" Newspaper

 

 

We have read what was written in "Al-Ra'y" newspaper (Issue No. (14044), Tuesday, March 24, 2009) under the "Al-Ra'y Platform" section entitled (The story of a Jordanian family raises deep questions in religion and society / Medical examination made him doubt her pregnancy, so he divorced her, and the due date of childbirth cleared her. Would she return to him?).

 

We would like to emphasize that divorce cases aren`t answered over the phone.

 

Indeed, this is true due to the extremely sensitive nature of this matter and because some people, if they heard the answer on the phone, try to change the question to get the answer that suits them.

This emanates from insufficient knowledge of the meaning of the Sharia ruling, which is the ruling of Allah before Whom we will be held to account. Consequently, there is no use in having hidden some facts from the Mufti or the Judge. Once Allah's Messenger (PBUH) said, "You people present your cases to me and some of you may be more eloquent and persuasive in presenting their argument. So, if I give some one's right to another (wrongly) because of the latter's (tricky) presentation of the case, I am really giving him a piece of fire; so he should not take it." {Bukhari & Muslim}.

 

It is the duty of the Iftaa` Department to give the ruling of Sharia; however, the responsibility of implementation is that of the person concerned.

In the matter under discussion:

 

• How dare a man divorce his wife repeatedly although recently married? What happened to patience, good character, and trusting wife?!

 

• How could four doctors make a mistake in a matter that lies within their field of specialty and the fact that medical devices, nowadays, are very advanced?!

 

• What could the Mufti do after the husband admits having divorced wife on three separate occasions and this is proven in the Sharia court? Just as the wife was made lawful to her husband by uttering one word, she is made forbidden to him by uttering one word as well, which is the utterance of divorce. Out of His mercy, Allah made the wife unlawful to her husband after three divorces (Talaq Bain baynuna Kubra/Final divorce). Allah the Almighty says {What means}: "A divorce is only permissible twice: after that, the parties should either hold Together on equitable terms, or separate with kindness. It is not lawful for you, (Men), to take back any of your gifts (from your wives), except when both parties fear that they would be unable to keep the limits ordained by God. If ye (judges) do indeed fear that they would be unable to keep the limits ordained by God, there is no blame on either of them if she give something for her freedom. These are the limits ordained by God; so do not transgress them if any do transgress the limits ordained by God, such persons wrong (Themselves as well as others). So if a husband divorces his wife (irrevocably), He cannot, after that, re- marry her until after she has married another husband and He has divorced her. In that case there is no blame on either of them if they re-unite, provided they feel that they can keep the limits ordained by God. Such are the limits ordained by God, which He makes plain to those who understand." (Al-Baqarah, 229-230)

 

The marriage mentioned in the above verse is what the jurists call marriage of desire. I.e. the intention is living permanently with the wife, and not the engaging in a poor performance that the virtuous person would feel ashamed to mention. The Prophet (PBUH) said about it: "May Allah curse the one who makes permissible and the one who makes permissible for him." {Transmitted by Abu Dawood}. In addition, the Prophet (PBUH) called such person as "The borrowed "buck" goat". The Department wouldn`t deliver such Fatwa nor would any of the scholars who have respect for their knowledge. Moreover, with due respect, media should seek the truth and the ruling of Sharia since sympathizing with whoever divorces his wife in this way is inappropriate.

 

We do not like divorce because, as the Prophet (PBUH) said, it is the most hated of lawful things to Allah. However, worse than that is that a man lives with a woman who is not lawful to him, or that a woman lives with a man who is not lawful to her. The person addressed here is not the first to divorce and regret, but we confirm that no one had divorced without regretting that afterwards.

In the past, they used to say:

 

Do you cry over Layla while you left her*****Layla is gone, so what are you going to do about it!

In conclusion, do not blame the Mufti, but blame those who do not estimate matters correctly.

 

 

 

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

What is the ruling on performing Tarawih in sets of four rak‘ahs with only one Tasleem?

It is not permissible to combine more than two rak‘ahs with a single Tasleem in Tarawih prayer. Whoever does so, their prayer is invalid. Shaykh al-Islam Imam Muhammad al-Ramli (may Allah have mercy on him) stated: "If a person prays four rak‘ahs of the Tarawih prayer with a single Tasleem, it is not valid if they did so intentionally and with knowledge [of the prohibition]. Otherwise, it becomes an 'absolute voluntary prayer' (nafl mutlaq); because it is contrary to what has been prescribed." [Nihayat al-Muhtaj, Vol.2/P.127].

Is it permissible to offer an Udhiyah on behalf of the deceased?

In the Name of Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Offering an Udhiyah (sacrificial animal) on behalf of a deceased person is permissible. This is the official position of the Hanbali school (as stated in Kashshaf al-Qina’ by al-Bahuti,Vol.6/P.428) and was also upheld by the prominent Shafi'i scholar Al-’Abbadi (mentioned in Bidayat al-Muhtaj by Ibn Qadi Shuhbah,Vol. 4/P.358). It has likewise been narrated as a valid view among some Maliki and Hanafi scholars.
 
In fact, Imam Abu Dawud dedicated an entire chapter in his Sunan collection entitled, "Chapter on Sacrificing on Behalf of the Deceased." In it, he recorded a narration from Hanash, who said: "I saw 'Ali sacrificing two rams, so I asked him, 'What is this?' He replied, 'The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) commanded me to offer a sacrifice on his behalf, so I am sacrificing on his behalf.'"
 
Imam Abu Dawud also narrated from Jabir (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: "O Allah, this is from You, for You, and on behalf of Muhammad and his Ummah (community). In the Name of Allah, and Allah is the Greatest," and he then slaughtered the animal.
 
The textual evidence here lies in the fact that our Master, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), offered a sacrifice on behalf of his entire community—and it is well-established that his community includes those who have already passed away.
 
Furthermore, there is an abundance of sacred texts demonstrating that the rewards of righteous deeds reach the deceased. For instance, it is permissible to fast on behalf of a deceased person who passed away with missed obligatory fasts, and it is equally permissible to perform Hajj on their behalf, both of which are firmly established in authentic Hadiths. Therefore, if the reward of fasting (which is a purely physical act of worship) and Hajj (which is a joint physical and financial act of worship) can reach the deceased, then the reward of an Udhiyah reaches them with greater reason (by way of A Fortiori argument). This is because it is a purely financial act of worship, falling under the general category of charity (Sadaqah).
 
Additionally, scholars have reached a consensus (Ijma') that the rewards of charity reach the deceased, and since the Udhiyah is inherently an act of charity, it falls under the same ruling. Consequently, based on all the aforementioned evidence, we hold the view that offering a sacrifice on behalf of the deceased is entirely permissible. And Allah the Almighty Knows Best.

What is the ruling on swearing on the Holy Quran and breaking that oath?

It is impermissible to swear on the Holy Quran in vain, and it is also impermissible to subject it to such an act since breaking the oath after swearing on the Quran entails an expiation.

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.

See More