عربي
Home


Articles

Articles

Caution and Verification are behind the Delay in Issuing Fatwa
Author : The General Iftaa` Department
Date Added : 12-07-2023

Caution and Verification are behind the Delay in Issuing Fatwa

 

All perfect praise be to Allah the Lord of The Worlds. May His peace and blessings be upon our Prophet Mohammad and upon all his family and companions.

 

In clarification for what was published by the news website "Saraya" under the title: "The Iftaa` Department Delays Issuing a Fatwa Regarding Foods, Believed to be Forbidden, Consumed by Jordanians" the writer wonders about the justifications for the delay in providing an answer to this issue!

Regarding this matter, the General Iftaa` Department clarifies that the delay in providing an answer is not a form of procrastination, as initially stated in the title. Rather, it is following the noble prophetic approach of caution and thoroughness before issuing the Fatwa since Allah will hold the Department accountable for it. The Prophet (PBUH) said: "Deliberateness is from Allah, and haste is from Satan." (Transmitted by At-Tirmidhi).

 

This prophetic approach is the direct reason for controlling the Fatwa and preventing it from deviating towards extremism or leniency, safeguarding it from error and danger. Moreover, it ensures that the Mufti is cleared from liability before Allah on the Day of Judgment, especially in delicate and intricate matters such as the issue of the ingredients used in the food industry.

 

It is an issue related to hundreds of diverse products that affect the lives of all Muslims. Thousands of companies and factories oversee these products, each with its own manufacturing and composition methods. The knowledgeable jurist is the one who distinguishes and contemplates whether a transformative "impossibility" has occurred in the substance's composition, or if mere "consumption and immersion" is sufficient, as some jurists have stated. This has been the subject of decisions by specialized jurisprudential assemblies.

 

This matter requires a great deal of Ijtihad (Independent reasoning) and consideration of advancements in industries and sciences today. Thus, the Iftaa` Department sought the guidance of specialized official institutions, such as the General Organization for Food and Drug Administration, to inquire about similar issues within the scope of this research.

 

However, anyone who believes that a Fatwa is an improvised political statement or a media sound bite has misconceived the principles of Islamic Law, which aims to uphold the interests of individuals and prevent harm from befalling them. May Allah have mercy on the Islamic scholars who have bequeathed to us the humility of saying, "I don't know." They were not driven by shyness or arrogance to withhold knowledge from its rightful owners or delay issuing a Fatwa. As the Prophet (PBUH) said: "Whoever seeks the pleasure of people by displeasing Allah, Allah will be displeased with him, and people will be displeased with him." (Transmitted by Ibn Hibban).

 

We advise the media to not hinder scientific institutions from carrying out their work with caution and excellence, especially the religious institutions responsible for issuing Fatwas and religious knowledge.

 

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 men wearing rings (those made of silver and of other metals, such as iron), and are there conditions for men wearing rings?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is sunnah for men to wear a silver ring on the right hand, following the practice of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). It is reported in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, on the authority of Anas ibn Mālik (may Allah be pleased with him), that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) took a silver ring and had “Muḥammad Rasūl Allāh” engraved on it. He said: “I have taken a ring of silver and had ‘Muḥammad Rasūl Allāh’ engraved on it, so let no one engrave the like of its engraving.”
It is a condition that the silver ring not exceed the size customary in the local norm (ʿurf). If it does, that is extravagance (isrāf). A ring made of a metal other than silver, such as iron or copper, is permissible to wear without disapproval (karāhah), except gold, which is forbidden (ḥarām) for a man to wear.
It is stated in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vol.1/p.586): “It is permissible, without disapproval, to wear a ring of iron or lead. It is sunnah for a man to wear a silver ring on the little finger of his right or left hand. Wearing it on the right is better, and it is permissible on the left, and on both together.”
It is also stated in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vol.2/p.97): “It is lawful for him, that is, the man, and likewise the khunthā (person of indeterminate sex), indeed all the more so, to wear a ring of silver, by consensus (ijmāʿ), because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) took a ring of silver, narrated by the two Shaykhs (al-Bukhārī and Muslim). Wearing it is in fact sunnah, whether on the right or the left, though the right is better according to the sound position, as stated in the chapter on clothing in al-Rawḍah… The Shāfiʿī jurists did not specify the permitted size of the ring, and they probably relied on custom (ʿurf), that is, the custom of that country and the habit of people of his standing in it. Whatever exceeds that is extravagance, as they said regarding a woman’s anklet. This is the reliable position (al-muʿtamad).” And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on one who wiped over his leather socks (*khuff*) while resident and then traveled, or wiped while traveling and then became resident? And likewise, what is the ruling on one who incurred a minor ritual impurity (*ḥadath aṣghar*) while resident, then traveled and wiped while traveling?

 

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
Whoever wipes over his leather socks (khuffayn) while resident and then travels, or wipes while traveling and then becomes resident, before a day and a night have passed in both cases, completes the wiping period of a resident. If he wipes while resident and then travels after a day and a night have passed, he must remove the socks, because the period has ended. Likewise, if he wipes while traveling and then becomes resident after a day and a night have passed, he must remove them as well.
Whoever breaks his wuḍūʾ while resident and then wipes while traveling takes the ruling of a traveler as regards the duration of wiping, so long as he does not become resident. It is stated in ʿUmdat al-Sālik wa ʿUddat al-Nāsik (Vol.1/p.15): “If he wipes over both [socks] or one of them while resident and then travels, or wipes while traveling and then becomes resident, or doubts whether he began the wiping while traveling or while resident, he completes only the wiping period of a resident. But if he broke his wuḍūʾ while resident and wiped while traveling, he completes the period of a traveler, whether or not the full time of a prayer had passed over him while resident.” And Allah Almighty knows best.

Is it permissible for one who sacrifices on behalf of another, with the latter's permission, to eat from the sacrifice?

It is permissible for someone who sacrificed on behalf of another with their permission to eat from it with their permission, and they stand in their place (act as their representative) in distributing it.
 
It is stated in Nihayat al-Muhtaj ila Sharh al-Minhaj (Vol.8/P.141): "And he—meaning the one sacrificing on his own behalf, provided he has not apostatized—has the right to eat from a voluntary sacrifice and his sacrificial gift; rather, it is recommended. As for an obligatory sacrifice, it is forbidden for him to eat from it, whether it was designated as such initially or as a liability in his dhimmah. And excluded by what has preceded is if he sacrifices on behalf of another, or if he apostatized, then it is not permissible for him to eat from it, just as it is absolutely impermissible to feed a disbeliever from it."(The text I found indicates the impermissibility of eating) ???
 
And it is stated in Hashiyat al-Jamal ‘ala Sharh al-Manhaj (Vol.5/P.262): "If a person offers a sacrifice on behalf of a living person with their permission, does he act as their representative in distributing it—on the grounds that permission to sacrifice is permission to distribute it—or does it depend on their explicit permission? This requires consideration, but the first view is not far-fetched." And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is incumbent upon the one offering the sacrifice if, after slaughtering the animal, they discover that one of its internal organs is damaged or diseased?

All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
The presence of disease or defect in the internal organs of a sheep does not affect the validity of the sacrificial animal, unless the disease leads to the animal becoming emaciated and its meat becoming corrupted.
 
It is stated in al-Iqnā' (2/590) by Imam al-Shirbīnī: "The third disqualifying condition: an animal with a manifest illness — meaning one whose illness visibly results in emaciation and corruption of its meat. However, if the illness is minor and does not produce such effects, it doesn`t affect the validity of the sacrificed animal." And Allah Almighty knows best.

See More