Caution and Verification are behind the Delay in Issuing Fatwa

| | عربي

Home

Articles

Summarized Fatawaa

What should a person, who doubts the validity of his Wudu, or over performs it, do?

One who doubts the validity of his/her Wudu while performing it should redo it until he/she is certain of having attained purity. But, if doubt was after having performed Wudu, then he/she should not pay attention to that as doubt after the end of an act of worship does not count. This is of course in case doubt was within the reasonable limits since once it goes beyond that, it becomes a whispering of the Shaytaan (devil) which he/she should ignore as the Wudu is valid.

Is it permissible for a woman who has become pure before the end of forty days of confinement to perform different acts of worship? and is it lawful for her husband to have sex with her?

Once postpartum bleeding ceases and she is certain that it won`t happen again, she becomes pure, and so she should perform Ghusl (ritual bath), pray, and fast. She can also have sex with her husband even before the end of (40) days because the minimum of postpartum bleeding is a moment, and the maximum is (60) days. However, the postpartum bleeding for the majority of women is (40) days, but this does not apply to rest of them.

What are the key differences between the 'aqīqah and the uḍḥiyyah?

All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.

The following are the key differences between the 'aqīqah and the uḍḥiyyah:

First: The 'aqīqah is slaughtered as an act of drawing closer to Allah the Almighty and expressing gratitude for the blessing of a newborn child. The uḍḥiyyah, on the other hand, is slaughtered as an act of drawing closer to Allah and expressing gratitude to Him specifically during the days of slaughter (ayyām al-naḥr).

Second: The 'aqīqah is performed on the seventh day from the birth of the newborn, whereas the uḍḥiyyah is performed on Eid al-Aḍḥā and its time extends for three days after the Eid.

Third: The 'aqīqah is performed once in a lifetime for the newborn, whereas the uḍḥiyyah is recommended every year for the one who is financially capable to offer it.

Fourth: It is Sunnah for the one intending to offer the uḍḥiyyah to refrain from cutting his hair and nails until after he has slaughtered. This is not a Sunnah for the one intending to perform the 'aqīqah.

Fifth: It is Sunnah for the 'aqīqah to be cooked and distributed to the poor in its cooked form. The uḍḥiyyah, by contrast, must be distributed as raw meat. And Allah Almighty knows best.

If someone starts the day sick or traveling while fasting, is it permissible for them to break their fast?

● A sick person who finds fasting difficult is allowed to break their fast, whether they began the day fasting or not.

● As for a traveler:

○ If they were still at home at dawn and then traveled after Fajr (dawn), they must continue fasting unless they experience extreme hardship, in which case they may break their fast.

○ However, if they were already traveling when dawn broke—meaning they had left their town before Fajr—then they are permitted to break their fast. This is what the Prophetﷺ did during the year of the conquest (of Makkah).

Send Your Question

Zakaat Account

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

• The General Iftaa` Department Commends the Decisive Security Operation: Jordan is Impervious to Terrorism and Terrorists

• Rabī‘ al-Awwal: The Month of the Prophetic Sīrah and the Season of Emulating the Loftiest Example

• The Obligation to Honor the Prophetic Station and to Uphold Complete Etiquette toward His Noble Rank

• An Official Statement from the General Iftaa' Department

• Regarding Women Driving Cars

• Dr. Zaid Ibrahim Al-Kilani Appointed as the Secretary-General of the General Iftaa` Department

• Launching the General Iftaa Department's Channel on Whatsapp

• A Royal Decree Appoints Hasanat as Grand Mufti

• Announcement of the Passing of the Esteemed Sheikh Kamel Khatatbeh

• Statement from the Iftaa` Department regarding Tarawih Prayer

>>> 1 2 3 4 5 <<<

Comments

Name

E. mail Address

Country

Comment Title

Comment

Enter the number shown on the image

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 istinja' after passing wind from the anus?

Ablution is invalidated by passing wind from the anus, even without a smell. Only ablution becomes obligatory from it. Istinja' is not obligatory nor recommended. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

I have a brother who is harsh in his dealings [with me], and many problems have occurred between us, and I do not intend to reconcile with him. What is the ruling of Islamic Law on that?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.

It is not permissible for a Muslim to abandon or boycott his fellow Muslim brother for more than three days. This is based on the saying of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him: "It is not lawful for a Muslim to forsake his brother for more than three [days], meeting each other but one turns away and the other turns away, and the better of the two is the one who initiates the greeting (salam)." (Reported by al-Bukhari.)

A Muslim must strive to end such estrangement (hajr), so as not to fall under the prohibition mentioned in the hadith. If he takes the initiative to reconcile but the other party does not respond, then there is no sin upon him. We remind [ourselves] of the saying of Allah, the Exalted: "And let them pardon and overlook. Do you not wish that Allah should forgive you? And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful." (An-Nur/22). And Allah, the Exalted, 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 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.