Statement of the Iftaa` Department on the Tourism Brochure Concerning Umm al-Raṣāṣ

| | عربي

Home

Articles

Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling on performing voluntary (nafl) prayer during the time of istiwā' (the sun's zenith) on the day of Jumu‘ah (Friday), and is this ruling specific to someone who has come to the mosque to perform the Jumu‘ah prayer?

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

It is permissible to perform voluntary (nafl) prayer during the time of istiwā' (the sun's zenith, i.e., its highest point before noon) on the day of Jumu‘ah (Friday) — whether for someone who is attending the Friday prayer or someone who is not, and whether they are among the people obligated to attend it or not.

It is stated in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vol.1/P.310): "The more correct position (al-aṣaḥḥ) is that prayer is permissible during this time without restriction — regardless of whether the person will be attending the Jumu‘ah prayer or not." And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

What is the ruling on ablution if vaginal discharge is expelled, and is it impure?

If these discharges exit from the external genitalia (apparent part of the vagina), they are not impure and do not invalidate ablution. If they exit from the internal part, they are impure and do invalidate ablution. If it is uncertain whether they are from the internal or external part, they are not impure and do not invalidate ablution.

The apparent part is what becomes visible when sitting, and what the husband's penis reaches during intercourse is considered part of the apparent. The internal part is what is beyond that. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on one who doubts washing a limb before or after finishing ablution?

If a person performing ablution doubts leaving the washing of a limb from the limbs of ablution during his ablution, he must repeat washing that limb and wash what comes after it. If he doubts leaving the washing of a limb after finishing the ablution, there is nothing upon him. And Allah the 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.

Send Your Question

Zakaat Account

Articles

Statement of the Iftaa` Department on the Tourism Brochure Concerning Umm al-Raṣāṣ

Author : His Eminence Noah Ali Salman

Date Added : 02-11-2026

Statement of the Iftaa` Department on the Tourism Brochure Concerning Umm al-Raṣāṣ

Muslims are united on nothing as they are united on the love of Allah and His Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him and his family), and on supporting Islam and the Muslims.

When the offensive cartoons against the Prophet Muḥammad (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) were published, Muslims of every school and persuasion rose to condemn that crime.

A few days ago, a tour guide noticed a phrase in a tourism brochure that insults, in an unjustifiable way, our master Muḥammad (peace and blessings be upon him). This guide, may Allah bless him, promptly informed the responsible authorities. The Minister of Tourism was notified, condemned the matter, and formed an investigative committee to determine who was responsible for the error.

The Iftaa` Department was among the first to draw the Minister’s attention to this matter, but in our own manner, which relies on reform through quiet means without publicly shaming anyone. The Minister informed us, before others, of the formation of this committee. Statements then followed from every quarter, disassociating themselves from the brochure and from the erroneous information in it. When the investigation ends and the person responsible is identified, any citizen may file a case in the name of the public right under the Sharīʿah against whoever insulted the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family). The laws in force in our country punish this.

This swift response from official bodies and the public shows that Islam is protected and defended by everyone, and that an insult to it and to its symbols is an insult to all, especially to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him and his family), for whom we would give our lives and souls, and whose family line provides the leadership by which this country is honored.

In summary, the offensive content of the brochure is this: describing the area of Umm al-Raṣāṣ, near the city of Mafraq in Jordan, it said: “In this place the Prophet Muḥammad (peace and blessings be upon him) met the Christian monk who taught him the virtues, or principles, of tawḥīd (the oneness of God).”

This refers to the Prophet’s (peace and blessings be upon him) journey to al-Shām (Greater Syria) with his uncle Abū Ṭālib before prophethood, when he was twelve years old. Historians doubt that this meeting took place.

What those who have spoken on this matter overlooked is that whoever prepared the brochure, whether Muslim or non-Muslim (and most likely non-Muslim, since the Ministry of Tourism clarified that it was prepared by an external party), implicitly acknowledges that tawḥīd was the religion held by the Christian scholars. So where did the Trinity come from? That is a different story.

Even if the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) had heard something about tawḥīd from that monk, Islam does not stop at the doctrine of tawḥīd. The Noble Qur’an and the purified Sunnah address every matter of life and set out the way of life that Allah intended for all people, in acts of worship, transactions, ethics, and international relations. The Qur’an also speaks of events that took place later, such as the Night Journey and Ascension (al-Isrāʾ wa’l-Miʿrāj), jihād, and the victory at Badr, and so on.

It is slander, and a contempt for people’s intelligence, for anyone to think that the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) learned all of this in a passing encounter at the age of twelve.

What the narrations say, if they are authentic, is that the monk recognized the signs of prophethood in our master Muḥammad (peace and blessings be upon him and his family), as described in the books in his possession. He feared for him from the Jews and advised his uncle Abū Ṭālib to take care for his safety. This is reasonable, for Allah the Exalted says of the People of the Book {what means}: “Those who follow the Messenger, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find written in what they have of the Torah and the Gospel” [al-Aʿrāf/157].

In more than one verse, Allah the Exalted informed us that the People of the Book who have preserved Allah’s covenants recognize the Prophet Muḥammad (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) as they recognize their own sons. Researchers, Muslim and others, have produced books collecting what remains in the Jewish and Christian scriptures of glad tidings of the Prophet Muḥammad (peace and blessings be upon him and his family), among them a book translated into Arabic under the title ʿĪsā Yubashshir bi-Muḥammad (“Jesus Foretells Muḥammad”).

In any case, we thank the tour guide who noticed this error offensive to the Prophet Muḥammad (peace and blessings be upon him), and we thank everyone who rose to defend Islam and its Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) for the sake of Allah. Islam will remain honored and protected, by Allah’s leave, in fulfillment of His promise. The Exalted has said {what means}: “It is He who sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth, to make it prevail over all religion, even if the polytheists dislike it” [al-Tawbah/33].

Two matters remain:

First: It is not permissible to rush into issuing rulings of disbelief (kufr) against individuals, because declaring someone a disbeliever (takfīr) is a grave matter. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “Whoever says to his brother, ‘O disbeliever,’ one of them has incurred it.” There is a great difference between saying “this statement is an act of disbelief” and saying “this person is a disbeliever.” The judgment on individuals is issued by the judge after the grounds for it are established by legitimate means. Refuting a statement of disbelief, however, is permissible for all people of knowledge.

Second: It is not permissible for anyone to regard himself as the sole protector of the Islamic religion, because in doing so he reduces the number of Islam’s supporters. All of us are protectors of the Sharīʿah and its people.

I thank those brothers who regard the Iftaa` Department and the Department of the Chief Justice as bodies to which such matters may be brought for redress, and not as bodies that fall short in protecting religious rites and need someone to prompt them to do their duty. We live up to our brothers’ good opinion in what we see as right and correct, but each of us has his own approach. We prefer to handle matters calmly, for that is more likely to bring a response. May Allah protect us all.

Article Number [ Previous | Next ]

Read for Author

• The Land of the Prophets is Inherited by the Pious

• The Birth of the Prophet: The Birth of the Nation of Goodness and Guidance

• Issuing Fatwas: Necessity and Regulations(*)

• Dialogue of Civilizations

• Islam and International Humanitarian Law

• Interview with His Eminence, the Grand Mufti, by Manar Al-Islam Magazine

• Religious Tolerance and the Rejection of Violence and Terrorism

• International Relations in Islam

• Inheritance is a Right Imposed by Islamic Law to Women just as it is to Men

• Ikhlas "Sincerity" or "Purity of Intention"

>>> 1 2 <<<

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

A person who has recently embraced Islam is afraid of undergoing circumcision (khitān) — what should he do?

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

If this person would be harmed by undergoing circumcision, based on the assessment of a trustworthy physician, then he is not obligated to undergo it. However, if the matter is simply a fear of the procedure itself, then it may be postponed until he feels at ease and settled about it, provided this does not lead him to become averse to Islam — while still taking care to remove any impurity from the concealed area [beneath the foreskin]. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

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.

Is it acceptable to perform the Aqiqah for a male child by slaughtering and distributing the first sheep, and bringing the second one cooked from the restaurant?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.

It is permissible to slaughter the first sheep with the intention of Aqiqah (the newborn's sacrificial offering) and distribute it entirely [uncooked], and to slaughter the second sheep and have it cooked at a restaurant to bring home for the household. However, it must be noted that it is obligatory to give some portion of the Aqiqah in charity to the poor, even if it is a small amount, though it is preferable to send the food cooked to them.

Buying a pre-cooked, ready-made sheep from a restaurant does not suffice as an Aqiqah. However, if an agreement is made with the restaurant to explicitly slaughter a sheep with the intention of Aqiqah for the newborn, and then cook it afterward, this is permissible.

In conclusion, slaughtering the sheep and distributing it with the intention of Aqiqah is permissible, and through it, the foundational prophetic tradition (Sunnah) is fulfilled. As for simply buying a cooked sheep from a restaurant that was not specifically slaughtered with the intention of Aqiqah, it will not count as such. Conversely, if the restaurant owner is commissioned (Wakala) to handle both the slaughtering and the cooking as an Aqiqah, it is valid. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

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.