Resolutions of Iftaa' Board



Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No. (305) "Pertaining to the Beneficiary from the Compensation Payment out of Solidarity Fund"

Date Added : 16-06-2021

Resolution No.(305) (10/2021), By The Board of Iftaa', Researches and Islamic Studies:

"Pertaining to the Beneficiary from Compensation Payment out of Solidarity Fund"

Date: (22/Shawal/1442AH), corresponding to (3/6/2021AD).

In its 8th meeting held on the above date, the Board of Iftaa` reviewed the letter No.(2560/2021) sent on (10/3/2021) from the Head of Jordanian Construction Contractors - Eng.Ahmad Yaqoob, it reads as follows:

It is incumbent upon a subscriber according to the regulations of social solidarity fund, to identify the beneficiary to receive the compensation payment in case of the former's death, as is the case with: "Mr. M.L, who is a subscriber in our fund whereas his son R.L was identified as the beneficiary entitled to receive the payment; unfortunately, the latter passed away, and after a short period of time and before updating the name of the new beneficiary, the father passed away as well on 27/10/2020. What is the ruling regarding the one who is entitled to receive the above payment  in this case?

After prolonged deliberations, the board decided what follows:

In principle, it is obligatory to abide by what was stated by the subscriber in the application side by side with the regulations of social solidarity fund system of Jordanian Construction Contractors; yet, due to the death of the beneficiary as mentioned above, dividing it among the heirs of the subscriber is an obligation in accordance to their shares as stipulated by the courts of Sharia. And Allah Knows Best.

 

Grand Mufti of Jordan, Sheikh Abdulkareem Al-Khasawneh

Dr. Mohammad Al-Khalayleh/ Member

Prof. Mahmoud Al-Sartawi/ Member       Dr. Majed Al-Darawsheh/ Member

Sheikh Sa`eid Hijjawi/ Member

Judge Dr. Samer Al-Kobbaj/ Member              Prof. Adam Nooah Al-Qhodah/ Member

Prof. Amjad Rasheed/ Member

Dr. Jameel Khatatbeh/ Member           Dr. Ahmad Al-Hasanat/ Member

Dr. Mohammad al-Zou`bi/ Member

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling on someone who dies while having missed fasts?

● If a person dies before having the opportunity to make up the missed fasts—such as someone whose excuse (e.g., illness) persisted until their death—then no makeup fast (qada), fidyah, or sin applies to them.
● However, if they had the ability to make up the fasts but did not do so before passing away, the missed fasts must be compensated by giving a mudd of food for each missed day from their estate.
The Prophet ﷺ said: "Whoever dies while having a month’s fast due, one needy person should be fed per day on their behalf." [Narrated by At-Tirmidhi]
Additionally, a guardian (wali) may fast on their behalf, as the Prophet ﷺ said: "Whoever dies while having missed fasts, their guardian should fast on their behalf." [Narrated by Al-Bukhari and Muslim]
In another narration: "If they wish." This indicates that both feeding the needy and fasting on behalf of the deceased are permissible options.

Is it permissible for a woman to sit with her brothers-in-law?

It is impermissible for a woman to sit with her brothers-in-law, and it is also impermissible for a person to have a Khulwa (seclusion) with his sister-in-law.

What is the ruling on the cessation of blood after (40) days from delivery, but later continued sporadically during two days of Ramadan?

Once postpartum bleeding (Nifas) ceases, and the woman is certain that it won`t reoccur, then she becomes ritually pure and so she is free to make Ghusl (purificatory bath), pray, and fast. If the bleeding reoccurs before fifteen days from its cessation, and before the end of (60) days after delivery, then the ruling on postpartum bleeding is effective, and her fasting and prayer are null and void, thus she must make up the fasting that she missed and not the prayer during those particular days.

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.