عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(146): "Ruling on a Muslim Taking his Share of the Estate from a Usurious Bank

Date Added : 05-10-2015

Resolution  No. (146) (11/2010), By The Board of Iftaa', Research and Islamic Studies:

"Ruling on a Muslim Taking  his Share of the Estate from a Usurious Bank"

Date: 2/9/1431 A.H corresponding to 12/8/2010 A.D

 

All praise be to Allah, peace and blessings be upon Prophet Mohammad and upon  all of his family and companions:

The Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies reviewed, in its 9th session held on Thursday(2/9/1431A.H) corresponding to (12/8/2010 A.D), the following  question:

My father passed away, and left us a sum of money which our mother didn`t divide  amongst us, rather , she kept it deposited  in a usurious bank for  thirty years; is it permissible for me to take my share and what is the ruling on paying the  Zakah due on it ?

After careful study and deliberation, the Board decided what follows:

What the mother did is unlawful in Islamic law because once the father died, the money  is transferred to the possession of the heirs-each according to his/her share. The degree of unlawfulness as far as the mother`s act is concerned increases by her dealing in Riba (usury); therefore, she should seek repentance, ask for forgiveness, withdraw the money from that bank and divide it amongst the eligible heirs. On their part, the heirs must  get rid of the usurious amount in their shares  by giving  it up to charity, and Allah will reward them for doing so since He, The Most Exalted, Says (What means): “O ye who believe! Fear God, and give up what remains of your demand for usury, if ye are indeed believers. If ye do it not, Take notice of war from God and His Apostle: But if ye turn back, ye shall have your capital sums: Deal not unjustly, and ye shall not be dealt with unjustly.” {Al-Baqarah/278-279}.

The heirs are also obliged to give the Zakah due on their shares for one year in case each of them reached Nisaab (i.e. minimum amount of wealth liable for the payment of zakat). And Allah Knows Best.

 

 

Head of the Iftaa` Board, The Mufti General of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, His Grace Sheikh Abdulkareem Al-Khasawneh

Vice Head of the Iftaa` Board, Dr. Ahmad Hilayel

Dr. Yahia Al-Botoosh/ Member

His Eminence, Sheikh Sa`ied Hijjawi/ Member

Dr. Mohammad Khair Al-Essa

Judge Sarrie Attieh

Dr. Abdulrahman Ibbdah/ Member

Dr. Mohammad Oklah/ Member

Dr. Abduln`nassir Abu Al Bass`al/ Member

Dr. Mohammad Al-Khalayleh/ Member

Dr. Mohammad Al-Gharaibeh/ Member

Executive Secretary of the Iftaa` board, Dr. Ahmad Al-has`sanat

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

Is it permissible to fast the six days of Shawwal before making up for the missed fasts of Ramadan?

● If a person missed fasts due to a valid excuse, they may fast the six days of Shawwal before making up for Ramadan fasts, because qada (makeup fasts) in this case can be delayed, while the six days of Shawwal must be observed within Shawwal.
● However, if a person missed fasts without a valid excuse, they must make up for the missed fasts immediately after Eid, before fasting the six days of Shawwal. If they fast the six days first, it is valid, but they must still make up for the missed Ramadan fasts afterward.
It is also permissible to combine the intention of qada (makeup fasts) and the six days of Shawwal in one fast. However, it is better to fast them separately, as this increases the reward and avoids scholarly disagreement regarding combining intentions.

Does the fast become invalid if water from rinsing the mouth reaches the stomach while performing ablution?

If water reaches the stomach without the fasting person exceeding normal rinsing or being excessive, their fast remains valid.
However, if they exceed the normal practice or exaggerate in rinsing, causing water to enter the stomach, their fast is invalid.
This is because excessiveness in rinsing is prohibited for a fasting person, as the Prophetﷺ said: "Exaggerate inhaling water during ablution, except when you are fasting." [Narrated by the Four Imams]
Transgression (Ta‘addi) refers to rinsing the mouth more than three times, while exaggeration (Mubalaghah) includes gargling, drawing water deep into the nasal passages, or filling the mouth with water in an unusual manner.

What is the ruling on Friday Ghusl (ritual bath)?

Friday Ghusl is a confirmed Sunna (Prophetic tradition) even if a person wasn`t in a state of Janbah (ritual impurity), or physically unclean. However, one who doesn`t make Ghusl on Friday isn`t sinful for the Prophet (PBUH) said: "It is good for a Muslim to make ablution for Friday prayer, but it is better to make Ghusul. [At-Tirmithi & Abu Dawood].

Is the Saying "Whatever is Taken by the Sword of Shyness is Forbidden" an Authentic Ḥadīth?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The saying "Whatever is taken by the sword of shyness is forbidden" is not an authentic ḥadīth, though its underlying meaning is sound. The established sharʿī principle is that a Muslim's wealth is not lawful for anyone to take except with his wholehearted consent, as Allah the Almighty says {what means}: "O you who have believed, do not consume one another's wealth unjustly, but only [in lawful] business by mutual consent." [Al-Nisā/ 29] And the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: "Listen to me and you will live well: do not wrong others, do not wrong others, do not wrong others. Indeed, a man's wealth is not lawful except with his full, willing consent." (Reported by Aḥmad in his Musnad.) Whatever is taken through the pressure of shyness or social embarrassment runs directly counter to genuine, wholehearted consent.
The jurists have explicitly stated that whatever is taken by means of the "sword of shyness" carries the same ruling as that which is taken by coercion — it must be returned to its rightful owner.
Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states in al-Fatāwā al-Kubrā (Vol.3/P.30): "Do you not see the reported scholarly consensus that whoever has something taken from him purely out of shyness, without his genuine consent, does not pass ownership of it to the one who took it? They reasoned that this constitutes a form of coercion through the 'sword of shyness,' comparable to coercion at the point of an actual sword. Indeed, many people would rather submit to the literal sword and endure the pain of its wound than submit to this first kind of coercion, out of fear for their dignity and standing — which people of sound judgment hold dear and guard most fiercely." And Allah the Almighty knows best.

See More