عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(208): "Ruling on Trading with Dealcoholized Grape Wine"

Date Added : 05-10-2015

Resolution  No. (208)(18/2014), by The Board of Iftaa, Researches and Islamic Studies:

"Ruling on Trading with Dealcoholized Grape Wine"

Date: 30/Zolqidah/1435 A.H, corresponding to 25/9/2014 A.D

 

All perfect praise is due to Allah, blessings and peace be upon Prophet Mohammad and upon his family and companions.

The Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies reviewed, in its twelfth session held on Thursday (30/Zolqidah/1435 A.H)-(25/9/2014 A.D), the letter sent by His Excellency, the Director General of the Jordan Food and Drug Administration in which he requested clarifying the Sharia ruling on the percentage of alcohol in “ Alcohol free grape juice “ product coming from Spain. The product is manufactured through fermentation first, then alcohol is processed out of it, without adding any chemicals, and that traces of alcohol remain in it, but these don`t exceed (0.04%) in the final product. It is worth mentioning that the product has a “Halal” certificate from the country of origin. It is also exported by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and the State of Kuwait.

After careful study and deliberation, the Board determined:

It is forbidden to have an intoxicant drink which is branded as “wine” even if it was dealcoholized  afterwards. The majority of the Muslim scholars deem that “wine” doesn’t become pure through being processed by human beings. This opinion is supported by the narration of Anas (May Allah be pleased with him) who reported that: ”when the Prophet (PBUH)  was asked if it is possible to process wine into vinegar, he said: (No)” {Muslim}. In addition, warding off harm lies in hindering such industry from becoming a reason for promoting and selling alcoholic drinks under the pretext that they are being processed and dealcoholized. And Allah Knows Best.

 

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

Prof. Ahmad Helayel/ Member

Dr. Hayel Abdolhafeez/ Member

Dr. Yahia Al-Botoosh/ Member

His Eminence, Sheikh Sa`ied Hijjawi/ Member

Dr. Mohammad Khair Al-Essa/ Member

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

Dr. Mohammad Al-Khalayleh/ Member

Prof. Mohammad Al-Qodah/ Member

Dr. Wasif Al-Bakkri/ Member

Dr. Mohammad Al-Zou`bi/ Member

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

Is it permissible to eat from an Udhiyah slaughtered on behalf of a deceased person?

Praise be to Allah, and prayers and peace be upon our Master the Messenger of Allah.
 
It is permissible to eat from the sacrifice (uḍḥiyyah) that is offered on behalf of a deceased person. This is the madhhab (school of thought) of the Hanbalis. In this case, the heirs take the place of the deceased as if he were alive, with the same rights to eat from it, give it in charity, and offer it as a gift.
 
It is stated in Maṭālib Uli al-Nuhā (Vol.2/P.472): "Offering a sacrifice on behalf of a deceased person is better than offering one on behalf of a living person, because the deceased is unable (to perform deeds) and is in need of reward. It is to be treated like a sacrifice on behalf of a living person in terms of eating, giving charity, and giving gifts." And Allah Almighty knows best.

"I told my family at night: 'I will fast tomorrow as qaḍā' (a make-up fast),' but I forgot to make the intention before sleeping. Is my fast valid?"

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
 
The intention is obligatory in acts of worship. For obligatory fasting, the required intention is to resolve to fast during the night [before dawn]. Its proper locus is the heart, while verbalizing the intention out loud in acts of worship is a sunnah — so that the tongue may align with the heart. If the intent behind the statement in question was the intention to fast, then it is valid; but if the intent was merely to inform someone, or reflected hesitation or doubt, then it is not valid.
 
It is stated in *Bushrā al-Karīm* (Vol.1/P.216): "It is a sunnah to verbalize the intention — that is, whatever has already been intended in the heart, whether an obligatory or a voluntary act — such as specifying the number of rak‘ahs, just before the opening takbīr — so that the tongue may assist the heart, and because this is further removed from whispered doubts (waswasah), and in order to accommodate the view of those who held it obligatory in every act of worship that requires an intention (even though this is a minority position), by analogy with Ḥajj."
 
Accordingly: if the intention to fast arose in your heart before the second adhān [i.e., before Fajr], then your fast is valid.
 
And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

What is the ruling on wiping the white area behind the ears instead of wiping the head?

The obligation in ablution is to wipe some of the head; it is not a condition to wipe all of it. Wiping the white area behind the ears suffices for that. And Allah the almighty knows best.

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