Resolutions of Iftaa' Board



Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(13): “The Prophecy of Adam (PBUH)“

Date Added : 02-11-2015

 

Resolution No.(13) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies:   

 “The Prophecy of Adam (PBUH)“

Date: 8/7/1409 AH, 14/2/1989 AD.

 

Question: What is the ruling of Sharia on the Prophecy of Adam (PBUH), and on those who deny it?
Answer: All success is due to Allah.
The Board is of the view that the Prophecy of Adam (PBUH) is established in the Quran and the Sunnah  (Prophetic tradition) because in Sharia terms a Prophet is: a man to whom a law was revealed,and this definition applies to Adam (PBUH) as shown in the following verses: “God did choose Adam and Noah, the family of Abraham,and the family of ’Imran above all people.“ {Al-Imran/33} also, He, The Most Exalted Said (What means) “We had already, beforehand, taken the covenant of Adam, but he forgot: and We found on his part no firm resolve.“ {Taha/115}, “But his Lord chose him (for His Grace): He turned to him, and gave him Guidance. “ {Taha/122}, and “For We assuredly sent amongst every People an apostle, (with the Command), "Serve God, and eschew Evil": of the People were some whom God guided, and some on whom error became inevitably (established). So travel through the earth, and see what was the end of those who denied (the Truth).“ {An-Nahil/36}.
Before Noah (PBUH), humanity was in a dire need for a divine guidance, and that was what Adam (PBUH) has delivered to his sons.
The Quranic verses about Adam-even though they haven`t stated his prophecy as explicitly as that of other Prophets-have strongly indicated his prophecy. Moreover, the majority of the interpreters of the Quran stated that Adam is one of the Prophets; therefore, acknowledging his prophecy is one of the basics of Islamic creed.
Our Scholars have also relied on Sunnah in proving the prophecy of Adam (PBUH). One of the most sound narrations in this regard is the one reported after Abi Ummamah Al-bahili (May Allah be pleased with him) and reads: “A man said to Prophet Mohammad (PBUH): O Messenger of Allah! A prophet was Adam? He replied: Yes.“ {Ibn Habban, Tabarani, and Al-Hakim}. And Allah Knows Best.

 

 

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling on undoing braids of hair during the ritual bath?

It is not a condition to undo braids if the water reaches all the hair and penetrates to its base. If the water does not reach except by undoing the braids, then it is obligatory to undo them for the water to reach. And Allah the 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.

Is it permissible to slaughter a single sheep with the combined intention of both the uḍḥiyyah and the 'aqīqah?

All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
According to Shaykh al-Islām Imam Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī, it is not permissible to combine the intention of the uḍḥiyyah and the 'aqīqah in a single animal, as each of the two has a distinct and separate cause that differs from the other.
However, Shaykh al-Islām Imam al-Ramlī permitted the combining of both intentions in a single animal — and this position offers a degree of latitude and ease. And Allah 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.