Resolutions of Iftaa' Board



Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(16): “Inheriting on Basis of Wala (Allegiance) and Manumission“

Date Added : 02-11-2015

Resolution No.(16) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies:
“Inheriting on Basis of Wala (Allegiance) and Manumission“
Date: 29/1/1411 AH, 20/8/1990 AD

 

We have received the following question: 
Mr. (Q) died this year in Makkah. His father Mr. (P) was a manumitted slave of Mr. (Y). Mr. (P) who had an heir (D) died without leaving him any estate. What is the ruling of Sharia on (D), does he remain manumitted like his father, or does he become free by the manumission of his father?
Mr. (Q) has died leaving a wife, a bequest, a debt, movable and immovable property in banks and companies...etc. His sole heir was his wife since he had no paternal relatives. Are the heirs of Mr. (Y) eligible to receive any share from the estate of Mr. (P) If yes, then to whom. The question that arises here is: who inherits Mr. (Q), and how should his estate be distributed after his debts are settled and his bequest is executed in charitable causes?
Answer: All success is due to Allah.
In this case, Mr. (Y) isn`t entitled to receive anything from the estate of Mr. (P). However, Mr. (Q`s) wife`s share is a quarter, and the rest of the estate is given to the public treasury because Mr. (P`s) mother is originally a free woman. This is based on what was stated in the books of jurisprudence: {Moghni Al-Mohtajj} and {Ash-sharh Al-Kabeer}; in volume (7), (P243) , in addition to another page of the latter book (247), that reads as follow: “One whom any of his free parents was originally free isn`t bound to pledge allegiance to anyone“. 
According to the articles of the Jordanian Law in force: “Mr. (Q`s) wife shall receive a quarter of his estate according to Islamic Sharia, and she shall also take the rest of his estate because she is his sole heir. This is stipulated in article (181) of the Jordanian Civil Status Law, which states that the rest of the estate shall be received by one of the spouses in case one of them died while having no paternal relatives.“ And Allah Knows Best.

 

Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, Chief Justice, Mohammad Mohailaan
The Grand Mufti of Jordan, Izz Ad-Deen At-Tamimi
Dr. Yaseen Dradkeh
Dr. Ahmad Hilayel
Dr. Ibrahim Zaid Al-Khaylani

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

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.

Is it valid for the 'aqīqah to be performed using the newborn child's own wealth?

All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is not permissible for the guardian to perform the 'aqīqah using the newborn child's own wealth, because the 'aqīqah is a voluntary act of giving (tabarru'), and a guardian is prohibited from making voluntary expenditures from the child's wealth. Should he do so, he becomes financially liable for what he spent. And Allah Almighty knows best.

Is Zakah (obligatory charity) due on land intended for selling?

Yes, lands intended for trade are valued, and Zakah is paid according to their estimated value after a lunar year had lapsed, but if the owner didn`t pay the due Zakah, then he should do so after selling them.

Is it incumbent on a husband to pay the alimony of his wife if she had left him and stayed at her parent`s without his permission?

When a wife leaves her house, and stays at her parent`s without asking her husband, she is considered a Nashiz (wife who refuses to abide by her husband’s orders), and so she doesn`t deserve an alimony.