Resolutions of Iftaa' Board



Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(44): “Ruling on the Proposed Amendments of Mutual Insurance for those Engaging in Murabaha with the Orphans` Fund Development Found"

Date Added : 02-11-2015

 

 

Resolution No.(44): “Ruling on the Proposed Amendments of Mutual Insurance for those Engaging in Murabaha with the Orphans` Fund Development Foundation“

Date: 15/11/1420 AH corresponding to 10/2/2000 AD.

 

The Board has received the following question:

What is the Sharia ruling on the proposed amendments of mutual insurance for those engaging in Murabaha with the Orphans' Fund Development Foundation?

Answer: All success is attributed to Allah.

The Board is of the view that the above type of insurance is permissible in Sharia for in this type, a number of individuals agree upon paying a certain sum, by each, as a contribution to be saved in a private fund or account, and to be spent in case an accident occurs to any of them. Its permissibility rests on the principle of cooperation, which is acknowledged by Islamic Sharia and its general rules. Allah, The Almighty, Says (What means): “Help ye one another in righteousness and piety, but help ye not one another in sin and rancour: fear Allah. For Allah is strict in punishment.” {Al-Maidah/2}.

The idea of this insurance exists in the Aqila (male blood relatives of the killer) system, which is based on solidarity and cooperation amongst the relatives of the murderer in unintentional killing when paying the Diya (blood money) of the murdered. In addition, mutual insurance lessens the financial burden on the family members of the deceased participant (mutual insurance), so they aren`t obligated to pay on his behalf, and he is acquitted Before Allah, The Almighty. Also, mutual insurance preserves the funds of the Orphans` Fund Development Foundation and secures its right to collect the debt due on the participants in case of their death.

This resolution {permissibility of mutual insurance} agrees with the theme of the second conference of the Islamic Research Academy , held in Al-Azhar during the month of Moharram,1385AH,  the Council of the Fiqh Academy held in Makkah in 1399AH, and the opinion celebrated by many contemporary scholars. And Allah Knows Best.

 

Iftaa` Board

Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, Chief Justice, Izz Al-Deen Al-Tamimi

Dr. Mohamoud Al-Bakheet

Dr. Abdulsalam Al-Abbadi

Dr. Yousef Gheezaan

  Dr. Umar Al-Ashkhaar

  Dr. Abdulaziz Al-Khayyat

Sheikh Saeid Hijjawi

Sheikh Na`eim Mojahid

   Sheikh Mahmoud Shwayaat

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

Is it permissible for a husband to sell his wife`s jewelry if he was in a hard up?

A woman`s jewelry and dowry are her own property, and it is forbidden for the husband to take either without obtaining her approval. However, it is desirable for the wife to support her husband through considering her jewelry a sort of documented debt on him.

What is the ruling on men wearing rings (those made of silver and of other metals, such as iron), and are there conditions for men wearing rings?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is sunnah for men to wear a silver ring on the right hand, following the practice of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). It is reported in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, on the authority of Anas ibn Mālik (may Allah be pleased with him), that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) took a silver ring and had “Muḥammad Rasūl Allāh” engraved on it. He said: “I have taken a ring of silver and had ‘Muḥammad Rasūl Allāh’ engraved on it, so let no one engrave the like of its engraving.”
It is a condition that the silver ring not exceed the size customary in the local norm (ʿurf). If it does, that is extravagance (isrāf). A ring made of a metal other than silver, such as iron or copper, is permissible to wear without disapproval (karāhah), except gold, which is forbidden (ḥarām) for a man to wear.
It is stated in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vol.1/p.586): “It is permissible, without disapproval, to wear a ring of iron or lead. It is sunnah for a man to wear a silver ring on the little finger of his right or left hand. Wearing it on the right is better, and it is permissible on the left, and on both together.”
It is also stated in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vol.2/p.97): “It is lawful for him, that is, the man, and likewise the khunthā (person of indeterminate sex), indeed all the more so, to wear a ring of silver, by consensus (ijmāʿ), because the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) took a ring of silver, narrated by the two Shaykhs (al-Bukhārī and Muslim). Wearing it is in fact sunnah, whether on the right or the left, though the right is better according to the sound position, as stated in the chapter on clothing in al-Rawḍah… The Shāfiʿī jurists did not specify the permitted size of the ring, and they probably relied on custom (ʿurf), that is, the custom of that country and the habit of people of his standing in it. Whatever exceeds that is extravagance, as they said regarding a woman’s anklet. This is the reliable position (al-muʿtamad).” And Allah Almighty knows best.

The imam recited a verse containing a prostration of recitation (*sajdat al-tilāwah*) but did not prostrate. After the imam's *salām*, a follower (*maʾmūm*) performed a prostration of forgetfulness (*sujūd al-sahw*) because the imam had not performed the prostration of recitation. Is it permissible to go against the imam in this way?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
There is no sin on the imam if he omits the prostration of recitation (sujūd al-tilāwah), even deliberately. The maʾmūm (the one following the imam) is obliged to follow the imam in the prayer, so if the imam does not perform the prostration of recitation, it is not permissible for the follower to prostrate, because the imam is appointed only to be followed.
If the follower introduces a prostration after the imam’s salām but before his own salām, in a case where there is no prostration of forgetfulness (sujūd al-sahw), his prayer is invalidated if he knew it to be prohibited. Otherwise, he is excused on account of his ignorance and his prayer is not invalidated.
It is stated in Ḥāshiyat al-Imām al-Jamal ʿalā Fatḥ al-Wahhāb: “His statement: ‘So the omission of the hayʾāt (the non-essential sunnahs of the prayer) is not compensated for by prostration; if one prostrates for any of them deliberately, his prayer is invalidated, unless he is excused due to his ignorance.’”
Since this issue is one that is hidden from the laymen, as it is among the subtleties of knowledge, and the laymen are excused for ignorance of whatever is of such a nature, and their act of obedience is not invalidated because of it, it may be said that the prayer of one who has not acquired knowledge of this issue is not invalidated, with the necessity of learning the rulings remaining. As for after knowing it, the prayer is invalidated. And Allah Almighty knows best.

Is a person who forgot to make up missed fasts until the next Ramadan began required to pay expiatory compensation (Fidyah) alongside the makeup fast (Qada')?

 
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Whoever forgets to make up missed fasts of Ramadan (Qada') until the following Ramadan begins incurs no sin, pursuant to the statement of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him): "Indeed, Allah has pardoned for my nation their mistakes, their forgetfulness, and that which they are coerced into doing." [Narrated by Ibn Majah, and Al-Bayhaqi in Al-Sunan Al-Kubra]
 
Furthermore, such an individual is not obligated to pay a expiatory compensation (Fidyah). It is stated in Bushra Al-Karim (p. 580)—one of the authoritative Shafi'i jurisprudential texts: "As for delaying it [the makeup fasts] due to a valid excuse—such as travel, breastfeeding, forgetfulness, or ignorance of the prohibition of delay (even for one living among scholars)—no Fidyah is required. This is because delaying performance during the actual month is permissible due to these excuses; hence, delaying makeup fasts is even more permissible, even if it continues for years."
And Allah Almighty knows best.