Resolutions of Iftaa' Board



Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(55): “Ruling on Receiving a Financial Compensation against Procrastination in Payment“

Date Added : 28-10-2015

 

Resolution No.(55): “Ruling on Receiving a Financial Compensation against Procrastination in Payment“

Date: 22/8/1422 AH corresponding to 7/11/2001 AD.

 

Question:

The Municipality of Irbid took possession of a plot from the lands of Irbid in 1987, owned by the Orphans` Fund Development Foundation for a price estimated at that time with (82215) JDs. (51215) JDs of that sum were paid to the Foundation and (31000) JDs remained due on the Municipality until 31/12/1999, when the Foundation filed a suit to collect the remaining amount. Later on, a court order was issued whereby the municipality was forced to pay off the price of the land (31000) JDs in addition to the statutory interests estimated at (32355) JDs and (600) fils, and so the Municipality did settle all the due sums during January 2000. However, the Orphans` Fund deposited the interests in the above plot`s bank account temporarily.

Please clarify the Sharia ruling as regards disposing of these interests, taking into consideration that article(4) of the Orphans` Foundation`s law No.(20) for the year 1972 states: “The Foundation aims at developing orphans` funds by investing them in legitimate businesses that don`t violate the rules of  Islamic Sharia “?

Answer: All success is due to Allah.

The procrastination on the part of Irbid`s Municipality in paying the remaining sum of the land`s price is considered a violation to the funds of the orphans and an act of injustice against them for the Prophet (PBUH) said in this regard: “Procrastination (delay) in paying debts by a wealthy man is injustice. So, if your debt is transferred from your debtor to a rich debtor, you should agree. “ {Al-Bukhari}. In addition, the Messenger of Allah said: "if one who can afford it delay repayment, his honor and punishment become permissible." {Muslim}. 

Therefore, the Municipality`s procrastination hindered the development of the orphans` funds through legitimate businesses decreed by the law-giver for the Prophet (PBUH) said in this regard {what means}: “One who becomes the guardian of an orphan, who owns property, must trade on his behalf and not leave it (saved and unused) until it is all eaten up by Zakah (which is paid yearly).” {Related by At-Tirmidhi and Ad-Daraqutni with a weak chain of narrators...}.

Therefore, the Board is of the view that a suitable compensation must be estimated in light of the harm done to the orphans` funds during the delay period, and to be paid in accordance with the average of the profits distributed on the orphans deposits during that period.

For example, if the average was 5%, then the amount due to the orphans is this average multiplied by the number of delayed years. These profits are permissible from the view point of Islamic Sharia and aren`t considered from the usurious interests because they are a compensation against  the harm done to the orphans` funds resulting from delay in payment on the part of the debtor, which impeded developing and investing them in legitimate businesses. 

The extra amount of profit that remains after giving the orphans their due shares is unlawful money (according to many scholars), and must be given to the poor and for charity. The Board also deems that this extra money must be deposited in the reserve account stated in clause (G), article (14) of the Orphans` Fund Development Foundation, and reads as follows: “The Board may dedicate more than 25% of the reserve earnings of the Islamic institutions or give cash assistance to underage orphans and needy Muslim students.” And Allah Knows Best.

 

Iftaa` Board

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

            Dr. Mohammad Abu Yahia

           Dr. Abdulsalam Al-Abbadi

    Dr. Yousef Gheezaan

Dr. Wasif Al-Bakhri

         Dr. Abdulaziz Al-Khayaat

  Sheikh Saeid Hijjawi

      Sheikh Na`eim Mojahid

               Sheikh Mahmoud Shwayyaat

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

Does undergoing an endoscopy during the day in Ramadan affect the validity of fasting?

Undergoing an endoscopic procedure during the day in Ramadan—whether through the mouth, nose, front private part, or back private part—invalidates the fast.
Whoever undergoes such a procedure must refrain from eating and drinking for the rest of the day out of respect for the sacred month and make up for that day after Ramadan.

My father has debts and asked me to repay them years ago, and I promised him I would do so upon his death — is it permissible for me to go back on my promise given that I am unable to repay them, especially since he refuses to contribute to repayment on the grounds that the debt has become my responsibility by virtue of my promise?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The established principle is that a father's debt is to be repaid from his own wealth, if he possesses sufficient means. As for the promise made by the son to repay it on his father's behalf, fulfilling such a promise is strongly recommended, and breaking it is considerably disliked. Shaykh al-Islām Imām al-Nawawī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "Fulfilling a promise is emphatically recommended, and breaking it is severely disliked. The evidences for this from the Qurʾān and the Sunnah are well known." [Rawḍat al-Ṭālibīn,Vol. 2/P.278] Shaykh al-Islām Imām Zakariyyā al-Anṣārī, may Allah have mercy upon him, further states: "The reason fulfilling a promise is not obligatory and breaking it is not forbidden is that a promise is in the nature of a gift, and a gift does not become binding except upon receipt." [Asnā al-Maṭālib fī Sharḥ Rawḍ al-Ṭālib,Vol. 2/P.487]
Given that the son does not possess the financial means to fulfil his promise to his father, breaking this promise falls beyond his capacity — and Allah does not burden a soul beyond what it can bear. Since the father himself possesses sufficient wealth to settle his own debt, repayment must be made from his own funds. Should he pass away before doing so, the debt is to be settled from his estate. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on eating or drinking during the circumambulation?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is disliked (makrūh) to eat or drink during the circumambulation (ṭawāf).
Shaykh al-Islām Imām al-Nawawī states in al-Majmūʿ: "It is disliked to eat or drink during ṭawāf, and the dislikedness of drinking is lighter. Neither of them, nor both together, invalidates the ṭawāf. Al-Shāfiʿī said: 'There is no objection to drinking water during ṭawāf, and I do not consider it sinful; however, I prefer that it be avoided, as refraining from it is more befitting in terms of proper conduct.' Among those who explicitly stated the dislikedness of eating and drinking, and that drinking is the lesser of the two, is the author of al-Ḥāwī."
If, however, a person is in genuine need of drinking, then there is no dislikedness in doing so. In any case, the ṭawāf itself remains valid. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

Is it acceptable to perform the Aqiqah for a male child by slaughtering and distributing the first sheep, and bringing the second one cooked from the restaurant?

 

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.

It is permissible to slaughter the first sheep with the intention of Aqiqah (the newborn's sacrificial offering) and distribute it entirely [uncooked], and to slaughter the second sheep and have it cooked at a restaurant to bring home for the household. However, it must be noted that it is obligatory to give some portion of the Aqiqah in charity to the poor, even if it is a small amount, though it is preferable to send the food cooked to them.

Buying a pre-cooked, ready-made sheep from a restaurant does not suffice as an Aqiqah. However, if an agreement is made with the restaurant to explicitly slaughter a sheep with the intention of Aqiqah for the newborn, and then cook it afterward, this is permissible.

In conclusion, slaughtering the sheep and distributing it with the intention of Aqiqah is permissible, and through it, the foundational prophetic tradition (Sunnah) is fulfilled. As for simply buying a cooked sheep from a restaurant that was not specifically slaughtered with the intention of Aqiqah, it will not count as such. Conversely, if the restaurant owner is commissioned (Wakala) to handle both the slaughtering and the cooking as an Aqiqah, it is valid. And Allah the Almighty knows best.