عربي
Home


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

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.

What is the ruling on performing istinja' before every ablution?

Istinja' is not from the conditions for the validity of ablution. It is only obligatory for prayer when there is impurity from urine or stool on the private part, or if there is fear of the impurity spreading to the body or clothing. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

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.

Is Zakah (obligatory charity) due on the money saved for marriage?

Zakah is due on the money saved for marriage if it reached the Nissab (minimum amount liable for Zakah), and a whole lunar year had lapsed over possessing it.

See More