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

What is the ruling on purchasing sacrificial animals and authorizing their slaughter via telephone?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
It is preferable for the one offering a sacrifice (udhiyah) to slaughter the animal himself, in adherence to the Sunnah, or to be present at the slaughter if possible.
 
It is valid to authorize a butcher to purchase a sacrificial animal on his behalf and slaughter it, regardless of whether the animal is owned by the butcher or the butcher is acting as an agent in its sale—according to the Hanbali school—provided that the butcher specifically designates and purchases the animal for the person offering the sacrifice before slaughtering it. And Allah Almighty knows best.

Is it permissible to include others in the reward of one`s sacrifice?

 

In the Name of Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
It is permissible for the person offering an Udhiyah (sacrificial offering) to include others in the spiritual reward of the sacrifice. However, it is not permissible for multiple people to jointly share the purchase price of a single sheep or goat, unless one person gifts the money to the other.
 
It is stated in Mughni al-Muhtaj (6/137) by Al-Khatib al-Shirbini:
 
"If a person includes someone else in the reward of his sacrifice and slaughters it on his own behalf, it is permissible."
 
It should be carefully noted that including someone else in the reward of one's sacrifice is completely distinct from offering a sacrifice on behalf of someone else. And Allah the Almighty Knows Best.

What should a person do if they suffer from an incurable illness that prevents them from fasting?

A person who has an illness that is not expected to be cured and prevents them from fasting must feed a needy person one mudd (600 grams) of food (such as wheat or rice) for each missed day instead of fasting.
Allah Almighty says {what means}: "and [in such cases] it is incumbent upon those who can afford it to make sacrifice by feeding a needy person." [Al-Baqarah/184].

 
What is the ruling on someone who eats or drinks while uncertain about the arrival of dawn, then later finds out that dawn had not yet broken?

If a person does this, their fast remains valid, as it is confirmed that they ate during the night. Similarly, if someone eats while uncertain and remains unsure whether they ate before or after dawn, their fast is still valid. This is based on the maxim of Sharia Law, which states: "Certainty is not removed by doubt." Certainty, here, is the presence of night, and the doubt concerns the arrival of dawn. Therefore, one relies on certainty and disregards doubt.

See More