عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(78): “Ruling on Selling Gold Jewels for Native Gold of Unequal Weight“

Date Added : 02-11-2015

 

Resolution No.(78) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies:

“Ruling on Selling Gold Jewels for  Native Gold of Unequal Weight“

Date: 27/4/1425 AH, corresponding to 16/6/2004 AD.

 

 

Question:

What is the ruling when a goldsmith offers gold jewels of a particular weight as a loan to a dealer of jewels in return for a particular wage, then the latter settles that loan by giving the former an equal amount of Native gold by installments, in addition to the agreed upon wage ?

Answer: All success is due to Allah.

The Board is of the view that it is permissible to sell formed gold for Native gold of unequal weight, considering the extra weight as a compensation for the workmanship, whether the sale was by cash or by installments (1) unless this gold was intended for its price, and this is the view adopted by Ibn Taymyah, Ibn Al-Qayiim, Alhasan, Ibrahim, Al-Sho`abi, Moaweiyah Bin Abi Sufian and Al-Hasan Al-Bassri.

Evidences supporting this view are as follows:

1- Formed  gold(final product)used for women`s ornament is classified, through the allowed workmanship, amongst the permitted manufactured items such as clothes and goods, and as it isn`t intended for its price and is set for trading, there is no harm in selling it for Native gold of an unequal weight.

2- Formed gold has an advantage over Native gold because of the workmanship; therefore, it is permissible to sell it for Native gold of unequal weight, where the difference in weight compensates for the workmanship.

3- Banning such a sale does harm to the interests of craftsmen, because this means that they stop producing golden ornaments as they receive nothing in return for their workmanship in case they sold these for an equal amount of Native gold.

4- Prophetic narrations prohibit selling gold for gold of unequal weight in case it was intended for its price, and this is mentioned in the Hadith narrated by Abu Hurairah: “Gold is to be paid for by gold with equal weight, like for like, and silver is to be paid for by silver with equal weight, like for like. He who made an addition to it or demanded an addition dealt in usury.” {Muslim}.This is because the reason behind prohibiting usury in gold and silver is intending their prices, so once they aren`t intended as such, it becomes permissible to sell gold for gold of equal weight, and the same applies to silver.

The prohibition also applies to using utensils made of gold or silver as well as wearing gold by men since the Prophet (PBUH) forbade such things.

Moreover, the prohibition extends to other items which aren`t made by man such as dates, for good and bad dates are the creation of Allah, so selling dates for dates of unequal weight is forbidden.

This is indicated in the Hadith narrated by Abu Saeid Alkhudari and Abu Hurairah (May Allah Be Pleased with them): “Allah's Messenger (PBUH) appointed somebody as a governor of Khaibar. That governor brought to him an excellent kind of dates (from Khaibar). The Prophet (PBUH) asked: "Are all the dates of Khaibar like this?" He replied: "By Allah, no, O Allah's Messenger (PBUH)! But we barter one Sa of this (type of dates) for two Sas of dates of ours and two Sas of it for three of ours." Allah's Messenger (PBUH) said: "Do not do so (as that is a kind of usury) but sell the mixed dates (of inferior quality) for money, and then buy good dates with that money." {Bukhari}.

Although the Board is of the view that such an act is permissible, it recommends avoiding  it, save when deemed necessary.

Note (1): The transaction mentioned in the above question contradicts the Prophet`s Hadith: “Don't sell gold for gold unless equal in weight “ {Bukhari&Muslim}.

This Hadith mentions gold in general; therefore, the questioner should first sell the formed gold for dinars, then buy the gold that he wants  in order to avoid usury as mentioned in the Hadith of Abu Sa'eed Al-Khudri. And Allah Knows Best.

 

Iftaa` Board
Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, Chief Justice, Izzaldeen Al-Tamimi
Dr. Wasif Al-Bakhri
Dr. Abdulsalam  Al-Abbadi
Dr. Yousef Ghyzaan
Dr. Moh. Abu Yahia
Sheikh Sae`id Hijjawi
Sheikh Abdulkareem Khasawneh

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

I have a brother who is harsh in his dealings [with me], and many problems have occurred between us, and I do not intend to reconcile with him. What is the ruling of Islamic Law on that?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is not permissible for a Muslim to abandon or boycott his fellow Muslim brother for more than three days. This is based on the saying of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him: "It is not lawful for a Muslim to forsake his brother for more than three [days], meeting each other but one turns away and the other turns away, and the better of the two is the one who initiates the greeting (salam)." (Reported by al-Bukhari.)
A Muslim must strive to end such estrangement (hajr), so as not to fall under the prohibition mentioned in the hadith. If he takes the initiative to reconcile but the other party does not respond, then there is no sin upon him. We remind [ourselves] of the saying of Allah, the Exalted: "And let them pardon and overlook. Do you not wish that Allah should forgive you? And Allah is Forgiving and Merciful." (An-Nur/22). And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

What is the ruling on performing Tahajjud after the Witr?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
It is permissible for one who has prayed the Witr to perform voluntary (Nafl) prayers after it. However, it is preferable for the Witr to be the final prayer of the night. Therefore, if a person is confident that they will wake up during the night for Tahajjud, it is recommended for them to delay the Witr until after the Tahajjud. Conversely, if one fears they may not wake up, they should perform the Witr before sleeping.
 
Al-Khatib al-Shirbini (may Allah have mercy on him) stated: 'It is not disliked (Makruh) to perform Tahajjud after the Witr, but it is not recommended to do so intentionally.' [Mughni al-Muhtaj, Vol. 1/P.454]. And Allah the Exalted knows best."

 

 

What is the meaning of the Prophetic statement that a boy is held in pledge (murtahan) for his 'aqīqah?

All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
The first interpretation: That if the boy dies in infancy without an 'aqīqah having been performed on his behalf, he will not intercede for his parents on the Day of Resurrection. This is the position of Imam Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, and Imam al-Khaṭṭābī concurred with him, stating: "The finest of what has been said regarding this matter is the position adopted by Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal." — [Fatḥ al-Bārī by Ibn Ḥajar,{Vol.9/P.594]
The second interpretation: That the child is likened to a pledged object (marhūn) — one from which full benefit and enjoyment cannot be derived until it is redeemed. A blessing is only made complete upon the one blessed when they fulfil the obligation of gratitude (shukr), and the prescribed expression of gratitude for this particular blessing is what the Prophet ﷺ established as Sunnah — namely, the slaughtering of the 'aqīqah on behalf of the newborn as an act of thankfulness to Allah the Almighty and as a supplication for the wellbeing and safety of the child. This is the position of Mullā 'Alī al-Qārī. See: [Mirqāt al-Mafātīḥ Sharḥ Mishkāt al-Maṣābīḥ, Vol.7/P.2688]
And Allah Almighty knows best.

Is it permissible for one who sacrifices on behalf of another, with the latter's permission, to eat from the sacrifice?

It is permissible for someone who sacrificed on behalf of another with their permission to eat from it with their permission, and they stand in their place (act as their representative) in distributing it.
 
It is stated in Nihayat al-Muhtaj ila Sharh al-Minhaj (Vol.8/P.141): "And he—meaning the one sacrificing on his own behalf, provided he has not apostatized—has the right to eat from a voluntary sacrifice and his sacrificial gift; rather, it is recommended. As for an obligatory sacrifice, it is forbidden for him to eat from it, whether it was designated as such initially or as a liability in his dhimmah. And excluded by what has preceded is if he sacrifices on behalf of another, or if he apostatized, then it is not permissible for him to eat from it, just as it is absolutely impermissible to feed a disbeliever from it."(The text I found indicates the impermissibility of eating) ???
 
And it is stated in Hashiyat al-Jamal ‘ala Sharh al-Manhaj (Vol.5/P.262): "If a person offers a sacrifice on behalf of a living person with their permission, does he act as their representative in distributing it—on the grounds that permission to sacrifice is permission to distribute it—or does it depend on their explicit permission? This requires consideration, but the first view is not far-fetched." And Allah the Almighty knows best.

See More