Resolutions of Iftaa' Board



Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(81): “The Ruling of Sharia on Printing Two Copies of the Quran“

Date Added : 28-10-2015

 

Resolution No.(81) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies:

 "The Ruling of Sharia on Printing Two Copies of the Quran“

Date: 9/7/1425 AH, corresponding to 25/8/2004 AD.

 

 

 

 

Question: 

I have attached two copies of the Quran, and would like to know whether printing them is permissible or not?

First copy: Printed by Dar Al-Kahir, Beiruit, size 35/25 cm, 4th edition 1402, and includes a marginal index on each page of the Mus-haf.

Second copy: Memorization Mus-haf written on cards that hold Tafseer Al-Jalalain, first edition 2004 AD.

Answer: All perfect praise be to Allah.

The Board is of the view that the marginal index in the first copy usually leads to concealing the marks indicating the Quran`s parts, Ahzaab, Arbaa`, pauses and instances of prostration. The Board sees that such a copy of the Mus-haf is lawful so long as it preserves the marks which indicate the above mentioned.

 

 

As regards the second copy, the Board has the following remarks:

1- This copy changes the order of the Quran`s chapters as  revealed from Allah The Almighty.

2- Writing the Mus-haf on cards eliminates the marks indicating its parts, Ahzaab, Arbaa`, pauses and instances of prostration.

3- Placing Tafseer {science of explaining the meaning of the Quran} Al-Jalalain behind these cards contradicts with the practice observed by Al-Salaf Al-Saleh {righteous predecessors} who kept the interpretation on the margins.

4- There are many methods for memorizing the Quran other than the cards method.

Therefore, the Board bans printing the second copy. And Allah Knows Best.

 

The Board of Iftaa`
Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, Chief Justice, Izzaldeen At-Tamimi
Dr. Abdullah Al-Manasrah
Dr. Yousef Ghyzaan
Dr. Abdulmajeed Al-Salaheen
Dr. Wasif Al-Bakhri
Sheikh Naei`m Mujahid
Sheikh Sae`id Hijjawi

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling on brown discharge before the menstrual period? Is it considered part of menstruation (Hayd)?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Dusky discharge (Kudrah), reddish discharge (Humrah), and yellowish discharge (Sufrah) are all considered menstruation (Hayd) if they occur during the time of the menstrual cycle. If their duration exceeds a day and a night, and the period persists from the first sight of the discharge until the cessation of the menstrual blood—provided the total duration does not exceed fifteen days—then all of it is menstruation. However, if the duration exceeds fifteen days, then the discharge is not considered menstruation, but rather chronic irregular bleeding (Istihadah). And Allah the Exalted knows best.

Which takes precedence: the 'aqīqah or the uḍḥiyyah?

All praise is due to Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
The 'aqīqah is an act of worship through which a servant draws closer to Allah the Almighty in gratitude for the blessing of a newborn child. It is a confirmed Sunnah for those who are financially capable, and Allah does not burden any soul beyond what it can bear.
However, the uḍḥiyyah takes precedence, as it is a confirmed Sunnah established from the Prophet ﷺ through stronger and more numerous narrations — indeed, the Ḥanafī scholars hold it to be obligatory. Furthermore, its time is narrow and limited, expiring with the passing of the days of Eid, whereas the 'aqīqah may be delayed until one becomes financially capable of performing it.
And Allah Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on waiving a debt owed by a debtor and counting it toward zakāh?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Waiving a debt owed by a debtor, with the intention of counting it toward zakāh, does not fulfill the zakāh obligation. Rather, it constitutes an ordinary act of charity, for which Allah rewards the giver generously — since one of the conditions for the validity of zakāh is that the person paying it must form the intention of zakāh at the actual moment the wealth is paid out. In this case, the debt has already been established as a standing obligation upon the borrower, so it is not valid to simply redirect the intention toward zakāh after the fact.
It is preferable, instead, for the creditor to first collect the debt from the debtor, and then return to him the amount of money he is required to pay as zakāh — or a portion of it — if the debtor happens to fall under one of the eight categories that Allah, the Exalted, has commanded be given from zakāh.
It is stated in ‘Umdat as-Sālik, from the books of the Shāfi‘ī school: "If someone gives [money] to a poor person, stipulating that the recipient return it to him in payment of a debt owed to him, or says, 'I am making what you owe me into zakāh, so take it [as such]' — this is not valid. But if he gives it to him with the [unstated] intention that the recipient will use it to repay him, or says, 'Repay what you owe me, so that I may [then separately] give it to you as zakāh,' or the debtor himself says, 'Give it to me, so that I may [then] repay you with it' — this is valid, and there is no binding obligation for the recipient to actually fulfill this [informal understanding]." And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

Is the marriage contract considered valid if concluded at home by the marriage official (Ma`zon)?

Yes, it is valid as long as it is registered at the court.