عربي
Home


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 of Islamic Law regarding one who purchases a sacrificial animal (uḍḥiyah) and it then develops a defect before slaughter?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If a defect that invalidates the sacrifice (uḍḥiyah) arises after its purchase — for example, if one purchased a sound, defect-free animal, and it then developed a limp, blindness in one eye, or a similar defect before slaughter — it does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah, according to the Shāfi'ī school.
It is stated in Asnā al-Maṭālib fī Sharḥ Rawḍ al-Ṭālib (Vol.1/P.535): "Even if the limp develops [in the animal] while the knife is upon it, it still does not fulfill the requirement, because it is lame at the moment of slaughter — this is analogous to a case where a sheep's leg breaks and one hastens to slaughter it [in that condition]."
The Ḥanbalī school, however, held that if the one offering the sacrifice purchased the animal while it was sound and defect-free, and a defect then befell it afterward, the sacrifice remains valid and there is no obligation to replace it.
It is stated in Masā'il al-Imām Aḥmad, one of the Ḥanbalī reference works (Vol.8/P.4021): "I said: If a person purchases the sacrificial animal while it is sound, and it is then afflicted with illness, blindness in one eye, or a broken limb [before slaughter]? He [Imam Aḥmad] said: It is said that it still fulfills the requirement. Isḥāq said likewise, because he purchased it while sound, and the defect befell it only afterward, so it remains sufficient on his behalf." [End of quote]
Accordingly, a sheep afflicted with a defect that invalidates the sacrifice does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah — whether the defect arose after purchase or during the slaughter itself — according to the Shāfi'ī school. However, there is no objection to following the Ḥanbalī position on this matter [as a valid alternative]. And Allah, the Most High, knows best.

If the bleeding ceases after 40 days following childbirth, but then returns intermittently during two days of fasting, what is the ruling?

 
Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Whenever the post-natal bleeding (Nifas) ceases and the woman is certain it will not return, she has become pure; therefore, she must perform the ritual bath (Ghusl) and resume praying and fasting. However, if the blood returns within fifteen days of its cessation and before sixty days have passed since the delivery, the ruling of Nifas applies once again. Consequently, any fasting or prayer performed during that interval of purity is rendered invalid; she must make up for the missed fasts of those days, but she is not required to make up for the prayers. And Allah the Exalted knows best.

What is the ruling on intramuscular injections? Do they break the fast?

Therapeutic injections administered under the skin or into the muscles do not break the fast, as they do not enter the body cavity (jauf) through an open passage.
However, intravenous (IV) injections that provide nourishment do break the fast because they function like food and drink in effect.

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.

See More