Resolutions of Iftaa' Board



Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(104): “Ruling on the Medical Insurance of those Working for the American Jordanian Company for Apparel (Jordache)“

Date Added : 28-10-2015

 

Resolution No.(104) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies:

“Ruling on the Medical Insurance of those Working for the American Jordanian Company for Apparel (Jordache)“

Date: 5/4/1427 AH, corresponding to 3/5/2006 AD.

 

 

 

 

Question:

What is the Sharia ruling as regards the medical insurance of the workers of the American Jordanian Company for Apparel (Jordache) at the general clinics?

Answer: All success is due to Allah.

The Board is of the view that medical insurance is a branch of cooperative insurance, which is considered from the bare contracts. This contract isn`t affected by the contributors` ignorance as regards its benefit to them because they are contributors. Moreover, it isn`t risky, usurious or aleatory. 

Taking the above medical insurance into consideration, we realize that it takes the same ruling as cooperative insurance, which is an insurance with an institution that cares about workers, and isn`t a traditional insurance company. However, the Board recommends adjusting the maximum of age: (until  fifty) to become (as long as he works for the company).

The Board also recommends deleting article (14) of the draft agreement so as for the medical insurance to become effective through that institution`s commitment to cover the workers medical care during the period assigned in the draft. Based on that, the medical insurance included in the future draft agreement becomes permissible from the view point of Sharia. And Allah Knows Best.

 

 

Iftaa` Board

Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, Chief Justice, Dr. Ahmad Hilayel

Dr. AbdulMajeed Al-Salaheen

Dr. Abdukareem Al-Khasawneh

Dr. Yousef Ghyzaan

Dr. Wasif Al-Bakhri

Sheikh Sae`id Hijjawi

Sheikh Nae`im Mujahid

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

Is Zakah due on the orphan`s money?

Yes, Zakah is due on the money of the orphan.

What is the ruling on water that contains ornamental fish — does it become impure on account of their waste?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The water in a pond containing ornamental fish is pure so long as it has not been altered, for a small amount of fish waste (rawth) is pardoned and overlooked — provided it does not change the water.
It is stated in Ḥāshiyat al-Jamal ʿalā Sharḥ al-Manhaj (Vol.1/P.178): "A small amount of hair from a non-edible animal is pardoned, as is a small amount of hair from a riding animal — on account of the hardship involved in avoiding it — and likewise a small amount of fish waste is pardoned, unless it alters the water." And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on offering a sheep as a sacrifice (Udhiyah) if its fat-tail is sound, except that when it was young, the tip of its fat-tail was cut so that it would grow larger? And what is the ruling in case of doubt regarding the amount that was cut?

 
In the Name of Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Cutting a minor, insignificant portion from the tip of an animal's fat-tail (al-alyah) to encourage it to grow larger is not considered a defect, and it does not prevent the animal from being valid for sacrifice (Udhiyah).
 
It is stated in Tuhfat al-Muhtaj (Vol.9/P.352): "There is some scholarly deliberation regarding the common practice of cutting the tip of the fat-tail so that it grows larger. It could potentially be likened to a partial cut of the ear—supported by the jurists' general rule: 'even if it is a small amount.' On the other hand, if it is an exceptionally minor cut, it might have no effect on validity. This is explicitly clarified by the juristic exception to the general rule, which states that cutting a tiny piece from a large limb causes no harm. This latter view is more well-founded.
 
Furthermore, I found that some scholars investigated this matter and concluded: 'It should not affect validity if a custom-sanctioned portion of its fat-tail is removed during its youth to make it grow larger and look better, just as castrating a male animal causes no harm.' However, applying this unconditionally contradicts the established texts of the jurists, as understood from what I have laid out; thus, the restriction I specified is what must be relied upon."
 
Similarly, it is mentioned in Nihayat al-Muhtaj (8/135): "If a small piece is cut from the fat-tail to help it grow larger, the most well-founded view is that the sacrifice remains valid, as was given in a formal legal verdict (Fatwa) by my father [Shihab al-Din al-Ramli], may Allah be pleased with him. This is proven by the jurists' maxim: 'The loss of a tiny piece from a large limb causes no harm.'"
 
In cases where there is doubt as to whether the portion cut was large or small, the animal is still deemed valid for sacrifice. It is noted in Hashiyat al-Shubramallisi ‘ala Nihayat al-Muhtaj (Vol.8/P.135):
 
"This matter requires careful consideration, but the closer and more correct view is that it is valid. This is because soundness is the default state for the animal from which the piece was cut, and it aligns with what usually occurs—namely, that the part removed to help the fat-tail grow larger is naturally very small." And Allah the Almighty Knows Best.

What is the ruling on the prayer of the individual following the imam whose prayer is broadcasted via television?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Among the conditions for the validity of following an Imam (Sihhat al-Iqtida’) is that the Imam and the follower (Ma’mum) must be in the same location. Therefore, the prayer of one who follows an Imam whose prayer is being broadcast via television from a distant location is not valid. However, if the follower is with the Imam in the same mosque, the prayer is valid. And Allah the Exalted knows best.