عربي
Home


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

What is required of one who doubts the number of rakʿāt during prayer?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
If a person doubts the number of rakʿāt he has prayed, he should build upon the lesser number, as that is what he is certain of. He should then perform the prostration of forgetfulness (sujūd al-sahw) before the final salām at the end of the prayer. ʿAṭāʾ ibn Yasār narrated that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: "When any one of you is in doubt during his prayer and does not know whether he has prayed three rakʿāt or four, let him pray one more rakʿah and then perform two prostrations while seated before the salām. If the rakʿah he prayed was a fifth, these two prostrations will make it even; and if it was the fourth, then the two prostrations serve as a humiliation for the devil." (Reported by Abū Dāwūd.)
It is stated in al-Muqaddimah al-Ḥaḍramiyyah — one of the foundational texts of the Shāfiʿī school: "If one doubts whether he has prayed three rakʿāt or four, he is obliged to build upon the lesser number."
However, if such doubt recurs repeatedly and reaches the level of obsessive whispering (waswasah), he should not build upon the lesser number in that case — rather, he should build upon the greater number. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

Is the Saying "Whatever is Taken by the Sword of Shyness is Forbidden" an Authentic Ḥadīth?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The saying "Whatever is taken by the sword of shyness is forbidden" is not an authentic ḥadīth, though its underlying meaning is sound. The established sharʿī principle is that a Muslim's wealth is not lawful for anyone to take except with his wholehearted consent, as Allah the Almighty says {what means}: "O you who have believed, do not consume one another's wealth unjustly, but only [in lawful] business by mutual consent." [Al-Nisā/ 29] And the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: "Listen to me and you will live well: do not wrong others, do not wrong others, do not wrong others. Indeed, a man's wealth is not lawful except with his full, willing consent." (Reported by Aḥmad in his Musnad.) Whatever is taken through the pressure of shyness or social embarrassment runs directly counter to genuine, wholehearted consent.
The jurists have explicitly stated that whatever is taken by means of the "sword of shyness" carries the same ruling as that which is taken by coercion — it must be returned to its rightful owner.
Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states in al-Fatāwā al-Kubrā (Vol.3/P.30): "Do you not see the reported scholarly consensus that whoever has something taken from him purely out of shyness, without his genuine consent, does not pass ownership of it to the one who took it? They reasoned that this constitutes a form of coercion through the 'sword of shyness,' comparable to coercion at the point of an actual sword. Indeed, many people would rather submit to the literal sword and endure the pain of its wound than submit to this first kind of coercion, out of fear for their dignity and standing — which people of sound judgment hold dear and guard most fiercely." And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on wudu (ablution) when there is an adhesive substance on the hand that is difficult to remove?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
The general principle is: if what is applied to the limbs of wudu' (ablution) does not form a barrier substance preventing water from reaching the skin, then the wudu' is valid despite its presence. However, if these substances prevent water from reaching the skin, the wudu' is not valid with their presence, and they must be removed so that water reaches the hair or skin without any barrier.
Shaykh al-Islam, the Imam an-Nawawi, may Allah have mercy on him, says: "If there is wax, dough, henna, or similar substances on some of his limbs [of wudu'], and this prevents water from reaching any part of the limb, then his purification (tahara) is not valid — regardless of whether the amount is much or little. But if there remains on the hand or elsewhere only the trace and color of the henna, without its substance [i.e., the physical residue itself], or the trace of a liquid oil such that the water touches the skin of the limb and flows over it, though it does not remain [as a barrier] — then his purification is valid." [Al-Majmu' , Vol.1/P.529]. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

What is the ruling on praying behind a disliked Imam?

 

 
Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
It is mildly disliked (Makruh Tanzihan) for a man—other than the permanent designated Imam (Imam Ratib)—to lead people in prayer if the majority of them dislike him due to a religiously blameworthy reason (Amr Madhmum Shar‘an), such as associating with open sinners (Fussaq), for example. As for the followers who dislike him, the prayer behind him is not disliked for them. However, if less than the majority dislike him, or if the majority dislike him for a reason that is not religiously blameworthy, then his leading the prayer is not disliked. And Allah the Exalted knows best.

See More