Resolutions of Iftaa' Board



Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(110): “Ruling on the Slaughtering Method Used by the Indian Company (M.K over Seas)”

Date Added : 02-11-2015

 

Resolution No.(110): “Ruling on the Slaughtering  Method Used by the Indian Company (M.K over Seas)”

Date: 2/6/1426 AH, corresponding to 28/6/2006 AD.

 

The Board received the following question:
What is the Sharia ruling on the slaughtering method used by the Indian company (M.K over Seas)?
Answer: All success is due to Allah
After reviewing the slaughtering mechanism, the personnel doing the slaughtering and those supervising it, the Iftaa Board has decided the following:
The slaughtering is in accordance with the rulings of Sharia, the personnel carrying out the slaughtering are Muslims and the aforesaid company is overseen by a specialized Muslim overseer who makes sure that the slaughtering is carried out in accordance with the rulings of Islamic Sharia. And Allah Knows Best.  

 

Chairman of The Iftaa' Board/Cheif Justice/ Dr. Ahmad Hilayeel
      Dr. Yousef Ali Ghythan
                            Dr. Abd-Al-Majeed Al- Salaheen       
Dr. Wasif Al Bakhri
                             Sheikh Abd-Al-Kareem Al-Khsawneh
     Sheikh Sa'eed Hijjawi
          Sheikh. Na'eem Mojahed

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling on someone who fasts but does not pray?

A Muslim must be diligent in fulfilling all obligations, and after the Shahadah, prayer is the most important duty.
● If someone abandons prayer out of disregard, they are considered a disbeliever, and their fasting is not accepted.
● If they abandon prayer out of laziness, they are still a Muslim, and their fasting remains valid, but they have committed a grave sin by neglecting prayer.

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.

What is the ruling on Friday Ghusl (ritual bath)?

Friday Ghusl is a confirmed Sunna (Prophetic tradition) even if a person wasn`t in a state of Janbah (ritual impurity), or physically unclean. However, one who doesn`t make Ghusl on Friday isn`t sinful for the Prophet (PBUH) said: "It is good for a Muslim to make ablution for Friday prayer, but it is better to make Ghusul. [At-Tirmithi & Abu Dawood].

My father has debts and asked me to repay them years ago, and I promised him I would do so upon his death — is it permissible for me to go back on my promise given that I am unable to repay them, especially since he refuses to contribute to repayment on the grounds that the debt has become my responsibility by virtue of my promise?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The established principle is that a father's debt is to be repaid from his own wealth, if he possesses sufficient means. As for the promise made by the son to repay it on his father's behalf, fulfilling such a promise is strongly recommended, and breaking it is considerably disliked. Shaykh al-Islām Imām al-Nawawī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "Fulfilling a promise is emphatically recommended, and breaking it is severely disliked. The evidences for this from the Qurʾān and the Sunnah are well known." [Rawḍat al-Ṭālibīn,Vol. 2/P.278] Shaykh al-Islām Imām Zakariyyā al-Anṣārī, may Allah have mercy upon him, further states: "The reason fulfilling a promise is not obligatory and breaking it is not forbidden is that a promise is in the nature of a gift, and a gift does not become binding except upon receipt." [Asnā al-Maṭālib fī Sharḥ Rawḍ al-Ṭālib,Vol. 2/P.487]
Given that the son does not possess the financial means to fulfil his promise to his father, breaking this promise falls beyond his capacity — and Allah does not burden a soul beyond what it can bear. Since the father himself possesses sufficient wealth to settle his own debt, repayment must be made from his own funds. Should he pass away before doing so, the debt is to be settled from his estate. And Allah the Almighty knows best.