Resolutions of Iftaa' Board



Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(144): "The Jordanian Personal Status Draft Law/2010"

Date Added : 02-11-2015

Resolution No.(144)(9/2010) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies:

"The Jordanian Personal Status Draft Law/2010"

Date: 16/6/1431 AH, corresponding to 30/5/2010 AD.

 

During its sixth session held on the above date, the Board reviewed the Jordanian Personal Status Draft Law.

After thorough studying and deliberating, it decided what follows:

The above draft law is derived from the provisions of Islamic Sharia with its four Madhabs (Schools of thought), and achieves its goals related to the family rules through protecting the rights of women, family, and children, in general; therefore, the Board recommends going on with its constitutional procedures until it is ratified.

Moreover, the Board appreciates the sincere efforts of the Supreme Judge, the Sharia Judiciary Commission and all the people that have participated in drafting this law. We pray that Allah, The Almighty, favors Islam and Muslims with success and progress. All success is due to Allah.

 

 

Head of the Iftaa` Board, The Mufti General of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, His Grace Sheikh Abdulkareem Al-Khasawneh

Vice Head of the Iftaa` Board, Dr. Ahmad Hilayel

Dr. Yahia Al-Botoosh/ Member

His Eminence, Sheikh Sa`ied Hijjawi/ Member

Dr. Mohammad Khair Al-Essa

Judge Sarrie Attieh

Dr. Abdulrahman Ibbdah/ Member

Dr. Mohammad Oklah/ Member

Dr. Abduln`nassir Abu Al Bass`al/ Member

Dr. Mohammad Al-Khalayleh/ Member

Dr. Mohammad Al-Gharaibeh/ Member

Executive Secretary of the Iftaa` board, Dr. Ahmad Al-has`sanat

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling on tasting food while fasting?

Tasting food while fasting is disliked (makruh). However, if any part of the food reaches the body cavity (jauf), the fast becomes invalid.

Is it obligatory to have the intention for each day of fasting, or is one intention sufficient for the whole month?

The intention is obligatory for each day of Ramadan because each day is an independent act of worship separate from the others.
The intention must be made at night before the break of dawn, as the Prophetﷺ said: "Whoever does not intend fasting at night, there is no fast for him." [An-Nasa’i] 
And he also said: "Whoever does not firmly resolve to fast before dawn, there is no fast for him." [At-Tirmidhi, Abu Dawood, and An-Nasa’i]
Whoever wakes up and eats Suhoor while mindful of fasting has made the intention. Likewise, one who firmly intends at any moment during the night to fast the next day has also fulfilled the intention.

What is the ruling on ablution if vaginal discharge is expelled, and is it impure?

If these discharges exit from the external genitalia (apparent part of the vagina), they are not impure and do not invalidate ablution. If they exit from the internal part, they are impure and do invalidate ablution. If it is uncertain whether they are from the internal or external part, they are not impure and do not invalidate ablution.
 
The apparent part is what becomes visible when sitting, and what the husband's penis reaches during intercourse is considered part of the apparent. The internal part is what is beyond that. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

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.