عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(154): "Ruling on Spending on the Waqf (an endowment) from it Own Funds"

Date Added : 02-11-2015

Resolution No.(154)(19/2010) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies:

"Ruling on Spending on the Waqf (an endowment) from its Own Funds"

Date: 7/10/1431 AH, corresponding to 16/9/2010 AD.

 

 

All perfect praise be to Allah, The Lord of The Worlds; and may His blessings and peace be upon our Prophet Mohammad and upon all his family and companions.

During its tenth session held on the above given date, the Board reviewed the letter of His Excellency the Premiere concerning the request of the Minister of Awqaf (endowments) and Islamic Affairs to re-allocate financial support to the Awqaf Funds Development Foundation or to combine its budget with that of the Ministry of Awqaf. This is of course after reviewing the letter of the Awqaf Minister and the remarks made by the Ministers of Finance and the Public Sector`s Development. 

After extensive deliberations, the Board decided what follows:

The Board stresses its resolution No.(103); 5/4/1427 AH, corresponding to 3/5/2006 AD, which states: " Since the above Foundation functions as the trustee of the Waqf, then it is permissible for it to allocate a certain amount from the Waqf`s revenues to cover the expenses and wages of its employees, but within reasonable limits along with maintaining the original capital. This is based on the following Hadith: Concerning the Waqf of 'Umar: It was not sinful of the trustee (of the Waqf) to eat or provide his friends from it, provided the trustee had no intention of collecting fortune (for himself). Ibn 'Umar was the manager of the trust of 'Umar and he used to give presents from it to those with whom he used to stay at Mecca. {Bukhari}.

The majority of the Muslim scholars from the four schools of thought-except Ibn Etaab-are of the view that the wage of the Waqf administrator, whether it was conditioned from the Waqif (endower) or the judge, should be from the outcome of the Waqf itself. The Muslim scholars mentioned that the wage of the Waqf administrator or trustee, if not  specified by the endower, should be equivalent to his regular wage.

The Board advises the government to participate in covering the Waqf`s administrative expenditure, and steer its profits in charitable channels, as much as possible, to serve public interest. This is because the government is responsible for taking care of the country`s and the citizens` interests and this would lead to having more trust in the Waqf Funds Development Foundation. As a result, people would give more donations in order for that Foundation to play a more active role in serving charitable causes. And Allah Knows Best.

 

Head of the Iftaa` Board, The Grand Mufti 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

Is it permissible for someone who is unable to fast to pay the fidyah (ransom/compensation payment) to himself, due to his own poverty?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is not permissible, nor does it fulfill the obligation, for a sick person who is currently and permanently unable to fast to pay the fidyah (ransom/compensation payment) to himself, since it is a financial obligation owed by him, established as a standing debt upon him — much like any other debt he owes. If he were to pay it to himself, it would not thereby be discharged. So if he cannot find [anyone eligible to] pay it to, it remains a standing obligation upon him, and is not thereby waived. If Allah, the Mighty and Majestic, later grants him wealth, it becomes obligatory upon him to pay it out to the poor and needy.
Imam al-Khaṭīb ash-Shirbīnī (raḥimahullāh) said: "There is no difference in the obligation of the fidyah between the wealthy and the poor person; its benefit lies in its remaining established as a standing debt upon the poor person [until he is able to pay it] — and this is the more correct position (al-aṣaḥḥ), as indicated by the wording of ar-Rawḍah and its source text." [Mughnī al-Muḥtāj, Vol.2/P.174]
Accordingly: it is not permissible for a Muslim to pay the fidyah to himself while he remains poor. If the sick person is poor, he is not obligated to pay the fidyah immediately, and it remains a standing debt upon him until a time when he has sufficient means and wealth. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

Does swallowing a fly, road dust, or flour dust break the fast?

A fasting person does not break their fast if something enters their body cavity against their will, such as a fly, road dust, or flour dust.

Does collecting saliva and swallowing it break the fast?

Swallowing collected saliva does not break the fast, but it is an unnecessary and meaningless act.

Is it permissible to fast the six days of Shawwal before making up for the missed fasts of Ramadan?

● If a person missed fasts due to a valid excuse, they may fast the six days of Shawwal before making up for Ramadan fasts, because qada (makeup fasts) in this case can be delayed, while the six days of Shawwal must be observed within Shawwal.
● However, if a person missed fasts without a valid excuse, they must make up for the missed fasts immediately after Eid, before fasting the six days of Shawwal. If they fast the six days first, it is valid, but they must still make up for the missed Ramadan fasts afterward.
It is also permissible to combine the intention of qada (makeup fasts) and the six days of Shawwal in one fast. However, it is better to fast them separately, as this increases the reward and avoids scholarly disagreement regarding combining intentions.

See More