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

What is the ruling on swearing an oath by the Prophet ﷺ, and does such an oath take effect according to Imām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, requiring expiation upon its breach?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Swearing an oath by a created being is disliked (makrūh) in our Shāfiʿī school. Shaykh al-Islām Imām al-Nawawī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "Swearing by a created being is disliked — such as swearing by the Prophet, the Kaʿbah, Jibrīl, the Companions, or the Prophet's family. Al-Shāfiʿī, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: 'I fear that swearing by other than Allah the Almighty may constitute an act of disobedience.' The scholars of the school explained this to mean: that is, something forbidden and sinful — indicating that he had some hesitation in the matter. Al-Imām stated: the established position of the school is that it is categorically not forbidden, but rather disliked. Furthermore, whoever swears by a created being, his oath does not take effect and no expiation (kaffārah) is required if he breaks it." [Rawḍat al-Ṭālibīn wa ʿUmdat al-Muftīn, Vol. 11/P.6]
According to the Ḥanbalī school, however, expiation becomes obligatory upon one who swears by our master the Prophet ﷺ and then breaks his oath. Imām al-Bahūtī al-Ḥanbalī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "No expiation is required for swearing by other than Allah the Almighty, even if the oath is broken — because expiation was made obligatory for swearing by Allah and His attributes, out of reverence for His names, and nothing else is equal to Him in this regard... except in the case of swearing by our Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ, for expiation becomes obligatory when one swears by him and then breaks the oath. This was explicitly stated in the narration of Abū Ṭālib, because he is one of the two conditions of the two testimonies of faith by which a disbeliever becomes a Muslim. Ibn ʿAqīl held the view that swearing by any of the other prophets, peace and blessings be upon them all, carries the same ruling." [Sharḥ Muntahā al-Irādāt, Vol. 3/P.441]. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

Someone wiped over his shoes after wearing them in a state of purity, then took them off and prayed without them?

Ablution is not invalidated by taking off leather socks or shoes after wiping over them. However, whoever takes them off after wiping must wash his feet only. If he prayed without washing his feet, he must wash his feet and repeat the prayer. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

Is it permissible to eat from an Udhiyah slaughtered on behalf of a deceased person?

Praise be to Allah, and prayers and peace be upon our Master the Messenger of Allah.
 
It is permissible to eat from the sacrifice (uḍḥiyyah) that is offered on behalf of a deceased person. This is the madhhab (school of thought) of the Hanbalis. In this case, the heirs take the place of the deceased as if he were alive, with the same rights to eat from it, give it in charity, and offer it as a gift.
 
It is stated in Maṭālib Uli al-Nuhā (Vol.2/P.472): "Offering a sacrifice on behalf of a deceased person is better than offering one on behalf of a living person, because the deceased is unable (to perform deeds) and is in need of reward. It is to be treated like a sacrifice on behalf of a living person in terms of eating, giving charity, and giving gifts." And Allah Almighty knows best.

What are the nullifiers of fasting?

1. Anything that enters the body cavity intentionally, even in small amounts, through an open passage such as the mouth, nose, ears, front, or back private parts.
2. Intentional vomiting.
3. Sexual intercourse.
4. Masturbation.
5. Menstruation and postnatal bleeding.
6. Insanity.
7. Apostasy.
8. Fainting if it lasts for the entire day.

See More