عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(218): "Ruling on Accepting the Donations Made by Non-Islamic Banks to Charitable Organizations"

Date Added : 21-12-2015

Resolution No.(218)(8/2015) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies:

"Ruling on Accepting the Donations Made by Non-Islamic Banks to Charitable Organizations"

Date: 24/Zolhijjah/1436 AH, corresponding to 8/10/2015 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.

On the above given date, the Board reviewed the question of His Excellency Dr. Marwan Al-Homood, which reads as follows: What is the ruling of Islamic Sharia on accepting the donations made by non-Islamic banks to establish different charitable societies, or to equip them with furniture and other supplies?

After researching and deliberating, the Board arrived at the following view:

Islam has defined certain methods for making money and spending it, and has prohibited a Muslim from resorting to unlawful means for making a living. Therefore, that which he earns from a lawful business is equally lawful, for he can eat from it, spend, and give to charity and receive a reward from Allah, The Almighty. On the other hand, that which he earns from an unlawful business is equally unlawful, so he doesn`t receive a reward for it; rather, he is considered sinful, for Allah accepts only that which is lawful. Our beloved Prophet (PBUH) said: "There is no flesh raised that sprouts from the unlawful except that the Fire is more appropriate for it." {At-Tirmizi}

Since the transactions of non-Islamic banks include that which is lawful and unlawful, there is no harm in accepting the donations that they make to charitable activities, such as establishing relief agencies, research centres, charitable societies, and schools. This is because the four Muslim Jurists have permitted accepting the gifts of those whose lawful money is mixed with unlawful money. They also said that its owner is the one accountable for committing the sin of earning unlawful money. This is provided that the donations aren`t used for promoting unlawful transactions, and that the unlawful money wasn`t considered as such because it was made by coercion, or theft. This reason of prohibition that such money should be given back to its rightful owner and can`t be accepted as a donation. And Allah Knows Best.

The Grand Mufti of Jordan / His Eminence Sheikh AbdulKareem al-Khasawneh

Prof. Abdulnasser Abulbasal / Member

Dr. Yahia al-Botoosh / Member

Sheikh Sae`id Hijjawi / Member

Dr. Wasif al-Bakhri / Member

Prof. Mohammad al-Qhodat / Member

Dr. Mohammad Al-Khalayleh / Member

Dr. Mohammad Khair Al-Esa / Member

Dr. Mohammad  al-Z`obi / Member

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

Is "Bismillāhir-Raḥmānir-Raḥīm" a verse (āyah) of Sūrat al-Fātiḥah?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The basmalah ("Bismillāhir-Raḥmānir-Raḥīm") is, without question, a verse (āyah) of the Noble Qur'an, and according to the Shāfi‘ī school, it constitutes a verse of Sūrat al-Fātiḥah itself. Al-Fātiḥah is a pillar of the prayer, and it consists of seven verses, of which the basmalah is one. The prayer is not valid without reciting it, nor if any of the Fātiḥah's verses, letters, or shaddahs (consonant doublings) are omitted or altered.
It is stated in Bushrā al-Karīm (Vol.1/p.202), from the books of the Shāfi‘ī school: "The basmalah is a complete verse of it [i.e., of al-Fātiḥah] in practice — and it suffices, for this to be established, that there be strong probability (ẓann), especially given that this has come very close to certainty (yaqīn), due to the consensus (ijmā‘) of the Companions on its inclusion in the muṣ-ḥaf [the written text of the Qur'an] in its script, despite their extreme diligence in excluding from it anything that did not genuinely belong to it — to the point that they even [carefully regulated] its diacritical dots and vowel markings." And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

Is it incumbent on the fiancée to obey her fiancé?

When the woman settles in her husband`s house, it is incumbent on him to provide for her and it is incumbent on her to obey him. Before that, and if the marriage contract had been concluded, then she is lawfully his wife and thus she should abide by custom in treating him, but if the marriage contract hadn`t been concluded, then she should treat him as a non-Mahram (Marriageable).

What is the ruling of Islamic Law regarding one who slaughters a ewe and it turns out to have been pregnant, and is it permissible to slaughter the ewe if one knows it is pregnant?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If a person slaughters a ewe and it turns out to have been pregnant, the fetus becomes lawful (ḥalāl) by virtue of its mother's slaughter (tabaʿan li-ummihā).
It is stated in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vol.6/P.158): "A fetus found dead [after the mother's slaughter], or found alive but in a state resembling that of a slaughtered animal [i.e., dying shortly after], becomes lawful — whether or not it had grown fur — provided it is found in the womb of a mother that was lawfully slaughtered, whether her slaughter was by cutting the throat, or by an arrow or hunting dog sent after her. This is based on the ḥadīth: 'The slaughtering of the fetus is [effected by] the slaughtering of its mother' [narrated by al-Tirmidhī, who graded it ḥasan, and by Ibn Ḥibbān, who graded it ṣaḥīḥ] — meaning that the slaughter which rendered the mother lawful renders the fetus lawful as well, by virtue of following her; and because the fetus is one of her constituent parts, and her slaughter renders lawful all of her parts."
This ruling differs, however, from the case of one who knows from the outset that the ewe is pregnant [and intends to sacrifice her specifically as the udḥiyah while pregnant] — in which case, according to the Shāfi'ī school, she does not fulfill the requirement of a valid sacrifice.
It is stated in Ḥāshiyat al-Bujayrimī 'alā al-Khaṭīb (Vol.4/P.335): "A pregnant animal does not fulfill the requirement [of a valid sacrifice], and this is the authoritative position (al-mu'tamad), because pregnancy diminishes the quality of the meat. As for why such an animal is nevertheless counted as complete [i.e., fully valid] in matters of zakāh, that is because the intent there is reproduction (nasl), not the quality of the meat.". And Allah, the Most High, knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on someone who wakes up in a state of janābah (major ritual impurity) near the very end of the prayer's designated time, during cold weather — should he heat water in order to perform ghusl, even though the prayer's time will expire as a result, or should he perform tayammum instead?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
If the water is cold, and cannot be used due to fear of harm that is not ordinarily tolerable, or that would result in illness, then in this case it becomes obligatory to heat the water — even if heating it causes the time for Fajr to expire — and no sin is incurred in doing so, due to his valid excuse. He may not resort to tayammum (dry ablution) instead, since water remains available [and merely needs to be heated].
Imam Shihāb ad-Dīn Aḥmad ar-Ramlī (raḥimahullāh) said: "He was asked regarding a person who, if he were to use cold water, would experience harm that permits tayammum, and who has access to something with which he could heat the water — but if he heats it, the prayer's time will expire. Is it obligatory for him to heat it even if the time expires, or should he pray with tayammum within the prescribed time? He answered that it is obligatory for him to heat the water, even if the time for that particular obligatory prayer expires." [Fatāwā ar-Ramlī, Vol.1/P.98]
Imam al-Bājūrī (raḥimahullāh) said in his Ḥāshiyah on Sharḥ Ibn Qāsim (Vol.1/P.173): "And if he fears [harm] from using cold water, and is currently unable to heat it, but knows of a place where firewood is available, such that if he were to go there he would not return until after the prescribed time has expired — what appears [to be the correct position] is that it is obligatory for him to go and seek the firewood, even if the time expires as a result, as this is the position ultimately settled upon by ar-Ramlī, and as related from him by Ibn Qāsim." And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

See More