Resolutions of Iftaa' Board



Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(22): “Marriage of Challenged Individual"

Date Added : 29-11-2015

 

Resolution No.(22) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies:    

“Marriage of Challenged Individuals“

Date: 20/11/1411 A.H, corresponding to 3/6/1991 A.D

 

We have received the following question:
What is the ruling of Sharia on the marriage of challenged individuals?
Answer:
All success is due 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.
Having reviewed article (120) of the Jordanian Civil Status Law which grants a wife the right to ask for separation in case her husband became insane after the conclusion of their marriage contract, and the articles (113-119) which give her/him the right to ask for dissolution of marriage due to illnesses and diseases, the Board is of the view that it is permissible to confine the marriage of an individual afflicted with a disability, repulsive disease, or a disease that  could be transmitted to others or to his offspring, whether his disability was mental, physical, or psychological. It is also permissible to confine the marriage of an individual inflicted with a handicap, or was genetically handicapped, by obtaining a permission from a Sharia judge, by analogy to the ruling applied to the person inflicted with insanity, or idiocy, which undermines the very purpose of marriage itself.
The ruling in such cases depends on the judge`s decision and assessment of the best interest of both spouses, provided that each case is considered separately and after submitting a certified medical report from a specialized committee of expert doctors, showing that his disability or illness is incurable, and that he is likely to beget children inflicted with the same disabilities. In this case, the judge is entitled to stop this marriage before the conclusion of the contract to avoid any future harms since in this situation marriage loses its purpose, and causes embarrassment or harm to one of the spouses or to both of them. And Allah Knows Best.

 

Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, Chief Justice Mohammad Mohailan
The Grand Mufti of Jordan, Izzaldeen At-tamimi
Dr. Abdusallam Al-Abbadi
Dr. Umar Al-Ashkhar
Dr. Yaseen Daradkeh
Dr. Abdulahaleem Al-Ramahi
Sheikh Ratib Al-Zahir
Sheikh Ibrahim Khashan
Dr. Abdullahlim Ar-ramahi

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

My brother works in a conventional bank and gave me one of the gifts distributed to bank employees — what is the ruling on accepting it?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
There is no objection to accepting such gifts, because the physical gift itself does not carry any inherent prohibition — unlike stolen property. Sin does not transfer or extend to the one who receives the gift, for Allah the Almighty says {what means}: "And no bearer of burdens shall bear the burden of another." [Al-Anʿām/164]
The evidence for this is that the Prophet ﷺ himself ate from the food of the Jews, conducted transactions with them, and purchased from them — and it is well known that their wealth was intermingled with ribā. Similarly, the wealth of conventional ribā-based banks is a mixture of the lawful and the unlawful.
Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "It is not forbidden to transact with one whose wealth is predominantly unlawful, nor to eat from it — as al-Nawawī affirmed in al-Majmūʿ." [Tuḥfat al-Muḥtāj, Vol. 9/P.389] And Allah the Almighty knows best.

Is washing the private part after urinating (Istinjaa`) a condition, and is it done with water and soap, or with water only?

Istinjaa` is obligatory for removing impurity, and it can be done with toilet paper, or a stone, or water. It is preferable to do Istinjaa` first with paper, or stone, or the like, then to wash the private part with water until making sure that the impurity has been removed. Using soap is not a condition, but there is no harm in doing so provided that it is washed off with water. It is also permissible to use either water, or paper if impurity is removed by any.

Is it permissible for a woman to observe voluntary fast without her husband's permission?

A woman is not permitted to observe a voluntary fast (nafl) while her husband is present without his permission.

What is the ruling on offering a sheep as a sacrifice (Udhiyah) if its fat-tail is sound, except that when it was young, the tip of its fat-tail was cut so that it would grow larger? And what is the ruling in case of doubt regarding the amount that was cut?

 
In the Name of Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Cutting a minor, insignificant portion from the tip of an animal's fat-tail (al-alyah) to encourage it to grow larger is not considered a defect, and it does not prevent the animal from being valid for sacrifice (Udhiyah).
 
It is stated in Tuhfat al-Muhtaj (Vol.9/P.352): "There is some scholarly deliberation regarding the common practice of cutting the tip of the fat-tail so that it grows larger. It could potentially be likened to a partial cut of the ear—supported by the jurists' general rule: 'even if it is a small amount.' On the other hand, if it is an exceptionally minor cut, it might have no effect on validity. This is explicitly clarified by the juristic exception to the general rule, which states that cutting a tiny piece from a large limb causes no harm. This latter view is more well-founded.
 
Furthermore, I found that some scholars investigated this matter and concluded: 'It should not affect validity if a custom-sanctioned portion of its fat-tail is removed during its youth to make it grow larger and look better, just as castrating a male animal causes no harm.' However, applying this unconditionally contradicts the established texts of the jurists, as understood from what I have laid out; thus, the restriction I specified is what must be relied upon."
 
Similarly, it is mentioned in Nihayat al-Muhtaj (8/135): "If a small piece is cut from the fat-tail to help it grow larger, the most well-founded view is that the sacrifice remains valid, as was given in a formal legal verdict (Fatwa) by my father [Shihab al-Din al-Ramli], may Allah be pleased with him. This is proven by the jurists' maxim: 'The loss of a tiny piece from a large limb causes no harm.'"
 
In cases where there is doubt as to whether the portion cut was large or small, the animal is still deemed valid for sacrifice. It is noted in Hashiyat al-Shubramallisi ‘ala Nihayat al-Muhtaj (Vol.8/P.135):
 
"This matter requires careful consideration, but the closer and more correct view is that it is valid. This is because soundness is the default state for the animal from which the piece was cut, and it aligns with what usually occurs—namely, that the part removed to help the fat-tail grow larger is naturally very small." And Allah the Almighty Knows Best.