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

What is the meaning of the Udhiyah?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
The Udhiyah (Sacrificial Offering) refers to the livestock (An'am) that is slaughtered as an act of drawing closer to Allah the Almighty. This takes place on the day of Eid al-Adha (the 10th of Dhu al-Hijjah) and during the three days of Tashreeq that follow the day of Eid. And Allah the Exalted 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.

Is the Saying "Whatever is Taken by the Sword of Shyness is Forbidden" an Authentic Ḥadīth?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The saying "Whatever is taken by the sword of shyness is forbidden" is not an authentic ḥadīth, though its underlying meaning is sound. The established sharʿī principle is that a Muslim's wealth is not lawful for anyone to take except with his wholehearted consent, as Allah the Almighty says {what means}: "O you who have believed, do not consume one another's wealth unjustly, but only [in lawful] business by mutual consent." [Al-Nisā/ 29] And the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: "Listen to me and you will live well: do not wrong others, do not wrong others, do not wrong others. Indeed, a man's wealth is not lawful except with his full, willing consent." (Reported by Aḥmad in his Musnad.) Whatever is taken through the pressure of shyness or social embarrassment runs directly counter to genuine, wholehearted consent.
The jurists have explicitly stated that whatever is taken by means of the "sword of shyness" carries the same ruling as that which is taken by coercion — it must be returned to its rightful owner.
Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states in al-Fatāwā al-Kubrā (Vol.3/P.30): "Do you not see the reported scholarly consensus that whoever has something taken from him purely out of shyness, without his genuine consent, does not pass ownership of it to the one who took it? They reasoned that this constitutes a form of coercion through the 'sword of shyness,' comparable to coercion at the point of an actual sword. Indeed, many people would rather submit to the literal sword and endure the pain of its wound than submit to this first kind of coercion, out of fear for their dignity and standing — which people of sound judgment hold dear and guard most fiercely." And Allah the Almighty knows best.

 
What is the ruling on someone who eats or drinks while uncertain about the arrival of dawn, then later finds out that dawn had not yet broken?

If a person does this, their fast remains valid, as it is confirmed that they ate during the night. Similarly, if someone eats while uncertain and remains unsure whether they ate before or after dawn, their fast is still valid. This is based on the maxim of Sharia Law, which states: "Certainty is not removed by doubt." Certainty, here, is the presence of night, and the doubt concerns the arrival of dawn. Therefore, one relies on certainty and disregards doubt.