Resolutions of Iftaa' Board



Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(61): "Dropping an Amount of Postponed Sale in return for Hasting in Payment"

Date Added : 29-11-2015

 

Resolution No.(61): "Dropping an Amount of Postponed Sale in return for Hasting in Payment"

Date: 7/5/1432 AH, corresponding to 18/7/2002

 

The Board received the following question:

What is the ruling of Sharia on dropping an amount of the postponed sale for hasting in paying the bank?

Answer: All the success is due to Allah

The Board is of the view that it is permissible for the bank to drop an amount of the due price of the Murabah in return for the postponed sale for the (asker) as it sees fit provided that it isn`t a regular procedure that it follows with every client, or was initially conditioned in the Murabaha contract, in order to avoid Riba (usury and interest). This is based on the opinion of the jurists who differentiate between a loan and a sale transaction: it is impermissible to drop the due amount of the loan for hasting in paying it.

However, it is permissible to drop the due amount of postponed sale for hasting in paying it as indicated by the later Hanafite jurists such as Abu Asso`ud Afandi and Ibn Abdeen. And Allah Knows Best. Note: kindly refer to resolution no. (56).

 

Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, Chief Justice, Izz Aldeen Attamimi

Dr. Wasif Al-Bakhri

           Dr. Abdulsalam Al-Abbadi

 Dr. Yousef Ghizaan

    Sheikhb Sa`id Hijjawi

        Sheikh Na`iem Mujahid

              Sheikh Mahmood Shwayat

 

 

 

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling of Islamic Law regarding one who purchases a sacrificial animal (uḍḥiyah) and it then develops a defect before slaughter?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If a defect that invalidates the sacrifice (uḍḥiyah) arises after its purchase — for example, if one purchased a sound, defect-free animal, and it then developed a limp, blindness in one eye, or a similar defect before slaughter — it does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah, according to the Shāfi'ī school.
It is stated in Asnā al-Maṭālib fī Sharḥ Rawḍ al-Ṭālib (Vol.1/P.535): "Even if the limp develops [in the animal] while the knife is upon it, it still does not fulfill the requirement, because it is lame at the moment of slaughter — this is analogous to a case where a sheep's leg breaks and one hastens to slaughter it [in that condition]."
The Ḥanbalī school, however, held that if the one offering the sacrifice purchased the animal while it was sound and defect-free, and a defect then befell it afterward, the sacrifice remains valid and there is no obligation to replace it.
It is stated in Masā'il al-Imām Aḥmad, one of the Ḥanbalī reference works (Vol.8/P.4021): "I said: If a person purchases the sacrificial animal while it is sound, and it is then afflicted with illness, blindness in one eye, or a broken limb [before slaughter]? He [Imam Aḥmad] said: It is said that it still fulfills the requirement. Isḥāq said likewise, because he purchased it while sound, and the defect befell it only afterward, so it remains sufficient on his behalf." [End of quote]
Accordingly, a sheep afflicted with a defect that invalidates the sacrifice does not fulfill the requirement of a valid uḍḥiyah — whether the defect arose after purchase or during the slaughter itself — according to the Shāfi'ī school. However, there is no objection to following the Ḥanbalī position on this matter [as a valid alternative]. And Allah, the Most High, knows best.

What is the ruling on Qonot Du`a (supplication) at dawn prayer?

All perfect praise be to Allah,The Lord of The Worlds                                                                                                                                                                        It is a confirmed Sunnah, and whoever leaves it should perform Sujood As-Sahw (prostration of forgetfulness). And Allah Knows Best.

Is it permissible for one who sacrifices on behalf of another, with the latter's permission, to eat from the sacrifice?

It is permissible for someone who sacrificed on behalf of another with their permission to eat from it with their permission, and they stand in their place (act as their representative) in distributing it.
 
It is stated in Nihayat al-Muhtaj ila Sharh al-Minhaj (Vol.8/P.141): "And he—meaning the one sacrificing on his own behalf, provided he has not apostatized—has the right to eat from a voluntary sacrifice and his sacrificial gift; rather, it is recommended. As for an obligatory sacrifice, it is forbidden for him to eat from it, whether it was designated as such initially or as a liability in his dhimmah. And excluded by what has preceded is if he sacrifices on behalf of another, or if he apostatized, then it is not permissible for him to eat from it, just as it is absolutely impermissible to feed a disbeliever from it."(The text I found indicates the impermissibility of eating) ???
 
And it is stated in Hashiyat al-Jamal ‘ala Sharh al-Manhaj (Vol.5/P.262): "If a person offers a sacrifice on behalf of a living person with their permission, does he act as their representative in distributing it—on the grounds that permission to sacrifice is permission to distribute it—or does it depend on their explicit permission? This requires consideration, but the first view is not far-fetched." And Allah the Almighty knows best.

Is it permissible to pay the Zakah (obligatory charity) for settling the debt of a deceased relative?

It is impermissible to pay the Zakah for settling the debt of the deceased since Zakah is paid to eligible recipients who are alive. As for the debts of the deceased, they are to be settled from the estate before dividing it amongst the heirs, but if the deceased didn`t leave an estate, then it is desirable for his/her heirs to settle those debts if they can afford them. And Allah Knows Best.