Resolutions of Iftaa' Board



Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(50): "Ruling of Sharia on the Staff Provident Fund of a Shareholding Company"

Date Added : 27-12-2015

Resolution No.(50): "Ruling of Sharia on the Staff Provident Fund of a Shareholding Company"

Date: 2/5/1422 AH, corresponding to 22/7/2001 AD

We have received the following question:

What is the ruling of Sharia on the staff provident fund of a Jordanian shareholding company; and is the staff member subscribing to that fund obliged to pay Zakah in return for his savings in it?

Answer:

The Board is of the view that some of the investments undertaken by the above fund adhere to the rules of Islamic Sharia; whereas, others don`t. Therefore, profits made through lawful methods are equally lawful; whereas, those made from unlawful methods are equally unlawful.

Moreover, since subscribing to the above fund is mandatory, then there is no harm that every staff member subscribes to it because he has to make a living.

However, upon the collection of his claims from the above fund, including the profits, it is mandatory that every staff member investigates where they come from.

Therefore, those, which come from a lawful source of investment, are equally lawful.

Whereas, those which come from an unlawful source of investment are equally unlawful. The latter must be given to charity in order to get rid of the ill-gotten money.

However, if he couldn`t distinguish the lawful from the unlawful while knowing for sure that it is most probable that they include ill-gotten money, he may possess half of these profits on the basis that they are legitimate, and he should give the other half for charity to get rid of the ill-gotten money, unless he thought it is probable to be the other way around.

On the other hand, if he couldn`t tell the lawful from the unlawful while not knowing for sure that it is probable that they include money coming from an unlawful source, he may possess all of the profits as lawful money on the basis that Muslims` transactions are, in principle, valid and they are righteous people.

As regards the rule of Islamic Sharia on the Zakah of the savings of the staff member in that fund as well as that of their profits, the Board is of the view that he is obliged to give their Zakah once they reach Nisab (Minimum amount liable for Zakah) after one lunar year elapses over possessing them, in accordance with the opinion of the Maliki school of jurisprudence on the Zakah of debts. And Allah Knows Best.

 

Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, the Chief Justice, Sheikh Izuldeen At-tamimi

Dr. Wasif al-Bakhri

           Dr. Abdulsalam Al-Abbadi

            Dr. Mohammad Abu Yahia

        Sheikh Sae`id Al-Hijjawi

               Sheikh Mahmood Shewayat

                                             Dr. Yousef Ali Ghyzan Sheikh Nae`im Mujahid 

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling on entering the toilet with something containing the remembrance of Allah?

It is disliked to bring into the toilet anything containing a reminder of Allah, such as the Quran or a sacred name (like the name of Allah, Muhammad, etc.). If one does that, etiquette dictates that he conceal it so it is not visible while entering the toilet, either by cupping his hands over it, putting it in his pocket, or inside his shirt if it is a necklace or ring. 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.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on eating or drinking during the circumambulation?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is disliked (makrūh) to eat or drink during the circumambulation (ṭawāf).
Shaykh al-Islām Imām al-Nawawī states in al-Majmūʿ: "It is disliked to eat or drink during ṭawāf, and the dislikedness of drinking is lighter. Neither of them, nor both together, invalidates the ṭawāf. Al-Shāfiʿī said: 'There is no objection to drinking water during ṭawāf, and I do not consider it sinful; however, I prefer that it be avoided, as refraining from it is more befitting in terms of proper conduct.' Among those who explicitly stated the dislikedness of eating and drinking, and that drinking is the lesser of the two, is the author of al-Ḥāwī."
If, however, a person is in genuine need of drinking, then there is no dislikedness in doing so. In any case, the ṭawāf itself remains valid. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

My father has debts and asked me to repay them years ago, and I promised him I would do so upon his death — is it permissible for me to go back on my promise given that I am unable to repay them, especially since he refuses to contribute to repayment on the grounds that the debt has become my responsibility by virtue of my promise?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The established principle is that a father's debt is to be repaid from his own wealth, if he possesses sufficient means. As for the promise made by the son to repay it on his father's behalf, fulfilling such a promise is strongly recommended, and breaking it is considerably disliked. Shaykh al-Islām Imām al-Nawawī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "Fulfilling a promise is emphatically recommended, and breaking it is severely disliked. The evidences for this from the Qurʾān and the Sunnah are well known." [Rawḍat al-Ṭālibīn,Vol. 2/P.278] Shaykh al-Islām Imām Zakariyyā al-Anṣārī, may Allah have mercy upon him, further states: "The reason fulfilling a promise is not obligatory and breaking it is not forbidden is that a promise is in the nature of a gift, and a gift does not become binding except upon receipt." [Asnā al-Maṭālib fī Sharḥ Rawḍ al-Ṭālib,Vol. 2/P.487]
Given that the son does not possess the financial means to fulfil his promise to his father, breaking this promise falls beyond his capacity — and Allah does not burden a soul beyond what it can bear. Since the father himself possesses sufficient wealth to settle his own debt, repayment must be made from his own funds. Should he pass away before doing so, the debt is to be settled from his estate. And Allah the Almighty knows best.