عربي
Home


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

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.

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.

What are the benefits of slaughtering an Aqeeqah?

All Perfect Praise be to Allah, The Lord of The Worlds, and may His Peace and Blessings be upon our Prophet Muhammad and upon all of his family and companions.                                                                                                                                                                                                                          Extending thanks to Allah for His grace, expressing happiness for having a newborn, declaring lineage, and feeding the mother to compensate for the blood that she had lost during delivery.

Does the fast become invalid if water from rinsing the mouth reaches the stomach while performing ablution?

If water reaches the stomach without the fasting person exceeding normal rinsing or being excessive, their fast remains valid.
However, if they exceed the normal practice or exaggerate in rinsing, causing water to enter the stomach, their fast is invalid.
This is because excessiveness in rinsing is prohibited for a fasting person, as the Prophetﷺ said: "Exaggerate inhaling water during ablution, except when you are fasting." [Narrated by the Four Imams]
Transgression (Ta‘addi) refers to rinsing the mouth more than three times, while exaggeration (Mubalaghah) includes gargling, drawing water deep into the nasal passages, or filling the mouth with water in an unusual manner.

See More