عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(102): "Ruling of Sharia on some Dealings of the American Stores Company""

Date Added : 13-03-2016

 

Resolution No.(102) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies: "Ruling of Sharia on some Dealings of the American Stores Company"

Date: 5/4/1427 A.H, corresponding to 3/5/2006 A.D

 

 

We have received the following question: 

What is the ruling of Sharia concerning the dealings of the American Stores Company (ASC)?

The Company`s dealings are as follows:

The Company may take part in an auction and during the bidding process it may be offered a sum of money in return for withdrawing. Is accepting that offer and taking that money lawful or unlawful?

Moreover, the Company concludes joint indemnity and investment contracts whereby an agreed upon condition sets a certain amount of indemnity e.g. 20% from the overall sales, with a certain minimum stipulated in the contract. Is conditioning a minimum in these contracts lawful or unlawful?

Also, the Company deals with non-Islamic banks, but is currently dealing with the  Jordan Islamic Bank. Is dealing with the latter bank through Islamic Murabaha lawful, taking into consideration that, in essence, the dealing is similar to that carried out with non-Islamic banks?

Would you kindly clarify the position of Sharia on the above so as to adhere to its provisions when dealing with the Islamic banks?

The Board is of the following view:

1- It is forbidden to offer or take any sum in return for withdrawing from a bid because this leads to defrauding people`s goods. Allah, The Almighty, Said (What means): "So give full measure and weight and do not defraud people’s goods." {Al-A`araf/85}. Also, the Prophet (PBUH) said: "There should be neither harming nor reciprocating harm." {Ibn Majah}.

2- Having reviewed a sample of the above contracts which the Company concluded with other parties, the Board realized that they don`t adhere to the provisions of Sharia in the following aspects:

The juristic framing of these contracts is that they are Ijarah (Hiring) contracts because one of the parties offers a specific place to the other party in return for a certain wage. What counts in these contracts is their implied meaning, not their phrases and structures.

The wage in an Ijarah contract should be specified, because the Prophet (PBUH) said: "Whoever employs a person should inform him of his wage." In these contracts the wage is not specified. It is either: e.g. 20% from the overall sales or a certain defined sum, and the higher is collected by the company.

Defining the wage as 20% from the overall sales makes it unspecific because both parties are unaware of what will be sold, and this annuls the contract because it becomes an aleatory contract. The Prophet (PBUH) has forbidden aleatory sale. He said: "If anyone makes two transactions combined in one bargain, he should have the lesser of the two or it will involve usury." {Sunan Abu-Dawud}.

In conclusion, dealing with the Jordan Islamic Bank through Islamic Murabaha is lawful so long as the Bank complies with its conditions stipulated in Sharia.

A key condition is that the Bank must purchase the commodity upon the purchaser`s request, collect it, possess it, guarantee it, then sell it to the purchaser because the Prophet (PBUH) told Hakeem Bin Hazim: "If you purchase food, don`t sell it until you collect and take possession of it." {Musnad Ahmad}. And Allah Knows Best.

 

 

 

 

 

* Murabaha means selling an object while informing the purchaser of its original price and the profit he is getting in this deal. The conditions of the validity of this sale/transaction are the same as the other sales/transactions, i.e. the sold item itself should be lawful, pure, useful, in the possession of seller, and the seller should be able to hand it over to the purchaser.

 

 

Chairman of the Iftaa` Board, Chief Justice, Izzuldeen Attamimi

Dr. Yousef Ghyzan/ Member

Dr. Abdulmajeed Assalaheen/ Member

Sheikh Sa`eid Hijjawi/ Member

Sheikh Abdulkareem Al-Khasawneh/ Member

Dr. Ahmad Hilayel/ Member

Sheikh Nae`im Mujahid/ Member

Dr. Wasif Al-Bakri

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

What is the ruling on performing dry ablution (tayammum) on a wall or stone?

One of the conditions for tayammum is that it be with pure, clean dust (soil). It is not valid to perform tayammum by striking stones, a wall, sand that has no dust (i.e., that does not produce dust), pebbles alone, or clay, as these are not from the earth or its same category. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on supplicating with other than the transmitted (Ma'thur) supplications in prayer?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is permissible to supplicate (make du'a) during the prayer for anything from the affairs of religion or worldly life, and the prayer is not invalidated by doing so.
Shaykh al-Islam, the Imam an-Nawawi, may Allah have mercy on him, says: "Our madhhab [i.e., the Shafi'i madhhab] holds that it is permissible for a person to supplicate during it [the prayer] with anything that is permissible to supplicate with outside the prayer, from the affairs of religion or worldly life. He may say: 'O Allah, grant me wholesome sustenance, offspring, a house, and a beautiful young wife' — describing her; or: 'O Allah, free so-and-so from prison,' or 'destroy so-and-so,' and other such things — and none of this invalidates his prayer according to us. And this is also the view of Malik, ath-Thawri, Abu Thawr, and Ishaq." [Al-Majmu', Vol.3/P.454]. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

Is it permissible for someone who is unable to fast to pay the fidyah (ransom/compensation payment) to himself, due to his own poverty?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is not permissible, nor does it fulfill the obligation, for a sick person who is currently and permanently unable to fast to pay the fidyah (ransom/compensation payment) to himself, since it is a financial obligation owed by him, established as a standing debt upon him — much like any other debt he owes. If he were to pay it to himself, it would not thereby be discharged. So if he cannot find [anyone eligible to] pay it to, it remains a standing obligation upon him, and is not thereby waived. If Allah, the Mighty and Majestic, later grants him wealth, it becomes obligatory upon him to pay it out to the poor and needy.
Imam al-Khaṭīb ash-Shirbīnī (raḥimahullāh) said: "There is no difference in the obligation of the fidyah between the wealthy and the poor person; its benefit lies in its remaining established as a standing debt upon the poor person [until he is able to pay it] — and this is the more correct position (al-aṣaḥḥ), as indicated by the wording of ar-Rawḍah and its source text." [Mughnī al-Muḥtāj, Vol.2/P.174]
Accordingly: it is not permissible for a Muslim to pay the fidyah to himself while he remains poor. If the sick person is poor, he is not obligated to pay the fidyah immediately, and it remains a standing debt upon him until a time when he has sufficient means and wealth. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

What is the ruling on praying behind a disliked Imam?

 

 
Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
It is mildly disliked (Makruh Tanzihan) for a man—other than the permanent designated Imam (Imam Ratib)—to lead people in prayer if the majority of them dislike him due to a religiously blameworthy reason (Amr Madhmum Shar‘an), such as associating with open sinners (Fussaq), for example. As for the followers who dislike him, the prayer behind him is not disliked for them. However, if less than the majority dislike him, or if the majority dislike him for a reason that is not religiously blameworthy, then his leading the prayer is not disliked. And Allah the Exalted knows best.

See More