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 of Islamic Law on following the actions of the imam in prayer and how this following is achieved?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
The follower (ma'mum) is required to follow his imam in the actions of the prayer. This "following" (mutaba'ah) means that the follower performs each action of the prayer after the imam has begun it but before he has finished it. For example, the follower bows (in ruku') after the imam has reached the position of bowing, then rises after the imam has risen. The Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him, said: "The imam is only appointed to be followed, so when he says the takbir, say the takbir; and when he bows, then bow; and when he prostrates, then prostrate" (agreed upon, i.e., reported by both al-Bukhari and Muslim).
It is stated in Mughni al-Muhtaj (1/505): "Among the conditions of valid congregational prayer (iqtida') is following the imam in the actions of the prayer... meaning that following the imam is obligatory in the physical actions of the prayer, not in its verbal utterances... Complete following (kamal al-mutaba'ah) is achieved when the follower's beginning of an action comes after the imam's beginning of that same action, while the follower's beginning of the action precedes the imam's completion of it" — end of quote, with slight paraphrasing.
And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

Is it permissible to divide one mudd of fidyah between two people?

No, it is not permissible to divide one mudd between two people, because it would not count as a full meal for either of them.

The Jurisprudential Significance of the Ḥadīth: "Whoever says, at the conclusion of the Fajr Prayer, while crossing his legs, before speaking..."
"Whoever says, at the conclusion of the Fajr prayer, while crossing his legs, before speaking: 'Lā ilāha illā Allāh, waḥdahu lā sharīka lah, lahu al-mulku wa lahu al-ḥamdu yuḥyī wa yumītu wa huwa ʿalā kulli shayʾin qadīr' ten times — ten good deeds will be recorded for him, ten bad deeds will be erased from him, he will be raised ten levels, he will spend that day in protection from everything disliked and guarded from the devil, and no sin will be able to befall him on that day except associating partners with Allah" — does this noble ḥadīth apply to the imam, and what is meant by "extraneous speech"?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
It is recommended for both the imam and those praying behind him to recite, immediately after the final salām, the specific remembrance reported in the sunnah to be said before turning away from one's place of prayer. The imam then leaves his praying spot, and the act of "turning" is fulfilled when the imam faces the congregation — even without physically leaving his spot — by positioning his right side toward them and his left side toward the qiblah, and this applies even while he is engaged in supplication.
Al-ʿAllāmah Ibn Qāsim al-ʿAbbādī states in his Ḥāshiyah ʿalā al-Tuḥfah (Vol.2/P.105): "It is most virtuous for the imam, once he has given the salām, to rise from his place of prayer immediately afterward." He adds that an exception must be made for the remembrances that are specifically required to be recited before he turns away. He then notes, citing Sharḥ al-ʿUbāb: "Yes, an exception to this rising immediately after the salām applies to the Fajr prayer, due to the authentic report that the Prophet ﷺ, when he prayed Fajr, would remain seated until the sun rose." He further cites, from al-Khādim, the ḥadīth concerning one who recites, at the conclusion of the Fajr prayer while still in the position of crossing his leg to rise: "Lā ilāha illā Allāh, waḥdahu lā sharīka lah..." and the rest of the well-known ḥadīth. He comments that this makes explicit that this particular remembrance is to be recited before the worshipper turns his legs to leave, and the same applies to Maghrib and ʿAṣr, as reported in those contexts as well.
What is meant by "speech" in the relevant ḥadīth is extraneous worldly speech that is not called for after the prayer and for which there is no legitimate excuse. The remembrances reported to be recited upon concluding the prayer, however, do not fall under this category of extraneous speech, since they are themselves required by the sharīʿah.
Al-ʿAllāmah ʿAlī al-Shabrāmalsī states in his Ḥāshiyah ʿalā al-Nihāyah (Vol.1/P.551): "If someone greets a person with salām while he is occupied with reciting this remembrance [i.e., 'Lā ilāha illā Allāh...'], should he return the greeting — without this causing him to forfeit the promised reward, since he is engaged in an obligatory matter — or should he delay returning the greeting until he finishes, this being a legitimate excuse for the delay?" He continues: "I say: the more likely view is the former, and the prohibition on speech is to be understood as applying to extraneous speech for which there is no legitimate excuse. Based on this, should the worshipper give precedence to this remembrance ('Lā ilāha illā Allāh...') or to reciting Sūrat al-Ikhlāṣ ('Qul huwa Allāhu aḥad')? This requires consideration, though it is not unlikely that the remembrance takes precedence, given that the Lawgiver urged hastening to it through his words 'while crossing his leg.' This is not considered ordinary speech, since it is not extraneous to what is required after the prayer."
Accordingly, it is recommended for both the imam and those praying behind him to recite this remembrance and to give it precedence over the other remembrances of the prayer, ensuring it is said before they move from their place. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on delaying Zakat al-Fitr until after Eid day?

It is forbidden to delay Zakat al-Fitr beyond the sunset of Eid day. If someone delays it past Eid day without a valid excuse, they have committed a sin and must immediately make up for it because their obligation remains unfulfilled, and they must clear their responsibility.

See More