عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(244): "A Masjid should be Used as such"

Date Added : 12-11-2017

Resolution No.(244) (13/2017):

"A Masjid should be Restricted as such"

Date: 20/Safar/1439 AH, corresponding to 9/11/2017

 

All perfect praise be to Allah, The Lord of The Worlds, and may His blessings and peace be upon our Prophet Mohammad and upon all his family and companions.

 

During its twelfth session held on the above date, the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies reviewed the letter sent by the Manager of Awqaf of Balqa Governorate requesting using Um Jawza Old Msjid as a Cultural Forum. Could you kindly clarify the ruling of Sharia on renovating, using and leasing that Masjid to the Cultural Directorate of Salt, taking into consideration the fact that it has been closed for more than twenty five years.

 

After deliberating the above question, the Board reached the following view:

 

According to Sharia, a Masjid is an Islamic endowment (Waqf) that may not be used for a purpose other than that for which it was endowed in the first place, whether a particular person had made it a Waqf or it became such for being used by people as Masjid. Based on the fact that it was proven to be a Masjid, it may not be changed into something else; rather, it should remain as such, and should be maintained and preserved for offering prayers. However, it may be used for a purpose close to that of Masjid, such as teaching Quran and Religious Sciences. But, turning it into a cultural forum isn`t permissible; particularly since Article (1239) of the Jordanian Civil Code states: "It isn`t permissible to change a Masjid into something else nor change the use of whatever was endowed to serve that Masjid in the first place." And Allah Knows Best. 

 

 Chair  of Iftaa` Board

Grand Mufti of Jordan, Dr. Mohammad Al-Khalayleh

 

Vice chair of Iftaa` Board, Sheikh AbdulKareem al-Khasawneh

 

Prof. Abdulnaser abulBasal, Member                    Prof. Abdullah al-Fawaz/ Member

Judge Khalid Woraikat,Member                            Dr. Mohammad Khair al-Esa, Member

Dr. Majid Darawsheh, Member                            Sheikh Sa`eid Hijjawi,  Member

Dr. Ahmad al-Hasanat, Member                          Dr. Mohammad al-Zo`bi, Memebr

 

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

Who should pay the Zakah (obligatory charity) from the orphan`s money?

His/her guardian, and if the latter fails to do so, then the orphan himself/herself is obliged to pay the Zakah once he/she reaches puberty, and is capable of handling his/her own affairs. And Allah Knows Best.

I vowed to give a specific charity if a certain matter came to pass — what is the ruling on giving that charity before the matter is realised?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Fulfilling a vow (nadhr) is obligatory, in accordance with the word of Allah the Almighty: "And let them fulfil their vows." [Al-Ḥajj/ 29] And the saying of our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ: "Whoever vows to obey Allah, let him obey Him; and whoever vows to disobey Him, let him not disobey Him." (Reported by al-Bukhārī.)
The Shāfiʿī scholars distinguished between a financial vow (nadhr mālī) and a bodily vow (nadhr badanī). They permitted the fulfilment of a financial vow to be brought forward — before the stipulated condition is met — but did not permit the same for a bodily vow, which may only be fulfilled after the condition has actually been realised.
Shaykh al-Islām Imām Zakariyyā al-Anṣārī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "It is permissible to bring forward the fulfilment of a financial vow before the condition stipulated in it is met — such as saying: 'If I am healed, I vow to free a slave' or 'to give such-and-such in charity' — just as it is permissible to pay zakāh in advance. This is unlike a bodily vow, such as fasting." [Asnā al-Maṭālib, vol. 4/P.246]
Imām al-Bājūrī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "Like expiation other than fasting, a financial vow — such as saying: 'If Allah heals my sick one, I vow to free a slave for the sake of Allah,' or 'If Allah heals my sick one, I vow to free a slave on the Friday following the recovery' — it is permissible to bring it forward before the recovery in the first case, and before the Friday following the recovery in the second case." [Ḥāshiyat al-Bājūrī ʿalā Sharḥ Ibn Qāsim, Vol.2/P.596] And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law on performing prayer on the upper floors of al-Masjid al-Ḥarām?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Facing the actual structure of the Ka‘bah (‘ayn al-Ka‘bah) is one of the conditions for the validity of the prayer. The scholars have clarified what is meant by "the actual structure of the Ka‘bah."
Imam ash-Sharwānī (raḥimahullāh) said: "What is meant by its ‘ayn (actual structure) is its physical body, or the airspace directly aligned with it — if the person praying is not inside it. But if he is inside it, then the airspace alone does not suffice; rather, the actual physical structure must be faced, such that even if he faces a projecting part of it measuring roughly two-thirds of a dhirā‘ (cubit) or more, this would be sufficient." [Ḥāshiyat ash-Sharwānī ‘alā Tuḥfat al-Muḥtāj, Vol.1/P.484]
Sheikh al-Qulyūbī (raḥimahullāh) said: "Unlike one who prays outside it — i.e., outside the Ka‘bah — for him the airspace (directly above it) suffices, even if he is higher than it, or even if he is at the location where it (hypothetically) has been demolished." [Ḥāshiyat al-Qulyūbī ‘alā Sharḥ al-Minhāj,  Vol.1/P.154]
Accordingly, the prayer is valid on the upper floors of al-Masjid al-Ḥarām, even though these floors are higher than the roof of the Ka‘bah itself. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

Is it incumbent on a husband to pay the alimony of his wife if she had left him and stayed at her parent`s without his permission?

When a wife leaves her house, and stays at her parent`s without asking her husband, she is considered a Nashiz (wife who refuses to abide by her husband’s orders), and so she doesn`t deserve an alimony.

See More