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

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.

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.

How is the niṣāb (minimum threshold) of gold calculated when one owns gold of multiple different karats?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Zakāh is obligatory on cash and on gold designated for saving or for trade, provided the total reaches the niṣāb (minimum threshold liable for Zakah), and a full ḥawl (lunar year) has elapsed over it. The niṣāb is (85) grams of 24-karat gold; for 21-karat gold, the niṣāb equals (97) grams; and for 18-karat gold, it equals (113) grams.
If one owns gold of multiple different karats, the person paying zakāh should calculate the monetary value of all the gold he owns, combining these values together to determine whether the total reaches the niṣāb. He then pays zakāh on this combined monetary value, once the total reaches the niṣāb. The relied-upon position is to calculate the zakāh based on the buying price [i.e., the price the gold merchant would pay the owner to purchase the gold from him] on the day the zakāh obligation is due. And Allah, the Exalted, 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.

See More