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 acceptable to perform the Aqiqah for a male child by slaughtering and distributing the first sheep, and bringing the second one cooked from the restaurant?

 

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.

It is permissible to slaughter the first sheep with the intention of Aqiqah (the newborn's sacrificial offering) and distribute it entirely [uncooked], and to slaughter the second sheep and have it cooked at a restaurant to bring home for the household. However, it must be noted that it is obligatory to give some portion of the Aqiqah in charity to the poor, even if it is a small amount, though it is preferable to send the food cooked to them.

Buying a pre-cooked, ready-made sheep from a restaurant does not suffice as an Aqiqah. However, if an agreement is made with the restaurant to explicitly slaughter a sheep with the intention of Aqiqah for the newborn, and then cook it afterward, this is permissible.

In conclusion, slaughtering the sheep and distributing it with the intention of Aqiqah is permissible, and through it, the foundational prophetic tradition (Sunnah) is fulfilled. As for simply buying a cooked sheep from a restaurant that was not specifically slaughtered with the intention of Aqiqah, it will not count as such. Conversely, if the restaurant owner is commissioned (Wakala) to handle both the slaughtering and the cooking as an Aqiqah, it is valid. 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 is the ruling on eating or drinking during the second Adhan?

It is not permissible to eat or drink during the second Adhan because it announces the break of dawn and the obligation to start fasting. Allah Almighty says {what means}:"and eat and drink until you can discern the white streak of dawn against the blackness of night." [Al-Baqarah/187].
Whoever eats or drinks during this time invalidates their fast, and they must refrain from eating for the rest of the day and make up for the missed fast later.

 

What is the ruling on swearing an oath by the Prophet ﷺ, and does such an oath take effect according to Imām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, requiring expiation upon its breach?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Swearing an oath by a created being is disliked (makrūh) in our Shāfiʿī school. Shaykh al-Islām Imām al-Nawawī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "Swearing by a created being is disliked — such as swearing by the Prophet, the Kaʿbah, Jibrīl, the Companions, or the Prophet's family. Al-Shāfiʿī, may Allah have mercy upon him, said: 'I fear that swearing by other than Allah the Almighty may constitute an act of disobedience.' The scholars of the school explained this to mean: that is, something forbidden and sinful — indicating that he had some hesitation in the matter. Al-Imām stated: the established position of the school is that it is categorically not forbidden, but rather disliked. Furthermore, whoever swears by a created being, his oath does not take effect and no expiation (kaffārah) is required if he breaks it." [Rawḍat al-Ṭālibīn wa ʿUmdat al-Muftīn, Vol. 11/P.6]
According to the Ḥanbalī school, however, expiation becomes obligatory upon one who swears by our master the Prophet ﷺ and then breaks his oath. Imām al-Bahūtī al-Ḥanbalī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states: "No expiation is required for swearing by other than Allah the Almighty, even if the oath is broken — because expiation was made obligatory for swearing by Allah and His attributes, out of reverence for His names, and nothing else is equal to Him in this regard... except in the case of swearing by our Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ, for expiation becomes obligatory when one swears by him and then breaks the oath. This was explicitly stated in the narration of Abū Ṭālib, because he is one of the two conditions of the two testimonies of faith by which a disbeliever becomes a Muslim. Ibn ʿAqīl held the view that swearing by any of the other prophets, peace and blessings be upon them all, carries the same ruling." [Sharḥ Muntahā al-Irādāt, Vol. 3/P.441]. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

See More