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 a person rewarded for refraining from all that breaks their fast when required to do so, and is it considered a valid fast?

If a person eats or drinks thinking that Fajr has not yet arrived, but then someone informs them that Fajr had already begun, they must refrain from eating for the rest of the day and make up the fast later.
If they observe the required restraint (imsak), they will be rewarded for obeying the command because fulfilling an obligation brings reward.
However, this is not considered a valid fast in terms of rulings. For example:
● It is not disliked (makruh) for them to use a miswak after noon.
● They are not encouraged to hasten the breaking of the fast at sunset.
● Other fasting-related rulings do not apply to them.

Is it permissible for one who sacrifices on behalf of another, with the latter's permission, to eat from the sacrifice?

It is permissible for someone who sacrificed on behalf of another with their permission to eat from it with their permission, and they stand in their place (act as their representative) in distributing it.
 
It is stated in Nihayat al-Muhtaj ila Sharh al-Minhaj (Vol.8/P.141): "And he—meaning the one sacrificing on his own behalf, provided he has not apostatized—has the right to eat from a voluntary sacrifice and his sacrificial gift; rather, it is recommended. As for an obligatory sacrifice, it is forbidden for him to eat from it, whether it was designated as such initially or as a liability in his dhimmah. And excluded by what has preceded is if he sacrifices on behalf of another, or if he apostatized, then it is not permissible for him to eat from it, just as it is absolutely impermissible to feed a disbeliever from it."(The text I found indicates the impermissibility of eating) ???
 
And it is stated in Hashiyat al-Jamal ‘ala Sharh al-Manhaj (Vol.5/P.262): "If a person offers a sacrifice on behalf of a living person with their permission, does he act as their representative in distributing it—on the grounds that permission to sacrifice is permission to distribute it—or does it depend on their explicit permission? This requires consideration, but the first view is not far-fetched." And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on the ablution of one from whom blood exits from his nose or a wound?

Blood flowing from a wound or a nosebleed does not invalidate ablution. However, performing ablution is recommended to avoid scholarly disagreement with those who make ablution obligatory after blood flows. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

What is the ruling on the cessation of blood after (40) days from delivery, but later continued sporadically during two days of Ramadan?

Once postpartum bleeding (Nifas) ceases, and the woman is certain that it won`t reoccur, then she becomes ritually pure and so she is free to make Ghusl (purificatory bath), pray, and fast. If the bleeding reoccurs before fifteen days from its cessation, and before the end of (60) days after delivery, then the ruling on postpartum bleeding is effective, and her fasting and prayer are null and void, thus she must make up the fasting that she missed and not the prayer during those particular days.

See More