عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

"Resolution No. (246): "Ruling on Zakah of Associations and Unions' Funds"

Date Added : 04-12-2017

Resolution No. (246) by the Board of Iftaa', Research and Islamic Studies:

"Ruling on Zakah of Associations and Unions' Funds"

Date 2/Rabi' Al-Thani/1439 AH, corresponding to 21/11/2017 AD

 

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

During its 13th session held on the above date, the Board of Iftaa', Research and Islamic Studies reviewed the letter sent from the Chairman of Jordan Housing Developers Association, and reads as follows:" We would like to ask about the Sharia Ruling on the Zakah's Nisaab {Minimum amount liable for Zakah}of the nonprofit funds of the Associations and Unions such as Jordan Housing Developers Association whose incomes consist of membership fees and other members' annual subscriptions. Moreover, these funds are distributed on the association's activities, employees' salaries, rents and many other activities. Yet, the aforementioned association is a nonprofit party and aims to develop the career of constructing apartments and buildings as is the case with many other unions. The statute of the Association is included in the letter?

After prolonged deliberations, the Board decided the following:

Zakah is a commandment of Allah to a Muslim with the conditions clarified by the scripts of Sharia and the first of which is "Possession" referred to, by jurists, as "Specific owner" since it is stated in [Nihayat Al-Muhtaj vol.3/pp.127]: "Being possessed by a specific owner is among the conditions that make Zakah on wealth obligatory."

Similar to endowment funds, the Zakah condition (Specific owner or owners) doesn't apply to the afore parties. 

Moreover, Zakah is due on co-operative associations and other organizations that have a specific owner

or multiple shareholders. And Allah Knows Best. 

 

Chairman of Iftaa` Board,

Grand Mufti of Jordan,

Dr. Mohammad Al-Khalayleh

Vice Chairman, Sheikh Abdulkareem Al-Khasawneh

Prof. Abdullah Al-Fawaz, Member

Dr. Ahmad Al-Hasanat, Member

Dr. Mohammad Khair Al-Esa, Member

Dr. Majid Darawsheh, Member

Sheikh Sa`eid Al-Hijjawi, Member

Judge Khalid Woraikat, Member

Dr. Mohammad Al-Zo`bi, Member

 

Decision Number [ Previous | Next ]


Summarized Fatawaa

Is it permissible for a menstruating woman to recite the Quran from the computer without actually touching the Quran?

It is not permissible for a woman in her menstrual period, or in postpartum to recite the Quran, even by heart, or without actually touching the Quran itself. Recitation itself is what is prohibited on her regardless of how it is done. However, it is permissible for her to surf through the Quran by her eyes, or to recall it in her head without uttering the words. There is no harm for her to look at the Quranic verses on the computer without touching it, or to utter the words as this is called looking not reciting or reading.

What is the ruling of Islamic Law regarding one who slaughters a ewe and it turns out to have been pregnant, and is it permissible to slaughter the ewe if one knows it is pregnant?

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings upon our master, the Messenger of Allah.
If a person slaughters a ewe and it turns out to have been pregnant, the fetus becomes lawful (ḥalāl) by virtue of its mother's slaughter (tabaʿan li-ummihā).
It is stated in Mughnī al-Muḥtāj (Vol.6/P.158): "A fetus found dead [after the mother's slaughter], or found alive but in a state resembling that of a slaughtered animal [i.e., dying shortly after], becomes lawful — whether or not it had grown fur — provided it is found in the womb of a mother that was lawfully slaughtered, whether her slaughter was by cutting the throat, or by an arrow or hunting dog sent after her. This is based on the ḥadīth: 'The slaughtering of the fetus is [effected by] the slaughtering of its mother' [narrated by al-Tirmidhī, who graded it ḥasan, and by Ibn Ḥibbān, who graded it ṣaḥīḥ] — meaning that the slaughter which rendered the mother lawful renders the fetus lawful as well, by virtue of following her; and because the fetus is one of her constituent parts, and her slaughter renders lawful all of her parts."
This ruling differs, however, from the case of one who knows from the outset that the ewe is pregnant [and intends to sacrifice her specifically as the udḥiyah while pregnant] — in which case, according to the Shāfi'ī school, she does not fulfill the requirement of a valid sacrifice.
It is stated in Ḥāshiyat al-Bujayrimī 'alā al-Khaṭīb (Vol.4/P.335): "A pregnant animal does not fulfill the requirement [of a valid sacrifice], and this is the authoritative position (al-mu'tamad), because pregnancy diminishes the quality of the meat. As for why such an animal is nevertheless counted as complete [i.e., fully valid] in matters of zakāh, that is because the intent there is reproduction (nasl), not the quality of the meat.". And Allah, the Most High, knows best.

What is the ruling on offering a sheep as a sacrifice (Udhiyah) if its fat-tail is sound, except that when it was young, the tip of its fat-tail was cut so that it would grow larger? And what is the ruling in case of doubt regarding the amount that was cut?

 
In the Name of Allah, and may peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Cutting a minor, insignificant portion from the tip of an animal's fat-tail (al-alyah) to encourage it to grow larger is not considered a defect, and it does not prevent the animal from being valid for sacrifice (Udhiyah).
 
It is stated in Tuhfat al-Muhtaj (Vol.9/P.352): "There is some scholarly deliberation regarding the common practice of cutting the tip of the fat-tail so that it grows larger. It could potentially be likened to a partial cut of the ear—supported by the jurists' general rule: 'even if it is a small amount.' On the other hand, if it is an exceptionally minor cut, it might have no effect on validity. This is explicitly clarified by the juristic exception to the general rule, which states that cutting a tiny piece from a large limb causes no harm. This latter view is more well-founded.
 
Furthermore, I found that some scholars investigated this matter and concluded: 'It should not affect validity if a custom-sanctioned portion of its fat-tail is removed during its youth to make it grow larger and look better, just as castrating a male animal causes no harm.' However, applying this unconditionally contradicts the established texts of the jurists, as understood from what I have laid out; thus, the restriction I specified is what must be relied upon."
 
Similarly, it is mentioned in Nihayat al-Muhtaj (8/135): "If a small piece is cut from the fat-tail to help it grow larger, the most well-founded view is that the sacrifice remains valid, as was given in a formal legal verdict (Fatwa) by my father [Shihab al-Din al-Ramli], may Allah be pleased with him. This is proven by the jurists' maxim: 'The loss of a tiny piece from a large limb causes no harm.'"
 
In cases where there is doubt as to whether the portion cut was large or small, the animal is still deemed valid for sacrifice. It is noted in Hashiyat al-Shubramallisi ‘ala Nihayat al-Muhtaj (Vol.8/P.135):
 
"This matter requires careful consideration, but the closer and more correct view is that it is valid. This is because soundness is the default state for the animal from which the piece was cut, and it aligns with what usually occurs—namely, that the part removed to help the fat-tail grow larger is naturally very small." And Allah the Almighty Knows Best.

What is the ruling on one who slept while firmly seated on the ground, regarding nullification of ablution?

The default ruling regarding sleep is that it nullifies ablution. An exception to this is one who slept while firmly seated on the ground; his ablution is not nullified by sleep if he wakes up while still firmly seated on the ground. And Allah the Almighty knows best.

See More