عربي
Home


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board


Resolutions of Iftaa' Board

Resolution No.(256): "Ruling on Proving Lineage of Child Born out of Wedlock"

Date Added : 15-05-2018

Resolution No.(256)(9 /2018) by the Board of Iftaa`, Research and Islamic Studies:

"Ruling on Proving Lineage of Child Born out of Wedlock"

Date: 3/Sha`ban/1439 AH, corresponding to 19/4/2018 AD.

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

During its fifth session held on the above date, the Board reviewed the letter sent from Mr. Hussein Al-Qaisi, Chairman of the House of Deputies` Legal Committee, and it read as follows: Could you clarify the ruling of Sharia on attributing the child born out of wedlock, in rape cases, to rapist if definite scientific methods have proven that?

After deliberating, the Board decided to ask the House of Deputies to rephrase article (157) of the Civil Status Law No.(36)/2010, to read as follows:

1- A child`s lineage to father is proven by wedlock, confusedness of sexual intercourse, father`s confession or the existence of a proof.

2- The court has the right to prove lineage by resorting to definitive scientific methods with observing the rulings of proving lineage by wedlock. And Allah Knows Best.

Chairman of Iftaa` Board,

Grand Mufti of Jordan,

Dr. Mohammad Al-Khalayleh

Sheikh Abdulkareem Al-Khasawneh, Member

Dr. Ahmad Al-Hasanat, Member

Dr. Majid Darawsheh, Member

Sheikh Sa`eid Al-Hijjawi, Member

Prof. Abdullah Al-Fawaz, Member

Judge Khalid Wuraikat,    Member

Dr. Mohammad al-zou`bi, Member

 

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.

What is the ruling on a person who insists on praying in a specific spot and becomes angry if someone else prays there?

ruling on a person who persists in praying in a specific spot and becomes angry if someone else occupies it

Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
 
Our Master the Prophet ﷺ forbade a man from habitually claiming a specific spot in the mosque as a camel claims its place (to sit); scholars consider this to be among the disliked matters (Makruhat). It is therefore obligatory to advise this individual that whoever arrives at a spot first has the most right to it. And Allah the Exalted knows best.

Is it permissible for one to shake hands with his uncle`s daughter?

No, it isn`t because he is a non-Mahram (Marriageable) to her.

Is it permissible to fast the six days of Shawwal before making up for the missed fasts of Ramadan?

● If a person missed fasts due to a valid excuse, they may fast the six days of Shawwal before making up for Ramadan fasts, because qada (makeup fasts) in this case can be delayed, while the six days of Shawwal must be observed within Shawwal.
● However, if a person missed fasts without a valid excuse, they must make up for the missed fasts immediately after Eid, before fasting the six days of Shawwal. If they fast the six days first, it is valid, but they must still make up for the missed Ramadan fasts afterward.
It is also permissible to combine the intention of qada (makeup fasts) and the six days of Shawwal in one fast. However, it is better to fast them separately, as this increases the reward and avoids scholarly disagreement regarding combining intentions.

See More