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

Must a person refrain from eating for the rest of the day if they break a fast of a vow (nadhr) or a make up fast (qada)?

 

Whoever observes a vowed fast (nadhr) or a makeup fast (qada) is prohibited from breaking it without a valid excuse. If they break it without a legitimate reason, they are sinful.
However, they are not required to refrain from eating for the rest of the day, because such restraint is only required out of respect for the month of Ramadan, not for other types of fasting.

What is the ruling on someone who eats or drinks thinking that the night is still present, then realizes that dawn has broken?

Whoever eats or drinks thinking that the night is still present, then later discovers that dawn has broken, must refrain from eating and drinking for the rest of the day out of respect for the sacred month. However, they must make up that day after Ramadan, and there is no sin upon them.

I bought an apartment, and I am saving money to pay the remaining balance of its price — is zakāh obligatory on this money?

All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Zakāh is obligatory on all saved/hoarded wealth. Once the total wealth reaches the niṣāb (minimum threshold liable for zakah— equivalent to the value of 85 grams of pure 24-karat gold) and a full ḥawl (lunar year) has elapsed over it, zakāh becomes obligatory at a rate of (2.5%) — even if the wealth is earmarked for basic future needs, and even if the wealth's owner is in debt. Debt does not prevent the obligation of zakāh, nor is it deducted when calculating the zakāh due, based on the general and unrestricted wording of all the Qur'anic verses commanding zakāh, which draw no distinction between someone in debt and anyone else.
It is stated in ‘Umdat as-Sālik, from the books of the Shāfi‘ī school: "If someone possesses exactly the niṣāb, and owes an equivalent amount in debt, zakāh remains obligatory on what is in his possession, and the debt does not prevent this obligation" — meaning, the obligation of zakāh on what is presently in his possession.
The ḥawl (annual cycle) recognized for zakāh, as well as for the other sharī‘ah obligations that Allah, the Exalted, has imposed upon Muslims, is the Hijrī (lunar) year. And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.

 
What is the ruling on someone who eats or drinks while uncertain about the arrival of dawn, then later finds out that dawn had not yet broken?

If a person does this, their fast remains valid, as it is confirmed that they ate during the night. Similarly, if someone eats while uncertain and remains unsure whether they ate before or after dawn, their fast is still valid. This is based on the maxim of Sharia Law, which states: "Certainty is not removed by doubt." Certainty, here, is the presence of night, and the doubt concerns the arrival of dawn. Therefore, one relies on certainty and disregards doubt.